The Politics of Placelessness
by Lynda Brayer*
The peace process was supposed to offer a real solution to the Israeli occupation, to liberate the Palestinians, and to provide them with the single right which they have been so long denied: a nationality. Yet this right is still withheld and is even further from Palestinians than it was in 1993, 1967, or 1948. Israel continues to commit a violation of international law without parallel in the modern world: the systematic denial of nationality to an entire people. The exposure of this violation is now essential if it is ever to be properly understood and opposed, and if we are ever to see a genuine and lasting peace in the Middle East.
The Importance of Nationality
At the end of the twentieth century, nationality is the fundamental requirement for interaction and cooperation between human beings. Our nations are communities in which we share language, traditions, values, and laws. We cannot envisage communal life without this foundation of belonging, the idea of place and time which adheres to a nation. Nationality and the rights which it bestows upon citizens are the basis of a democratic system which depends upon the promotion and protection of these rights.
The United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights enshrines the principle of nationality alongside the other basic requirements for a meaningful and free existence. Article 15 of the declaration reads as follows:
1. Everyone has the right to a nationality.
2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.
According to the declaration, nationality must be a constant presence in our lives as human beings. We may even change our nationality if our sense of belonging should be offended or constrained by the actions of our nation; but it must not be taken from us at any price. Of course, many countries guard their nationalities fiercely, creating laws to inhibit the ease with which one can become a member of a nation; but virtually every nation commits itself to a system of acquiring citizenship that is at least transparent and consistent.
There are two major systems for acquiring nationality in the world today, each with a long and rich history of operation throughout the world: ius soli and ius sanguinis. The first offers nationality on the basis of the location of one's birth. If you are born within a country, you automatically possess its nationality. On the other hand, ius sanguinis confers nationality on the principle of descent, establishing a family connection with a nation and seeking to maintain it across the generations.
These conventions of nationality are variously applied throughout the world and are open themselves part of a wider political framework. Sometimes, both systems work in tandem to ensure a wide citizenship; occasionally, one is preferred over the other for political reasons. A country seeking to curb the entry of immigrants, for example, might move from the ius soli to the ius sanguinis to deter the assumption that arrival in a new country guarantees benefits to a refugee and his/her subsequent generations. We have seen this shining occur in Germany and California in recent years, with backlash of controversy and debate in both instances. People understand that nationality is a vital issue, and attempts to restrict or to deny nationality are rightly publicized and contested.
However, despite the potential for injustice inherent in this selective commitment to one or another system, we should be clear that virtually no state rejects both principles and denies citizenship on both grounds. The debates in Germany and in the United Sates were sparked by a shuttling between ius soli and ius sanguinis, not by a
rejection of both. Nations universally agree on the need to replenish and reenergize their populations, a process which can only occur with the granting of nationality to more and more people. Nationality provides the individual and the community with permanent and formal legal protection of their rights and their status as human beings within a particular territory. These are rights which a democratic government cannot deny to the people whom it represents.
Israel and "Nationality"
Palestinian nationality has been one of the promises of the recent peace process. From the president of the United Sates, to the doves of Israeli politics, to the people of the West Bank and Gaza themselves, the stated ambition has been the same: to see the creation of some form of Palestinian sate within the Occupied Territories and thus to allow the Palestinians to have their fundamental human right of nationality.
Unfortunately, Palestinians are still denied this right. The dignity of nationality has not been conferred upon them by the present peace process, and they seem further from realizing this aim now than at any time in their history thus far. In the Occupied Territories in 1997, the Palestinians are still without the nationality which was promised them. To understand fully how this terrible situation has prevailed, we must look in detail at the conditions in which Palestinians are now living.
The Palestinian "Passport": Restriction of Movement
Passports facilitate international travel. They are a method of ensuring that each country's sovereignty and security are maintained and that foreign visitors are always readily identifiable. In Israel, a passport is required for travel abroad. It is not needed to drive from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem or from Jerusalem to any of the settlements in the Occupied Territories. For Israeli citizens, none of the land west of the Jordan is foreign territory. Israeli nationality is sufficient to guarantee passage through these areas without impediment.
In Palestine, the passport has a very different function. The inhabitants of all the Palestinian areas need Israeli identity cards to move from one part of the Occupied Territories to another. These cards are necessary for the movement of people, and so they serve as internal passports. Their function is similar to the "passes" employed in apartheid South Africa to control and restrict the "nonwhites population.
