Abstract
Abstract
Environmental justice is defined in a broader sense as, “The fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people, regardless of race, color, national origin, or income, with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.” In view of this definition, it is fair to say that no nation can achieve sustainable development if it lacks environmental justice. Sustainability or sustainable development is defined as, “The development that meets the needs of the present, without compromising the ability of the future generations to meet their own needs.” Accordingly, it is really difficult to maintain sustainable development without having environmental justice. The acts of many governments (particularly those of industrial countries) have, unfortunately, resulted in poisoning of communities and lands, and in genocides of peoples and the environment. As we are concerned here with the environmental status in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT), it is important to focus on the injustices and oppressions practiced by the state of Israel and its successive governments, army, settlers, and industries against the environment in Palestine. This article sheds light on the issues of environmental justice (injustice) and sustainable (unsustainable) development in the OPT, in view of the Israeli violations of international law and international treaties, as well as the local and regional agreements related to the environment. Israel, since it occupied the Palestinian territories in June 1967, has committed what is believed to be racism and genocide against the environment and its constituents (land, soil, water, air, and biodiversity). In view of the above, certain principles of environmental justice should be universally affirmed and adopted, taking into account the tremendous violations of the Israeli authorities against the environment in the OPT, in particular, and in Historic Palestine, in general.
Introduction
The term “Environmental Justice” first emerged in the United States as a political issue in the late 1980s, after the United Church of Christ (UCC) issued a report arguing that low-income communities, and particularly communities of color, suffer a disproportionate share of the burden of environmental hazards. The UCC report focused on the locations of hazardous waste facilities and suggested that prejudiced policymakers victimized low-income communities of color because of their relative lack of political power. 1 Many activists refused to use the term “Environmental Justice” and instead they used the term “Environmental Racism,” as a way of connecting their concerns to the civil rights movement.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) defines “Environmental Justice” as, “The fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people, regardless of race, color, national origin, or income, with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.” 2 This is premised on the belief that particular segments of the society, such as low-income communities, ethnic or racial minority groups and, on a wider scale, poor nations and nations that suffer from political oppression and military occupation (as in the case of the Palestinian people under the Israeli military occupation), bear a disproportionate amount of risk associated with environmental degradation and hazards.
Sustainability or “Sustainable Development,” on the contrary, is defined by the often quoted Brundtland Commission as, “The development that meets the needs of the present, without compromising the ability of the future generations to meet their own needs.” 3 However, most accept that sustainable development requires that current economic activities do not impair the well-being of present and future generations, in terms of the balance between economic, social, environmental, and natural resources. 4 So, by understanding and comprehending the definitions of both terms “Environmental Justice” and “Sustainable Development,” it is clear that no sustainable development can be achieved in the lack of environmental justice.
Disputes that involve large industrial projects in developing nations, enforcement of environmental regulations in communities with large minority populations, and destruction of the environment as a result of wars and military occupations (as in the cases of some countries in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, including Palestine, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and Libya) are strong examples of environmental degradation, environmental destruction, and their due results, including hazards and impacts on humans, animals, and plants, as well as on the climate and ecosystems, in general.
Israel, since it occupied the Palestinian territories (the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip—known as the Occupied Palestinian Territories [OPT]) in June 1967, has made a lot of changes on the ground. These changes, which are discussed below in some detail, have negatively affected not only the people and the land but also the environment and the ecological systems.
Aspects or Principles of Environmental Justice
The aspects or principles of environmental justice are discussed in this article, in view of the Israeli actions on the ground against the environment in the OPT. These aspects or principles include the following: (1) Environmental Justice; (2) Environmental Equity; (3) Environmental Racism; (4) Environmental Classism; and (5) Community of Concern. 5
Environmental justice
“Environmental Justice,” in addition to its definition given above, is the right to a safe, healthy, productive, and sustainable environment for all, where “environment” is considered, in its totality, to include the ecological (biological), physical (natural and built), social, political, aesthetic, and economic environments. Environmental justice refers to the conditions in which such a right can be freely exercised, through which individual and group identities, requirements, and dignities are preserved, fulfilled, and respected, in a way that provides for self-actualization and personal and community empowerment. 6 , 7 , 8 On the contrary, “Environmental Injustice” reflects the past and present actions taken against the environment and expresses socioeconomic and political objectives and tools needed to address those actions.
Environmental equity
“Environmental Equity” is an ideal of equal treatment and protection for various racial, ethnic, and income groups under environmental statutes, regulations, and practices, applied in a manner that yields no substantial differential impacts relative to the dominant group and the conditions prevailing. Although environmental equity implies elements of “fairness” and “rights,” it does not necessarily address past inequities or view the environment broadly, nor does it incorporate an understanding of the underlying causes and processes.
Environmental racism
“Environmental Racism” is racial discrimination in environmental policymaking, enforcement of regulations and laws, and targeting of minority communities by disposing wastes (sometimes toxic, hazardous, and dangerous) and locations of polluting industries. Racial discrimination can be intentional or unintentional and is often a manifestation of “Institutional Racism.” This term—Environmental Racism—acknowledges the existing political reality that continues to perpetuate environmental inequities and injustices.
Environmental classism
“Environmental Classism” is the result of and the process by which implementation of environmental policy creates intended or unintended consequences, which have disproportionate impacts (adverse) on lower income persons, communities, or populations. These disparate effects occur through various decision-making processes, program administration (e.g., superfund cleanup schedules), and the issuance of regulatory actions, such as compliance inspections and other enforcement measures, including fines, penalties, and administrative and judicial orders. For instance, while wealthy countries are discussing climate change as something that will hurt their people, low-income communities have been living with the consequences of climate change. This is represented in a largely unseen nightmare of pollution, water contamination, and natural disasters that affect people, including their health and housing security. 9
Community of concern
“Community of Concern” is a neighborhood, community, or population composed predominantly of persons of color, a substantial proportion of persons who are below the poverty line, or a population living under military occupation of another state (as in the case of the Palestinian population living under the Israeli military occupation since June 1967). The “Community of Concern,” as already defined, is subjected to a disproportionate burden of environmental hazards, which also experiences a significantly reduced quality of life, relative to the surrounding or comparative communities. For instance, in 1982, activists in Warren County, North Carolina, USA, catalyzed a powerful social movement when 414 demonstrators were arrested for protesting the sitting of a toxic waste facility in the predominantly black and low-income community. 10 , 11 This community of concern should be targeted by policy makers for environmental reparations or remedies to compensate or restore environmental quality to comparable levels and should be afforded special protection from additional adverse impacts. The case of the OPT is a very strong example of the “Community of Concern” regarding the heavy environmental burden the OPT and the Palestinian population are suffering from.
The “Aspects (or Principles) of Environmental Justice,” mentioned above, and the Principles of the “Universal Environmental Justice” (UEJ), mentioned below, are presented in this article to reflect on the gross and catastrophic violations of the Israeli occupation authorities against the environment in the OPT.
