PRESIDENT ISAAC Herzog speaks as US Secretary of State Antony Blinken looks on, in Tel Aviv on Tuesday. While the PA proudly declares its full partnership with Hamas, the US continues to maintain that this twisted leadership is a viable alternative for post-war Gaza, says the writer.
Many Israelis have begun to understand that on the “day after,” we cannot simply revert to the “day before.”
The basic, underlying assumptions and security paradigms upon which Israeli policy has been built for decades came crashing down on October 7. On that day, it became painfully clear that the underlying assumptions upon which Israel has based its relationship with the Palestinian Authority (PA) and with the Arab population of Judea and Samaria and the Gaza Strip were rooted in fallacies, misconceptions, and even self-delusion.
Despite all evidence to the contrary, we continued to pretend – and behave – as if we had a partner that shared the values we Israelis cherish, and we ascribed our own aspirations to our Palestinian interlocutors: to live in peace and prosperity; to provide a better future for our families; and to live in dignity under strong democratic institutions that protect our values and nurture progress and development.
Unfortunately, all our wishful thinking was proven to be nothing more than self-delusion but if misery loves company, we can console ourselves in the knowledge that we are not alone in this massive failure. Our Western allies – principal among them our closest and staunchest ally, the United States – continue to operate under the same delusions.
Palestinian Authority declares full partnership with Hamas
While the PA proudly declares its full partnership with Hamas, not only in spirit but also in the murderous actions of October 7, the US continues to maintain that this twisted leadership is a viable alternative for post-war Gaza. The “martyrs” and “prisoners” funded by the PA – those who either succeeded or attempted to murder Israelis but were neutralized or apprehended by the IDF – are as much a testament to the PA’s intentions as the official PA curriculum, the countless public pronouncements by PA officials, or the refusal of the PA to amend its charter, which continues to call for jihad and the eradication of Israel.
PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY head Mahmoud Abbas attends Christmas Midnight Mass at the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, last year. Abbas, in recent years, has depicted Jesus as Palestinian, says the writer. (credit: Ahmad Gharabli/Reuters)
Similarly, the unchecked illegal PA program of de facto annexation of areas under full Israeli jurisdiction – “Area C” – has been willfully ignored by successive Israeli governments in the decades since the PA launched the Fayyad Plan. This openly violates international law with the support of the European Union and a host of governments that pay lip service to their commitment to that same law and to “a negotiated resolution of the conflict.” Israel continues to cling to collapsed enforcement paradigms and delusional “appeasement” and “tolerance” that have turned its national interest into nothing more than a rumor.
It’s time for a reality check. It’s time to reexamine the underlying assumptions and begin to rebuild our security paradigm. Some in the US have started to demand that their government shake off the reverie of self-delusion; a recent opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal calling for an end to US tax dollars funding the PA’s pay-for-slay program, to which the October 7 murderers have been added, is a case in point.
Under a newly adopted law, the “reasonableness doctrine,” created by former Chief Justice Aharon Barak as a means of vastly expanding the power of Israel’s High Court to overrule policy choices made by officials, has been curtailed.
In what may come as a surprise to critics of the move in Israel and abroad, the sky has not fallen, and Israel’s judicial branch has not lost its independence. The new law simply restores limits upon the Supreme Court’s ability to strike down ministerial appointments or other decisions by elected officials, while not touching the Court’s jurisdiction regarding decisions taken by the non-political echelon – the sweet spot that preserves powers for the Court that are unique in the Western world, but restores to the people their ability to govern themselves democratically through elections.
Consider a recent petition brought by the Regavim Movement against a Civil Administration protocol that automatically suspends enforcement against illegal Arab-built structures. The Civil Administration is an arm of the Israeli defense apparatus that administers “Area C” of Judea and Samaria, the territory over which Israel exercises full jurisdiction under the Israel-PLO Oslo Accords.
