Honourable members of the Foreign Affairs Portfolio Committee

Ladies and Gentlemen

I would like to start by thanking the Foreign Affairs Portfolio Committee and Chairperson Comrade Sithole for giving me once again the opportunity of addressing this august gathering.

We are proud of the historically strong relationship among our two peoples and the distinguished relationship between the Parliament of the Democratic Republic of South Africa and our Palestinian Legislative Council and Palestinian National Council.

We are furthermore proud of your keen interest and consequent follow-up of the dramatic events happening in Occupied Palestine and your contribution to reach a just and peaceful solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Following the murder of President Yasser Arafat, Israel has predicted that the Palestinian territories will succumb to chaos and that internal struggle for power will ultimately lead to civil war. Public declaration from various Israeli leaders pointed towards a will on the side of Israel to promote such a civil war since it would serve many of it's objectives that cannot be achieved with the execution of the peace process. However the wisdom of both the Palestinian leadership as well as the Palestinian people and our collective determination to create a viable, independent, sovereign, democratic Palestinian State with Jerusalem East as its capital translated into a smooth, peaceful and democratic transition of power through the presidential elections that saw the election of President Mahmood Abbas as the new President of the Palestinian Authority, President of the State of Palestine.

With this regard, we would like to convey our deepest gratitude and thanks to the South African government and the South African Parliament for sending observers to observe in the Presidential elections and in particular comrade Sithole for taking part in this noble and valuable mission, hoping that you will take also part in the legislative elections that should be held in the near future.

Allow me before I start my briefing to make a short historical review of the situation.

Ladies and Gentlemen

The history of Palestine has been marked by many dramatic events that have left a lasting impact not only on the region, but also on the world at large. Despite its crucial importance, and the mass of literature written about the subject, ignorance about the Question of Palestine is fairly widespread. There exist two main reasons for ignorance about the true nature and dimension about the Palestine Question.

The first is the systematic, well-planned and expertly organized misinformation and distortion which are spread in the Western media by Zionist and Israeli propaganda concerning the question generally. This process of misinformation and distortion is coupled with a deliberate concealment of the history of Palestine which for 1800 years, and until recent times, was an exclusive Arab country. The Israelis are anxious to bury that part of the past during which the Jews did not live or exist in Palestine. For this reason the History of Palestine for that period is ignored, distorted or not even taught in Israeli schools. The purpose of Israel's suppression of the historical Arab character Palestine is to give the false impression of continuity of Jewish presence in the country and hence of a non-existent historical connection between the two Jewish monarchies of biblical times and the State of Israel establish 25 centuries later. The second reason is that each new wrong committed against the Palestinian people blots out the preceding one. For over 55 years Israel has by force of arms and , after every stage in this expansion, it had appealed to "reason' and suggested 'negotiations'. 'Every new conquest' became the new basis of the proposed negotiation from strength which ignores the injustice of the previous aggression.

Rarely in History - at least in modem history - has the majority of the population of a country been forcibly displaced and uprooted by a militant minority of foreign origin. Yet this happened in Palestine in 1948 when nearly a million Palestinians were expelled or otherwise forced to leave their homes, towns and. villages ; were robbed of their lands, properties, and possessions and became refugees without homes and without any means of livelihood.

Realities of the 1948 War; On 15 May 1948, that is on the day following the proclamation of the Jewish State and the withdrawal of British forces from Palestine, the Arab states intervened in the hostilities which Jewish forces had opened on Palestinians in the month of April 1948. Contrary to what was misrepresented by Israeli propaganda, the War of 1948 between Israel and neighboring Arab States did not involve an all out offensive by Arabs against the Jews, nor did it aim at wiping them out of Palestine. The Arab States intervened essentially to protect the Palestinians from massacres such as Deir Yassin and hopefully to prevent the partition of the country. The absence of resolve on the part of the Arab States to launch a war against the Jews of Palestine is confirmed by Jolin Bagot Glubb. British Commander of the Arab Legion of Transjordan. He declared that on the very day before the fighting began in Palestine, the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States, Azzam Pasha, admitted to him that they had never 1>elieved that the issue would come to fighting. "'We believed that the solution would be political"" he said The number of men which the Arab States engaged in the conflict disproves any suggestion that they had launched an all-offensive against the Jews in 1948. The Arab armies which then moved into Palestine represented token forces from Egypt, Syria, Transjordan, Lebanon Iraq and Saudi Arabia which totaled 20 000 men while the Jews put into the field 60 000 to 80 000 fully trained men of the Haganah and 5 000 to 10 000 of the lrgun and Stern Gang. As to the Palestinians, they possessed no military training o organisation and their military potential was limited to small groups of volunteer with little or no military experience. The largest group of volunteers was the Arab Liberation Army with an estimated strength of 6 000 to 7 500 men. Another factor o: weakness for the Palestinians was that they have been systematically disarmed by the British Government because of their opposition to its policy in Palestine. Between 1937 and 1947, over 7 600 rifles had been confiscated from the Arabs while only 135 rifles were confiscated from the Jews.

While the UN was immersed in debates about the future government of Palestine, the Zionist Jews put into effect their own plan to seize Palestine and to establish a Jewish State. It has now been disclosed that this plan had been hatched for years, in fact several years before the adoption by the UN of the partition resolution. Uri Millsteir reported in Hadashot newspaper of 11 January 1985 a conversation, which he had with Yigael Yadin, Acting Cilief of Staff in the 1948 war hours before the latter's death. Yigael Yadin said that he distributed the 'D-Plan' on 10 March 1948 to the General Staff and battalion commanders. The D-Plan was based on previous plans drawn up by the Haganah, a Jewish paramilitary organisation in Palestine in 1945, 1946, 1947, and 1948.

The purpose of the plan was " to seize control of the area of the Jewish State and to defend its borders and to defend the settlements and populations outside the borders..." In addition the following specific points were laid down in the D-Plan: "the destruction of Arab villages near Jewish settlements and main arteries of transportation and the evacuation of their inhabitants, the siege of Arab cities that were not located inside the Jewish State according to the UN resolution direct actions against Arab targets in Western Palestine, outside the borders of the Jewish State."

It is clear that the D-Plan had two objectives: The first was to establish a Jewish State, not within the boundaries defined by the UN, but in all such a territory as Jewish forces could seize even outside such borders. The second was to establish such a state free from Arabs by requiring the "evacuation" - meaning the deportation - of the villagers. The implementation of the D-Plan before the termination of the mandate possessed the advantage of enabling the Jews to act immediately through their paramilitary organisations- the Haganah, the lrgun and the Stem Gang - without opposition or interference from either the Mandatory winch was not prepared to risk its forces to prevent the realization of the plan, or form the Arab States which could not intervene while the mandate was still in force and the British Government maintained its troops in the country.

