Why has Israel refused to give up the occupied territories?

Answer 1

Let me give you an example. In 2006, Israel gave up the "occupied territory" of Gaza. Since that time, thousands of explosive, deadly rockets have been fired at our civilians. So why should we be so hasty to give up any further territory?Texas was once Mexican territory. If Mexico fired rockets at American civilians and demanded its return, do you think America would capitulate?

Opening Note
It is worth noting at the outset three things:

1) Occupied Territories: First, according to UNSC Resolution 242, Israel has legal occupation of six distinct territories as a result of the Six Day War pending a final peace treaty, the Sinai Peninsula, the Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem, the West Bank, the Eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee, and the Golan Heights. The Sinai Peninsula was returned to Egypt in 1979-1982. The Gaza Strip was withdrawn from in 2005. Israel has been in negotiations with Syria on numerous occasions, most famously in 2011 before the Syrian Civil War, concerning the return of the Golan Heights and possibly the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee. What this question is likely referring to are the two of these six territories that are claimed for a Palestinian State under Israeli Occupation, namely East Jerusalem and the West Bank, and this question will focus on those.

2) Gaza is NOT Currently Occupied: Second, the Gaza Strip is currently surrounded and blockaded by Israel, but Israeli soldiers do not monitor and control domestic policy in Gaza; Hamas does. Israel has already ceded this territory to the Palestinian Authority in 2005, which lost a civil war in 2007 to Hamas, which currently runs things there. As a result, the question of lifting of the blockade would be separate and should be asked independently.

3) Diversity of Israeli Opinion on the Matter: Third, many Left-Wing Israelis are in favor of a whole or partial cession of the West Bank to the Palestinian Authority. However, as this is not the position of the Israeli government, or many Right-Wing Israelis, the position of the Right should be explained.

Rationales to Avoid Cession of the West Bank and East Jerusalem

1) Appeasement: The primary reason that Right-Wing Israelis are opposed to giving up control of large sections of the West Bank is because they see that doing so would be appeasing the violence. Unilateral activity by Israel in the past, such as the 2005 withdrawal from Gaza, was seen by Islamic Militant Groups as a victory for their violent acts and inspired them to become more violent not less. Therefore, rather than help the Palestinians create a peaceful society, the cession of the territory would lead to increased violence and hostility, especially against Israeli citizens.

2) Security Dangers: There are a number of military and security benefits conferred by the West Bank to Israel as a state. The West Bank is dominated by two hilly regions, the Samarian Highlands in the north and the Judean Highlands in the south. Should Israel be invaded, these are strong tactical positions, above the enemy position. Additionally, as the highest point near Israel's nerve centers (the Jerusalem and Tel Aviv metropolitan areas), the Judean Highlands serve as the perfect place to have Israeli Anti-Aircraft devices and detection systems. Such systems do not function as well at lower altitudes where hills can block their effectiveness. Also from a borders standpoint, the West Bank city of Qalqilyah is around 12 km from the Mediterranean Sea and could serve as an invasion point to divide northern Israel (Haifa, Acre, Tiberias, Safed, and Hadera) from Central and Southern Israel (Tel Aviv metropolitan area, Jerusalem, and Beersheba), putting Israel in a precarious political situation. Finally, the east edge of the West Bank is the Jordan River Valley, which serves as a defensive embankment and makes Israeli invasion from Jordan impossible; ceding this would give away this defense.

3) Jewish Holy Sites: The West Bank and East Jerusalem are home to the vast majority of Jewish Holy Sites, including the Western Wall / Temple Mount site, which is the holiest site in Judaism. Most of the land of the Old Testament Kingdoms is also in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The Cave of the Patriarchs is in Hebron, the Tomb of Joshua in Nablus, the Tomb of Rachel in Bethlehem, and numerous other important Jewish sites are in the West Bank. When the West Bank was under Jordanian control prior to the Six Day War, Jews around the world (not just Israelis) were banned from visiting these sites. The Islamic Waqf, the Jordanian-organized Islamic organization which still runs the Dome of the Rock and Al-Aqsa Site (which includes just up to the Western Wall), has repeatedly argued that the Jewish reverence of the Western Wall is a Zionist invention and has no connection to Pre-Zionist Judaism (even though mountains of historical evidence controvert him). The Tomb of Joshua in Nablus is full of Islamic graffiti. Muslims in Hebron push strongly towards preventing Jewish access to the Cave of the Patriarchs. If these holy places were devolved to the Palestinian Authority, it is a serious possibility that Jews may be forbidden from visiting them.

4) Confidence in Negotiating Partner: Many Israelis doubt that the Palestinian Authority can actually follow through on its promises and secure peace because of the repetition of the cycle of agreements and breaking the agreements.

