Occupied Palestinian territories

The West Bank

The Gaza Strip

The term "Palestinian territories" is used by mainstream Western journalists as a collective name for the West Bank and the Gaza Strip — two territories in Palestine. The Palestinian people seek to found an independent state in these non-sovereign areas.

Because nearly all Palestinians, as well as the bulk of the nations in the UN, consider these territories to be under occupation by Israel, they frequently refer to them as the occupied Palestinian territories, or, simply, Occupied Palestine, which has been a term for the area since the earliest days of Partition. This term connotes much more than a definition, but a host of related propositions that amount to a preventive political argument about the disposition and status of the land:

that these territories are under the military control of a nation that does not have sovereignty over them;

that the nation in control of these territories, i.e., Israel, is thus obliged (as a matter of right as well as by international law) to return these territories to their rightful owners; and

that these territories belong by right to the Palestinians, i.e., the stateless indigenous Arabs of Palestine.

This term is often (erroneously) used interchangeably with the term Occupied Territories. This latter term, when used in the context of the region, actually refers to an inclusive set of both the Palestinian territories and the Golan Heights. The Golan is not settled by Palestinians nor claimed by them, but rather by Syrians. The confusion stems from the fact that all these territories were captured by Israel during the 1967 Six Day War and are similarly considered as occupied territories by most world nations.

See Arab-Israeli conflict.

Meanings of the term

Not all uses of the term intend to convey the same meaning, which can lead to confusion. The term "Palestinian territory" is often obfuscated for political reasons by supporters of Israel and other Zionists — centrally that Israel naturally does not want to unilaterally compromise its own interests by politically legitimizing any Palestinian claims to land within the boundaries of Israel. At times, the term "Israeli territory" will include the very land where Palestinian refugees currently live. Thus, not all users of the term intend to convey the same meaning, which can lead to confusion:

Many advocates use the term "Palestinian territories" to imply that these ought to belong to the Palestinian people — or that they already do, either by right or by international law. In particular, the Palestine Liberation Organization has declared West Bank and Gaza Strip as such territories, following the Oslo Accords.
Some journalists use the term merely to indicate lands where Palestinian Arabs dwell, outside the green line, or the 1949 cease fire line considered a de facto border by many.
Some Palestinian nationalists consider the land within Israel's de facto boundaries to be de jure part of Palestine. Some advocates have claimed that maps used in schools under the jurisdiction of the Palestinian Authority depict Palestine as consisting of all the territory between the Mediterranean Sea, Lebanon, Syria, the Jordan River and Egypt - including Israel, the West Bank and Gaza Strip - though it has been argued that the maps referred to are geological and historical maps (which show regions and geographical features), rather than political maps (which show countries).

Often, people refer to non-sovereign lands that are within the traditional boundaries of Palestine, but outside the generally recognized borders of Jordan and Israel, as being Palestinian territories. As mentioned above, since the late 1990s, this has included most of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.

This usage tends to convey a complex of ideas, chiefly the view that (1) there exists a Palestinian people who (2) deserve their own homeland which (3) ought to include Gaza and West Bank.
Adherents of this point of view or users of this definition commonly use the term "occupied Palestinian territories".

Claims

Bi-national claims to the same lands have been made, based on exacerbated political and ethnic distinctions. While a neutral observer may view these distinctions as minor, the conflict is in fact an ethnic one, with claims to sovereignty and divinity embellishing the underlying political and territorial issues. This article discusses both Israeli and Arab claims.

Israeli claims

Israeli claims to the territories are based primarily on three arguments (though there are others). First, the territory historically belonged to the Jewish people first. The Arabs and their western supporters dismiss this claim as irrelevant, since Jews, having been mostly driven out by Rome in the years 70CE and 135CE, did not control the land at the time the Arabs arrived. This is a complicated issue, with few precedents to draw upon elsewhere in history, since Israel's having thrice returned to the same land from exile is very unusual.

Second, many Israeli (and other) Jews, many Christians, and even some Muslims [1] hold that the land was promised to the people of Israel by God. The Jewish and Christian claim is based largely on God's promise to Abraham in Genesis chapter 15, and its reiteration to Abraham's sons Isaac and Jacob and descendent Moses in later chapters of the Hebrew Bible; the Muslim belief that the land was promised to the Israelites at one point is based in various verses in the Qur'an that generally concur with Genesis chapter 15. Westerners sympathetic to the Palestinians often dismiss these claims as religious and therefore without force in a modern international dispute. Palestinian (and other) Muslims counter it in a variety of ways, such as by claiming that, according to their religious beliefs, God sent Islam to replace older religions as the final Word thus replacing previous covenants, or sometimes claiming that since Ishmael was firstborn, he should inherit the promise together with Isaac. Palestinian Christians generally do not recognize the validity of theological arguments supporting exclusive Jewish claims to the land, and many subscribe to the belief that, with the coming of Jesus, the covenants of the Old Testament were concluded, and therefore the new promise that now applies to the followers of Jesus is that of the Kingdom of Heaven and not material possessions on earth (see also Supersessionism). [2],[3],[4],[5],[6],[7].

The third Israeli claim is based on their current control of the territories. ("Possession is nine-tenths of the law") The Palestinians counter this claim by saying that Israel is controlling the territories unjustly by denying its residents the right to self-determination, and some deny the validity of the Israeli nation entirely.

Palestinian claims

The Palestinian claims are in some ways similar, despite being diametrically opposed to Israel's claims. First, they claim that they have continuously lived in the area longer than anyone else, making their current stay in the land (and therefore their current claim to it) the most longstanding. Israelis counter this by pointing out that they had occupied the land previously, before being driven out by Rome, and that in any event some Jews have lived there continuously since Roman times.

