Bedouin citizens of Israel denied water as means of transfer

[Jcrowley]

Bedouin citizens of Israel denied water as means of transfer
Report, Adalah, 29 November 2006

Adalah: The Water Tribunal Supported the Government's Policy of Seeking to Move Arab Bedouin Citizens of Israel from their Land in the Naqab by Upholding Decisions of the Water Commissioner not to Supply them with Drinking Water

On 18 November 2006, Adalah submitted an appeal to the Supreme Court of Israel against a ruling delivered by the Haifa District Court (sitting as a Water Tribunal) on 13 September 2006 that upheld prior decisions of the Water Commissioner not to provide water to hundreds of Palestinian Arab Bedouin families living in unrecognized villages in the Naqab (Negev). The Water Tribunal based its decision on the political issue of the "illegal" status of the unrecognized villages.

Adalah argued in the appeal that the Water Commissioner's decisions to deny the basic right to water to hundreds of families were based on improper and arbitrary considerations. First and foremost, the aim of these decisions is to support the government's policy of seeking to relocate Arab Bedouin from their land to government-planned towns, by refusing to provide them with basic services such as access to clean drinking water. Adalah asked the Supreme Court to overturn the Water Tribunal decision, and to order the provision of water access points via the existing main water distribution network to the affected families.

<snip>

In the appeal, Attorney Badeer argued that refusing to provide the families with drinking water of the necessary quality and quantity, constitutes a violation of their basic, constitutional right to dignity, which includes the right to an adequate standard of living, the right to health as well as the right to life. Conditioning these rights on the application of a racist and discriminatory governmental policy is illegal, Adalah argued.

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article6129.shtml

[papau]

1. no towns means no property tax means no services - or are they willing to buy the water?

If they are refusing to sell water that is a denial is a human right violation.

If it is just Bedouin trying to live on the cheap - it is hard to see where this - while effective as anti-Israel propaganda - is anything other than a logical decision - IMHO

[newyorican]

2. Do illegal settlements get water?

hmm...

[eyl]

3. they also pay tax. AFAIK

[newyorican]

5. Illegal settlements pay tax?

To whom?

[Poll_Blind]

6. Yeah, that IS a good question. ??? n/t

PB

[newyorican]

8. I thought so...

:shrug:

[papau]

13. Do Bedouin citizens of Israel declare an income and pay a tax on it? Just

curious about how one taxes a nomad.

[newyorican]

14. I'll take a stab at your question....

...which, I might add, is in response to a question.

The Bedouin of Israel pay taxes, serve in the army, most even speak Hebrew but because of what’s happening here, they feel like outcasts in their own country.

Source

So...Do illegal settlements pay taxes? If so, to whom?

I found this tidbit...

Some settlements close to towns in Israel proper were subsidized by giving the inhabitants tax cuts, cheap mortgages and grants of between $6,900 and $57,000 — perks ordinarily reserved for outlying areas.

-snip-

The state also picked up as much as half the tab for hooking up utilities. And pro-settler lawmakers fought to control key ministries such as Construction and Housing, National Infrastructure, and Transportation so they could direct money to settlements.

Source

Perhaps the scope of your "curiosity" is too narrow. I can't imagine why it would be...

[eyl]

18. you do realize

that getting tax cuts mean they pay taxes in the first case?

[papau]

19. Your source notes the welfare payments to the nomads, but does not say how they pay taxes

Indeed you have posted a simple assertion - with no facts.

While I certainly can imagine the likely reason you did so, I do wonder what is your claimed reason for avoiding my question .....

[newyorican]

23. Actually, you are incorrect..

The interviewer asserted this to Olmert. Olmert didn't refute it.

That is commonly known as conceding the point. Perhaps you would like to question Olmert as to how the taxes are paid?

Your question has been answered, even though the answer is not to your liking.

The question I posed, however, stands without an answer...

In addition, you are incorrect about "welfare payments to the nomads". The article/interview makes no such assertion, though 'how they are paid' in that sense doesn't appear to puzzle you. The welfare payments are made to some or many Bedouins that have moved into designated villages in accordance with the orders/requests of the Israeli govt. They are no longer nomads.

[eyl]

17. Depends

First of all, note that these days, many of the Bedouin are not nomads (a trend Israel has been trying to encourage). As far as income taxes are concerned they're supposed to pay, but there's a fair amount of "black" employment in that sector.

[papau]

20. Those on the qypsy life pride themtselves on paying no taxes, ever - & the Bedouin are likewise

famous for avoiding paying any taxes or fees.

But I was wondering if there was some withholding at source like our payroll withholding that would force them to pay taxes, even if they did not file. Of course even if there was a withholding, they woould still excape the local taxes that pay for the water infrastructure. And cash economy workers of course escape withholding on wages, by definition.

Last I looked it was items we might call crafts being sold plus livestock that made up the Bedouin economy - except for those Bedouin that can claim citizenship as a Saudi - in which case they are rich and the lifestyle as a nomad is a choice. I don't see many ways to tax them except something like the sales tax approach that the Arabs have had for a 1000 years - but that only covers items sold in the suk (the open market often run by the religious with the suk tax paying for all things religious including all the costs of the Mosque that often in theory owns the suk land).