Although subject to the supervision of the Minister of Defense, the Civil Administration enjoys substantial autonomy in setting policy, and the protocol in question was not formulated by the minister or his staff, nor by any preceding holder of this office; it was instituted and enforced by the Civil Administration alone.
In fact, Justice Groskopf noted in the decision, that although the amendment limiting the “reasonableness doctrine” came into effect some three weeks ago, this case focuses on policies instituted by the “professional echelon” (OC Central Command and Commander of the Civil Administration), and is therefore unaffected by the new law.
Some might argue that this passing comment, intended to provide justification for hearing the petition in the first place, is an important insight into the bigger picture of the level at which Israel’s governance in Judea and Samaria is conducted in practice; more on this below.
The particulars of the case involve a petition filed by Regavim last year regarding a “standard operating procedure” applied by the Civil Administration to illegal Arab-built structures in Area C.
The upshot has been an umbrella of legal protection that lasts for years on end. The appeals process, if it can be called a process, drags on interminably as the structures are built to completion, inhabited for years thereafter, and accepted as one more fact on the ground in the Battle for Area C. No such protection is afforded to illegal Jewish construction, which the High Court has ordered demolished even when its legal status is unclear or in the process of legalization.
This past May, when arguments were heard in the High Court of Justice, Regavim presented data that paints a very clear picture of the abuse of the system by Arab construction offenders: From 2018 to 2020, a whopping 1302 permit requests were submitted – and not a single one was approved.
Eight-hundred-and-one requests were rejected outright and another 501 are still pending. In that same time period, 479 appeals were filed, of which 475 were denied.
In other words, the overwhelming majority of requests and appeals were frivolous, baseless, utterly without merit – and were clearly nothing more than a means of protecting existing illegal structures that cannot and will not be granted legal status.
The stalling tactic of submitting a permit request followed by an appeal when the request is rejected, has effectively turned the system against itself and provided the legal cover for mass-scale annexation of the open spaces of Area C by the Palestinian Authority.
The state’s representatives argued that enforcement bodies have the authority to suspend enforcement against illegal structures according to priorities based on a variety of considerations. Additionally, the state’s attorney presented a very broad interpretation of the Jordanian law to justify the policy of suspending enforcement until all procedural and legal steps are exhausted.
Justice Groskopf noted that the government’s arguments were inconsistent, and Chief Justice Hayut criticized the government for failing to present accurate data regarding the number of permit requests and appeals: “The respondents are expected to periodically examine the policy they adopt in this context, and to formulate an opinion based on the data… in order to determine whether the data supports the policy they have instituted,” said the Chief Justice.
Nonetheless, the High Court found insufficient cause to intervene, agreeing that continued reliance on this policy “does not overstep the boundaries of reasonableness.” Regavim’s petition was rejected.
This gives us an opportunity to think about what is “reasonable” about current Israeli policy in Judea and Samaria, and what is “unreasonable.” Although the High Court found that the Civil Administration’s authority to implement its current policy is “not unreasonable,” its policy is bringing about unreasonable results.
On a purely legal level, the Civil Administration clearly has a mandate to formulate and implement enforcement policy, but this mandate is itself unreasonable. The Civil Administration is an arm of the military, and its primary objective is to maintain peace and quiet.
Unfortunately, this objective is all too often achieved through unreasonable means that are beyond the purview of military operations and go to the heart of politics, geopolitics, international relations, and Israel’s future. In the case of wholesale, open-ended suspension of enforcement, the price for avoiding confrontation with Arab construction offenders – and with the international community that is supporting this activity as a means of creating a de facto Palestinian state – is the sacrifice of Israel’s security, the decimation of Israeli governance, discrimination against Jews, and deprivation of their right to live in and develop Jewish communities in Area C.
The very expansive interpretation given by the Civil Administration to Jordanian law is itself unreasonable, even if it is “legal”: It protects, encourages, and rewards illegal construction; undermines governance and the rule of law; and enables de facto annexation of what is, at the very least, disputed territory that the State of Israel has been entrusted and empowered to protect – very unreasonable outcomes indeed.