The D-Plan was put into force at the beginning of April 1948. In the execution of its first objective. The Jewish paramilitary organisations seized several hundred villages and most of the Arab cities in Palestine before the termination of the mandate on 15 May 1948, even though most were located outside the area of the Jewish state as defined by the UN. Tiberias was occupied on 19 April 1948, Haifa on 22 April 1948, Jaffa on 28 April 1948, the Arab quarters in the New City of Jerusalem on 30 April, Beisan on 8 May, Safad on 10 May.

The second objective, namely the 'evacuation' of the Arab inhabitants, was success by achieved by means of a notoriously heinous outrage: on the 9th April l948 the massacre in Deir Yassin by the Irgun - a terrorist organisation led by Menac em Begin- of 300 men, women and children "without any military reason or provocation of any kind" as reported by Jacques de Reynier, the Chief Delegate of the International Red Cross.

The Deir Yassin massacre achieved its purpose of terrorizing the Palestinians and they began an exodus which assumed catastrophic dimensions. The effect of the Deir Yassin massacre upon the Palestinians is described by Menachem Begin, Israel's first prime minister: the arabs began to flee in terror... of the about 800 000 Arabs who lived in the present territory' of the state ofisrael, only some 165 000 are still there

Where the Deir Yassin massacre did not achieve its objective in removing the Palestinians from the territory which the Jews had seized, they did not hesitate to expell them physically, as happened at the time of the occupation of Tiberias on 19 April, Ilaifa on 22 April, Jaffa on 28 April and Safad on 10 May 1948, all before the end of the mandate and before the proclamation of the Jewish State.

This proves that Israel has never been attacked by masses of Arabs, but on the contrary, Israel has taken the initiative to occupy Palestine with its military might, committing scores of war crimes in the process.

It comes as no surprise to see the same government of Israel, under the command of general Ariel Sharon, killing over 140 people in the Gaza strip under the false pretense of Israel's security and under the umbrella of the so-called Unilateral Withdrawal from Gaza.

We are a liberation movement fighting for the natural rights of our people under the Israeli occupation in Palestine. Our struggle is a struggle of independence, which can only be fulfilled by the creation an independent, sovereign Palestinian State with Jerusalem-East as its Capital.

The failure by all the successive Israeli governments to implement its international duties as laid out in the peace process has led to the deterioration of the situation. Since the assassinations of the late Rabin by an Israeli extremist, the governments of Perez, Netanyahu, Barak and presently Sharon have all increased the number of settlements in the Occupied territory and despite signing numerous interim agreements with the Palestinian leadership - Wye River 1 and 2, Camp David, Mitchell Report, Zeney Report, Sharrn Es sheikh and Taba- Israel has continuously refused to implement any of the obligations it had to do. This failure is what g=-has led to the Intifadah which started on September 28, 2000.

Latest 4evelopments in the Palestinian Israeli conflict:

September 28, 2005 will be the 5th Anniversary of the ongoing Intifadah, the uprising of the Palestinian people against the Israeli occupation.

The symbolic of this day is embodied by the courageous resistance of our Palestinian people in the face of the most ruthless occupation the world has ever witnessed.

Our people are still living under complicated and dangerous circumstances due to the over escalating Israeli military campaign, Israeli state terrorism, collective punishment and colonial settlement policy.

I am here today to express our grave concern over the tragic events in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, since September 28, 2000, including the rising number of deaths and injuries, mostly among Palestinian civilians, the deepe4i.ng humanitarian crisis facing the Palestinian people, and the widespread destru4tion of Palestinian property and infrastructure, both private and public, including many institutions of the Palestinian authority.

This 5th year of Palestinian Intifadah saw new developments that were added to the ongoing slaughtering of our defenseless people.

These elements are the acceleration of the construction of both the Apartheid Wall of separation ion and the settlement activity, the Advisory Opinion of the ICJ the so called "Disengagement Plan".

The apartheid Wall of Separation:

Israel approved the construction of a "Permanent Barrier" (The Wall of separation), between the occupied West Bank and Israel. The Wall of separation is being constructed almost entirely in occupied Palestinian territory, including in occupied Jerusalem extending beyond the Green Line. The Wall of separation is not simply a concrete wall or wire fence, but is an entire regime composed of razor wire, trenches, watch towers, electric fences and ditches. This Apartheid Wall of separation illegally annexes more than 58% of the land of the West Bank to Israel.

In addition to the physical structures, Israel has instituted a number of administrative measures designed to isolate the Palestinian population and deny them access to their land and natural resources. Such measures include confiscation orders, home demolitions, erection of "Gates" for which the "permission" is now required and the creation of "Closed Zones" to which Palestinians have no access.

On 3 December 2003 the General Assembly Resolution 58/21 on the "Peaceful Settlement of the Question of Palestine" received overwhelming support reflective of the near consensus of the international community with regard to this issue, a consensus rooted in positions and convictions that are based on the primacy of international law in international relations and on the universal ideals of justice and peace. During the 58^th session of the General Assembly, member states once again adopted this resolution by a huge majority of l60 votes in favor with only 6 against and 5 abstentions.

Regrettably, resolution 58/21, like countless other United Nations resolutions relevant to the question of Palestine, has not been implemented. This is mainly due to the intransigence and defiance of Israel, the occupying power, and its refusal to adhere to international law and to fulfill its obligations in accordance with the charter of the United Nations and relevant General Assembly and Security Council resolutions, including with regard to compliance with Resolution 58/21. Instead, Israel, the occupying power, has continued to blatantly and flagrantly violate and even commit grave breaches of international law as it has persisted with its now 37 year occupation of the Palestinian people and the Palestinian land, refusing to withdraw its occupying forces, in compliance with Security Council Resolutions 242(1967) and 338(1973), and relentlessly carrying on its illegal and oppressive policies and practices in the occupied Palestinian territories.

Not a single day has passed during which the occupying power has not deliberately engaged in violation of international law, including International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights Law, in its practices and measures against the Palestinian people, both individually and collectively, and it is without a doubt that systematic human rights violations and war crimes continue to be committed by Israel against the Palestinian people.

Since the beginning of this 2nd Intifadah, Israel, the occupying power, has continued carrying out its military campaign against the Palestinian people and has continued to use excessive, indiscriminate and disproportionate force against Palestinian civilians, wilfully killing civilians, including by extrajudicial execution and causing thousands of injuries. To date more than 3600 Palestinian civilians have been directly killed by the Israeli occupying forces and settlers since September 2000, and more than 52000 Palestinian have been injured, many critically and permanently disabled by the use of live ammunitions, rubber coated steel bullets and other internationally forbidden weapons.