Principles of Uej
The following 20 points constitute the basic principles for UEJ,
12
which, individually and collectively, are strongly violated in the OPT by the Israeli occupation authorities, as discussed in the following sections:
Affirming of sacredness of Mother Earth, ecological unity, and interdependence of all species, and the right to be free from ecological destruction. Demanding that public policy is based on mutual respect and justice for all peoples, free from any form of discrimination or bias. Mandating the right to ethical, balanced, and responsible uses of land and renewable resources in the interest of a sustainable planet for humans, animals, and plants. Calling for universal prevention of the use of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons in any dispute among all the peoples of the world. Calling for protection from nuclear testing, extraction, production, and disposal of toxic and hazardous wastes and poisons, and nuclear testing that threatens the fundamental right to clean air, clean soil, clean water, and healthy food. Affirming the fundamental right to political, economic, cultural, and environmental self-determination of all peoples. Demanding the cessation of the production of all toxins, hazardous wastes, and radioactive materials, and that all past and current producers be held strictly accountable to the people for detoxification and the containment at the point of production. Demanding the right to participate, as equal partners, at every level of decision-making, including assessment, planning, implementation, enforcement, and evaluation. Affirming the right of all workers to a safe and healthy work environment, without being forced to choose between unemployment and unsafe livelihood. Affirming the right of those who work at home to be free from environmental hazards. Protecting the right of victims of environmental injustice to receive full compensation and reparations for damages, as well as quality health care. Considering governmental acts of environmental injustice a violation of international law, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
13
and the United Nations (UN) Convention on Genocide and Racism. Recognizing a special legal and natural relationship of the native (indigenous) peoples to governments, through treaties, agreements, compacts, and covenants to affirm sovereignty and self-determination. Affirming the need for urban and rural ecological policies to build new cities and to improve rural areas in balance with nature and honoring the cultural integrity of all communities. Providing fair access for all to the full range of natural resources. Calling for the strict enforcement of principles of informed consent and a halt to the testing of experimental reproductive and medical procedures and vaccinations on peoples and animals [as well as plants]. Opposing the destructive operations of multinational corporations. Opposing military occupation, repression, and exploitation of lands, peoples and their cultures, and other forms of life. Calling for the education of present and future generations, with emphasis on social and environmental issues, based on people's experience and diverse cultural perspectives. Requiring that states and peoples, as individuals and communities, make their choices to consume as little as possible of the natural resources available; to produce as little waste as possible; and to make conscious decisions to challenge and reprioritize lifestyles, to insure the health of the natural world for present and future generations.
Environmental “Injustices” as Related to The Opt
Geopolitical background
The Palestinian Territories (with a total area of ∼6,000 km 2 ), comprising the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, have been occupied by the state of Israel since June 1967. These territories, internationally recognized as the OPT, form only 22% of Historic Palestine (with a total area of ∼27,000 km 2 ), as Israel was established, in 1948, on the remainder (78%) of the lands of Historic Palestine. This is despite the UN Partition Plan for Palestine, which was based on the UN General Assembly Resolution 181. 14 The 181-Resolution was approved by the General Assembly on November 29, 1947, to terminate the British Mandate of Palestine by August 1, 1948, and to facilitate the creation of two states, one Jewish and one Arab, having 51% and 49% of the entire area of Historic Palestine, respectively. According to the Resolution 181, Jerusalem was declared to be a “corpus separatum”—a separate body, to be run under an international UN administration. The area to be run in this way included all of Jerusalem, Bethlehem, and Beit Sahour, to encompass the Muslim and Christian holy sites. During the 1967 war, Israel occupied the rest of Historic Palestine, and thus, Historic Palestine became entirely under the Israeli control.
In 1993, the Palestinian and Israeli leaderships signed the Oslo Agreement. 15 According to this agreement, the OPT were divided into three areas: “Area A,” which is under the Palestinian control, security-wise and administration-wise; “Area B,” which is under the Israeli control, security-wise, and under the Palestinian control, administration-wise; and “Area C,” which is under the Israeli control, security-wise and administration-wise. Based on the Oslo Agreement, the Palestinians' jurisdictions are presently not applicable to more than 18% (which is “Area A” only) of the West Bank, while “Area B” (22%) and “Area C” (60%) are totally under Israeli control, in terms of security and administration. Even that, Palestinian control on “Area A” is without contiguity between the Palestinian governorates altogether and within each governorate separately, as Israeli troops can enter this area anytime they want. As such, any considerable efforts that are made to take care of the environment on the Palestinian side, under these complicated geopolitical conditions, will be meaningless, as long as the Palestinians have these conditions on the ground, and as long as the Palestinian territories are divided into “Area A,” “Area B,” and “Area C,” according to the 1993 Oslo Agreement.
Environmental status in the OPT
As several nations are concerned and are involved when it comes to environmental issues (such as water, air, and soil pollutions, and waste management), and based on the fact that there is nothing called “Israeli environment” or “Palestinian environment” but rather “one regional environment,” great efforts must be made by the international community, at large, and the countries in the Middle East region, in particular, to protect the environment and to improve its status. This should be done in the form of direct or indirect multilateral cooperation that should involve all concerned parties. Such an action will certainly enable each of the parties concerned to have a better understanding of the environmental issues of interest and, in turn, a better understanding of the importance of the environmental issues in each of the countries involved. This, however, can be achieved, in the case of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, when an independent state of Palestine is declared on the entire parts of the OPT, with full sovereignty on its air space, land territories, and sea.
Israel's destruction of the environment
The fact that the international community has just recognized (in 2011) Palestine as a state with East Jerusalem as its capital (over the OPT) has enabled the Palestinian leadership, represented in the Palestinian authority, to begin entering international treaties and conventions. Presumably, this entering has both, theoretically and symbolically, lessened the environmental injustices inflected by Israel against the environment and the Palestinians, but nothing happened on the ground, similar to many other practices against the Palestinians in the OPT. To this connection, Israel (successive governments, army, settlers, industries, etc.) has never stopped its violations of international laws and treaties, as it has kept destroying the environment since its establishment in 1948 on 78% of the area of Historic Palestine, and then since it occupied the rest (22%) of Historic Palestine in 1967. The Israeli practices have led to the degradation of the environment, in terms of the pollutions caused to the water, air, and soil, which (pollutions) in their impacts reflect very negatively on humans, animals, plants, and ecosystems.