5) Uprooting the Settlements: Most Palestinians have argued that all 500,000+ Jewish Settlers in the West Bank and East Jerusalem (roughly 300k and 200k respectively) must return to Israel proper in order for the land to be properly devolved. Right-Wing Israelis look upon such a request as sanctioning a forced exodus from the land of their ancestors and refuse to make such a concession. Both Palestinians and Israeli Settlers refuse to compromise on this issue, even with midway possibilities, such as Israeli Settlers maintaining Israeli citizenship, but being subject to Palestinian Law or Israeli Settlers adopting Palestinian Nationality and becoming part of a multi-religious Palestinian State.

6) Lack of Refugee Solution: One of the biggest requirements to have long-term peace between Israel and Palestine is a resolution of the refugee situation. When Israel was created, 720,000 Palestinians escaped the land. Given their barbaric reception by their Arab neighbors, most want to return to the places that their family used to live. This is untenable for Israel since this would lead to Israel becoming a Muslim-majority state. Part of the resolution of this issue would be for the refugees to be exclusively repatriated to a Palestinian State, but simply ceding the land without having such an agreement would remove Israel's bargaining power on this issue.

7) Ignoring the Difficulties Faced by Palestinians: There are simply those on the Right who do not realize that or are not interested in that Palestinians in the West Bank are subject to a military legal system which detains them and holds proceedings away from civil law and generally accepted judicial practices. (For example, in a West Bank military tribunal, the accused is not allowed a translator should he not understand Hebrew or a lawyer to defend his interests before the court and the records of the proceedings are private, not public.) Conversely, Israeli Settlers in the West Bank are subject to Israeli Civil Law and do not see this more brutal system. As a result, they do not see why it is so bad for Palestinians who live there.

Answer 2

Answer 1

I will try to give you an abbreviated answer with the use of some of the many facts concerning this issue.....

Because if they were to leave, it would mean a renouncement to their long lasting argument of acquiring the "promise land." That reference within the biblical text is the basis of their entire argument on their right to settle and dominate the area, as well as their "right to exist." It would irreparably weaken the very foundation of their culture and the basis of their religion. That is, Jews would cease to exist (no longer a people). The US would suffer greatly if this were to happen, because among other things (such as monetary investments) they would lose the basis as to why they have been "defending" them since the holocaust. Christianity, as a child of Judaism, would suffer the same fate. The US and many countries the world over would lose the most powerful method of mass manipulation and control, religion. It would weaken US standing at home and abroad. One of the reasons why the US supports the Jewish people.

Answer 2

Aside from the fact that this question is incredibly slanted, there are several major reasons why Jews do not just up and leave Israel (and go back to Europe).

1) European Anti-Otherism: The European concept of a nation-state was dependent on the idea that all of the people in any particular nation were of the same ethnic stock and heritage. Jews were branded by this system to be "the Other" and were regarded at best as possible equals and at worse as traitors, spies, thieves, and fifth columns. When the Dreyfus Affair turned out marches in Paris that said "Death to the Jews" on account of a kangaroo court against a particular guiltless Jew, it became clear that the Jew could not be integrated into Europe. After the Holocaust, the strongest proof that the Jew and the European Nation-State were irreconcilable, this view persists. In Europe, it is now directed at the Moslems since the Jews are not large enough of a threat to the European System.

2) Historical Myth of Andalucia: The idea that Jews, Christians, and Muslims used to live in Palestine in perfect harmony based on a historical myth. The lack of constant violence is not peace or else what is going on inside of Iran (i.e. massive amounts of torture and vote-rigging by fundamentalist ideologues) would be peace. The Muslim idea of the "Andalucian Solution" is not based on historical fact or precedent. In Andalucia, sure Jews lived in relative security and prosperity for the Middle Ages. It did not come close to peace, though, in that Jews were still repressed, still taxed, and still subject to occasional pogroms. The question supposes that this system, one that rejects universal rights and freedoms applicable to all people, is viable today and would be desirable to non-Muslims is preposterous and absurd.

3) Palestine was violent: The idea that there was peace specifically in Palestine prior to World War II is fallacious. Palestine had been the site of numerous militias and violent activities perpetrated by both Arab Jihadists and Zionist Settlers during the Interwar period. Prior to World War I, there were violent attacks by Muslims under the protection of the Ottoman Banner on Jews and Christians in the territory to recover extra funds for the government. The idea that the British Mandate of Palestine was peaceful actually runs counter to historical evidence.

4) I Was Born Here!: Most Israelis today were born in Israel, have Israeli nationality, go to Israeli schools, and work Israeli jobs. They have lives, families, and history in Israel. Why should they be forced to abandon everything they've built to feed a dream based on non-truth (i.e. that Palestine would be peaceful without Jews). Additionally, there are 6 million Israeli Jewish citizens while there are only 4 million Palestinians outside of Israel's borders (this number includes Gaza and the West Bank). If anybody should be forced to move on pure numbers, it should be the Palestinians.

