Jerusalem Offers a Grim Model for a Post-Annexation Future

A general view of a Palestinian neighborhood of Silwan in east Jerusalem, seen on Wednesday, July 1, 2020. (AP)
A general view of a Palestinian neighborhood of Silwan in east Jerusalem, seen on Wednesday, July 1, 2020. (AP)
TT
20

Jerusalem Offers a Grim Model for a Post-Annexation Future

A general view of a Palestinian neighborhood of Silwan in east Jerusalem, seen on Wednesday, July 1, 2020. (AP)
A general view of a Palestinian neighborhood of Silwan in east Jerusalem, seen on Wednesday, July 1, 2020. (AP)

It's hard to say what exactly will change in the West Bank if Israel follows through on its plans to annex parts of the occupied territory, but east Jerusalem, which was annexed more than a half-century ago, may provide some answers.

Israeli leaders paint Jerusalem as a model of coexistence, the “unified, eternal” capital of the Jewish people, where minorities have equal rights. But Palestinian residents face widespread discrimination, most lack citizenship and many live in fear of being forced out.

Rights groups say that in some aspects, Palestinians in east Jerusalem have even fewer legal protections than those in the West Bank, where it's possible to appeal to international laws governing the treatment of civilians in occupied territory.

They point to Israel's Absentee Property Law of 1950, which allows the state to take control of any property whose owner lives in an “enemy state” and was used to confiscate the lands and homes of the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who fled or were forced out during the war surrounding Israel's creation in 1948.

Rights groups say that in recent decades, authorities have abused the law to seize homes in sensitive parts of Jerusalem, evicting Palestinian residents and paving the way for settlers to move in.

The Sumarin family has been locked in a 30-year legal battle to prove ownership of their home in Silwan, an east Jerusalem neighborhood coveted by Jewish settlers because of its proximity to holy sites.

When the original owner died in the 1980s, the property was deemed to have an absentee landlord because his four children lived in Jordan. The Israeli branch of the Jewish National Fund then purchased the property from the state in 1991. Last week, a court ordered the family to vacate the property by mid-August and to pay around $5,800 in court fees.

Family members say the original owner left it to his nephew, who was born and raised there, and from whom they are descended. The extended family living in the home, which now includes 15 men, women and children, says it will appeal the decision.

“Who’s absent? We’re right here. I’ve been here for 40 years," said Amal Sumarin, the wife of the nephew's son. “Where are the families with their children supposed to go? Every house built in Silwan is under threat.”

The Israeli branch of the Jewish National Fund, which promotes Jewish settlement in the holy land and is known by its Hebrew acronym KKL, did not respond to Associated Press requests for comment.

Rights groups fear that if annexation takes place, Israel will use the same law to strip Palestinians of privately held land in the West Bank.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has vowed to annex all of Israel's settlements and the strategic Jordan Valley in line with President Donald Trump's Middle East plan, which overwhelmingly favors Israel and was rejected by the Palestinians.

It's unclear when or even if Netanyahu will follow through on his pledge, but he has made clear that he wants to annex land but not people, leaving cities, towns and villages under limited Palestinian self-rule. Tens of thousands of acres of privately owned land would likely become part of Israel, potentially leaving the owners “absent” in enclaves outside its new borders.

“It’s not something that we will see the first day of annexation, and it won’t be a big announcement," said Hagit Ofran, an expert on settlement policy at Peace Now, an Israeli rights group opposed to the settlements. "But the potential is that Israel will not only prevent the owners from accessing their land... but also take over their land.”

Palestinians in the annexed territories are unlikely to be offered citizenship, due to Israel's interest in preserving its Jewish majority, and many would refuse it so as not to legitimize Israeli rule. Instead, they are likely to get the same kind of permanent residency held by most Palestinians in east Jerusalem.

That form of residency grants Palestinians access to social services, freedom of movement in Israel and the right to vote in local elections — but not national ones. It can be revoked if Palestinians reside outside the city, as many are tempted to do because of the difficulty of building or expanding homes in east Jerusalem.

Peace Now has found evidence of systematic housing discrimination and says around half of all Palestinian housing units in east Jerusalem have been built without hard-to-get permits, putting them at risk of demolition by Israeli authorities.

The inequities are on vivid display in Silwan, a crowded, run-down Palestinian neighborhood spilling into a valley just outside the walls of the Old City. Its proximity to the bitterly-contested hilltop religious site known to Muslims as the Noble Sanctuary and to Jews as the Temple Mount has made it a focus for powerful settler organizations who have spent decades acquiring properties there.

Palestinians view the sale of properties to such groups as a betrayal of their national cause, so the transactions are often carried out in secret through Palestinian middlemen, leading to drawn-out legal disputes and in some cases the physical takeover of homes — or parts of homes — by settlers who claim to have bought them.

Jawad Siyam's backyard is divided by a crude wall of corrugated steel. On the other side, a group of settlers live in a building that belonged to his family for decades. The settlers took control last year after a complicated 25-year legal battle that they won, in part by invoking the Absentee Property Law.

The two families don't get along.

Siyam says they shout at each other from their respective terraces. When the settlers held a party recently, Siyam responded to the loud music by dragging his speakers outside and blasting Arab pop.

“He is not a settler that comes to be your neighbor, he comes to take the next house and the next house," Siyam said. “These neighbors are coming to kick you out.”