It would be reasonable to require a less expansive interpretation and application of the Jordanian law. It would be no less reasonable to require the application of legal norms as they are applied throughout all other areas under Israeli jurisdiction.
It would certainly be no less reasonable to require the Civil Administration to uphold standards in the Arab sector that equal those for planning, construction, and environmental sustainability equal to those applied to the Jewish sector. Israel’s High Court of Justice has failed to grasp the magnitude and intensity of the battle for the open spaces of Area C that is being waged by the Palestinian Authority – and is being lost by the State of Israel. The Civil Administration has failed to defend Israel in that war. Neither the Civil Administration nor the High Court of Justice should be entrusted to provide solutions to these problems; the High Court’s decision in this case makes it clear that it does not intend to do so.
Regavim’s petition on this matter, as in so many others, was an attempt to force the Israeli government to act as any reasonable government should, and the decision that was handed down leaves the door wide open for the government to do so. The time has come for Israeli legislators to roll up their sleeves, wade into the muddy waters, and restore reasonableness to Civil Administration protocols. In other words, it’s time for the Israeli government to govern.
Big news for the State of Israel: The government has outlined a historic and strategic plan that will restore governance and personal safety to the Negev.
Last week, Prime Minister Netanyahu convened a meeting of the Ministerial Committee on Legalizing the Settlement, and the Economic Development, of the Bedouin Sector in the Negev to discuss the new plan. After a few adjustments, the plan, which will advance legalization of the settlement of the Bedouin population in the Negev for 2023-2025, will be voted on by the government in the next few weeks.
We congratulate Minister Amichai Chikli for his hard work to make this happen, and for insisting months ago, during the coalition negotiations, to take on the complicated task of legalizing Bedouin settlement in the Negev. We also thank Ministers Smotrich and Ben Gvir for their assistance.
There’s a long way to go, but this is a significant step in the right direction.
*
Meanwhile, recently, we launched the Hebrew-language version of our most recent report, “Virtual Reality: The Myth of Historic Bedouin Villages of the Negev.”
The report examines the factuality – more precisely, reveals the ‘fake’ – behind the Bedouin narrative of historic villages of the Negev for which they demand the State of Israel’s official recognition.
The report, based on analysis of aerial photographs of the Negev dating back to the 1940s, proves that in almost all of the locations currently claimed to be historic villages, not a single tent was erected before the establishment of the State of Israel; the locations were equally barren in the 1950s and 1960s. No tents, no houses – and certainly no villages.
The report has sent shockwaves through Israeli public discourse, and a barrage of attempts and rebuttal and denial from left-wing organizations.
The full English-language version is scheduled for publication later this summer; meanwhile, check out the Executive Summary here.
In the heart of the Land of Israel, an exclusive new housing project is underway. To qualify for this prime location you must have Jewish blood on your hands: Eligibility is for those who have served a minimum 5-year prison sentence in an Israeli security prison.
Recently, work began on a new neighborhood of 100 luxury villas in Area B – the portion of Judea and Samaria under Palestinian Authority civil jurisdiction and Israeli security jurisdiction.
The project developer, the Ramallah-based “Al Karameh Corporation for Prisoner Housing,” is an association whose members have served sentences of at least five years in Israeli prisons for terror-related convictions. The governing board of the corporation boasts family members of notorious terrorists, including Ablah Saadat, wife of Ahmad Saadat, Secretary General of the People’s Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and Naim Al-Sharif, father of Imad Al-Sharif, a convicted Hamas terrorist.
The new neighborhood has a commanding position overlooking Route 60 at the British Police Junction. This is the spot from which countless terrorist incidents have been launched, including in 2002 when an Palestinian-Arab sniper murdered 7 IDF soldiers, 3 civilians and injured 6 others.
