| Revision as of 03:48, 3 August 2007 view sourceEleland (talk | contribs)8,909 edits rv to PalestineRemembered's last. More of an empty gesure, really; I will surely.be reverted by Israeli nationalists (can't call them "Zionists") quickly.← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:27, 3 August 2007 view source Armon (talk | contribs)4,546 edits rv to self: Wow guess I must be an evil Zionist -or maybe I just consider stuff like "punished for being Palestinian." "theft" and "Apartheid wall" just a tad POVNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{sprotected}} | {{sprotected}} | ||
| :''This article covers the use of house demolition in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. For a broader overview of house demolition as a military tactic, see ].'' | :''This article covers the use of house demolition in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. For a broader overview of house demolition as a military tactic, see ].'' | ||
| ] | ] | ||
| '''House demolition |
''']''' is a controversial tactic used by the ] (IDF) for ] and other security purposes in the ] and ] during the course of the ]. The IDF justifies it as a ] against ]. The effectiveness and legality of this practice has repeatedly been questioned by ], whose neutrality has in turn been questioned. | ||
| In February 2005, the Israeli Defense Ministry ordered an end to the demolition of houses for the purpose of punishing the families of ]s. | |||
| == Purposes and means== | == Purposes and means== | ||
| {{POV-section}} | {{POV-section}} | ||
| House demolition is typically justified by the Israeli Defence Forces on grounds of: | House demolition is typically justified by the Israeli Defence Forces on grounds of: | ||
| * Deterrence, achieved by harming the relatives of those who carry out, or are suspected of involvement in carrying out, attacks.<ref |
* Deterrence, achieved by harming the relatives of those who carry out, or are suspected of involvement in carrying out, attacks.<ref></ref> | ||
| * Counter-terrorism, by destroying militant facilities such as ]s ]s, headquarters and offices. | * Counter-terrorism, by destroying militant facilities such as ]s ]s, headquarters, and offices. | ||
| * Forcing out an individual barricaded inside a house, which may be rigged with explosives, without risking soldiers' lives. | * Forcing out an individual barricaded inside a house, which may be rigged with explosives, without risking soldiers' lives. | ||
| * Self-defence, by destroying possible hideouts. | * Self-defence, by destroying possible hideouts. | ||
| Line 15: | Line 17: | ||
| Opponents of house demolition cite other motives: | Opponents of house demolition cite other motives: | ||
| * ] |
* ]. This refers to the indiscriminate use of force against Palestinian civilians as a punishment for "harbouring" or "tolerating" militant activity.<ref name="btselem-punishment"/> | ||
| * |
* Annexation of land to build the ] or to expand Israeli settlements.<ref name="Amnesty-rubble"/> | ||
| * Annexation, of land to build the ] or ] meant to separate Israel from the West Bank.<ref name="Amnesty-rubble"/> | |||
| Demolition is carried out using ]s, ]s planted by ] forces, or by directly bombing the house with ] or ]. | Demolition is carried out using ]s, ]s planted by ] forces, or by directly bombing the house with ] or ]. | ||
| ==Legal status== | ==Legal status== | ||
| The |
The legality of house demolition under ] is disputed. The ] protects non-combatants in occupied territories. Article 53 says: "Any destruction by the Occupying Power of real or ] belonging individually or collectively to private persons … is prohibited."<ref></ref> | ||
| Israel, which is a party to the Convention, denies that it is applicable to the ],<ref name="Amnesty-rubble">. ]</ref> on the grounds that acceptance of this convention would imply recognition that they are sovereign territories of other states,<ref>Alan Dowty, ''The Jewish State: A Century Later'', University of California Press, 2001, ISBN 0520229118, p. 217.</ref> but has stated that on humanitarian issues it will govern itself ''de facto'' by its provisions, without specifying which these are.<ref>Gerson, Allan. ''Israel, the West Bank, and International law'', Routledge, Sept 28, 1978, ISBN 0-7146-3091-8, p. 82.</ref><ref>Roberts, Adam, "Decline of Illusions: The Status of the Israeli-Occupied Territories over 21 Years" in ''International Affairs'' (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-), Vol. 64, No. 3. (Summer, 1988), pp. 345-359., p. 350</ref> | |||
| Israeli use of house demolitions has been particularly controversial. However, Israel, which is a party to the Fourth Geneva Convention, asserts that the terms of the Convention are not applicable to the ] on the grounds that it does not exercise sovereignty in the territories and is thus under no obligation to apply the treaty in those areas. This position is rejected by human rights organisations such as ], which notes that "it is a basic principle of human rights law that international human rights treaties are applicable in all areas in which states parties exercise effective control, regardless of whether or not they exercise sovereignty in that area."<ref name="Amnesty-rubble">. ], 18 May 2004.</ref> | |||