Gaza Strip, in particular
The entire territory of the Gaza Strip (which has the highest population density in the world, and where more than 2 million inhabitants live on ∼365 km 2 ) has been subjected for the last 12 years (i.e., since June 2007) and counting to a blockade (by land, sea, and air) and strong inhumane sanctions imposed on it by the Israel authorities. The average population density 16 in the West Bank in mid-2011 reached 456 capita/km 2 of the total area, while in the Gaza Strip it reached 4353 capita/km 2 . The Israeli blockade and sanctions on the Gaza Strip have badly devastated all aspects of life of its Palestinian population. The siege and sanctions on the Strip, through which foods, medications, fuels, and so on are not allowed to enter, have resulted in the death of hundreds of people; many of whom are children, elderly, and infirm individuals. In addition, in one decade (i.e., since December 2008), Israel launched three all-out wars (in 2008/2009, 2012, and 2014 17 ), in which Israel used every weapon possible (except nuclear), including white phosphorous. 18 This is in addition to the airstrikes that Israel has been launching on the Gaza Strip from time to time. During those Israeli wars and airstrikes on the besieged population in the Gaza Strip, thousands of people were killed and tens of thousands were injured, and the impacts on the environment have been devastating. For instance, the farmers in the Gaza Strip have been unable to recover from the continuous Israeli attacks and closures, causing agricultural employees to be reduced by 60%; the loss of the agricultural sector reached USD180 million in 1 year due to direct damages to agricultural assets. 19 In addition, as a result of the Israeli wars on the Gaza Strip, the wastewater treatment plants, as well as the electricity-generating plants, were totally destroyed. This has resulted in daily dumping of more than 50,000 m 3 of raw sewage into the Mediterranean Sea, 20 causing high levels of pollution in the sea and gross damage to the marine life. In brief, the Gaza Strip, as described by the UN, will be an “unlivable” place by 2020, 21 with respect to pollution, water and energy shortages, waste, health deterioration, lack of medications, and so on.
Israel's control of Palestinian water resources
Concerning the issue of consumption and utilization of natural resources, particularly water, Israel has full control on more than 85% of the Palestinian water resources in the OPT. 22 Water is extracted by Israeli authorities from the Mountain Aquifer underlying the occupied West Bank. The West Bank's Mountain Aquifer is composed of three main subaquifer systems, which are the Western Aquifer System, the North-Eastern Aquifer System, and the Eastern Aquifer System, which are located entirely underneath the occupied West Bank. The Palestinians are not receiving their fair share of water from their own rightful water resources; are not allowed to drill new wells or even deepen or rehabilitate the already existing wells; are not allowed to develop the water distribution network in the OPT; and, in some areas, are not allowed to repair some parts of the water network damaged by Israeli forces during the frequent invasions and incursions of the occupied West Bank. In the West Bank, there are some areas where the daily water consumption per person is only 25–30 L, which is less than a quarter of what the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends (120 L/capita/day), mainly because the West Bank's inhabitants are not getting enough water from the controlling power, which is Israel. 23 However, the water situation in the besieged Gaza Strip is much worse than that in the West Bank. The Gaza Strip is entirely dependent on the Coastal Aquifer System (CAS), which is severely overextracted as the population in the Gaza Strip extracts three times more than the natural yield of CAS. This has led to the seawater intrusion into CAS, causing higher levels of salinity of the groundwater extracted from it. 24 , 25
Water pollution
The acts of the Israelis (successive governments, soldiers, settlers, manufacturers, etc.) have led to pollution of the water resources in the OPT, especially of the groundwater of CAS underlying the Gaza Strip. This is due to the following reasons: (1) the 12-year and continued blockade on the 2 million people living in the Gaza Strip; (2) the CAS over-pumping; and (3) the wide usage of pesticides leaking into the shallow CAS. For instance, the chloride and nitrate concentrations in CAS have reached up to 2000 mg/L and up to 210 mg/L, respectively; meanwhile, the recommended values for chloride and nitrate are 250 and 45 mg/L, respectively. 26 So, to implement environmental justice, Israel, along with international organizations, has a duty to identify the high levels of pollution affecting the water in the OPT (particularly in the Gaza Strip) and ascertain the sources of that pollution. It is well known, however, that many of the diseases that affect the Palestinians in the OPT, especially in the Gaza Strip, are caused by the drinking water because it is highly polluted due to the chemical and biological pollutants and salts found in the groundwater. 27 In addition, it is well known that many of the Israeli industries, Israeli military bases, Israeli incursions in the OPT, the presence of more than 250 illegal Israeli settlements in the OPT, which have ∼1 million inhabitants, the construction of the Israeli Segregation Wall (ISW) with a total length of more than 700 km built on more than 13% of the OPT, 28 and, last but not least, the Israeli wars on the Gaza Strip have all resulted in high levels of water pollution in the OPT. It is important to mention that many of the Israeli industries in the OPT produce huge amounts of waste in the both solid and fluid. 29 Some of this waste is hazardous, which, in turn, seeps (in the case of liquid waste) or leaks (in the case of solid waste after being dissolved) into the groundwater aquifer systems underlying the OPT, including the Mountain Aquifer System of the West Bank, and the CAS of the Gaza Strip. This is in addition to the huge amounts of waste (solid and liquid sewage) produced by the Israeli settlements, which have badly polluted the groundwater in the OPT.
Air pollution
While the Palestinian population in the OPT has limited resources to manage pollution, the Israelis (successive governments, military forces, Israeli settlers, industries, etc.) have sufficient resources and are highly trained and experienced with mitigating pollution, specifically air pollution. Air pollution in the OPT is largely attributed to the Israeli industrial zones, the Israeli settlements, the Israeli army activities, and the Israeli military bases existing in the OPT. Israel emits every day tremendous amounts of gases that cause heavy air pollution. A considerable number of respiration illnesses, from which many Palestinians in the OPT are suffering, are caused by the gases emitted from the Israeli industries, heavy vehicular traffic, and the military's activities, especially those located in the OPT. Some studies showed that the concentration of gases, especially carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, and others in the air of the OPT, increases on weekdays and decreases considerably during the weekends (particularly Saturdays), as the Israeli industries are closed, because of the weekend's Jewish holiday on Saturdays. 30 However, there are other sources of air pollution in the OPT, both resulting from the Palestinian inhabitants and industries, as well as naturally occurring. 31 These include burning tires; landfills and open-air waste burning; stone-cutting industries; open-air waste dumping (hazardous, chemical, industrial, organic, etc.); open-air animal slaughterhouses; the prevalence of chemical fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, and so on; heavy smoking; and wide use of fireworks. This is in addition to the naturally occurring air pollution resulting from dust storms—known as “Khamsīn,” “Khamasin,” or “Khamaseen,” which is a Middle Eastern term for the dry, hot wind that blows in from the desert (Sahara in North Africa and Arabian Peninsula) from March through May, and sometimes continues through several months of the year, which (its continuation) is probably due to climate change.