There are many different kinds of Palestinian passports, each dependent, not upon the place of birth, but upon the place of habitation at the time of issuance. A Jerusalem passport would probably entitle you to move around the West Bank, providing you did not stay away from Jerusalem for too long. A Ramallah passport also licenses travel between Palestinian areas in the West Bank, although you would be absolutely prohibited From visiting Jerusalem at the present time, and could never do so - even with the border open - without obtaining an additional permit before traveling. A Gaza passport would entitle you, at present, merely to remain in Gaza. Here, perhaps, it would be better to revert to the Israeli definition of Identity card," since a passport which does not license any movement whatsoever is a contradiction in terms.
In the West Bank, there is a further restriction of movement which is dependent, not upon the place of habitation, but upon an Israeli security rating. This extralegal classification can Further impede travel, restricting a person to his or her particular town or village in a sate of virtual house arrest. To complete the scheme of Israeli control, a new generation of electronic identity cards is now being introduced which will soon keep every Palestinian under tool surveillance. These will ensure that all Palestinians are always identifiable and traceable by Israel. Even those who may move with a degree of freedom will be constantly monitored by the Israelis.
We thus have at least three different Palestinian passports and three consequent Palestinian national identities. A Palestinian From Jerusalem can hardly share the same nationality as a Palestinian From Gaza since the former has much greater freedom of movement than the latter; similarly, a resident of Nablus confined to that city for "security" reasons can hardly be compared with a neighbor who can move throughout the West Bank. The ongoing occupation of Palestinian territories and the increasingly coercive methods employed to limit and contain Palestinian activity ensure that Palestinian nationality is a fractured, shifting concept.
Deportation and the Withdrawal of Internal Passports ("Identity Cards")
We can see from the above that the Jerusalem "nationality" is the most extensive of all three categories, and so we should not be surprised to learn that Israel attempts most fiercely to control and to curb the Palestinian population which lives in Jerusalem.
To be in possession of a Jerusalem identity card is no guarantee that one will keep it. These cards may be taken away according to extralegal criteria applied by the Israelis and are frequency withdrawn from Palestinians in accordance with the larger Israeli policy of limiting the number of Palestinians in Jerusalem. To leave Jerusalem for a prolonged period of time is to risk being deprived of the right h return. To move away From Jerusalem is out of the question since there will be no way to reenter once the slim rights granted by residency are denied. All Palestinians leaving for foreign destinations must deposit Their identity cards with the Israeli authorities upon weir departure, and the return of this identity is at The discretion of Israel.
For example, a student going to shady abroad may well be denied the right to return to his or her home in Jerusalem. Those who find work abroad may also experience difficulties when they return.
The depositing of one's identity card upon departure aptly symbolizes The status of identity for Palestinians: everything they have belongs to Israel.
Discrimination Against Palestinian Families
The rights of Palestinian families have been particularly eroded by the Israeli system of classification. Although the principle of the unity of families is universally recognized, in Palestinian areas it is common practice for family members to be separately classified and effectively kept from one another.
For example, possession of the Jerusalem identity card is not sufficient to grant Jerusalem stains to all family members; if one is living at an address outside of Jerusalem (even in a neighboring village), that place of current residency is the deciding factor in the attribution of identity to The family.
Families may therefore face separation and hardship if they have lived in more than one place, and they can easily be forced away from one area if they are not all allowed to live there together. This is another Israeli strategy for keeping Palestinians out of Jerusalem and for keeping those Palestinians with Jordanian links out of the West Bank.
Of course, the situation for extended families is far worse. There are no provisions whatsoever for allowing siblings, grandparents, and other relations to come together in one place. The rights of these extended families are absolutely not recognized, and so many people are unable to live with or even to visit their loved ones.
These oppressive rulings are the legacy of the Israeli census of 1967, undertaken just at chat moment when Israel extended its jurisdiction over East Jerusalem. Palestinians had previously enjoyed free movement between the towns and villages of the West Bank and Jerusalem and were entirely unprepared for the draconian restrictions which were soon to be forced upon them.
Apart from those classifications based upon family unification provisions, the entire system of Palestinian identity is still derived from that picture of Palestinian society taken in 1967, a Frozen view of a people used to fluid existence, who could not possibly be expected to arrange themselves demographically with the following 30 years in view. The temporary situation was knowingly and maliciously presented as permanent, and it still dictates Palestinian existence almost three decades later.