Daniel Luria, the executive director of Ateret Cohanim, one of the settler organizations that operates in Silwan, says Jews have as much right to live there as in Tel Aviv. For him and other ideological settlers, Jerusalem is the capital of the biblical homeland promised to the Jews, and the settlers are heirs to the “pioneers” who established Israel in the first place.

“The Jews have a right, clearly, as the true sons of Abraham coming back home, to live in any neighborhood," he said. "Especially if an Arab wants to sell, which is the case in 99% of the cases.”

For many Palestinians living in the West Bank, which has been under Israeli military rule for decades, annexation seems like a grim formality. Siyam fears they will be in for a cruel awakening.

“People think it will not change because they talk about the big image," he said. "If you talk about the small image, and details, it will change a lot.”



Conflicting Visions for Gaza’s ‘Day After’ Amid a Complex Reality

Palestinians bid farewell to a relative killed in an Israeli airstrike outside the Indonesian Hospital in Beit Lahia, northern Gaza Strip, on Saturday (AFP)
Palestinians bid farewell to a relative killed in an Israeli airstrike outside the Indonesian Hospital in Beit Lahia, northern Gaza Strip, on Saturday (AFP)
TT
20

Conflicting Visions for Gaza’s ‘Day After’ Amid a Complex Reality

Palestinians bid farewell to a relative killed in an Israeli airstrike outside the Indonesian Hospital in Beit Lahia, northern Gaza Strip, on Saturday (AFP)
Palestinians bid farewell to a relative killed in an Israeli airstrike outside the Indonesian Hospital in Beit Lahia, northern Gaza Strip, on Saturday (AFP)

As discussions over the future of Gaza continue, the conflicting visions among key players make reaching a consensus increasingly difficult. The phrase “it’s complicated,” used by US envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff to justify Israel’s continuation of the war, summarizes the deep divisions among stakeholders.

Since the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel, followed by Israel’s devastating war on Gaza, international efforts to define the “day after” scenario have remained unresolved.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu refuses to allow either the Palestinian Authority (PA) or Hamas to govern Gaza. Meanwhile, former US President Donald Trump envisions turning Gaza into the “Riviera of the Middle East”—without the PA, Hamas, or even Palestinians themselves. Arab states are considering an independent committee to manage Gaza, while the PA insists on taking sole control. Hamas, on the other hand, has proposed a support committee to oversee governance. The result is a landscape where no party shares a unified vision for post-war Gaza.

A senior Palestinian official emphasized that the PA and Arab states are relying on the US to take a firm stance and impose a solution on Israel. “There is no agreement yet. The issue must still be settled,” he told Asharq Al-Awsat. The official stressed that a binding US position, along with Arab and international support, is necessary for any effective governance plan.

While Trump and Netanyahu have outlined different visions for Gaza, behind the scenes, the US is engaged in discussions about post-war governance. Yet, Netanyahu has repeatedly avoided addressing this issue, preferring to focus on military operations. Israeli writer Avi Shilon argued in Yedioth Ahronoth that Netanyahu is prolonging the war to evade making a tough decision about Gaza’s future.

Both Witkoff and Shilon believe Hamas intends to maintain its presence in Gaza. While Witkoff insists that Hamas’ continued rule is unacceptable to Trump’s administration, he hinted that the group could participate politically if it disarms.

Witkoff also suggested that negotiations might provide a path forward, arguing that Hamas is not as ideologically rigid as some claim.

This approach aligns with US efforts to engage Hamas indirectly, recognizing that Israel has been unable to decisively eliminate the group. Shilon noted that Israel’s demand to end Hamas’ rule is justified in principle but impractical in reality.

“Israel cannot force Hamas to surrender. A group willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of its people and endure Gaza’s destruction has no incentive to return hostages if all we offer is their removal from power,” he wrote, adding that the US has come to the same realization.

Hamas responded swiftly to Witkoff’s remarks, with spokesperson Abdel Latif al-Qanoua stating that some of these proposals are under discussion with mediators. He affirmed that Hamas is open to governance arrangements in Gaza, provided they have broad consensus. “We approved the formation of a societal support committee in Gaza that does not include Hamas. We have no ambitions to govern Gaza; what matters to us is national consensus, and we are committed to its outcomes,” he said.

Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdel Aty previously outlined a comprehensive reconstruction plan for Gaza, including training Palestinian security forces in Egypt and Jordan before their deployment to the Strip. A Hamas official confirmed to Asharq Al-Awsat that the group genuinely does not seek to govern Gaza, but it insists that governance arrangements be Palestinian-led, without US or Israeli dictates. “Our weapons are not up for discussion unless it leads to a Palestinian state,” the official emphasized.

The PA and Fatah have also entered the debate, calling on Hamas to relinquish control of Gaza. Fatah spokesperson Munther al-Hayek urged Hamas to step aside, warning that the upcoming period could be “even more severe” for Gaza’s civilians.

A lingering question remains: Will the October 7 attack ultimately bring Palestinians closer to statehood, or will it destroy their aspirations?

Thirty-two years after the Oslo Accords—when US sponsorship, international backing, and a strong PA seemed to pave the way for peace—Israel’s refusal to conclude negotiations has kept Palestinians in a cycle of talks, conflicts, and political paralysis. Over time, Israel’s approach has weakened the PA and, whether intentionally or not, bolstered Hamas’ influence—leading to the devastating events of October 7.

As the region contemplates Gaza’s future, the unresolved question remains: What lessons have Washington and Tel Aviv learned, and what do they truly want?