Tree uprooting
Israel, since its occupation of the Palestinian territories in June 1967, has been applying some of the most devastating policies against the environment, including deforestation of the OPT, which has resulted in desertification, considering that Historic Palestine is classified as a semiarid to arid region. Further to the above- and below-mentioned examples of the Israeli actions of destruction caused to the environment, Israel, as a state and as an occupying power, has uprooted during the last five decades (i.e., since June 1967) a large number of trees, including fruit-bearing trees (mainly olives and citrus). According to Visualizing Palestine, as of October 2013, more than 800,000 trees were uprooted, with USD12.3 million lost each year by the 80,000 families depending on the olive harvest. 32 The large number of trees, which Israel (successive governments, army, settlers, and industries) has uprooted, cut, burnt, and destroyed, represents a real ecological genocide. This genocide has created some ecological imbalance, as a result of the Israeli policies of deforestation and desertification, in turn deepening the impacts of climate change on the Mediterranean region. 33 The uprooting of Palestinian trees conducted by the Israeli soldiers and settlers represents a hate crime against the Palestinians and their properties, according to the Israeli daily “Haaretz.” 34
Biodiversity damage
Concerning the biodiversity and protection of nature in the OPT, it is clear that the Israeli attacks against the environment over the last 51 years of the Israeli military occupation of the Palestinian territories (i.e., since June 1967 and continues) have led to the extinction of many fauna and flora species. In addition, many other fauna and flora species are classified as endangered species. 35 As such, it is a matter of time until those species become extinct as well. On the contrary, Israel, to be viewed differently by the world community, plans to introduce different species to the OPT, such as Dorcas gazelles and Nubian ibex, without taking into consideration important factors, such as the animals' number, distribution, habitats, and other interactions, that should be investigated to keep the natural balance of the ecosystems of the area, where the new species will be introduced. Along these lines, in the 1950s, Israel drained Lake Hula in northern Historic Palestine to increase the farmable land area, eliminate the potential for malaria, and reduce evaporative water loss. Before its drainage, Lake Hula was 5.3 km long and 4.4 km wide, extending over 12–14 km 2 . It was a shallow, pear-shaped basin about 1.5 m deep in summer and 3 m deep in winter. Over the following four decades, this drainage created serious ecological and agricultural problems, such as underground peat fires, soil subsidence and inundation, loss of endemic species, and possible increased nutrient loading to the Tiberias Lake (Sea of Galilee or Kinneret Lake), which is the primary storage and supply reservoir for Israel's freshwater needs. 36 However, the state of Israel finally realized, after it caused this environmental disaster (drainage of Lake Hula), that successful development can endure only if a balanced compromise between nature and development is achieved. 37
Climate change
In the last few decades, people started to experience the impacts of climate change that have dramatically affected several places (land and sea) around the world. The impacts vary from small effects to severe and even catastrophic ones, resulting in the deaths of many people and in gross damages to properties. The Middle East, particularly the Eastern-Mediterranean region, including Historic Palestine (Israel and the OPT), is no exception for the climate change impacts.
38
In the presence of several ecological and environmental problems, aside from the political instability, the region has already witnessed in the last few decades dramatic climate changes and their effects. The climate change impacts in the region will probably have, over the next few decades, double or even triple the effects, in comparison with the effects that have impacted or will impact other parts of the world. In his study on impacts of climate change on the Eastern-Mediterranean region, the author investigated the following components, as related to climate change
39
:
The lack of enough water resources and thus the presence of tremendous water shortages resulted in draught and desertification, as well as in deterioration of health and socioeconomic conditions, including rampant diseases
40
and high rates of poverty and unemployment.
41
Climate change can also result in “induced migration” of inhabitants, when/if their regions are hit by, for instance, hurricanes, heat waves, and droughts.
42
As natural resources (particularly water) are going to become scarce due to climate change, more wars may take place in the Middle East, adding to the pre-existing tensions and the many wars that took, and are currently taking, place in the region, as well as the long-term instability.
43
Geopolitics is a critical issue that has contributed to, and will continue to contribute strongly to, climate change in the region. For example, the construction of the illegal ISW and the hundreds of settlements existing in the OPT have badly contributed to climate change in the region.
44
This is due to the fact that such activities have led to (on the Palestinian side, as discussed above) deforestation, land degradation, loss of biodiversity, loss of water resources, and so on. The possible construction of mega projects, such as the Red Sea–Dead Sea Conveyance (RSDSC) project, which, if constructed, will cause huge ecological and environmental hazards, resulting in climate change impacts and in triggering seismic events, such as earthquakes.
45
This project was strongly opposed by research scientists, academics, environmentalists, socio-economists, and so on.
46
The Gaza Strip, as part of the OPT, is a very special case, with respect to the climate change impacts. This is because of the small area (365 km
2
) of the Gaza Strip and its large population (over 2 million), high population density (4353 capita/km
2
in mid-2011), and high population growth rate (3.2).
47
On the contrary, the rising sea level of the Mediterranean Sea neighboring the Gaza Strip, the intrusion of seawater into the CAS, and water shortages, along with many other environmental, geopolitical, and socioeconomic problems, in addition to the ongoing 12-year siege by Israel, have made the Gaza Strip a very strong contender to be greatly impacted by climate change. Based on empirical calculations made by Salem (2011), the sea level rose between 0.4 and 22.4 cm for the period of 1915–2010, and it is projected to rise between 25.9 and 43.2 cm for the period of 2025–2100.
48
These conditions altogether indicate that coping strategies and adaptation measures to combat climate change in the Gaza Strip are really hard to fathom. The climate change impacts, along with the long-standing difficult conditions in the Gaza Strip (including the continuous siege since June 2007) as well as in the West Bank, have already resulted in droughts and crop failures in the OPT.
49
,
50
The situation in the Gaza Strip is miserable, and accordingly, it cannot supply the normative domestic needs under any scenario, and hence, it requires immediate augmentation, regardless of climate change impacts.