Denial of Social Benefits
Even though Palestinians in Jerusalem have paid their national insurance into the same fund and at the same rate as Jews, they do not have the same entitlement to benefits. Again, these benefits are dependent for Arabs upon the place of current habitation. For example, if a person is already receiving a pension and is then forced to live outside of Jerusalem, pension payments are immediately stopped. If such a person returns to Jerusalem, s/he is held in quarantine for two years before payment is renewed.
The National Insurance law defines Arab entitlement according to residency right, and Jewish entitlement according to the Jewish Right of Return.
In practice this means that a Palestinian who has worked for a lifetime in Jerusalem can lose his or her right to a pension (which s/he has paid for over decades) if forced to live in Bethlehem or Ramallah; but an elderly Jew arriving in Israel for the first time is entitled to a full pension despite having made no contributions, no matter where he w the decides to live in Israel or in the Occupied Territories.
Those Palestinians who live outside of annexed East Jerusalem never receive an Israeli pension, even though Their work within Israel is taxed at 12.5 percent for this very purpose. An estimated $2 billion has been given by Palestinians to Israel in National Insurance (NI) contributions since 1967, despite the fact that Palestinians are not eligible for ten of the eleven benefits drawn from the Nl fund.
This injustice is specifically targeted at Palestinians. The more recent influx of labor from overseas (which has been recruited after the disappearance of Palestinian workers due to the collective punishment of Israeli border closures) has been taxed at 0.89 percent only (the official rate for foreign workers), whilst the Palestinian rate remains at 12.5 percent.
This, in turn, means that Palestinians (if and when the border closures are relaxed) will find it more difficult to work in Israel since employers will favor those workers who are taxed at a much lower rate.
The Palestinian rate of Nl deduction was illegal even according to Israeli law for more than 20 years and was sustained through secret government fiat rather then explicit legislation.
Freeze on Arab Settlements and the Destruction of Property
There has been a concerted effort by the Israelis throughout their 30-year occupation to prevent Palestinians from building homes, offices, and infrastructure. Advances which might have a positive effect on Palestinian individuals and the nascent Palestinian nation have been deterred with extreme prejudice.
In East Jerusalem, we can see most clearly the consequences of the usurpation of existing law by Israeli occupation and colonization. The Israeli state has, since 1967, enforced a policy of population control upon the Palestinian community in Jerusalem. All decisions regarding property rights and planning have been executed in accordance with this desire to reduce and control the number of Palestinians living in East Jerusalem.
The plan of population control is pursued systematically. No construction is permitted in East Jerusalem except in accordance with a Town Planning Scheme produced by the Jewish Municipal Government. All Palestinian landowners are unable to build upon their own land until these Planning Schemes have become law. Even if a plan is approved, however, there are numerous methods by which Palestinian development is contained. Firstly, the Planning Schemes are almost always restricted to areas which are bully developed, empty or unused Palestinian land is typically excluded From the plans. This means that there is little room for expansion of Palestinian neighborhoods and no solution to the problems of overcrowding within these existing communities. Secondly, land within the Planning Scheme can itself be appropriated for other purposes than housing; roads, "public buildings," or (most cynically) "green areas" ensure that Palestinian land is confiscated from legitimate owners or rendered useless. Thirdly, the Planning Schemes militate against industrial development of any kind and ensure that Palestinian construction remains at low density; for planning purposes, Palestinian urban areas are frequently treated as if they were villages; again, to ensure that the population is strictly controlled.
It goes without saying that none of these limitations applies to the Jewish areas of Jerusalem. Although Planning Schemes are also necessary for Jewish development, they bear no resemblance to the Palestinian Schemes. High density housing is encouraged, and as little land as possible is reserved for "public buildings" or other functions which would impede population growth. In addition, the Jewish Planning Schemes, although more elaborate and well-researched than the Palestinian ones, pass through the Municipality at great speed - typically in less than two years. Palestinian Schemes, by contrast, typically take as many as 10 years and sometimes more than 15. Palestinians themselves are finally forced to pay the bill for the Schemes, even though their land has been divided and reduced as a consequence of them.