At the :same time, the occupying power has continued to wantonly destroy Palestinian homes, properties, infrastructure and agricultural lands and orchards, to detain and imprison thousands of Palestinian civilians, including women and children, and to impose harsh measures of collective punishment on the entire Palestinian population, exacerbating the already dire humanitarian crisis. More than 7250 houses belonging to Palestinian civilians have been completely destroyed or demolished making almost 40000 Palestinian homeless, more than 250 000 acres of Palestinian land was confiscated by Israel, more than 17 500 acres of Palestinian land has been razed by Israel and more than 1 million trees have been uprooted by Israel.

Throughout the recent period Israel has also continued to intensively carry out its campaign of settler colonialism in the occupied Palestinian territories, in direct contravention to international law, particularly the 4^th Geneva convention. The occupying power has continued to confiscate more land to construct and expand illegal settlements, to build bypass roads for the armed illegal Israeli settlers, and to allow for the establishment of dozens of settler out post on Palestinian land.

Directly linked to Israeli's campaign of settler colonialism is its ongoing construction of the apartheid Wall. In utter contempt, disrespect and defiance of Resolution ES 10/13 of 21 October 2003 and ES 10/14 of 8 December 2003, and in violation of numbers relevant provisions of international law, Israel has continued to construct the apartheid Wall and for this unlawful purpose has continued to confiscate land, to destroy property and to impose a series of illegal restrictions, including by a means of a "Permit System", constituting an entire associated regime of measures intended to facilitate the construction of the Wall of separation. The apartheid Wall and its associated regime has resulted in the complete caging of thousands of Palestinian civilians in walled enclaves or ghettos, the separation and isolation of cities, towns and villages from each other and in some cases from within, has severely impaired the access of the hundreds of thousands of Palestinian civilians in affected areas to their jobs, schools, medical facilities and farmland while causing the displacement of thousands of Palestinian civilians and has led to extensive loss of livelihood and the impoverishment of thousands of families, compounding their suffering and hardship under Israeli occupation.

In the months since the adoption of Resolution 58/21, the critical issue of the apartheid Wall has been the predominant concern of the international community visa-vis the situation in the occupied territories, including Jerusalem East. In the most significant development in the United Nations system in regard to the question of Palestine since the adoption of the Partition Plan in Resolution 181 of 29 November 1947, the International Court of Justice (IC J) rendered, on 9 July 2004 an Advisory Opinion on the "Legal Consequences of the Construction of the Wall of separation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories" pursuant to the request made by the Assembly in its 10th emergency special session in Resolution ES10/14 of 8 December 2003.

The Court's advisory opinion is a strong and comprehensive one that represents an historic opportunity to return to the rule of the international law in the effort to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Indeed, the Advisory Opinion underscores the applicability, and the need of respect, of the rules and principles of international law for resolving the issue of the Wall of separation and the ultimate peaceful resolution of the question of Palestine.

The rules and principles of international law emphasized by the Court correspond to the very same rules and principles repeatedly reaffirmed by the General Assembly in the resolution relevant to the question of Palestine, which for decades have been disregarded and violated by Israel, the occupying power.

In its advisory opinion, the ICJ, inter alia, concluded that "the Construction of the Wall being built by Israel the occupying power in the occupied Palestinian territory including in and around East Jerusalem and its associated regime are contrary to international law". In arriving at this determination, the Court undertook a historical analysis of the status of the occupied Palestinian territory, followed by an analysis to establish whether the law had been breached and then a determination of the legal consequences in this regard. The court found that the area east of the 1949 Armistice Line "Green Line" and the former eastern boundary of Palestine Under the Mandate including East Jerusalem was Occupied by Israel in 1967 and under international Law Considered to be occupied territory. Here it is necessary to also recall the

adoption by the General Assembly on 17 may 2004 of Resolution 58/292 on "The Status of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem".

In brief with regard to the specific violations of international law including International Humanitarian law and Human rights law the Court concluded, inter alias in its advisory opinion that Israel's construction of the Wall of separation and its associated regimes create a "fait accompli" on the ground which would be tantamount to de facto annexation have led to the destruction or requisition of properties in contravention of relevant provisions of the Hague regulations and the Fourth Geneva Convention, and violate the Palestinian people's freedom of movement and the right to work, to health. to education and to an adequate standard of living

In examining the route of the Wall of separation the Court found that not only did it depart from the green line but that the "Wall's sinuous route has been trailed in such a way as to include within that area the great majority of Israeli Settlements in the occupied Palestinian Territory (including East Jerusalem) in this regard, it is significant the court also explicitly concluded that the Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory (including East Jerusalem) have been established in breach of international law".

Israeli's goal in building the apartheid Wall is two fold:

(1) To confiscate Palestinian land in order to facilitate further colony expansion and unilaterally redraw geopolitical borders, (58% of the West Bank.) and,

(2) To encourage an exodus of Palestinians by denying them to earn a living from their land by denying them adequate water resources, and by restricting freedom of movement to such an extent as to make remaining in their town or village an unavailable option.

Upon the apartheid Wall completion, it is estimated that approximately 343 000 Palestinians will by trapped between the Wall of separation and the Green Line, 93 000 of whom will by trapped in "Double Walled" ghettos or enclaves. Following its determination that the construction of the Wall of separation and its associated regime are contrary to international law, the Court determined the following:

(1) Israel is under the obligation to terminate its breaches of international law, to cease the construction of the apartheid Wall being built in the occupied Palestinian territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, to dismantle the structure therein situated and to repeal or render ineffective all legislative and regulatory acts relating thereto,

(2) Israel in under obligation to make reparation for all damage caused by the construction of the Wall of separation in the occupied Palestinian territory, including in and around East Jerusalem,

(3) All states are under an obligation not to recognize the illegal situation resulting from the construction of the Wall of separation and not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by such construction; and all parties to the 4^th Geneva Convention have an additional obligation of ensuring compliance by Israel with the Convention,

4) The United Nations, especially the General Assembly and the Security Council, should consider what further action is required to bring an end to the illegal situation resulting from the construction of the apartheid Wall.

The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), in its XIVth Ministerial Meeting in Durban last August took the lead this regard and its declaration on Palestine in fact called for specific measures to be taken, including sanctions by member states, collectively, regionally and individually to prevent any products of the illegal Israeli settlements from entering their markets, to decline entry to Israeli settlers involved in the construction of the separation Wall and other illegal activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem. The EU apparent agreement on distinct treatment of settlement products is an important step in this regard.