51
In light of the above, it is important to mention that, in the case of the OPT, in particular, and the Eastern-Mediterranean region, in general, it is obvious that politics is a major contributor to climate change, meaning that climate change in this region of the world is primarily anthropogenic driven. Consequently, unless the international community intervenes to find a political solution for the Middle East conflict, based on the UN resolutions, the Eastern-Mediterranean region and, particularly, the OPT will suffer very badly as a result of climate change and its impacts. Aside from politics, however, there are technical means suggested to mitigate climate change impacts or to adapt with them. These include the use of renewable energy sources, particularly solar energy. 52 Even adapting some technologies to reduce the climate change impacts in the OPT is impractical, however, due to the acts of the Israeli occupation on the ground. This is due to the fact that the OPT are totally under Israeli control, and presently, Israel does not allow the implementation of solar energy projects in the OPT, especially in rural areas although they are not connected to the regional electricity grid. 53
Israeli waste dumped in the OPT
The destruction environmental policies and practices of Israel also include the disposal of hazardous and nonhazardous solid and liquid wastes in the OPT, despite the fact that Israel has signed international treaties and conventions, such as the “Basel Convention on the Control of Trans-boundary Movement of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal.” 54 In this context, Israel must reaffirm its commitment to the Basel Convention, by stopping the disposal of its waste within the OPT. In a recent article published on July 3, 2018, entitled, “Israeli Jewish settlement's pours its sewage into Palestinian fields,” the author documented with pictures that “raw sewage from the new West Bank [Jewish] settlement of Amihai is flowing straight into agricultural fields worked by Palestinians from the village of Turmus Ayya [in the Ramallah Government of the West Bank].” 55 According to Danny Gymshi (Head of the Israeli Criminology and Law Enforcement Institute at the College of Management Academic Studies in Rishon Lezion—COMAS), serious environmental infractions committed in the OPT align with many of the criteria for crimes against humanity. 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 In a recent field study, B'Tselem (an Israeli human rights organization) found that there are at least 15 Israeli waste treatment facilities in the occupied Palestinian West Bank. Most of the waste they process is produced in Israel. Six of the facilities handle hazardous waste, which requires special processes and regulatory supervision, due to the dangers it poses, including toxicity, mutagenicity (carcinogenicity), infectiousness, flammability, and combustibility. 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 One of the world's oldest nuclear reactors—Dimona (the Israeli nuclear reactor)—which by all indications is not only obsolete but also structurally compromised—is still operating in Israel, posing enormous environmental and security threats to the entire Middle East. 64 As a result of the waste generated by Dimona, high-risk areas include the Hebron Governorate in the southern part of the occupied West Bank, where the towns of Yatta, Al-Thaheriyya, Bani Na'im, and others have much higher incidences of cancer compared with the national average. Health officials have also documented cases of children born with physical deformities. 65
Israel's pesticides
Another example of Israeli violations of international environmental treaties and conventions is the fact that there is no coordination between the Palestinian and Israeli authorities regarding pesticides and pest control policies. It is well known that several kinds of pesticides enter the OPT from Israel, although they are internationally forbidden, or their usage dates are expired. Furthermore, the labels on the pesticides entering the OPT do not contain the chemical specifications and safety precautions written in Arabic; they are written in Hebrew despite the fact that most Palestinian farmers do not read Hebrew and thus cannot understand how to safely handle these pesticides. During an epidemiological study conducted over a 10-year (1990–1999) period, the study reported that farmers applied several banned and potential hazardous pesticides, despite known carcinogenicity, genotoxicity, and cytotoxicity. As a result, the total number of recorded cancer cases in men (2277) and women (2458) revealed a strong commonality of extensive exposure to pesticides. 66 , 67 , 68 In addition, the Israeli army (IDF) uses, purposely, pesticides to poison Palestinian crops to damage and destroy them. The Israeli army has confirmed that it used crop dusters to kill vegetation—and perhaps inadvertently, agricultural crops inside the Gaza Strip. According to Palestinian officials, more than 420 acres (∼170 hectares or 1.7 km 2 ) of land were damaged by the spraying. 69 Moreover, Israeli soldiers poison water wells in the OPT; according to the Gulf News (2016), “Israeli colonists are deliberately poisoning water wells in West Bank villages, towns and cities, pushing indigenous Palestinian residents off their land to pave way for an Israeli takeover.” 70 This was based on Jewish Rabbis' calls to poison the Palestinian water supply. 71
Cultural heritage and religious places
Cultural heritage and religious shrines are internationally considered essential parts in environmental impact assessments. Concerning the Palestinian cultural and natural heritage sites, as well as the religious places in the OPT and in Israel proper, Israel has caused tremendous damage to many of them. Historic Palestine, as a country enriched with so many ancient civilizations and related cultural, heritage, and religious sites and shrines, which go back to thousands of years, should be given special attention by the world community. On the contrary, Israel, since it was established in 1948 in Historic Palestine and since it (Israel) militarily occupied the rest of Palestine in 1967, has destroyed a huge number of unique sites and has caused tremendous damage to many other unique sites and places in Historic Palestine. Shortly after its establishment in 1948, Israel destroyed and depopulated hundreds of Palestinian villages, some of which were rooted in biblical times and earlier, where many cultural, historic, and religious sites and places used to exist. Again, these sites and places constitute a world heritage, whose protection requires cooperation from the entire international community. The world at large, based on the fact that Israel has caused great damage and destruction to unique heritage sites in Historic Palestine, should recognize the duty of ensuring the identification, protection, conservation, presentation, and transmission to future generations of cultural and natural heritage, and endeavor to implement the “UNESCO World Heritage Convention (1972).” 72
A few examples are given here on the Israeli violations of international law, concerning the damage and destruction of heritage places in Historic Palestine (in the OPT and in Israel proper). In 1969, a huge fire gutted the southeastern wing of the Al-Aqsa Mosque in the Holy City of Jerusalem, resulting in a total destruction of a priceless 1000-year-old wood and ivory pulpit (known in Arabic as “Minbar Salah-ud-Din,” in English as “Saladin's Pulpit”). This arson attack on the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem (which is the third holiest site in Islam after the Mosques in Mecca and Medina in Saudi Arabia) was carried out by a Christian Zionist (with the name Michael Dennis Rohan; a Protestant follower of an Evangelical sect, known as the “Church of God”), who came as a tourist from Australia to the Holy Land of Palestine and burnt the Al-Aqsa Mosque on August 21, 1969. 73 Other examples of the Israeli attacks on Palestinian heritage places include, but not limited to, the following: (1) the repeated attacks on the Al-Aqsa Mosque and other holy places in Jerusalem and other cities in the OPT, which are frequently carried out by Israeli soldiers, Jewish fanatics, members of parliament (the Israeli Knesset), as well as the former Israeli Prime Minister—Ariel Sharon, as his visit resulted in the ignition of the Second Intifada (Public Uprising) which lasted for more than 4 years (September 2000–February 2005); (2) the massacre of dozens of Palestinian worshipers in the Al-Ibrahimi Mosque in the Holy City of Al-Khalil (Hebron)—known as the “Cave of the Patriarchs Massacre,” 74 , 75 which took place on February 25, 1994, and was carried out by an American Jewish settler (Dr. Baruch Goldstein); and last but not least (3) the military attack on, and the 6-week siege of, the Church of the Nativity (where Jesus Christ was born) in the Holy City of Bethlehem, which lasted 40 days (from April 2, 2002, until May 10, 2002). 76 During the same period, the Israeli forces shelled Santa Maria Church in al-Madbasa neighborhood in Bethlehem, where a number of priests and nuns were wounded, including Father Jack As'ad (a Palestinian who holds Italian citizenship and was seriously wounded). Also, Israel has built on the site of one of the oldest Islamic graveyards in the City of Old Jerusalem (which is part of the OPT) a Holocaust museum. Seth Freedman (2009) wrote, “The best way to honour the Holocaust victims is to stop a Museum of Tolerance being built on a Muslim cemetery.” 77 Furthermore, Israel has burnt or destroyed many mosques and churches and it also destroyed many graveyards in different localities in Historic Palestine. 78 , 79 In ∼8 years (2009–2017), according to the Israeli daily “Haaretz,” “53 mosques and churches were vandalized in Israel since 2009, but only 9 indictments filed.” 