Construction underway in the new neighborhood
This proves unequivocally that those calling upon Israel and the world to prop up and even strengthen the Palestinian Authority are completely out of touch with reality. It is high time that we understand precisely who and what we are dealing with: The Palestinians – both the leadership and the rank and file civilian population – idolize terrorists and consider them freedom fighters and martyrs, while the Israeli government agonizes over the morality of deporting the families of terrorists or of instituting the death penalty.
While all this hand-wringing and moralizing is going on, terrorism continues to claim the lives of Israelis throughout the Land of Israel, and the bloody tally of Jewish victims continues to swell.
An aerial view of an illegal house – built for terrorists
In the case of Jordanian Law #40, the racist law still in force that prevents individual Jews from buying land in Judea and Samaria, the High Court of Justice claimed that there is no justifiable reason to intervene. When Regavim petitioned against the law, the High Court judges sent us to the legislator.
However, in two other cases, the High Court deemed it right to intervene: when a Jewish community refused to allow an Arab to move in, the judges ruled that he can live there (the Kaadan case); and when a Jew requested to lease land in a Bedouin town, the Court rejected his petition (the Avitan case).
The High Court of Justice intervenes in government and Knesset decisions only if they seem unreasonable. But it’s clear that the question of what’s reasonable or not depends on your political outlook. If it is *reasonable* to cancel the law against infiltration in Israel and *unreasonable* to cancel a racist law which prohibits the sale of property to Jews, what does that say about “reasonableness” in the eyes of the justices?
Purim is over. It’s time to take the masks off, and restore the balance between the different branches of Israeli government.
The illegal Bedouin outpost of Khan al Ahmar near Kfar Adumim
For the ninth time: the State of Israel asks the High Court to allow another postponement of its response to Regavim’s petition for the evacuation of the Palestinian Authority’s flagship outpost, Khan al Ahmar. Regavim: “A right-wing government is tested by deeds, not by words.”
The extension granted to the state four months ago to respond to Regavim Movement petition to relocate the Bedouin squatters of Khan al Ahmar ended today, and the state has requested an additional four-month extension to present its position.
“The political echelon remains steadfast in its position that the rule of law requires the demolition orders to be carried out in the Khan al Ahmar compound,” according to the state’s request, adding that in the weeks since the formation of the present government, the new head of the National Security Council, Tzachi Hanegavi, has been working in cooperation with the National Security Advisor, representatives of the Ministry of Defense, the IDF, the General Security Service (Shin Bet), the Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Justice, and other government representatives.
“The details of this intensive effort speak to the complexity, sensitivity and importance that state officials attach to compliance with the conditional orders already issued in this matter, as well as the fact that the issue is a high priority… On the other hand, given the complexity of the issue and its sensitivity, the high level of interest in the international community and the and implications for the foreign relations and security of the State of Israel at the present time, those charged with handling this case at the professional level have been instructed to complete all necessary steps required to formulate an appropriate response to the conditional order as soon as possible. The formulation of a detailed response on such a sensitive and complicated issue justifies the position of the political echelon that an additional stay be granted to enable the professionals to complete their work and to submit a comprehensive analysis to the political echelon.”
The Regavim Movement issued a strongly-worded statement criticizing the postponement request. “We were hoping for an appropriate response by a national right-wing government – as promised in the election campaign,” said Meir Deutsch, Director General of Regavim. “There is no justification for this. Like Cato in ancient Rome, we continue to repeat the same demand, to hold the same consistent position, to call upon our representatives in the government to act immediately to evacuate this illegal encampment – as well as dozens of other Palestinian Authority outposts created in the same mold – not 300 meters away from its present location, but to the neighborhood prepared precisely for this purpose near Abu Dis.”
Regavim responded to the state’s request for postponement by calling on the High Court to issue a final order, as it intimated it would when it granted the previous postponement, and put an end to the saga once and for all. “This is an extreme case of ‘lack of reasonableness’,” added Deutsch. “After all is said and done, this case will prove whether the High Court applies the same standard of reasonableness to cases from both sides of the political divide, or whether the reasonableness standard is nothing more than a judicial fig leaf for a particular agenda. We await a final judgement for the relocation of the Khan al Ahmar outpost in a manner that is consistent with Israel’s national interests.”