5) Mizrahi Jews: Upwards of 40% of the Jewish community in Israel is actually from Arab countries, not the United States or Europe. They fled under pain of death at the same time as the Palestinians did and in greater numbers (850,000 vs. 720,000). The Arab States where they were living were inhospitable at that point (counter to Arab retellings of the story) and have become even more Anti-Semitic with the Rise of Islamism in the Arab World. As a result, if Israel were to un-exist, they would be relegated to torture and murder in the countries of their origin.

6) Immigration and Quota Laws: The United States and Europe have quota regulations and laws restricting the ingress of people from foreign lands. Even if the Jews wanted to leave, which they don't, they would not be able to do it with any real immediacy. Furthermore, most places in Europe where Jews came from no longer have any real Jewish population and would cause problems and strife in their areas of Europe.

7) Historical Connection: All of the above regions fail to note how important the Land of Israel is to the Jewish people. It is the location of their holiest sites, which have been and continue to be abused and attacked by the Muslims who live there (such as the Cave of Machpelah). Therefore, the idea of leaving those sites to Muslim control again is unthinkable. Jews consistently find archaeological evidence of their past and of their ancestry. Ahad Ha'am, an early Zionist poet, explained that the Jewish Soul is intrinsically connected to his history and in the same way that a German-American can never be as properly German as a German in Germany, the People of Israel can never be as properly Jewish if they are not in the Land of Israel. The relics in that land speak to a Jewish sensibility and character.

8) American Jews: Most of Israel is of Old-World Provenance. Since the United States was beset with few pogroms and general tolerance for different religions, Jews in the United States never emigrated en masse to Israel. Some did, but most stayed behind. As a result if all of the American and American descended Jews returned to the United States, Israel would have lost less than 5% of its Jewish population.

As to Answer 1's assertions, the Jews survived for centuries without having a substantial population in Israel, so the idea the leaving Israel would "weaken" the Jewish culture is clearly incorrect. Additionally, the Jews do not claim that their right to exist as a sovereign power derives from The Bible, but from International Law. The League of Nations Mandate for Palestine (the document that gave Britain the right to control Palestine) explicitly states in Article 6 that Palestine is to serve as a future Jewish National Homeland. It is on this document and UNGA Resolution 181 (II) that Israel grounds its legitimacy. The historical attributes only serve to further the Jewish connection to the land outside of legal claims. Finally, regardless of whether religion is a method of governmental control is debatable, but forcing Jews to leave Israel would not in any way weaken religion. In fact, the growth of Atheism in the United States has roughly coincided with the time-period when the US supported Israel (1967-Present), so it would seem that if there is a correlation at all, it goes in the other direction.

Answer 3

Let me give you an example. In 2006, Israel gave up the "occupied territory" of Gaza. Since that time, thousands of explosive, deadly rockets have been fired at our civilians. So why should we be so hasty to give up any further territory?Texas was once Mexican territory. If Mexico fired rockets at American civilians and demanded its return, do you think America would capitulate?

Answer 4

Let me give you an example. In 2006, Israel gave up the "occupied territory" of Gaza. Since that time, thousands of explosive, deadly rockets have been fired at our civilians. So why should we be so hasty to give up any further territory?Texas was once Mexican territory. If Mexico fired rockets at American civilians and demanded its return, do you think America would capitulate?

Answer 5

Opening Note
It is worth noting at the outset three things:

1) Occupied Territories: First, according to UNSC Resolution 242, Israel has legal occupation of six distinct territories as a result of the Six Day War pending a final peace treaty, the Sinai Peninsula, the Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem, the West Bank, the Eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee, and the Golan Heights. The Sinai Peninsula was returned to Egypt in 1979-1982. The Gaza Strip was withdrawn from in 2005. Israel has been in negotiations with Syria on numerous occasions, most famously in 2011 before the Syrian Civil War, concerning the return of the Golan Heights and possibly the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee. What this question is likely referring to are the two of these six territories that are claimed for a Palestinian State under Israeli Occupation, namely East Jerusalem and the West Bank, and this question will focus on those.

2) Gaza is NOT Currently Occupied: Second, the Gaza Strip is currently surrounded and blockaded by Israel, but Israeli soldiers do not monitor and control domestic policy in Gaza; Hamas does. Israel has already ceded this territory to the Palestinian Authority in 2005, which lost a civil war in 2007 to Hamas, which currently runs things there. As a result, the question of lifting of the blockade would be separate and should be asked independently.

3) Diversity of Israeli Opinion on the Matter: Third, many Left-Wing Israelis are in favor of a whole or partial cession of the West Bank to the Palestinian Authority. However, as this is not the position of the Israeli government, or many Right-Wing Israelis, the position of the Right should be explained.