These various strategies for limiting the growth of the Palestinian community in Jerusalem are derived from a quota drawn up soon after 1967 designed to ensure ongoing Jewish domination of the city; the Municipality and the Israeli state are secretly committed to preserving a ratio of 72 percent Jewish to 28 percent Arab population. The techniques which have been successfully used in this pursuit can, of course, very easily be adapted to reducing the Palestinian presence still further and ensuring that Palestinian land rights are still further eroded.
"Illegal" in Their Own Land
These various denials of rights are entirely inconsistent with the principles of nationality, with the basic need to belong to a single community and a single nation. Palestinians can appeal neither to ius soli nor to ius sanguinis since there is no coherent and comprehensive nationality (and attached system of rights) available to them. Even in apartheid South Africa, "nonwhites" were granted the protection of one of these conventions. While they were denied the rights of nationality and hence citizenship in "white" South Africa they were afforded these rights in the Bantustans of their tribes. To fully understand the Palestinian predicament, then, we must think carefully about the many institutionalized restrictions upon Palestinians and the context in which they are maintained.
To think of the extended families of East Jerusalem as refugees from an older Palestine before the occupation is to begin to appreciate the true nature of Palestinian nationality today. Palestinians face exactly the same problems as illegal immigrants in other countries. A telling indication of the disparity between Palestinian nationality in Jerusalem and Israeli nationality is the increasing number of Palestinians who are speculatively applying for Israeli citizenship. These people are choosing Israeli nationality over Palestinian. Recognizing that there is no Palestinian identity under Israeli rule, they are assuming the only nationality they can. These Jerusalem Palestinians might just be considered resident aliens since Israel grudgingly admits their existence and grants them minimal rights. Those Palestinians outside Jerusalem are subject to a circumscription of movement and a systematic denial of rights in accordance with a rejection of any claim to residency in a particular country; thus, they have the status of illegal immigrants in the eyes of Israeli law Just as the Turkish population in Germany or the Latino population in California face discrimination in their new countries and are encouraged to return to their origins rather than to make a new life for themselves in a different place, so the Palestinians are an unwanted and unwelcome people in the Israeli-occupied territories.
This comparison contains one major flaw, however: the Palestinians are not from another place. They are from Gaza, Jericho, or Jerusalem. They have not immigrated to these areas. They have simply stayed in the same place. The extraordinary truth is that Palestinians have become illegal immigrants in their own land, simply by staying put as Israel has colonized their land. The Israeli nation, in East Jerusalem and through all its settlements in the West Bank and Gaza, has quietly expanded to surround and contain the entire Palestinian population, a population which clearly has no place within the state of Israel. The Palestinians are refugees in time rather than in space. There is nowhere for them to go except to a past which has been lost forever.
Since Israel will continue to regard their presence as illegal, no home will be found for them in the Jewish state, and they will be subjected to the persecution and discrimination which inevitably result from their placelessness.
This situation is not entirely without precedent. If we return to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries and study the colonialism of Europe in the Americas, we might find a parallel effort to usurp the territory of indigenous populations and to destroy the nationalities of entire peoples; if we return to 1 930s Germany, we can see the committed efforts of the Third Reich to disenfranchise and denationalize the Jews of Europe, leaving them without origins and without a future. The native peoples of the Americas suffered incredible hardship and virtual destruction; the Jews of Europe were taken to camps, places of no nationality and belonging, before they were also destroyed. History teaches us that the denial of nationality is an essential step on the road to the eradication of a people. This eradication of the Palestinians is what we are forced to contemplate in Israel, at the end of the twentieth century, in defiance of the lessons of the past.
The People Without a Land
One of the most enduring and deceptive slogans of Zionism was coined by Israel Zangwill almost 100 years ago: Palestine was a "land without a people for a people without a land." With the benefit of hindsight, we can now see the entire Zionist enterprise, this colonialism for the twenty-first century, as an effort to turn Zangwill's lie into a truth. The Palestinian people have been systematically and brutally detached from their land in the hope that they will consequently cease to be a people. Denied their basic rights and denied their nation, the Palestinians are the victims of Israel's politics of placelessness. The present peace agreements will not bring them Palestinian nationality but will simply conclude the process by which that nationality is destroyed forever.
* Lynda Brayer initiated the creation of the society of St. Yves, a Catholic legal resource center for human rights, in 1988. The society of St. Yves is a legal aid society based in East Jerusalem and committed to human rights for all based on the principle of self-determination and international law. A Catholic organization, the staff and clientele of St. Yves represent an ecumenical spectrum.