| Amnesty International has criticised the lack of ] in the use of house demolitions by Israel. Many demolitions are carried out with no warning or opportunity for the householder to appeal. | |||
| ⚫ | ==House demolition as punitive |
||
| According to the Israeli human rights organization ], Israel has implemented a policy of demolishing and sealing houses in the West Bank and Gaza Strip as a punitive measure against the Palestinian population since 1967, renewing its efforts with "increased vigor" at the start of the ]<ref name="btselem-punishment"> ]</ref>. ] reports that more than 2,500 homes were destroyed by the ] in this way through Sept, 2004, in addition to the more than 2,500 homes demolished as part of military "clearing operations" during the ] alone.<ref>. ]</ref> | |||
| ⚫ | In 2002, a proposed demolition case was appealed to the ]<ref name="Amnesty-rubble"/> who ruled that there must a right to appeal unless doing so would ''"endanger the lives of Israelis or if there are combat activities in the vicinity."'' In a later ruling the Supreme Court decided that demolitions can be carried out if advance notice would hinder demolition. Amnesty describes this as ''"a virtual green light"'' to demolition with no warning and this is now what happens in most cases. | ||
| "The declared objective of house demolitions was deterrence, achieved by harming the relatives of Palestinians who carried out, or were suspected of involvement in carrying out, attacks against Israeli citizens and soldiers. Indeed, the main victims of the demolitions were family members, among them women, the elderly, and children, who bore no responsibility for the acts of their relative and were not suspected of involvement in any offense. ... Furthermore, unlike house demolition in the past, in which the IDF was careful to damage only the house of the nuclear family of the person because of whom the house was being demolished, in many cases during the al-Aqsa intifada, the IDF has also damaged nearby homes. ... B’Tselem’s research clearly shows that in some cases, soldiers intentionally damaged adjacent homes."<ref name="btselem-punishment"/> | |||
| ⚫ | ==House demolition as a punitive measure== | ||
| ⚫ | House demolitions are usually done without prior warning or legal process and often during the night. The home's inhabitants are given little time to evacuate - usually between a few minutes to half an hour.<ref> ]. ], ]</ref> |
||
| ⚫ | === History === | ||
| ⚫ | |||
| ==House demolition as annexation== | |||
| According to Amnesty International, "The destruction of Palestinian homes, agricultural land and other property in the Occupied Territories, including East Jerusalem, is inextricably linked with Israel’s long-standing policy of appropriating as much as possible of the land it occupies, notably by establishing Israeli settlements."<ref name="Amnesty-rubble"/> In Oct 1999, during the "Peace Process" and before the start of the Al Aqsa Intefada, Amnesty International wrote that: "well over one third of the Palestinian population of East Jerusalem live under threat of having their house demolished. ... Threatened houses exist in almost every street and it is probable that the great majority of Palestinians live in or next to a house due for demolition."<ref name="Amnesty-theft">. ]</ref> | |||
| During the period 2006-2007, Israel has demolished 165 homes in the West Bank (excluding East Jerusalem) claiming that they lacked building permits, leaving 724 people homeless. In addition, Israel destroyed 1,049 houses and other structures claiming permit violations in the West Bank in the period 1999-2003, and demolished 2,276 houses in the West Bank and East Jerusalem combined in the period 1987-1998. | |||
| "House demolitions ostensibly occur because the homes are built 'illegally' - i.e. without a permit. Officials and spokespersons of the Israeli government have consistently maintained that the demolition of Palestinian houses is based on planning considerations and is carried out according to the law. ... But the Israeli policy has been based on discrimination. Palestinians are targeted for no other reasons than that they are Palestinians. ... discriminated in the application of the law, strictly enforcing planning prohibitions where Palestinian houses are built and freely allowing amendments to the plans to promote development where Israelis are setting up settlements."<ref name="Amnesty-theft"/> | |||
| ⚫ | In 2002, a |
||
| ⚫ | ==History== | ||
| The use of punitive house demolitions in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is rooted in British military practices dating to the early twentieth century. In 1945, ] authorities formally legislated these practices under the Defence (Emergency) Regulations. Regulation 119 states that: | The use of punitive house demolitions in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is rooted in British military practices dating to the early twentieth century. In 1945, ] authorities formally legislated these practices under the Defence (Emergency) Regulations. Regulation 119 states that: | ||