Sharon so-called Disengagement Plan:

Now Israel attempts to formally evade the Road Map and the entire Peace Process by replacing it with the so called 'Disengagement Plan" and the continuation and the intensification of settlement activities. It is the Israeli way of deception in dealing with the peace initiatives that produced the so called Sharon's so called Plan of Unilateral Withdrawal from Gaza.

The Israeli government insistence in not dealing with the Palestinian National Authority to coordinate its withdrawal is a flagrant departure from the principles of the negotiations as stipulated in the Road Map.

Moreover, the Israeli government is keeping ambiguous about the nature, extent and timeline of its withdrawal. Despite all the deception and ambiguity, the President of the USA gave letters of assurances to the Israeli Prime Minister as a prize for their plan.

These letters of assurances are contrary to international law, in contravention of Palestinian National and Human Rights and in contravention to United Nations Resolutions and Charter.

Sharon's so called Plan of Unilateral Withdrawal from Gaza is very dangerous. It has started by the invasion and destruction of thousands of homes in the Gaza strip refugee camp of Rafah on the border with Egypt. It has strengthened its illegal control and occupation of the international passage between Gaza and Egypt. The second step of this plan is currently being undertaken in the north of Gaza. In fact the military operation has the same characteristics as the one carried in the south. It aim at breaking the will of the Palestinian people by means of hysteric bloody indiscriminate massacres among Palestinian civilians in the name of securing Israeli borders. Home demolitions allow for a tighter control of strategic areas in Gaza. The death toll in Gaza has reached a staggering 140 deaths with thousands of injured civilians

The ongoing military operations aims at effectively isolating Gaza by controlling the borders with Egypt and Israel, by controlling the sea access points and by controlling the airspace of the Gaza Strip. Therefore Sharon's so called Plan aims in fact at changing the status of the occupied territory.

He effectively controls the Gaza Strip while appearing in the eyes of the international community as having withdrawn from it. This means that even though Israelis still a de facto occupying power it is relieved of all its duties and responsibilities as the occupying power.

The efforts made by the extremist right-wing Likud government of Sharon to deceive the general public and the international community worldwide as to its intention with the so-called unilateral withdrawal plan have been unveiled by Sharon 5 senior advisor Dov Weisglass.

On 6 October 2004, in an interview to Israeli newspaper Haaretz, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's senior advisor, Dov Weisglass announced that the disengagement plan means a "freezing of the peace process".

When asked why the so-called disengagement plan has been hatched, Weisglass ,who is one of the initiator of the disengagement plan, said "in the fall of 2003 Israel understood that everything was stuck. And although by the way the American administration reads the situation. the blame fell on the Palestinians, not on Israel. Sharon grasped that this state of affairs could not last and that they wouldn't leave us alone. Time wasn't on our side. There was an international erosion and an internal erosion. Domestically in the mean time everything was collapsing. The economy was stagnant and the Geneva Initiative had gained support abroad.

In addition to that came a new hit with the letters of officers and letters of pilots and letters of commandos all refusing to serve in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. These were people like Yiftah Spector a renowned Israeli Air Force pilot who signed the pilot's letter.

The main achievement of the Gaza plan is the freezing of the peace process in a 'legitimate' manner

Freezing the peace process means that you prevent the establishment of a Palestinian State, you prevent any discussions on the refugees as well as the borders and Jerusalem. Using the words of Dov Weisgiass, what transpires from the so-called plan of unilateral withdrawal from Gaza is that "effectively this whole package called the Palestinian State, with all that it entails, has been removed indefinitely from our agenda. And all this with authority and permission. All with a presidential blessing and the ratification of both houses of Congress."

Dov Weisglass explains that "the disengagement plan is a device which in cooperation with the management of the world. ensures that there will be no stop watch in there. There will be no timetable to implement tbe settlers' nightmare. He has postponed that nightmare indefinitely. Because what was effectively agreed to with the Americans was that part of the settlements would not be dealt with until the Palestinians turn into Finns( Finland). That is the significance of what we did. The significance is the freezing of the political process. And when you freeze that process you prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state and you prevent the discussion about the refugees, the borders and Jerusalem.What more could have been anticipated? What more could have been given to the settlers?

We created a status quo vis-a'-vis the Palestinians. There was a really difficult package of commitments that Israel was expected to accept. That package is called a political process. It included elements we will never agree accept and elements we cannot accept at this time. But we succeded in taking that package and sending it beyond the hills of time. With the proper management we succeeded in removing the issue of political process from the agenda and we educated the world to understand that there Is no one to talk to. And we received a no one to talk to certificate that says:

The death of President Yasser Arafat represented a very emotional moment in the history of our people. The amount of sympathy and compassion expressed by the world in general turned the attention of the international community to the Palestinian conflict, after being side-lined by the tragic events happening in Iraq. The departure of a leader of his stature prompted some ill-wishing protagonists to predicted that chaos was inevitable.

However once again, the Palestinian people, despite being shackled by the heavy chains of occupation, rejected being denied the right to exercise the tool of their democratic aspirations, and as in 1994, organized very successful presidential elections.

Following the death of President Yasser Arafat, the President of PLC (Palestinian Legislative Council) Rouhi Fattouh assumed the rule of interim president of the State of Palestine as stipulated by the Constitution. This respect for the Constitution and the belief in peaceful and democratic transition of powers is the most salient feature of the Palestinian political life. It allowed the world to witness these realities of the Palestinian people.

In January 2005, the presidential elections took place under the supervision of more than 900 international observers coming from almost 130 countries and international organizations. Despite the disruption caused by the soldiers of the Israeli occupying army, the election process was carried in a transparent and democratic manner. This led to the election of President Mahmoud Abbas as the new democratically elected President of Palestine.

The programme of Mahmoud Abbas has been based on strengthen the national unity in order to better promote the interest of all Palestinians. This meant that all the different political parties that animate the political life in Palestine had to participate in the following elections namely the municipal and the legislative elections. llamas and the Islamic Jihad have finally joined the path of a peaceful resolution of the conflict by means of a negotiated settlement of all outstanding issues.

The represents a huge achievement that should be added to all the efforts that Palestinian have put in all these years in order to reach a just and fair solution to this conflict

As expected of the newly elected Palestinian leadership, the efforts to reform and improve the quality of the service of the government carried on. The reform of the finance of the state of Palestine as well as the reforms of all the security services have all been executed and conform with the recommendation of the quartet formed by the UN, the USA, Russia and the EU. A unilateral cease fire has been observed by all Palestinian political parties in order to empower the newly voted President to carry on with his programme of reaching a peaceful solution to the conflict. Unfortunately, as has been the case consistently over the past decade, Israel still refuses to deliver on any of the promises and agreements that have been signed.