80 Israel has also converted some other heritage and religious sites (such as mosques) in Historic Palestine into synagogues, restaurants, bars, and discotheques. “Hundreds of former mosques around the country were destroyed or serve other purposes. Most were turned into synagogues or museums, a few became storerooms, at least two are cafes, and one became a cowshed.” 81 Some of those mosques are totally in a state of neglect, such as the one in the Zakariyya (Zakharaya) village that (village) dates back to the Roman and Byzantine periods, and which was depopulated by Zionist gangs (such as Haganah) shortly before and after the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948. 82 , 83 The mosque in this historic depopulated village (Zakariyya or Zakharaya) was turned into a stable for horses used by Jewish settlers living there, as witnessed by visitors to the mosque. Israel also destroyed dozens of mosques in the West Bank (including Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip. 84 , 85 These examples clearly demonstrate the blatant Israeli violations of international law and all international treaties, including the environmental ones, calling on protecting the cultural heritage and historic and religious places and shrines. In other words and according to Philip Weiss (2017)—an American journalist who is the founder and coeditor of “Mondoweiss” with journalist Adam Horowitz, and who describes himself as an “anti-Zionist” and rejects the label “post-Zionist,” 86 “Israel's efforts to erase Palestinian history reflect ‘incremental genocide,’ Ehrenreich says.” 87 Ben Ehrenreich (the author of the book “The Way to the Spring: Life and Death in Palestine” 88 ) described Israel's treatment of Palestinians as an “incremental genocide.” 89 In addition, the Israeli authorities placed restrictions on the Palestinian population (Christians and Muslims) in the OPT and in Israel proper from entering occupied East (Old) Jerusalem and from reaching the holy places in the Holy City of Jerusalem, which are other blatant violations of international law and all the norms and standards of human rights. 90 , 91 Some other examples on the Israeli destruction of heritage sites are given in “Open Democracy: Free Thinking for the World.” 92
Israel changes the Arabic names of cities, towns, and sites into Hebrew
Since it was established in 1948, Israel has not ceased changing the names of cities and towns, as well as of religious sites and road signs, from Arabic to Hebrew. For example, under the new scheme, the Arab identity of important Palestinian communities will be obscured: Jerusalem, or “Al-Quds” in Arabic, was Hebraized to “Yerushalayim”; Nazareth, or “al-Nasra” in Arabic, the city of Jesus' childhood, was Hebraized to “Natzrat”; and Jaffa, the port city after which Palestine's oranges were named, was Hebraized to “Yafo.” 93 Meron Benvenisti—an Israeli journalist and historian—wrote, “After Israel's establishment in 1948, a naming committee was given the task of erasing thousands of Arab place names, including those of hills, valleys and springs, and creating Hebrew names.” The Country's first Prime Minister, David Ben Gurion, told the Committee: “We are obliged to remove the Arabic names for reasons of state.” 94 , 95 In addition, the Arabic names of more than 400 Palestinian villages destroyed by Israel during and after the 1948 war were lost as Jewish communities took their place. 96
Israel's destruction of Palestinian homes and structures
According to ICAHD (2017), 97 since 1967 when the Israeli occupation began in the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip, nearly 50,000 Palestinian homes and structures have been demolished—displacing hundreds of thousands of Palestinians and affecting the livelihoods of thousands of others. Combine this with the 678 Palestinian villages that were demolished when the state of Israel was established in 1948, creating 750,000 Palestinian refugees (3/4 of the population), and its ongoing policy of demolition within the state of Israel itself, the figure exceeds more than 100,000 Palestinian homes being demolished since 1948. This is a conservative figure because multilevel homes and apartment blocks count as one unit, and this figure also does not include the number of self-demolitions, which is a growing phenomenon done because Israel issues a bill for the demolition, which many Palestinians cannot afford to pay, so the Palestinians are forced to demolish their own homes. The 678 Palestinian localities destroyed by Israel during the Nakba (Palestinian catastrophe that took place in 1948) include the following: 220 had fewer than 100 inhabitants; 428 had between 100 and 3000 inhabitants; 30 towns and cities had more than 3000 Palestinian inhabitants. 98 Human rights organizations (Israeli, Palestinian, and International) agree that Israel's policy of house demolition constitutes a war crime. According to B'Tselem (an Israeli human rights organization), the Israeli act of the demolition of Palestinian homes is “a prohibited collective punishment, and is one of the most extreme measures used by Israel.” 99 According to Human Rights Watch (an international human rights organization based in Washington, DC, USA), “Israeli forces should immediately end unlawful demolitions of Palestinian homes and other structures in Occupied Palestinian Territory. Demolitions of homes and other structures that compel Palestinians to leave their communities may amount to the forcible transfer of residents of an occupied territory, which is a war crime.” 100 Just recently (on July 4, 2018), at least 35 Palestinians were wounded as Israeli forces prepared to demolish the entire Khan Al-Ahmar village near occupied East Jerusalem in the occupied West Bank, and forcibly transferred the entire community. 101 Israel not only demolishes Palestinian homes but also structures that are needed for living. In 2009 and 2017, the Israeli authorities twice destroyed the solar energy facilities installed in the village of Jubbet-Ad-Dib, near the Holy City of Bethlehem, south of the occupied West Bank. These solar facilities were installed on a humanitarian basis with the support of the Dutch Government of the Netherlands, because this village had no electricity since it was/is close to Jewish settlements that are illegally built on Palestinian lands occupied since 1967. 102 Also, in the year 2000, Israeli tanks bombed a port under construction in the Gaza Strip, to which the Netherlands had contributed 23 million Euro. 103 , 104 These Israeli acts and many other acts constitute grievous violations of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 1:23, Article 2:25, and Article 3:26), adopted by the UN General Assembly for Human Rights in 1948 (UN 1948). 105
The ISW
The construction of the ISW (“Apartheid Wall,” as named by the Palestinians, and “Security Fence or Barrier,” as known by the Israelis) started in 2002 and continues. The ISW is either an 8–12-m-high concrete partition or a multiline fence. 106 The total length of the ISW is more than 700 km (>435 mile), encircling the occupied West Bank, in general, including the Holy City of East Jerusalem, in particular. 107 , 108 The Wall has enclosed many water wells penetrating the Western Aquifer System, as well as many water springs, all of which belong to the Palestinians. Accordingly, the construction of the ISW has deprived many Palestinian farmers from their rightful share in water resources from their own wells and natural springs and, therefore, they abandon their lands and their farming jobs. The illegal construction of the ISW and the illegal building of hundreds of Jewish-only settlements in the OPT have contributed to climate change's adverse impacts in the region, as they have put extra pressure on the very limited natural resources (especially water) and have contributed to the man-made effect on climate, as they have produced bad environmental and socioeconomic consequences. These have resulted in tremendous rates of deforestation, land degradation, desertification, loss of biodiversity, and loss of water resources, as well as high rates of poverty and unemployment, as agriculture is considered the main livelihood for many Palestinians in the OPT. The Wall has already affected the lives of 411,000 Palestinians living in 81 communities. 109 In brief, the ISW has reduced biodiversity, limited grazing and cultivated areas, and annexed to Israel valuable water resources. These conditions have put more pressure on the remaining natural resources and have increased poverty among Palestinians living in the occupied West Bank. 110 According to the decision issued by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague, Netherlands, on July 9, 2004, the ICJ saw the ISW as an attempt to connect illegal Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank to Israel, constituting an annexation of Palestinian lands. Hence, the ISW will have significant impacts on future negotiations regarding borders and other issues. By building the ISW (and for that matter more than 250 Jewish settlements) on confiscated Palestinian lands, Israel has been strongly violating the Hague Convention of 1907 and the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 (IHL 1907, 1949). 111 The ISW violates the right to self-determination, the law of occupation, and human rights law, especially the right to freedom of movement and access to work, farms, holy places, healthcare, education, and adequate standards of living. “Self-defence” or “state of necessity,” as Israel keeps claiming, cannot be used as justification for violating international legal principles and the rights of people under military occupation. 112 The ICJ concluded that the construction of the ISW is contrary to international law, pointing to the legal consequences, and therefore, Israel must cease the Wall's construction.
