Shilo's Wild Wolves
Criminal investigation on illegal construction of houses in Shilo
New in the Website
At first, the paragraph above may seem odd. After all, aren't all Israeli settlements in the West Bank illegal? The United Nations Security Council, the International Court of Justice, and most countries (Israel being the obvious exception) agree that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies to the West Bank. Thus, the occupier cannot settle there, and all its settlements and outposts are equally illegal.
On the other hand, Israel claims that the Fourth Geneva Convention does not apply to the West Bank. Basing itself on this impossible interpretation, it pursues the creation of Jewish settlements. Thus, Israel considers legal the settlements founded with the permission and planning of the state. However, outposts—like Migron—built without such permission, are considered illegal. Yesterday’s decision was complex. It condemned the new houses because they had not been approved by the relevant authorities, but it announced to the court that the state would pursue the construction of three neighborhoods.
Shilo and Mateh Binyamin
Mateh Binyamin Regional Council (Mo'atza Ezorit Mateh Binyamin) is located north of Jerusalem; it administers 42 settlements, including several high-profile ones. Among them are Migron, Psagot—just on Jerusalem’s northern outskirts—and Shilo. Road 443, the new road annexing East Jerusalem to Israel, passes partly through the council area; the related Highway 60, leading from Jerusalem northwards, also crosses its area. Shilo is along the latter.
Shilo is 45km along Highway 60 north of Jerusalem, and has a population of over 2300, which is a lot in comparison to most West Bank settlements. The settlement was founded in 1978, and was officially recognized by the Israeli government the following year. The Israeli government claims that it is built entirely on state land, owned by the state in 1967, or reverted to it because the owners had fled. However, as in the case of Migron, Palestinians claim that more than a quarter of it is built on land privately owned by Palestinians. The Israeli claim is not credible. Associated Press discovered in 2008 that Abd Allatif Hassan Sumarin, who supposedly in 2004 sold a plot of land in Migron to Al Wattan Ltd (a Mateh Binyamin Regional Council owned company) had been dead since 1961.
On November 27, 2011, the Israeli Defense Ministry approved two plans which would create 119 new houses in Shilo. The plan will expand the settlement by 60%. This plan and another one at the nearby Shvut Rachel were reiterated yesterday to the Supreme Court. Since the Israeli Administration has no jurisdiction in the area, these issues are controlled by the IDF’s Civil Administration.
Shilo’s foundation year—the settlers had planned to occupy it four years before that, in 1974—make it among the first Jewish settlements in the West Bank. This was no casual move; it occupies the site of Biblical Shilo, which was the capital of Biblical Israel before Jerusalem replaced it (See Joshua 18:1; Exodus chapters 25 and 26, 1 Samuel chapters 3 and 4 and others). In other words, this is settlement aristocracy, with a name and location mentioned in the Pentateuch. This means the Israeli Administration will face serious political issues if it attempted to dismantle the illegal houses built in it. Even without the Biblical context, the dismantling of Jewish settlements by the Israeli government had been met with settler violence in the rare instances it occurred.
Would Netanyahu Surrender to the Rule of Law?
Does this mean that we will soon witness the destruction of settler houses in Shilo? Would the Israeli Administration dismantle Migron next month? To think in such a way would be naïve. Migron may be an illegal settlement even under the Israeli law, but this doesn't mean that Israel doesn't support it. A request for a cellular radio tower on the hill top was filed. The IDF granted it in spite of the land being owned by Palestinians. Later, five caravans were placed next to the radio tower. They had no authorization for that; yet, the IDF didn’t evacuate them. The money for the tower and the caravans, four million shekels, came from Israel’s Housing Ministry. There was neither statutory planning nor government decision on Migron. There could be neither of them, because it was private land which hadn't been confiscated. The government could not acknowledge in front of its institutions that it was creating an illegal settlement; thus it acted independently without bothering with formalities. In other words, it was an Israeli government theft even under its own laws. This is the archetypal Israeli settlements plan. One way or another, neither the new houses in Shilo nor the Migron outpost would be evacuated.
* Israel’s State Attorney (in Hebrew: Praklitut Hamedinah) is the legal representative of the State of Israel in its courts.
My articles on the web are my main income these days; please recognize my efforts in writing them by donating or buying a copy of The Cross of Bethlehem, or Back in Bethlehem.