| <blockquote>" (1) A Military Commander may by order direct the forfeiture to the Government of Palestine of any house, structure, or land from which he has reason to suspect that any firearm has been illegally discharged, or any bomb, grenade or explosive or incendiary article illegally thrown, or of any house, structure or land situated in any area, town, village, quarter or street the inhabitants or some of the inhabitants of which he is satisfied have committed, or attempted to commit, or abetted the commission of, or been accessories after the fact to the commission of, any offence against these Regulations involving violence or intimidation or any Military Court offence; and when any house, structure or land is forfeited as aforesaid, the Military Commander may destroy the house or the structure or anything growing on the land.<ref></ref></blockquote> | <blockquote>" (1) A Military Commander may by order direct the forfeiture to the Government of Palestine of any house, structure, or land from which he has reason to suspect that any firearm has been illegally discharged, or any bomb, grenade or explosive or incendiary article illegally thrown, or of any house, structure or land situated in any area, town, village, quarter or street the inhabitants or some of the inhabitants of which he is satisfied have committed, or attempted to commit, or abetted the commission of, or been accessories after the fact to the commission of, any offence against these Regulations involving violence or intimidation or any Military Court offence; and when any house, structure or land is forfeited as aforesaid, the Military Commander may destroy the house or the structure or anything growing on the land.<ref></ref></blockquote> | ||
| Line 50: | Line 38: | ||
| According to author Samuel Katz, "Destroying the house of a terrorist ... was cruel and after the fact, but it was meant to convince fathers to convince their sons that carrying out a terrorist attack, no matter how justified in the grander struggle, meant enormous hardship for the family."<ref name=Katz160>{{citebook |author=Katz, Samuel |title=The Hunt for the Engineer |publisher=Lyons Press |date=2002 |isbn=1585747491}}, page 160</ref> | According to author Samuel Katz, "Destroying the house of a terrorist ... was cruel and after the fact, but it was meant to convince fathers to convince their sons that carrying out a terrorist attack, no matter how justified in the grander struggle, meant enormous hardship for the family."<ref name=Katz160>{{citebook |author=Katz, Samuel |title=The Hunt for the Engineer |publisher=Lyons Press |date=2002 |isbn=1585747491}}, page 160</ref> | ||
| ⚫ | House demolitions are usually done without prior warning or legal process and often during the night. The home's inhabitants are given little time to evacuate - usually between a few minutes to half an hour.<ref> ]. ], ]</ref> | ||
| == Effectiveness as a Deterrence == | |||
| ===Criticism and responses=== | |||
| The effectiveness of house demolitions as a deterrence has been questioned. In 2005 an Israeli Army commission to study house demolitions found no proof of effective deterrence and concluded that the damage caused by the demolitions overrides its effectiveness. As a result, the IDF approved the commission's recommendations to end punitive demolitions of Palestinian houses.<ref></ref> | The effectiveness of house demolitions as a deterrence has been questioned. In 2005 an Israeli Army commission to study house demolitions found no proof of effective deterrence and concluded that the damage caused by the demolitions overrides its effectiveness. As a result, the IDF approved the commission's recommendations to end punitive demolitions of Palestinian houses.<ref></ref> | ||
| Line 58: | Line 48: | ||
| <blockquote>"Demolishing the homes of civilians merely because a family member has committed a crime is immoral. If, however,... potential suicide murderers... will refrain from killing out of fear that their mothers will become homeless, it would be immoral to leave the Palestinian mothers untouched in their homes while Israeli children die on their school buses."<ref>] (2004): ''"Right to Exist: A Moral Defense of Israel's Wars"'' ISBN 1400032431. p.260</ref></blockquote> | <blockquote>"Demolishing the homes of civilians merely because a family member has committed a crime is immoral. If, however,... potential suicide murderers... will refrain from killing out of fear that their mothers will become homeless, it would be immoral to leave the Palestinian mothers untouched in their homes while Israeli children die on their school buses."<ref>] (2004): ''"Right to Exist: A Moral Defense of Israel's Wars"'' ISBN 1400032431. p.260</ref></blockquote> | ||
| ==House demolitions in recent conflicts== | |||
| Dr. ] of ] writes: | |||
