Occupation from within: the Arab Bedouin in Israel

At the beginning of this year the Israeli government announced a that will displace more than 70 000 Arab Bedouin from their ancestral lands.

The Negev desert is a good place to bury dogs. The dog cemetery of Tsan Yatir provides a final resting place for beloved canines. Arab Bedouin humans are not so lucky. Increasingly they are discovering that the Israeli state has no place for them - dead or alive.

Following the news this week that an Israeli court has ruled the death of ISM activist Rachel Corrie, who was killed protesting the demolition of Palestinian homes in Gaza, to be "a regrettable accident", we should remember it's not only Palestinians living in the Occupied Territories who have come to fear Israeli forces. Israeli citizens are being forced out of their homes by dint of their ethnicity. In September 2011, the Israeli government approved the Prawer Plan for mass expulsion of the Arab Bedouin community in the Naqab (Negev) desert. At the beginning of this year the government announced its plan to establish ten new exclusively Jewish settlements along the Green Line demolishing 35 "unrecognised" villages and displacing more than 70 000 Arab Bedouin from their ancestral lands.

Following a 5am start I made the journey from Ramallah in the West Bank to Be’er Sheva in southern Israel to meet with local Bedouin leaders and Arab Minority Rights group Nadalah who are fighting the Prawer Plan every step of the way. The steps are seldom simple and fraught with the challenges that are inevitable when the state is your enemy. My journey was no exception. To get from Ramallah to the Naqab you have to cross the Green Line. It’s a funny thing the Green Line. At times it is impenetrable: to the Palestinians living in the Occupied Territories she is the Sphinx, devouring those who do not give the answer she requires. To Jewish Israeli citizens she is a sylph, dissolving in the wind whenever political expediency demands it.

Four hours, three buses, one train and a checkpoint later I arrived in the dusty heart of the Naqab to meet with Dr Thabet Abu Rass, the director of the Naqab Project at Adalah, who was keen to emphasise the parity between Arab Bedouin in Israel and Palestinian citizens in the West Bank and Gaza. “This is the occupation within”, he told me. “The state of Israel refuses to recognize them as a legitimate community and deliberately withholds basic services, such as water, electricity, sewage, schools and healthcare”.

Arab Bedouin have been inhabitants of the Naqab desert since the seventh century but have faced a state policy of displacement for over 60 years. Today, 70,000 Arab Bedouin citizens live in 35 villages that either predate the establishment of the State in 1948, or were created by Israeli military order in the early 1950s. The state of Israel considers the villages “unrecognized” and the inhabitants “trespassers on State land,” so denies access to state infrastructure to “encourage” the Bedouin to give up their land and establish new Jewish settlements in their place. 

Settlements are not only happening in the Occupied Territories, they are being built in the strategically important area of the Naqab to create a contiguous Jewish bloc south of the West Bank, the only difference being that these settlements are technically legal since they are built within the Green Line.

In an unprecedented move, in July the European Parliament called on Israel to put a hold on these policies of dispossession. According to Rawia Aburabia of the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, "the attempt to enshrine the Prawer Plan into law is a farce… it is a step that takes us back to the military regime." It is hard to object when the Prawer Plan recalls the more absurdist aspects of Joseph Heller’s Catch-22. You have to marvel at the evil genius of a system which demolishes people’s homes and then charges them for it. For the princely sum of 20,000-25,000 shekels (between £3,100 and £3,900) the Israeli government will reduce your house to rubble. This is leading to increasing numbers of “self-demolitions”, when people, threatened with demolition orders, are choosing to demolish their own homes at a personal cost of 15,000 (£2,350) shekels. Last year more than 1,000 houses were demolished and this year there have been over 120 official demolitions with many more self-demolitions.

Attiyah Alathamin, an Arab Bedouin from the "unrecognized" village of Khashem Zane, told me his story. “I built a home for my son and his wife when they got married. Shortly afterwards the Israeli government presented me with a demolition order and rather than pay the 25,000 shekels they were demanding I paid 15,000 to have it demolished myself.” Attiyah’s story is not unique.

Saleem Abu-el-Quian lives in the village of Umm el-Hieran which was established by military order in 1954. The state of Israel considers the some 500 residents to be trespassers and plans to destroy the village and transfer the population to the urban township of Hura in order to establish the exclusively Jewish town of "Hiran" on the ruins of Umm el-Hieran. He tells me that his son received notice of his reserve army duty on the same day that he was given a demolition order on his home. “Our children are fighting in the army and yet we are not getting anything in return. We have no school, no doctor’s clinic”.

The future for the Abu-el-Quian family and Umm el-Hieran is uncertain.

In November 2010, the prime minister’s office cancelled the planning authorities' partial recognition of the village. On 6 September  there will be a court hearing in Be’er Sheva to appeal against the demolition order. On 11 September there will be a meeting for the National Committee for Planning and Building to discuss the development of the Jewish settlement of Hiran. Twenty caravans of Israeli settlers are camped out in nearby Yatir Forest waiting to move in.