Israel releases wild boars, pigs, stray dogs, and large rats in the OPT
According to reports issued by Israeli and Palestinian institutions, the Israeli authorities release wild boars, pigs, dogs, and large rats in the OPT, especially the West Bank. The Palestinian Authority's President—Mahmoud Abbas—accused Israel of releasing wild boars to destroy agricultural fields in the West Bank to cause damage to produce and intimidate Palestinian farmers. 113 Palestinians blame Israeli settlers for deliberately releasing boars in the occupied West Bank to deliberately attack villagers, as a way to keep them off their land, while others claim that the ISW “affected the habitat of wild boars, possibly leading to higher concentrations of the animal's population in certain areas.” 114
The stray dogs, on the contrary, that exist in the OPT represent a real and serious problem to the OPT inhabitants, as they are considered dangerous. Officials from the Palestinian Ministry of Health stated that 840 Palestinians were bitten by stray dogs in the West Bank in 2014, which also attack and kill livestock. 115 According to the Animal Rights Group in Bethlehem, West Bank, the only solution for stray dogs is to create an animal shelter, where they could be neutered and spayed. Neutering and spaying make a big difference, meaning that one unaltered female dog and her offspring can produce 67,000 puppies in only 6 years, and one female cat and her offspring can produce an incredible 370,000 kittens in 7 years. 116
In July 2008, the official Palestinian news agency “Wafa” accused Israel of using supernatural rats that can even chase away Arab cats to encourage Arab residents of the Holy Old City of Jerusalem to flee in panic, as settlers flood the city with rats. 117 Regarding the tiny and overcrowded Gaza Strip, it has one of the highest rates of natural population growth in the world, averaging 3.442% in 2008 (effectively doubling the population every 20–21 years). 118 That was about 10 years ago. Nowadays, the number of rats in the Old City of Jerusalem, as well as in the entire West Bank and Gaza Strip, has certainly multiplied several times, and each rat weighs, apparently, no less than half a kilogram (≈1.1 lbs). However, it is noteworthy to mention that the breeding of these animals can be exponentially increased and they get larger in size by the increasing amounts of garbage that is, unfortunately, plentiful. In addition, the leap in construction in the OPT makes people to frequently open the sewers in their neighborhoods. The sewers are perfect habitats for rodents to live and breed. 119 , 120 Accordingly, the frequent opening of sewer systems encourages rodents to get out, move around freely, and breed easily.
Elements to Be Included in Environmental Agreements
In view of the above-discussed environmental problems related to the systematic and continuous Israeli destruction of the environment in Historic Palestine, including the OPT, it must be clear that, as long as the state of Palestine is not established, permanent status agreements on environmental cooperation must be undertaken on equal and justified bases between the Israelis and the Palestinians, with full supervision and engagement of the UN and other international organizations. This means that any negotiations between the Israeli and Palestinian leaderships, concerning the permanent status agreements on environmental cooperation, certainly need clarification for the Palestinian people living in the OPT, with respect to the permanent status of the “future state of Palestine.” Participation of international representatives in the implementation phase after and during the preimplementation phase of any environmental agreements between the two parties is essential and important, to avert disagreement, politicization, and paralysis in the trans-boundary management of natural resources, pollution, and execution of environmental policies.
Dealing with environmental issues should not be politically motivated by Israel, based on the fact that Israel has been the occupying power of the Palestinian territories since June 1967. As related to this, the Palestinians must learn (especially after 25 years of worthless negotiations between the Palestinian and Israeli leaderships; that is, since the singing of the Oslo Agreements in 1993 until now) that the Israelis intentionally play with time, as they have dragged the Palestinian negotiators into a no-end game: dividing the divided, fractioning the fractioned, specifying the specified, and detailing the detailed.
Direct negotiations were conducted over the last 25 years (since 1993) concerning environmental issues, which took place in a genuine effort from the Palestinian side to reach, relatively speaking, a just solution. That happened although the Palestinian leadership waived 78% of the total area of Historic Palestine and, accordingly, it negotiated with the Israelis, during the last 25 years, on the 22% of the area of Historic Palestine. Those worthless negotiations, which have led, unfortunately, nowhere, should be evaluated and assessed in terms of their elements of success, if any, and their elements of failure, which are many. This means that any future agreements should clarify and explain why both parties have reached such dead-ends, and how the Palestinian negotiators can learn from their terrible mistakes, regarding the Oslo Agreements based on total failure.
Any agreements between the Palestinians and the Israelis, in regard to the environment, should address the geopolitical changes that Israel has made and established on the ground over the last 51 years (i.e., since Israel occupied the Palestinian territories in June 1967 and continues). These changes include the building of hundreds of Israeli Jewish-only settlements and bypass roads, the ISW, the Israeli military bases, the hundreds of military check points and barriers, and so on, all of which are built or established illegally in the OPT, and in violation of international law and the Fourth Geneva Convention, as well as other norms and standards of international treaties. So, in any environmental agreements between the Palestinians and the Israelis, these existing changes must be clearly addressed. In addition, the reparations for damages and the compensation to the Palestinian people for those damages must be clearly stated in any agreements that may be signed between the Palestinian and Israeli leaderships.
Any environmental agreements between both parties should also address the impacts on, and the destructions caused to, the environment in the OPT, as a result of the policies and practices of the Israeli military occupation of the Palestinian territories. The Israeli policies and practices of systematic destruction of the environment, most of which are intentional, are clearly demonstrated through the following: (1) land confiscation; (2) land degradation; (3) air, water, soil, and noise pollution; (4) forceful seizing of large quantities of water resources owned by the Palestinians; (5) uprooting of millions of olive and other kinds of trees; (6) dumping of toxic, hazardous, radioactive, and other kinds of harmful waste; (7) dumping of huge quantities of wastewater; and last but not least (8) the use of all kinds of weapons against the Palestinians, some of which are internationally forbidden.
A complete record on the deterioration of the environmental situation in the OPT must be accomplished with all the details required, to be presented at any bilateral or multilateral negotiations, at the local, regional, and international levels. Such a record will enable the Palestinian side to respond, with factuality, technicality, and functionality, on all of the destruction acts carried out by Israel against the environment. Such a record must include, specifically, the large magnitude of destruction caused to the environment by Israel and its army, settlers, and industries during its ongoing occupation of the OPT since June 1967.