| ⚫ | House demolition has been used in an on-again-off-again fashion by the Israeli government during the ]. More than 3,000 homes have been destroyed in this way.<ref>. ]</ref>House demolition was used to destroy the family homes of Saleh Abdel Rahim al-Souwi<ref name=Katz160/> (perpetrator of the ]) and ]<ref>. Palestinian Academic Society for the Study of International Affairs</ref> (]'s chief bombmaker, known as "the engineer"), as well as the perpetators of the ], and the ].<ref>Katz, 280-281</ref> | ||
| <blockquote>"The thinking is that a national threat calls for a national response, invariably aggressive. Accordingly, a Jewish house without a permit is an urban problem; but a Palestinian home without a permit is a strategic threat. A Jew building without a permit is ‘cocking a snook at the law’; a Palestinian doing the same is defying Jewish sovereignty over Jerusalem."<ref>Dr. ], (2007): </ref></blockquote> | |||
| According to the Israeli human rights organization ]: | |||
| * From October 2001 to December 2005, Israel has demolished 668 homes as punishment, leaving 4,182 people homeless; | |||
| * Israel has demolished 1,746 homes for alleged military purposes since B'Teselem started keeping statistics in this category in 2004; | |||
| ==References== | ==References== | ||
| Line 67: | Line 60: | ||
| == External links == | == External links == | ||
| * | * | ||
| * | |||
| ] | ] | ||
| ⚫ | ] | ||
| ⚫ | ] | ||
| ] | ] | ||
| ] | ] | ||
| ⚫ | ] | ||
| ⚫ | ] | ||
Revision as of 04:27, 3 August 2007
 | This article is currently under extended confirmed protection. Extended confirmed protection prevents edits from all unregistered editors and registered users with fewer than 30 days tenure and 500 edits. The policy on community use specifies that extended confirmed protection can be applied to combat disruption, if semi-protection has proven to be ineffective. Extended confirmed protection may also be applied to enforce arbitration sanctions. Please discuss any changes on the talk page; you may submit an edit request to ask for uncontroversial changes supported by consensus. |
- This article covers the use of house demolition in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. For a broader overview of house demolition as a military tactic, see house demolition.
House demolition is a controversial tactic used by the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) for counter-insurgency and other security purposes in the West Bank and Gaza Strip during the course of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The IDF justifies it as a deterrent against terrorism. The effectiveness and legality of this practice has repeatedly been questioned by human rights groups, whose neutrality has in turn been questioned.
In February 2005, the Israeli Defense Ministry ordered an end to the demolition of houses for the purpose of punishing the families of suicide bombers.
Purposes and means
 | The neutrality of this section is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
House demolition is typically justified by the Israeli Defence Forces on grounds of:
- Deterrence, achieved by harming the relatives of those who carry out, or are suspected of involvement in carrying out, attacks.
- Counter-terrorism, by destroying militant facilities such as bombs labs, headquarters, and offices.
- Forcing out an individual barricaded inside a house, which may be rigged with explosives, without risking soldiers' lives.
- Self-defence, by destroying possible hideouts.
- Combat engineering, clearing a path for tanks and heavy APCs.
Opponents of house demolition cite other motives:
- Collective punishment. This refers to the indiscriminate use of force against Palestinian civilians as a punishment for "harbouring" or "tolerating" militant activity.
- Annexation of land to build the Israeli West Bank barrier or to expand Israeli settlements.
Demolition is carried out using armored bulldozers, explosives planted by combat engineering forces, or by directly bombing the house with artillery or aircraft.
Legal status
The legality of house demolition under International law is disputed. The Fourth Geneva Convention protects non-combatants in occupied territories. Article 53 says: "Any destruction by the Occupying Power of real or personal property belonging individually or collectively to private persons … is prohibited."
Israel, which is a party to the Convention, denies that it is applicable to the Palestinian territories, on the grounds that acceptance of this convention would imply recognition that they are sovereign territories of other states, but has stated that on humanitarian issues it will govern itself de facto by its provisions, without specifying which these are.
Amnesty International has criticised the lack of due process in the use of house demolitions by Israel. Many demolitions are carried out with no warning or opportunity for the householder to appeal.
In 2002, a proposed demolition case was appealed to the Israeli Supreme Court who ruled that there must a right to appeal unless doing so would "endanger the lives of Israelis or if there are combat activities in the vicinity." In a later ruling the Supreme Court decided that demolitions can be carried out if advance notice would hinder demolition. Amnesty describes this as "a virtual green light" to demolition with no warning and this is now what happens in most cases.