Interview: Regavim’s Naomi Kahn speaks to Kan English Radio about Khan al Ahmar postponement
This morning (Monday), Likud MKs Danny Danon and Yoel (Yuli) Edelstein joined the Regvaim Movement and the Jerusalem Environs Forum – and faced by a pro-Palestinian demonstration. Regavim: “The question isn’t whether or not, but how and when the outpost will be evacuated.”
The deadline for the state’s response in the Khan al Ahmar case is rapidly approaching – and the political pressure is climbing. This morning (Monday), World Likud Chairman MK Danny Danon and Chairman of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee MK Yoel (Yuli) Edelstein were joined by Likud activists on a tour of Khan al Ahmar hosted by the Regavim Movement and the Forum for Jerusalem Satellite Communities. A group Palestinian Arab and leftist activists protested nearby, waving Palestinian flags.
Less than 2 weeks remain for the state to submit its response to the High Court of Justice in the sixth petition submitted by the Regavim Movement regarding the illegal outpost adjacent to Route 1, the main access road connecting Jerusalem to the Dead Sea and Israel’s eastern border. This most recent deadline marks the eighth time the state has delayed compliance. The fast-approaching deadline of 1 February is the ninth such extension granted by the High Court – which also declared that it would be the last.
MK Danny Danon: “I have come here today to strengthen our government as it prepares its response to the High Court regarding the evacuation of this site. Israel is a state governed by law and order, and we must not accept selective enforcement. Khan al Ahmar must be evacuated immediately. I am well acquainted with the international community. Our friends around the world will understand that there can be no place for selective enforcement that discriminates against Jews in Judea and Samaria.”
The illegal outpost of Khan al Ahmar next to Route 1, east of Jerusalem, September 2022
Meir Deutsch, Director General of Regavim: “The State of Israel must understand that this is a mega-issue that goes far beyond the Khan al Ahmar outpost. Our annual documentation and mapping of the illegal construction in Area C proves that in the past decade the Palestinian Authority has taken tremendous strides toward establishing a de facto state in the heart of the Land of Israel – and the government is simply closing its eyes to reality.”
“The new government must prove to the voters who elected them that it is a real Zionist nationalist government – and place the Battle for Area C at the top of the agenda. The question regarding Khan al Ahmar is no longer whether the outpost will be evacuated, but when and how.”
Recent pictures of illegal gas stations in the Negev
While the cost to fill up your car continues to rise, there are those living in a parallel universe – in Bedouistan.
For many years, Regavim has been sounding the alarm bells about the phenomenon of dozens of illegal gas stations that are scattered throughout the Negev. Even when Police forces manage to shut one down, three new ones appear.
These gas stations don’t meet any regulatory standard, endanger lives, damage the environment, and bring in millions of shekels for criminal organizations that avoid tax payments.
This is another major task for the new government and Knesset: to restore governance in the Negev and the Galilee.
Learn more about the lawlessness and lack of governance in Israel’s Wild South in “Bedouistan” – the book published by Meir Deutsch, Regavim’s Director General. Place your order here.
To mark the 49th anniversary of the passing of David Ben-Gurion, we launched our “Sde Boker Initiative.” This comprehensive roadmap for the future of the Negev is the result of 16 years of fieldwork, analysis, legal research and activism that have enabled us to formulate a vision for the future, looking ahead to 2050 through the prisms of national planning and development imperatives, improved governance and resolution of land ownership claims.
Over the past year, we presented the Sde Boker initiative to each of the Zionist parties in the Knesset, and immediately after the establishment of the new government, we have begun to present it to the general public. Many members of the new government view the plan favorably, and we will continue to push for implementation of its core recommendations.