Ever since the so called disengagement plan has been presented by Sharon and Dov Weisgiass, not a single step on the ground has been taken to put it into effect.

On the contrary, our skepticism toward the seriousness of Sharon's intentions has been once more proven to be accurate. Sharon has further delayed any withdrawal of any settlement in Gaza in order to gain time and to appease the masses of illegal Israeli settlers. This confirm what Dov Weisglass had declared when he said that the disengagement plan was actually Sharon's way of killing and forever freezing the peace process while using American influence and bias to put pressure on the Palestinian leadership to portray them as the culprits.

The only way out of this dead locked situation seems to be by way of imposing sanctions on Israel as suggested by Arab League, NAM, the AU, the EU and different experts of international affairs.

Israelis not in a situation to help in peacefully resolving the conflict. The tendency in Israelis to retain by force what have illegally been acquired by means of violence and unrestricted , unchallenged force. Therefore only a serious and comprehensive set of sanctions would pressurize Israel and make it realize that it cannot stay as the only state in the world to defy International justice, The United Nation's Security Council and General Assembly Resolutions.

The myth of a democratic Israeli state in the midst of dictatorial regimes has been broken forever. The world has had the privilege to witness the survival of democratic values deeply entrenched in the Palestinian political culture and proudly manifested in the Presidential, Municipal and Legislative elections.

Ever since the so called disengagement plan has been presented by Sharon and Dov Weisglass, not a single step on the ground has been taken to put it into effect.

On the contrary, our skepticism toward the seriousness of Sharon's intentions has been once more proven to be accurate. Sharon has further delayed any withdrawal of any settlement in Gaza in order to gain time and to appease the masses of illegal Israeli settlers. This confirm what Dov Weisglass had declared when he said that the disengagement plan was actually Sharon's way of killing and forever freezing the peace process while using American influence and bias to put pressure on the Palestinian leadership to portray them as the culprits.

The only way out of this dead locked situation seems to be by way of imposing sanctions on Israel as suggested by Arab League, NAM, the AU, the EU and different experts of international affairs.

Israel is not in a situation to help in peacefully resolving the conflict. The tendency in Israel is to retain by force what have illegally been acquired by means of violence and unrestricted , unchallenged force. Therefore only a serious and comprehensive set of sanctions would pressurize Israel and make it realize that it cannot stay as the only state in the world to defy International justice, The United Nation's Security Council and General Assembly Resolutions.

The myth of a democratic Israeli state in the midst of dictatorial regimes has been broken forever. The world has had the privilege to witness the survival of democratic values deeply entrenched in the Palestinian political culture and proudly manifested in the Presidential, Municipal and Legislative elections.

Annex I

Dov Weisglass. "The significance of what we did is the freezing of the political process." (Alon Ron)

The big freeze By An Shavit (extract)

Is that what you really think - and Sharon, too - that there is no one to talk to?

"We reached that conclusion after years of thinking otherwise. After years of attempts at dialogue. But when Arafat undermined Abu Mazen at the end of the summer of 2003, we reached the sad conclusion that there is no one to talk to, no one to negotiate with. Hence the disengagement plan. Because when you're playing solitaire, when there is no one sitting across from you at the table, you have no choice but to deal the cards yourself." In 2001 you were still of a different opinion - you tried to reach an agreement with the Palestinian leadership. "Because of his trenchant realism, Arik never believed in permanent settlements: he didn't believe in the one-fell-swoop approach. Sharon doesn't think that after a conflict of 104 years, it's possible to come up with a piece of paper that will end the matter. He thinks the other side had to undergo a deep and extended sociopolitical change. But when we entered the Prime Minister's Office, he still believed that he would be able to achieve a very long-term interim agreement. An agreement of 25, 20, 15, 10, 5 years. There were some Palestinians who preferred that approach to the approach of [former prime minister Ehud] Barak. They were the ones we talked to. But very quickly we discovered that we were up against a stone wall, that when you get to the decision-making center, nothing happens."

Still, in 2002 you accepted the initiative of President Bush, the road map, and the principle of a Palestinian state, didn't you?

"For a great many years the accepted view in the world was that people turned to terrorism because their situation was bad. So that if you make things better for them, they will abandon terrorism. The Palestinian assumption was that when the Palestinian majority gets national satisfaction, they will lay down their arms and the occupiers and the occupied will emerge from the trenches and embrace and kiss. "Arik thought differently. He understood that in the Palestinian case the majority has no control over the minority. He understood that the ability of a central Palestinian administration to enforce its will on the entire Palestinian society is all but nonexistent. He understood that Palestinian terrorism is in part not national at all, but religious. Therefore, granting national satisfaction will not solve the problem of this terrorism. This is the basis of his approach that first of all the terrorism must be eradicated and only then can we advance in the national direction. Not to give a political slice in return for a slice of stopping terrorism, but to insist that the swamp of terrorism be drained before a political process begins.

"President Bush's speech of June 24, 2002, expressed exactly that approach. We didn't write it, but it articulated in the best way what we believed. That is why Sharon accepted the implicit principle of the speech immediately. He saw it as a historical turnabout. He saw it is a paramount policy achievement. For the first time the principle was accepted that before we enter the negotiating room, the pistols have to be left outside."

But didn't the road map translate that principle into a very crowded timetable?

"Arik would have preferred that the first stage of the road map go on for three years, the second stage five years and the third stage six years. But because the road map stipulated that it was based on performance and not on sacrosanct dates, he was able to accept it. He understood that the important thing was the principle. What's important is the formula that asserts that the eradication of terrorism precedes the start of the political process."

If you have American backing and you have the principle of the road map, why go to disengagement?

"Because in the fall of 2003 we understood that everything is stuck. And even though according to the Americans' reading of the situation, the blame fell on the Palestinians and not on us, Arik grasped that this state of affairs would not last. That they wouldn't leave us alone, wouldn't get off our case. Time was not on our side. There was international erosion, internal erosion. Domestically, in the meantime, everything was collapsing. The economy was stagnant, and the Geneva Initiative garnered broad support. And then we were hit with letters of officers and letters of pilots and letters of commandos [letters of refusal to serve in the territories]. These were not weird kids with green ponytails and a ring in their nose who give off a strong odor of grass. These were people like Spector's group [Yiftah Spector, a renowned Air Force pilot who signed the pilot's letter]. Really our finest young people."