Dr Thabet Abu Rass is not giving up just yet. "We will challenge it in the courts. We will challenge it on the ground...There is a call for more co-resistance and less co-existence".  Nadia Ben-Youssef, a lawyer specializing in Arab minority rights tells me that the Bedouin are tackling the state head-on with the same methods of non-violent resistance used by Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. “There is a growing belief that you can challenge the state on your feet. Arab Bedouin have told me ‘The government can demolish my home a hundred times, I will rebuild it 100 times. I will not be the one to lose my ancestors’ land’”.

Rebecca Greig is a feature writer for Palestine Business Focus Magazine and a freelance journalist based in the West Bank.

A Bedouin carries wood on his back as he walks barefoot back to his tent in the Negev desert. Photograph: Getty Images
Getty.
Show Hide image

What Brussels can learn from the Italian referendum

Matteo Renzi's proposed reforms would have made it easier for eurosceptic forces within Italy to gain power in upcoming elections in 2018.

The Austrian presidential elections can justifiably be claimed as a victory for supporters of the European Union. But the Italian referendum is not the triumph for euroscepticism some have claimed.

In Austria, the victorious candidate Alexander van der Bellen ruthlessly put the EU centre stage in his campaign. “From the beginning I fought and argued for a pro-European Austria,” he said after a campaign that saw posters warning against “Öxit”.

Austrians have traditionally been eurosceptic, only joining the bloc in 1995, but Brexit changed all that.  Austrian voters saw the instability in the UK and support for EU membership soared. An overwhelming majority now back continued membership.

Van der Bellen’s opponent Norbert Hofer was at an immediate disadvantage. His far right Freedom Party has long pushed for an Öxit referendum.

The Freedom Party has claimed to have undergone a Damascene conversion but voters were not fooled.  They even blamed Nigel Farage for harming their chances with an interview he gave to Fox News claiming that the party would push to leave the EU.

The European Commission, as one would expect, hailed the result. “Europe was central in the campaign that led to the election of a new president and the final result speaks for itself,” chief spokesman Margaritis Schinas said today in Brussels.

“We think the referendum in Italy was about a change to the Italian constitution and not about Europe,” Schinas added.

Brussels has a history of sticking its head in the sand when it gets political results it doesn’t like.

When asked what lessons the Commission could learn from Brexit, Schinas had said the lessons to be learnt were for the government that called the referendum.

But in this case, the commission is right. The EU was a peripheral issue compared to domestic politics in the Italian referendum.

Alberto Alemanno is Jean Monnet Professor of EU Law and an Italian. He said the reforms would have been vital to modernise Italy but rejected any idea it would lead to an Italian Brexit.

“While anti-establishment and eurosceptic actors are likely to emerge emboldened from the vote, interpreting the outcome of the Italian referendum as the next stage of Europe’s populist, anti-establishment movement – as many mainstream journalists have done – is not only factually wrong, but also far-fetched.”

Renzi was very popular in Brussels after coming to power in a palace coup in February 2014. He was a pro-EU reformer, who seemed keen to engage in European politics.

After the Brexit vote, he was photographed with Merkel and Hollande on the Italian island of Ventotene, where a landmark manifesto by the EU’s founding fathers was written.

This staged communion with the past was swiftly forgotten as Renzi indulged in increasingly virulent Brussels-bashing over EU budget flexibility in a bid to shore up his plummeting popularity. 

Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker even publicly reprimanded Renzi for demonising the EU.

Renzi’s vow to resign personalised the referendum. He gave voters a chance to give him a bloody nose when his popularity was at an all-time low.

Some of the reforms he wanted were marked “to be confirmed”.  The referendum question was astonishingly verbose and complex. He was asking for a blank cheque from the voters.

Ironically Renzi’s reforms to the constitution and senate would have made it easier for the eurosceptic Five Star Movement to gain power in upcoming elections in 2018.

For reasons best known to themselves, they campaigned against the changes to their own disadvantage.

Thanks to the reforms, a Five Star government would have found it far easier to push through a “Quitaly” referendum, which now seems very distant.  

As things stand, Five Star has said it would push for an advisory vote on membership of the euro but not necessarily the EU.

The Italian constitution bans the overruling of international treaties by popular vote, so Five Star would need to amend the constitution. That would require a two thirds majority in both houses of parliament and then another referendum on euro membership. Even that could be blocked by one of the country’s supreme courts.

The Italian referendum was closely watched in Brussels. It was hailed as another triumph for euroscepticism by the likes of Farage and Marine Le Pen. But Italians are far more likely to be concerned about the possibility of financial turbulence, which has so far been mildly volatile, than any prospect of leaving the EU in the near future.

James Crisp is the news editor at EurActiv.com.