To view a summary presentation of the Sde Boker Inititiative, click here.
Regavim’s video from May 2022 that explains Law 40
The High Court of Justice rejected the Regavim Movement’s petition to repeal Jordanian Law #40 which prohibits the sale of property in Judea and Samaria to Jews, on the grounds that “there is no call for intervening in matters of state”: “Despite the difficulty we have in coming to terms with the language of the law, there is no justification for this Court to intervene.” Regavim: “The High Court is enabling appalling discrimination. This is the first test of the new government’s mettle.”
Yesterday (Wednesday), the High Court of Justice rejected a petition filed by the Regavim Movement to compel the military commander and the Civil Administration to repeal Jordanian Law #40 which prohibits the sale of land in Judea and Samaria to Jews – a law still in force due to Israel’s decision not to extend its law or sovereignty to territory liberated in 1967.
In the High Court hearing earlier this week, Regavim’s attorney, Boaz Arzi, argued that this patently racist law should be struck down without further delay. In an earlier stage of the case, the High Court issued a conditional order requiring the government to respond within 60 days and explain why this discriminatory law should be allowed to stand. The attorney representing the Civil Administration argued that no real harm is caused by Jordanian Law #40 to Jews who wish to carry out real estate transactions in Judea and Samaria: the state’s work-around solution allowing would-be buyers to incorporate as a legal entity in Judea and Samaria in order to circumvent the antisemitic restriction against individuals, they argued, was sufficient. Regavim’s attorney responded: “Focusing on the quantity of transactions obscures the real issue. This is racism.”
The government’s representatives also argued that a committee, headed by the Assistant Minister of Defense, had examined the issue and determined that the restriction is “minor” while the level of political sensitivity regarding land in Judea and Samaria is immense. Therefore, the state argued, there is no justification for the Court to intervene in decisions taken by the military commander. Justice Groskopf noted, “The law is racist; that is clear. However, the cost outweighs the benefit. Essentially, the question is whether the considerations of the military commander in this matter are reasonable or unreasonable to the extent that the intervention of the Court is necessary.” The panel of three Justices accepted the State’s argument and rejected Regavim’s petition.
Jordanian Law #40 prohibiting the sale of property to non-Muslims was passed in the 1950s, during the illegal Jordanian occupation of Judea and Samaria following the War of Independence. Although the occupation came to an end in 1967, Israel refrained from extending sovereignty to the territories it had liberated, holding them in a “temporary” state of limbo in order to negotiate a political resolution to the conflict. Ever since, land purchases for Jewish settlement and development has been carried out through a bureaucratic-legal process designed to circumvent, but not annul, the anti-Jewish Jordanian law. In 1971, the IDF Chief of Central Command issued an order permitting commercial entities to purchase land in the area; individual Jews are barred from purchasing land to this very day. Regavim argued that the technical difficulties created by this “work around” are significant – and are nonetheless overshadowed by the inherent racism underlying the law itself, and the violation of Jews’ basic rights.
“This is an outrage,” says Meir Deutsch, Director General of Regavim. “For the first time, the High Court of Justice is upholding and permitting continued racial discrimination, hiding behind supposed diplomatic repercussions. No such discrimination against Arabs would be allowed, even if the government argued that there would be certain political or diplomatic fallout.” Deutsch added, “Can you imagine if the US Supreme Court had argued that because public transportation was readily accessible for black people, the cost of allowing them to use the front of the bus outweighed the benefit that would be achieved by judicial intervention?! If the Justices of Israel’s Supreme Court had been on the bench in the US, Rosa Parks and all those who came after her would probably still be on the back of the bus, and racial discrimination would still be the law of the land.”
“Law is an expression of a society’s values,” said Attorney Boaz Arzi. “Are these the values that we expect our justice system to uphold? We call upon the newly-elected government to reassert Jewish rights and the foundational principle of equality under the law that are the bedrock of the modern Jewish and democratic State of Israel.”