What was your main concern in those months, what was the main factor that pushed you to the disengagement idea?

"The concern was the fact that President Bush's formula was stuck and this would lead to its ruin. That the international community would say: You wanted the president's formula and you got it; you wanted to try Abu Mazen and you tried. It didn't work. And when a formula doesn't work in reality, you don't change reality, you change the formula. Therefore, Arik's realistic viewpoint said that it was possible that the principle that was our historic policy achievement would be annulled - the principle that eradication of terrorism precedes a political process. And with the annulment of that principle, Israel would find itself negotiating with terrorism. And because once such negotiations start it's very difficult to stop them, the result would be a Palestinian state with terrorism. And all this within quite a short time. Not decades or even years, but a few months."

I still don't see how the disengagement plan helps here What was the major importance of the plan from your point of view?

"The disengagement plan is the preservative of the sequence principle. It is the bottle of formaldehyde within which you place the president's formula so that it will be preserved for a very lengthy period. The disengagement is actually formaldehyde. It supplies the amount of formaldehyde that's necessary so that there will not be a political process with the Palestinians."

Is what you are saying, then, is that you exchanged the strategy of a long-term interim agreement for a strategy of long-term interim situation?

"The American term is to park conveniently. The disengagement plan makes it possible for Israel to park conveniently in an interim situation that distances us as far as possible from political pressure. It legitimizes our contention that there is no negotiating with the Palestinians. There is a decision here to do the minimum possible in order to maintain our political situation. The decision is proving itself. It is making it possible for the Americans to go to the seething and simmering international community and say to them, 'What do you want.' It also transfers the initiative to our hands. It compels the world to deal with our idea, with the scenario we wrote. It places the Palestinians under tremendous pressure. It forces them into a corner that they hate to be in. It thrusts them into a situation in which they have to prove their seriousness. There are no more excuses. There are no more Israeli soldiers spoiling their day. And for the first time they have a slice of land with total continuity on which they can race from one end to the other in their Ferrari. And the whole world is watching them - them, not us. The whole world is asking what they intend to do with this slice of land."

MANEUVER OF THE CENTURY

I want to remind you that there will also be a withdrawal in the West Bank.

"The withdrawal in Samaria is a token one. We agreed to only so it wouldn't be said that we concluded our obligation in Gaza."

You gave up the Gaza Strip in order to save the West Bank? Is the Gaza disengagement meant to allow Israel to continue controlling the majority of the West Bank?

"Arik doesn't see Gaza today as an area of national interest. He does see Judea and Samaria as an area of national interest. He thinks rightly that we are still very very far from the time when we will be able to reach final-status settlements in ]udea and Samaria." Does the evacuation of the settlements in Gaza strengthen the settlements in the West Bank or weaken them?

"It doesn't hurt the isolated, remote settlements; it's not relevant for them. Their future will be determined in many years. When we reach a final settlement. It's not certain that each and every one of them will be able to go on existing.

"On the other hand, in regard to the large settlement blocs, thanks to the disengagement plan, we have in our hands a first-ever American statement that they will be part of Israel. In years to come, perhaps decades, when negotiations will be held between Israel and the Palestinians, the master of the world will pound on the table and say: We stated already ten years ago that the large blocs are part of Israel."

If so, Sharon can tell the leaders of the settlers that he is evacuating 10,000 settlers and in the future he will be compelled to evacuate another 10,000, but he is strengthening the other 200,000, strengthening their hold in the soil.

"Arik can say honestly that this is a serious move because of which, out of 240,000 settlers, 190,000 will not be moved from their place. Will not be moved."

Is he sacrificing a few of his children in order to ensure that the others remain permanently where they are?

"At the moment he is not sacrificing anyone in Judea and Samaria. Until the land is quiet and until negotiations begin, nothing is happening. And the intention is to fight for every single place. That struggle can be conducted from a far more convenient point of departure. Because in regard to the isolated settlements there is an American commitment stating that we are not dealing with them at the moment, while for the large blocs there is genuine political insurance. There is an American commitment such as never existed before, with regard to 190,000 settlers."

If what you are saying is correct, the settlers themselves should organize demonstrations of support for Sharon, because he did a tremendous service to the settlement enterprise.

"They should have danced around and around the Prime Minister's Office."

And Sharon himself actually didn't undergo a de Gaulle-type reversal. He didn't make a U-turn. He remained loyal to the approach of the national camp.

"Arik is the first person who succeeded in taking the ideas of the national camp and turning them into a political reality that is accepted by the whole world. After all, when he declared six or seven years ago that we would never negotiate under fire, he only generated gales of laughter. Whereas today that same approach guides the president of the United States. It was passed in the House of Representatives by a vote of 405-7, and in the Senate by 95-5."

From your point of view, then, your major achievement is to have frozen the political

process legitimately?

"That is exactly what happened. You know, the term 'political process' is a bundle of concepts and commitments. The political process is the establishment of a Palestinian state with all the security risks that entails The political process is the evacuation of settlements, it's the return of refugees, it's the partition of Jerusalem. And all that has now been frozen."

So you have carried out the maneuver of the century? And all of it with authority and permission?

"When you say maneuver,' it doesn't sound nice. It sounds like you said one thing and something else came out. But that's the whole point. After all, what have I been shouting for the past year? That I found a device, in cooperation with the management of the world, to ensure that there will be no stopwatch here.

I return to my previous question: In return for ceding Gaza, you obtained status quo in Judea and Samaria?

It is therefore clear that the intention underlying and justifying this Disengagement Plan is not to reach a just and peaceful resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or two lead to the creatino of a Palestinian state but rather to legitimize and strenghthen the occupation of our people and land!

An appalling plan for Palestine is shaping up behind Israeli slogans of "disengagement." Away from international attention, the destiny being prepared for the Palestinian people is showing its true face more clearly than ever before. The Apartheid Wall, with its horrendous effects on Palestinian life and land, does not stand alone, but is today merging with the longstanding Israeli settlement policy and the creation of Jewish-only infrastructure into a comprehensive scheme for colonial domination and conquest based on racial discrimination.

"Modifications" to the Apartheid Wall that Change Nothing

The latest modifications of the path of the Apartheid Wall, announced with great fanfare, were nothing more than the result of U.S. and international pressure demanding maps that would enable them to defend the Wall in front of their constituencies and public opinion. The "new map" of the Wall represents a contorted game of numbers and definitions that has "lowered" the percentage of West Bank land stolen and destroyed by the Apartheid Wall to 6.1 percent.

