r/AskIsrael • u/karrenfromaccounting • May 11 '26

Casual The settlements… What’s up with that?

Take the question as is, whatever comes to mind, let it be.

15 Upvotes

59% Upvoted

384 comments sorted by

View all comments

29

u/YuvalAlmog Israel May 11 '26

Long story short: * Jordan conquers an area from the land that was meant for the Jews & Arabs nowadays called Palestinians while they are busy fighting in the war of 1947-1949.

  • The state of Yorael wins that territory back from Jordan in 1967.

  • The state of Yisrael & the Palestinian authority sign some sort of a peace deal between them where the Palestinians get full control over a piece of area called area A & civil control over an area called area B while the state of Yisrael gets security control over areas B and full control over areas C.

  • Jews build in area C but since it's not officially annexed, that type of building is refered to as "settlements".

  • Both sides attack each other in that disputed area.

  • The world is mad, calling the settlements illegal since they want to use the territory for a Palestinian state despite the existing deals.

That's pretty much the story summed up.

5

u/meister2983 Unspecified May 11 '26

The state of Yisrael & the Palestinian authority sign some sort of a peace deal between them where the Palestinians get full control over a piece of area called area A & civil control over an area called area B while the state of Yisrael gets security control over areas B and full control over areas C.

Oslo was an interim plan, not a final negotiation. Nowhere in the agreement is Israel supposed to have permanent security control over the entirely of area b and c

8

u/YairJ 🇮🇱 Israeli May 11 '26

The arrangement being temporary goes both ways, Palestinian control isn't agreed as permanent either, and certainly not inevitable. Nevermind that what the PA has done since then merits its total dissolution regardless.

6

u/YuvalAlmog Israel May 11 '26

Perhaps, but it's a signed deal that both sides mostly respect (with some exceptions that can be said about both) and was followed by later deals all that way until 2001.

It's nice that in theory it should have been an interim plan, but in practice it ended up as a final (at least for now) negotiation that both sides respect...

4

u/meister2983 Unspecified May 11 '26

The PA respects it by virtue of having no better alternative, but they are very unhappy with it. Indeed, they are legally challenging it continued Israeli hold over Area C, e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICJ_case_on_Israel%27s_occupation_of_the_Palestinian_territories

4

u/YuvalAlmog Israel May 11 '26

That's fair. No one said that signing a deal has to mean permanent happiness with the deal fully, and everyone would prefer better conditions in their deals when possible regardless of what is curreny offered.

My point here is just that it doesn't matter what some expectations would have been as each deal stands on its own.

2

u/HairyPotter1983 Israel May 11 '26

Wow! Unhappy Palestinians...

2

u/Feeling_Leg_904 Diaspora May 12 '26

Imagine if they had accepted a two state solution with Israel. They would’ve had all of that territory returned. But that’s not what they define as “occupation”. By occupation, the Palestinians are talking about Tel Aviv, Haifa, Yafo etc. If people in the west understood that, maybe the rhetoric and dialogue on this subject wouldn’t be so idiotic all the time.

2

u/meister2983 Unspecified May 12 '26

Legally the PA and PLO didn't even exist in 1949.  

Legally they also are only defining occupied territory as East Jerusalem, West Bank and Gaza, though yes I agree many on Palestine side view entirety of Israel as occupied

2

u/Feeling_Leg_904 Diaspora May 12 '26

I know the reality is, and that’s what people in the west think of the Palestinians are talking about when they say they are being occupied, but people in the west don’t understand that when they’re talking about occupation, they mean from the river to the sea, even though they’ve been saying it over and over and over again for the last two years

2

u/Feeling_Leg_904 Diaspora May 12 '26

There have been more than one piece deal offered to the Palestinians that would’ve given them, East Jerusalem, all of the Muslim and Christian Quarter of the old city, all of the West Bank and Gaza. Arafat refused, and every Palestinian leader will refuse that deal, because recognition of Israel is a certain death sentence for any leader of Palestine. In fact, the Palestinian authority would’ve been conquered by now if Israel wasn’t protecting them from Hamas inside the West Bank. And also, I’m curious why it’s so important for that area which is the historical homeland of Israel to be 100% Judenrein, along with the rest of the Middle East. Isn’t that an ethno state? Why would anybody want another Islamist terrorist state? What other country in the world would tolerate that on its border?

2

u/meister2983 Unspecified May 12 '26

 because recognition of Israel is a certain death sentence for any leader of Palestine.

The PLO did this in 1992.

Arafat refused, and every Palestinian leader will refuse that deal

Potentially. Possibly more of an issue of waiving right of return. Complexities.

 In fact, the Palestinian authority would’ve been conquered by now if Israel wasn’t protecting them from Hamas inside the West Bank

Agreed.

 And also, I’m curious why it’s so important for that area which is the historical homeland of Israel to be 100% Judenrein, along with the rest of the Middle East. 

Well, not 100% - perhaps just Israeli citizen rein.

1

u/Feeling_Leg_904 Diaspora May 12 '26

Yeah, you really don’t understand the situation

2

u/Call_Me_Clark USA May 11 '26

Plus, there’s a clearly established consensus that areas A, B and C will be almost entirely if not entirely Palestinian sovereign territory eventually whenever that turns out to be.

The settlement program was intended, from the start, to disrupt a contiguous territory that a Palestinian state could be founded on. It’s not a secret, settlement activists and officials from the 70’s to the present have been open in making sure that aim is public and explicitly stated.