In addition, while watching and monitoring the Israeli acts of destruction against the environment, more focus should be given to the Israeli unnatural growth in the settlements' population, which is currently close to 1 million settlers living in more than 250 settlements built illegally in the OPT. Since 1993 (i.e., since the Israeli and Palestinian leaderships signed the Oslo Agreements), the numbers of the Israeli settlements and settlers in the OPT have accelerated very rapidly. This means that increasing the numbers of the Israeli settlements and settlers and expanding the already existing settlements have led to the following: (1) more Palestinian lands have been confiscated by the Israelis; (2) more natural resources (especially water) have been taken away by the Israelis from their rightful owners (the Palestinian people); (3) more Palestinian trees have been uprooted by the Israelis; (4) more Palestinian homes have been demolished by the Israelis; and (5) more damage and even destruction to the environment (including biodiversity and the ecosystems) have taken place at the hands of the Israelis.
This is in addition to the already wide damage and destruction happening to the environment over the last 51 years (i.e., since Israel occupied the Palestinian territories in June 1967). Apparently, it is an impractical and nonapplicable approach to reach agreements between the Israelis and the Palestinians on environmental issues, without adopting parallel agreements on other issues, especially those that have direct impacts on natural resources, such as water, borders, settlements, Segregation Wall, Jerusalem, and the Palestinian refugees evicted from their homes and lands in 1948 (based on the fact that hundreds of Palestinian towns were ethnically cleansed 121 , 122 , 123 , 124 ). These issues, however, must go hand-in-hand with the core issue, which is the establishment of the state of Palestine within the 1967 borders on the entire territories of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, based on the UN Security Council resolutions and the world community's endeavors to find a just and lasting solution to the Palestinian question, in particular, and to the Arab/Israeli conflict, in general.
However, if the Israelis are still rejecting the “Two-State Solution” (TSS)—one state for the Israelis and the other for the Palestinians on 78% and 22%, respectively, of the total area of Historic Palestine, based on the 1993 Oslo Agreements, the Palestinians, with the support of the international community, must push forward toward the “One-State Solution” (OSS) for the two peoples (the Israelis and the Palestinians: Jews, Christians, and Muslims) on the same land, which is Historic Palestine. This is due to the fact that the TSS, according to the Oslo Agreements—1993, has already been paralyzed at the hands of the Israelis, as they have broken almost every article in the Oslo Agreements. The OSS, if happened, will be similar to the situation in South Africa, which was led and established by the historic leader Nelson Mandela. 125
Otherwise, the Palestinians will continue living in the OPT, as part of their own homeland “Historic Palestine” under the Israeli apartheid system, which was described by the Nobel Peace Laureate—Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu, as: “Their [Palestinian] humiliation is familiar to all black South Africans who were corralled and harassed and insulted and assaulted by the security forces of the Apartheid Government. In South Africa, we could not have achieved our democracy without the help of people around the world, who through the use of nonviolent means, such as boycotts and divestment, encouraged their governments and other corporate actors to reverse decades-long support for the Apartheid Regime. The same issues of inequality and injustice today motivate the divestment movement trying to end Israel's decades-long occupation of Palestinian territory and the unfair and prejudicial treatment of the Palestinian people by the Israeli Government ruling over them. Those who turn a blind eye to injustice actually perpetuate injustice. If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. It doesn't matter where we worship or live. We are members of one family, the human family, God's family.” This is reported by the two leading Israeli newspapers—“The Jerusalem Post” and “Haaretz.” 126 , 127
Conclusions
Politically speaking, the Israeli/Palestinian conflict has dragged the whole region of the Middle East and beyond into a very complicated situation, as many economic, social, political, cultural, environmental, and other dimensions of the conflict have been negatively affected over the last seven decades (i.e., since the state of Israel was established in 1948 on 78% of the area of Historic Palestine, and since 1967 it occupied the remaining area (22%) of Historic Palestine).
Certainly the Palestinian people in the OPT have been experiencing severe and dangerous levels of environmental destruction practiced over the last 51 years (since 1967) by the Israeli authorities (successive governments, army, settlers, industries, etc.). As a matter of fact, Israel (as the occupying power of the OPT) has never ended, since 1967, its continued violations of international law and all treaties related to the environment. This is in regard to air pollution, water pollution, soil degradation, desertification, deforestation, waste (of all kinds) disposal, destruction of heritage sites and places, climate change impacts, and totally controlling the Palestinian waters and preventing the Palestinian population from using even the very least amount of water that is recommended for survival by international organizations (such as the WHO), as well as the confiscation of large areas of the Palestinian lands, on which the illegal ISW and settlements were or have been constructed in violation of international law. These policies, activities, and practices conducted by the Israeli occupation authorities have caused tremendous damages to the environment in the OPT and, as such, have hampered any efforts to improve the status of the environment in the areas of concern.
In view of these very harsh and horrible conditions, under which the Palestinians in the OPT have been living for more than half a century and counting, it is strongly believed that international organizations are urgently needed to pay more attention to the suffering of the Palestinian people, and to the catastrophic consequences resulting from the severe damages caused by the Israelis to the environment in the OPT. The mandate of such organizations, particularly in regard to the environment in the OPT (as it is the primary concern of this study), should be focused on the monitoring of the daily damage and deterioration of the environment by the Israeli occupation authorities. The findings of the monitoring process should be dealt with very seriously and immediately.
In view of the above, it is unfair and illogical to lay on the Palestinian side similar magnitude of demands as related to the environment, similar to those of the occupying power (state of Israel, along with its army, settlers, and industries). It is also important to mention that unless the Israelis are willing to allow the Palestinians full latitude of operation in the OPT, the Palestinians will have limited operational ground to work on protecting the environment, especially in view of the Oslo Agreements' division of the West Bank into “Area A,” “Area B,” and “Area C,” on which the Palestinian authority has no control at all.
In addition, the Palestinians should not be asked to enforce or implement, for that matter, any environmental strategies unless they (the Palestinians) are equal partners with equal jurisdictions similar to the Israelis. It should be noted that if the Palestinians were to act as partners, they should be allowed to operate with more extended jurisdictions when it comes to environmental issues, taking into account the fact that the Palestinians in the OPT have been facing, since 1967, strong environmental racism and genocidal practices conducted by the Israeli authorities. The Israelis, as a result, must be held responsible for the tremendous measures of their actions committed against the environment in the OPT, in particular, and in Historic Palestine, at large. Only by doing so, environmental justice can be done, which should lead to fair sustainable development in the OPT and to the future state of Palestine with Jerusalem its capital, as well as in the surrounding region.
In view of the gross damage caused by the Israelis to the environment, and in the absence of a sovereign Palestinian state, the environmental issues, as any other issues of conflict, should be the concerns of both peoples. However, until a just solution for the Palestinian question can be reached, international organizations must intervene to protect the environment and the well-being of the Palestinians in the OPT, which should have the mandate to fully monitor the environmental status on the ground and, thus, to impose fines, penalties, and judicial orders on the state of Israel—the occupying power, as it has very badly destroyed the environment.
Footnotes
Acknowledgments
The author extends special thanks to Ms. Julia Frankosky, Michigan State University Libraries, MI, USA, for her critical review of this article. The author also extends sincere thanks to his friends and colleagues for their critical review of the article and their suggested improvements.
Author Disclosure Statement
No competing financial interests exist.