But of course, as the media and political leaders praising the new plan inevitably fail to point out, this 6.1 percent needs to be added to the 11.8 percent annexed by the settlements and the 29.1 percent isolated in the Jordan Valley. Without even taking into account the additional land that has also been stolen from the Palestinian people for the construction of the settlers-only roads, this makes a total of 47 percent of the West Bank, and reveals itself as absolutely no different from the 47 percent that Israel intended to annex before the supposed modifications.

This game of numbers is also aimed at re-directing how the situation on the ground is discussed. It steers attention towards the size of the Bantustans forced upon the Palestinian people, as if it was not the very fact that Palestinians are being closed off behind walls that should create outrage, rather than the question of whether these ghettos should be slightly larger. We are not fighting for bigger ghettos or for more colorful walls, but for liberation and justice in our land.

The New "Disengagement Plan" Map shows the completed sections of the Apartheid Wall in the northern West Bank (in black) and the remaining planned sections in blue. The Occupation's first phase of the Wall in the northern West Bank, from Zububa village in the Jenin district to Masha village in the south of the Qalqiliya distrid, resulted in 51 villages losing most of their agricultural lands behind the Wall. In villages like Jayyus in Qalqilya and Qaffin in Tulkarem, the Wall annexed some of the most fertile lands in the West Bank, leaving Palestinians with nothing. Here Israeli settlements like Alfe Minashe are expanding on lands isolated behind the Wall, while a new settlement is now under construction just behind the Wall on the isolated lands of Jayyus.

The Occupation Government, in an attempt to conceal its colonial expansionist plans behind the building of the Wall, claims a new route for the Wall has been designed. However, although some changes in the Wall route were made in individual villages like Zawiya in Salfit, and Biet man and Beit Sunk in north west Jerusalem, arid in the southern, and western Hebron areas, the Wall route continues as before in the rest of the West Bank, annexing some 47% of the West Bank. It will leave Palestinians in ghettos or semi-ghettos, linked together with tunnels and bridges under Occupation control. What is new in this fresh Wall route is that it is done under the title of a "disengagement plan" approved by Americans and Europeans who chose to consider it as part of the "road map". What is "new" now is that the Wall is built in line with the Israeli/western visions of "peace", while in reality perpetuating the Zionist, colonialist project.

The blue line on the map shows the uncompleted planned phases of the Wall as approved by the Israeli cabinet on February 20th, 2005.

1. The completed parts of the Wall are some 145 kms, while the second phase in which work for the new sections of the Wall has started since last year extends some 2lOkms on the West bank lands in addition to more than 90kms for the so-called Jerusalem Envelope.

2. The Wall annexes large areas of lands, cutting through the middle of the West Bank in Salfit to annex Ariel and the Shomron settlement blocks, and in jerusalem annexing the Etzion, Giv'at Ze'ev and Ma'ale Adumim settlement blocks leaving Palestinians in ghettos with no expansion potential. Annexing these settlement blocs with the already annexed settlements in the northern West Bank will result in the loss of 554 km2 of the West Bank. This is almost 9.5% of the total West Bank land mass.

3. Close to half the area taken in by the Wall is located in East Jerusalem and its surroundings, leaving the Palestinian City and its suburbs as a fractured cluster of semi-ghettos, robbing Palestinian citizens of their last remaining prospects for urban development in their capital and fatally depleting the West Bank's capacity for socio economic rehabilitation.

4. However, Israel does not count Jerusalem as part of its figures regarding the Wall and the West Bank. The Wall as projected around Jerusalem practically annexing all what is included in the current occupation municipal boundaries of EastJjerusalem (except Kafr Aqab, North of Qalandiya). Yet in an attempt to mislead the world about the real size of lands annexed behind the Wall, Israel doesn't include the 70 km2 taken from jerusalem, totaling 1.2% of the West Bank. Furthermore, Israeli calculations exclude the 46 km2 (0.8% West Bank) stolen in Latrun. Both areas taken together make some 116 km2, or 2% of the West Bank. This 2% of the West Bank should be added to the 7.6% of land annexed by the Wall.

5. The so-called "Jerusalem Envelope" extends form Beit Horon in the north west of the city to the southwest Kfar Etzion settlement in the Bethlehem distrid. The Envelope will annex the Ma'ale Adumim settlement block, to the east of Jerusalem city, annexing 62 km2 (just over 1% of the West Bank), 71 km2 from Etzion West in south west Jerusalem, and 31 km2 in the Giv'on block north west of Jerusalem. Altogether this adds up to 237 km2.

6. In the west Bethlehem area and in north west Jerusalem two main settler road bypasses cut in the middle of the West Bank Highway 60 (Beit jala-Khadr) and Highway 443 (South of Rafat), functioning as separation and ghettoizing tools. Both roads, already parts of them are, will be walled in on both sides.

7. In the Etzion settlement block the wall is projected to extend from Har Gilo moving around the Palestinian villages of Walaja (including Am juwaizeh) and Battir isolating them behind the Wall toward Wadi Fukin where it ends, leaving a huge gap with where the Wall is coming from (Bethlehem). This gap can be best explained by the huge expansion plans Israel has for its settlements in this area, both West and East of the Green Line (Zur Hadassah, Geva'ot and Bat Ayin) which it does not want to become unlinked by a Wall in this area.

8. The Ariel settlement finger, will upon completion annex 123 km2, totaling 2.1% of the West Bank.

9. The Jordan Valley, as shown in the map, remains, with or without a wall, under Occupation's control except for Jericho. Settlements built to the east of almost every Palestinian city establish a "belt" isolating these cities from their eastern lands and from the Valley. This is in addition to settlements inside the Valley itself. Moreover, the presence of occupation military training camps, settler controlled water resources and the isolation of Palestinian villages all strengthen the Occupation's control over the Valley. Annexing the Jordan Valley will mean the further annexation of 28% of the total West Bank land.

10. The Wall as completed and with the planned sections, form part of the Israeli "disengagement plan", considered by the Europeans and Americans as part of the "Roadmap" and the Israeli/western vision of a "viable state". It will lead to the creation of a Bantustan state. In principle the Israeli rhetoric around "viability" serves to legitimize the illegal activities of the Israeli occupation in the West Bank. The West Bank is one unit. It forms one piece of territory. Yet in the realities being carved out on the ground the term continuity or contiguity will never apply except within the misleading rhetoric of the United of four main construction projects that have been submitted to the public and are intimately linked to the construction of the Apartheid Wall:

1. The Building of New Settlements and the Expansion of Existing Settlements:

Settlements have always been at the core of the colonial project to control Palestine. The so-called "disengagement plan" claims to be about the dismantling of settlements: that is, the evacuation of settlements in the Gaza Strip and of four minor settlements in the West Bank near Jenin. But at the same time, Israel has announced the annexation of all the other approximately 200 settlements in the Occupied West Bank and Jerusalem. In additional Israel is currently expanding and constructing new settlements in the Tulkarem and Qalqiliya areas, ensuring the permanent annexation of the Palestinian lands isolated by the Wall.