Second, the Palestinian Arabs point out that they are the primary demographic group in the contested regions right now. The land therefore belongs to them because they currently occupy and possess it. Israel disputes their independence, since Israel has some level of control over the territories, and since they are adjacent to and dependent upon Israel. They also dispute that Palestinian Arabs constitute a separate nation from other ethnic Arabs.

Third, the Palestinians point out that their claims to the land would be much more amenable were it not for Israel's establishing of "facts on the ground" since 1967, which included land confiscation and building of Jewish settlements or separation barriers on land previously owned by Palestinian and making those lands off-limits to them. By reducing the size of the land where Palestinians are allowed to live, they claim that it is easier for the Israelis to argue that the land is uninhabited and prime for development by Israel. Israelis counter that Jewish settlements in the West Bank must gradually expand because of natural population growth, and that many areas are off-limits to Palestinians because of security reasons.

Points not in dispute

It is not the facts, then, that are the crux of the dispute; it is the interpretation and implications of the facts that are the focus of all the turmoil in the region. The following points are (at least for the most part) not in dispute:

The Israelis are descended from people who lived in the area prior to the year 70 CE. Most of them were driven out and scattered at that time, but there was no interruption in the Jewish presence in the Land of Israel.
The Arabs are descended from semitic tribes that lived in the region prior to Islam and from populations that migrated there from Arabia or Southeastern Europe since then.
The large numbers of Jews began returning to the region as a result of the Zionist movement in the late-19th to mid-20th century.
Palestinian Arabs are the largest demographic currently living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip regions.
Israel currently exercises overall control, but the Palestinians have some measure of autonomy.
Israel does not grant citizenship or any representation in the Israeli parliament to the Palestinians in the territories (apart from registered East Jerusalem residents, though very few of them have applied for Israeli citizenship and even fewer have had their applications approved [8],[9]).
According to Judaism, Christianity and Islam, both the Jews and the Arabs are descended from patriarch Abraham: Jews are the descendants of Isaac through Jacob and Arabs are the descendants of Ishmael.

All of this, however, leaves both sides adamant that their claims on the territories are the stronger or more important claims.

Historical status of West Bank and Gaza Strip

The only natural geographic boundaries for the West Bank and the Gaza Strip are the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, respectively. The rest of their boundaries were defined by the 1949 Armistice Agreements after the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. Following the war, West Bank was annexed by Jordan, though the annexation was recognized only by the United Kingdom. The Gaza Strip was occupied, but not annexed, by Egypt.

Israel captured these territories in the 1967 Six-Day War; since then they have been under Israeli control. After the war, UN Security Council Resolution 242 introduced the "Land for Peace" formula for normalizing relations between Israel and its neighbors.

The Oslo Accords of the early 1990's between the Palestine Liberation Organization and Israel led to the creation of the Palestinian Authority which includes a civil administration in the smaller towns and a security presence in the bigger cities of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The Authority lacks full sovereignty but it does possess a police force. The accords envisaged final status arrangements to be decided on later and thus led to the Camp David 2000 Summit which however did not establish an independent Palestinian state in these territories.

Legal Status of the territories

The final status of the Palestinian territories as an independent state for the Palestinian people is supported by the countries that back the road map. The government of Israel also accepted the road map but with 14 reservations [10]. Although Israeli settlements were not part of the Oslo Accord negotiations, Palestinian Arabs seeking to create a Palestinian state in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip generally argue that the creation and the presence of Israeli settlements or military forces in those areas is a violation of international law, as affirmed by a majority of members of the Geneva convention: "12. The participating High Contracting Parties call upon the Occupying Power to fully and effectively respect the Fourth Geneva Convention in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and to refrain from perpetrating any violation of the Convention. They reaffirm the illegality of the settlements in the said territories and of the extension thereof. They recall the need to safeguard and guarantee the rights and access of all inhabitants to the Holy Places." [11]

East Jerusalem, captured in 1967, was unilaterally annexed by Israel. This annexation has not been recognized by the international community, although U.S. lawmakers have declared their intention to recognize the annexation. Other states and organizations have condemned this proposal by some United States lawmakers. Because of the question of Jerusalem's status, some states refuse to accept Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and treat Tel Aviv as the de facto capital, basing their diplomatic missions there.

Israel claims that these territories are not currently claimed by any other state, and that Israel has the right to control them. In other words, Israel's stance is that while Palestinians do have the right to autonomy (as confirmed by the Oslo Accords), that does not mean they should automatically receive these territories.

Israel's position has not been accepted by most countries and international bodies, at least in their statements. The West Bank, and the Gaza Strip have been referred to as occupied territories (with Israel as the occupying power) by Palestinian Arabs [12], the rest of the Arab bloc, the UK [13], the EU, (usually) the USA ([14], [15]), both the General Assembly and the Security Council of the United Nations, the International Court of Justice, and the Israeli Supreme Court (see Israeli West Bank barrier).

The international community did not declare any change in the status of the territories as of the creation of the Palestinian Authority between 1993 and 2000. Although a 1999 U.N. document (see the link above) implied that the chance for a change in that status was slim at that period, most observers agreed that the Palestinian territories' classification as occupied was losing substantiality, and would be withdrawn after the signing of a permanent peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians (see also Proposals for a Palestinian state).

During the period between the 1993 Oslo Accords and the Second Intifada beginning in 2000, Israeli officials claimed that the term "occupation" did not accurately reflect the state of affairs in the territories. During this time, the Palestinian population had a large degree of autonomy and only limited exposure to the IDF. Following the events of the Second Intifada, and in particular, Operation Defensive Shield, most territories, including Palestinian cities (Area A), are back under effective Israeli military control, so the discussion along those lines is largely moot.