House demolition as a punitive measure
History
The use of punitive house demolitions in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is rooted in British military practices dating to the early twentieth century. In 1945, British Mandate authorities formally legislated these practices under the Defence (Emergency) Regulations. Regulation 119 states that:
" (1) A Military Commander may by order direct the forfeiture to the Government of Palestine of any house, structure, or land from which he has reason to suspect that any firearm has been illegally discharged, or any bomb, grenade or explosive or incendiary article illegally thrown, or of any house, structure or land situated in any area, town, village, quarter or street the inhabitants or some of the inhabitants of which he is satisfied have committed, or attempted to commit, or abetted the commission of, or been accessories after the fact to the commission of, any offence against these Regulations involving violence or intimidation or any Military Court offence; and when any house, structure or land is forfeited as aforesaid, the Military Commander may destroy the house or the structure or anything growing on the land.
According to author Samuel Katz, "Destroying the house of a terrorist ... was cruel and after the fact, but it was meant to convince fathers to convince their sons that carrying out a terrorist attack, no matter how justified in the grander struggle, meant enormous hardship for the family."
House demolitions are usually done without prior warning or legal process and often during the night. The home's inhabitants are given little time to evacuate - usually between a few minutes to half an hour.
Criticism and responses
The effectiveness of house demolitions as a deterrence has been questioned. In 2005 an Israeli Army commission to study house demolitions found no proof of effective deterrence and concluded that the damage caused by the demolitions overrides its effectiveness. As a result, the IDF approved the commission's recommendations to end punitive demolitions of Palestinian houses.
A number of Human rights organizations, including Human Rights Watch and the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, oppose the practice. They argue that the practice violates international laws against collective punishment, the destruction of private property, and the use of force against civilians.
Israeli historian Yaacov Lozowick writes:
"Demolishing the homes of civilians merely because a family member has committed a crime is immoral. If, however,... potential suicide murderers... will refrain from killing out of fear that their mothers will become homeless, it would be immoral to leave the Palestinian mothers untouched in their homes while Israeli children die on their school buses."
House demolitions in recent conflicts
House demolition has been used in an on-again-off-again fashion by the Israeli government during the al-Aqsa Intifada. More than 3,000 homes have been destroyed in this way.House demolition was used to destroy the family homes of Saleh Abdel Rahim al-Souwi (perpetrator of the Tel Aviv bus 5 massacre) and Yahya Ayyash (Hamas's chief bombmaker, known as "the engineer"), as well as the perpetators of the First and second Jerusalem bus 18 massacres, and the Ashqelon bus station bombing.
According to the Israeli human rights organization B'Tselem:
- From October 2001 to December 2005, Israel has demolished 668 homes as punishment, leaving 4,182 people homeless;
- Israel has demolished 1,746 homes for alleged military purposes since B'Teselem started keeping statistics in this category in 2004;
References
- House demolitions as punishment
- Cite error: The named reference
btselem-punishmentwas invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ Israel and the Occupied Territories Under the rubble: House demolition and destruction of land and property. Amnesty International
- Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions - Frequently asked questions
- Alan Dowty, The Jewish State: A Century Later, University of California Press, 2001, ISBN 0520229118, p. 217.
- Gerson, Allan. Israel, the West Bank, and International law, Routledge, Sept 28, 1978, ISBN 0-7146-3091-8, p. 82.
- Roberts, Adam, "Decline of Illusions: The Status of the Israeli-Occupied Territories over 21 Years" in International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-), Vol. 64, No. 3. (Summer, 1988), pp. 345-359., p. 350
- THE LEGALITY OF HOUSE DEMOLITIONS UNDER INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW
- ^ Katz, Samuel (2002). The Hunt for the Engineer. Lyons Press. ISBN 1585747491., page 160
- Israel: House demolitions -- Palestinians given "15 minutes to leave... Amnesty International. December 8, 1999
- Is the House Demolition Policy Legal under International Humanitarian Law?
- Human Rights News: IDF House Demolition Injures Refugees
- Yaacov Lozowick (2004): "Right to Exist: A Moral Defense of Israel's Wars" ISBN 1400032431. p.260
- Through No Fault of Their Own: Israel's Punitive House Demolitions in the al-Aqsa Intifada. B'Tselem
- Palestine Facts. Palestinian Academic Society for the Study of International Affairs
- Katz, 280-281