Rationales to Avoid Cession of the West Bank and East Jerusalem

1) Appeasement: The primary reason that Right-Wing Israelis are opposed to giving up control of large sections of the West Bank is because they see that doing so would be appeasing the violence. Unilateral activity by Israel in the past, such as the 2005 withdrawal from Gaza, was seen by Islamic Militant Groups as a victory for their violent acts and inspired them to become more violent not less. Therefore, rather than help the Palestinians create a peaceful society, the cession of the territory would lead to increased violence and hostility, especially against Israeli citizens.

2) Security Dangers: There are a number of military and security benefits conferred by the West Bank to Israel as a state. The West Bank is dominated by two hilly regions, the Samarian Highlands in the north and the Judean Highlands in the south. Should Israel be invaded, these are strong tactical positions, above the enemy position. Additionally, as the highest point near Israel's nerve centers (the Jerusalem and Tel Aviv metropolitan areas), the Judean Highlands serve as the perfect place to have Israeli Anti-Aircraft devices and detection systems. Such systems do not function as well at lower altitudes where hills can block their effectiveness. Also from a borders standpoint, the West Bank city of Qalqilyah is around 12 km from the Mediterranean Sea and could serve as an invasion point to divide northern Israel (Haifa, Acre, Tiberias, Safed, and Hadera) from Central and Southern Israel (Tel Aviv metropolitan area, Jerusalem, and Beersheba), putting Israel in a precarious political situation. Finally, the east edge of the West Bank is the Jordan River Valley, which serves as a defensive embankment and makes Israeli invasion from Jordan impossible; ceding this would give away this defense.

3) Jewish Holy Sites: The West Bank and East Jerusalem are home to the vast majority of Jewish Holy Sites, including the Western Wall / Temple Mount site, which is the holiest site in Judaism. Most of the land of the Old Testament Kingdoms is also in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The Cave of the Patriarchs is in Hebron, the Tomb of Joshua in Nablus, the Tomb of Rachel in Bethlehem, and numerous other important Jewish sites are in the West Bank. When the West Bank was under Jordanian control prior to the Six Day War, Jews around the world (not just Israelis) were banned from visiting these sites. The Islamic Waqf, the Jordanian-organized Islamic organization which still runs the Dome of the Rock and Al-Aqsa Site (which includes just up to the Western Wall), has repeatedly argued that the Jewish reverence of the Western Wall is a Zionist invention and has no connection to Pre-Zionist Judaism (even though mountains of historical evidence controvert him). The Tomb of Joshua in Nablus is full of Islamic graffiti. Muslims in Hebron push strongly towards preventing Jewish access to the Cave of the Patriarchs. If these holy places were devolved to the Palestinian Authority, it is a serious possibility that Jews may be forbidden from visiting them.

4) Confidence in Negotiating Partner: Many Israelis doubt that the Palestinian Authority can actually follow through on its promises and secure peace because of the repetition of the cycle of agreements and breaking the agreements.

5) Uprooting the Settlements: Most Palestinians have argued that all 500,000+ Jewish Settlers in the West Bank and East Jerusalem (roughly 300k and 200k respectively) must return to Israel proper in order for the land to be properly devolved. Right-Wing Israelis look upon such a request as sanctioning a forced exodus from the land of their ancestors and refuse to make such a concession. Both Palestinians and Israeli Settlers refuse to compromise on this issue, even with midway possibilities, such as Israeli Settlers maintaining Israeli citizenship, but being subject to Palestinian Law or Israeli Settlers adopting Palestinian Nationality and becoming part of a multi-religious Palestinian State.

6) Lack of Refugee Solution: One of the biggest requirements to have long-term peace between Israel and Palestine is a resolution of the refugee situation. When Israel was created, 720,000 Palestinians escaped the land. Given their barbaric reception by their Arab neighbors, most want to return to the places that their family used to live. This is untenable for Israel since this would lead to Israel becoming a Muslim-majority state. Part of the resolution of this issue would be for the refugees to be exclusively repatriated to a Palestinian State, but simply ceding the land without having such an agreement would remove Israel's bargaining power on this issue.

7) Ignoring the Difficulties Faced by Palestinians: There are simply those on the Right who do not realize that or are not interested in that Palestinians in the West Bank are subject to a military legal system which detains them and holds proceedings away from civil law and generally accepted judicial practices. (For example, in a West Bank military tribunal, the accused is not allowed a translator should he not understand Hebrew or a lawyer to defend his interests before the court and the records of the proceedings are private, not public.) Conversely, Israeli Settlers in the West Bank are subject to Israeli Civil Law and do not see this more brutal system. As a result, they do not see why it is so bad for Palestinians who live there.