2. More Settlers-Only "By -Pass" Roads:

These fenced and heavily military guarded bypass roads are for settlers only-Palestinians are not allowed to use or cross them. These roads cut through the West Bank and destroy the Palestinian road system, allowing the settlers free access everywhere, while at the same time annexing lands and isolating Palestinian communities from each other in the same way the Apartheid Wall does. Israel has announced the construction of a further 500 km of roads to reinforce this apartheid road network. This will ensure that Palestinian residential areas are nothing more than enclosed islands, totally isolated among the settlements and their road system.

3. Bridges and Tunnels:

Israel plans the construction of sixteen junctions with bridges (which will be guaranteed freeways for Israelis) and tunnels (which will be controlled passages for Palestinians, guarded by the Israeli military). These will be the only passage points for Palestinians needing to travel from one area or city to another within the West Bank. While providing a facade of "maximum contiguity" among Palestinian areas after all, the claim goes, these junctions will connect the Palestinian Bantustans with each other, thus providing "contiguity" this project is in fact aimed at guaranteeing full Israeli control over the West Bank even after a mock "withdrawal" of the Israeli army. All tunnels will be provided with gates (this is already the case in the village of Habla, in the Qalqiliya district, where the Palestinian population is at the mercy of the occupation forces in order to pass to or from their village), which will enable Israel to impose full curfew over the West Bank, perpetrate collective punishment at will, and control all Palestinian life. To do so' it will need no more than sixteen military cars, one for each junction.

A spider network of settler roads, bridges and tunnels continue to surround Palestinians villages and towns further ghettoizing them. The Occupation Forces have begun constructing 24 tunnels for Palestinian use while they remain barred from settler-only roads. Such roads, and the obligatory security zones which accompany them, separate Palestinians from their lands, isolating villages and towns from each other. Six tunnels are already completed, the rest under construction or pending.

Tunnels and settler roads will imprison Palestinians in a system of apartheid forging scattered and separated ghettos. This network of roads, together with the Wall, encircles Palestinians and perpetuates the Occupation's control over the Palestinian ghettos and people. With one road leading to one village, or a group of villages or a whole district, the Occupation Forces can invade, bomb or destroy a whole community, and withdraw, leaving Palestinians trapped with no sovereignty, no security, and no control over their lives.

These roads and tunnels, along with the Apartheid Wall create the borders for a final settlement to be enforced upon the Palestinians. The occupying forces call this "a viable state" - creating separated ghettos linked by a system of tunnels and low roads controlled by Occupation Forces - satisfying American calls for "maximum contiguity"

The Reality of "Disengagement": Full Bantustanization

The real Israeli political project can be found in the "disengagement plan" and the initiatives connected to it. The disengagement plan, far from being a withdrawal or giving the Palestinian people the right to statehood, demarcates the full Bantustanization of the Palestinian people. The rhetoric of disengagement hides a well elaborated and effectively planned project for the enslavement and destruction of an entire people. This plan consists of four main construction Apartheid Wall, the settlements, and their road system. This is the key element that provides economic sustainability to the rest of the Israeli plans. These Israeli-owned industrial zones will be sites for labor-intensive industries where the Palestinian people will be forced to work as exploited labor, enriching the Israeli economy in the attempt to earn a meager living in the only way possible behind the gates of our ghettos. Israel has asked the U.S. and Europe to fund the CBIZ, and thus to legitimize the Israeli political project, under the pretext of providing "work opportunities" for the Palestinian population. The CBIZ is also presented as a practical economic solution to a potential humanitarian disaster- after all, the argument goes, if the international community does not provide funding for this project, then the Palestinian population will be dependent on humanitarian aid (or simply starve to death in their ghettos, which might be upsetting for the world to watch). This humanitarian aid - like many other costs of the occupation of Palestine and the expulsion of Palestinians from their land - would thus have to be paid by the international community. In any case, under the CBIZ plan, the Palestinian people will remain subjected, enslaved, and deprived of any possibility of self-determination.

"Trapped Like Mice": A Plan for the Destruction of Palestinian Life

The Apartheid Wall allows Israel to implement and link all these policies into a coherent regime. It completes the Palestinian ghettos that have been prepared by the settlement policy and the road system. It also enables Israel to completely annex Jerusalem and to isolate it from the West Bank. In the light of these facts on the ground, it is obvious that no Palestinian state will be possible. It is also obvious that the continued violation of Palestinian rights and of international law remains the infrastructure of the new Israeli plans. The only future envisaged for the Palestinian people is one of ghettos and Bantustans, life under permanent Israeli domination and humiliation.

A Palestinian farmer standing in front of the destruction caused by the Apartheid Wall in Beit Duqqu asked: "You took our country and killed our children. You destroyed our houses and bulldozed our fields and built your settlements, what more do you want? Why the Wall? You want to trap us like mice, you want to put a prison gate for us and start counting us as if we were some animals?!"

The Role of the International Community

The Palestinian people will never accept a life lived under these conditions, which represents the completion of an apartheid system that by far exceeds the darkest times of South Africa, aiming at the complete demise of our people. We will not surrender to this destiny. But we are asking for a response from the world to this project for our demise that is clear, effective, and immediate. One year after the International Court of Justice decision regarding the illegality of the Apartheid Wall, the settlement policy, and the Occupation, Israel has not given any sign that it will stop the construction of the Wall. Rather, it has strengthened its colonial plans. International criticism has proven unable to bring about the changes that are needed.

The international community has - as with all other UN resolutions regarding Palestinian rights failed to take up its obligations to ensure that the ICJ decision is implemented and international law respected. It is the people of the world who are called upon to defend the values of justice and freedom. The call for the isolation of Israel, through boycott, divestment, and sanctions campaigns, needs to get louder every day, in every city around the world. The trend towards a new international anti-apartheid movement is emerging, and it is upon this grassroots support that the Palestinian people can build. These campaigns around the world must initiate a process that will make Israel pay a price for its crimes. Such a worldwide movement is necessary' in order to end this vicious blend of occupation, expulsion, and ghettoization, leading to the total enslavement of a whole people.

[PMG NOTE :The Facilitating Disengagement -Israel ‘s West Bank Road Plan and the Wall and Projected Israeli Unilateral Disengagement –February 2005 MAPs are not Included made available on request}