[eyl]

24. I'm not sure what you mean by payroll withholding

I'm not really sure how taxes are paid in the US. In all the jobs I've held in Israel, my employer saw to it that I filled out the appropriate forms when I began working for him (I filled out the form and gave it to him, and he filed it with the authorities. The taxes came out of my pay directly, before I got them. Normally, we don't get paychecks; the common procedure is that your pay is deposited directly into your bank account. Small businesses, or those who hire workers by the hour or day (e.g. building or agriculture) pay in cash or checks. In those cases, it's much harder to track if the taxes are paid. In any event, as you noted, it's not those taxes that are the problem (though they're a different problem) but rather the lack of paying land/municipal taxes.

[papau]

21. The people pay the usual state taxes - and the built up blocks pay local raxes - but I

doubt the folks in the one tralier settlements pay a local tax - but then they also have no infrastructure.

I really do not know if local infrastructure federal subsidy for a settlement is different (meaning more than) the subsidy for a village inside the green line.

That is an interesting question.

If it is more than the subsidy given towns inside the green line, there is at least a fairness question of why a subsidy for the settlement town but not for the nomad.

Granted it is a weak read to hold up the idea the nomads should get free water whenever they come through town, and it obviously not enough to hold up the human rights violation suggestion (which I doubt was a serious suggestion) - but it would bring up the question of fairness.

[pelsar]

22. I dont think you going to get "fair"..

when the state "takes away your traditional life style".....i think your no longer within the area of "whats fair". Comparing the settlements in the westbank vs the bedoiun doesnt work as the whole political/economic aspects are obviously very different

the whole article was simply an excuse to "bash israel" on something. I guess after israel left gaza (again), they needed to find some new human rights violations, and this goes under " if we cant find any, we'll just make it up and more than enough people will believe us"

[Douglas Carpenter]

4. b'tselem on water supply to the occupied territories

link: http://www.btselem.org/English/Publications/Summaries/200007_Thirsty_for_a_Solution.asp

"A significant part of the water sources that Israel uses to meet its needs are, according to international law, international water resources, shared by Israelis and Palestinians. Despite this, the rights of Palestinians to share of these resources were not recognized in practice, and the division gradually became discriminatory and unfair. Israelis benefit from advanced and reliable infrastructure for the supply of water for household use, enabling them unlimited water consumption for all household and municipal uses. Even though a high degree of water pollution is occasionally found at certain pumping sites, the water that ultimately reaches Israeli consumers is of reasonable quality. By contrast, Palestinians in the Occupied Territories suffer from an underdeveloped and unreliable water-supply system for household use.

Israel and the Palestinian Authority fully share two water systems: the Mountain Aquifer and the Jordan Basin. Israel receives 79% of the Mountain Aquifer water and the Palestinians 21%. Palestinians have no access to the Jordan Basin: 100% of its water are designated for Israel."

The Gap in Water Consumption

The discrimination in use of the resources shared by Israel and the Palestinian Authority is clearly seen in the figures on water consumption by the two populations: average water consumption in the West Bank for household, municipal, and industrial use is only approximately 26 cubic meters/person/year - approximately 70 liters per person a day.

There is a huge gap between Israeli and Palestinian consumption. The average Israeli consumes for household and municipal use approximately 103 cubic meters/person/year - 282 liters per person a day. In other words, average use per person in Israel is four times higher than consumption in the Occupied Territories. To make a more precise comparison, by also taking into account industrial water consumption in Israel, the average per person use per year reaches 127 cubic meters - 348 liters per person a day, or five times the average Palestinian consumption."
_________________________

more statistics on water consumption related to The Occupied Palestinian Territories:

http://www.btselem.org/English/Water/Statistics.asp

______________________

[IntiRaymi]

7. Very typical of this process.

Resources are being monopolized by those with the biggest gun & all the gold. It doesn't surprise me in the least that this is happening to a non-jewish group within Israel.
Not surprised in the least bit, either, by the republican-esque remarks about 'paying taxes.'

[pelsar]

9. very typical.....of "ignorence"....

if some indians in america made a town within Teton National park....and them complained that they couldnt get water hooked up.....would the various posters here be complaining about the US govt?


somehow i dont think so......so how shall we describe the difference?

[IntiRaymi]

10. Ignorance, Pelsar.

Your post draws an absurd analogy.
And, who cares about the USA - this is the Israel/Palestine forum!!

Stay on topic!

[pelsar]

11. just drawing a parrallel....

if the bedouin set up an encampment on public land and then demand that the country provide services.....its not the govt that is wrong for not providing the services...

or are you suggesting that because they are non jewish they can make a "village" on any public land and the govt must provide them with utilities.....

can you answer the question?....(of course we can compare to what the palestenians do in similar situations...but i doubt you want to go there .....)

[newyorican]

15. A failed attempt at topic deflection...

In the wilderness of the Negev Desert, the Bedouin have thrived for seven centuries. Loyalty to the land is the central code of honour to these tribal people. The Bedouin survive by growing cereal crops and herding livestock, but this traditional way of life is about to end for these desert-dwellers.

Israel claims this camp doesn’t exist. It’s a so-called “unrecognised village”, one of forty-five earmarked for destruction.

This is the story of one nation’s quest to urbanise a nomadic people. It’s part of a move to take land from some citizens to give to others. The Bedouin of Israel pay taxes, serve in the army, most even speak Hebrew but because of what’s happening here, they feel like outcasts in their own country.

Israel sees the Negev Desert as its new frontier, a sparse landscape it can settle with Jewish immigrants but in the way are some of its own citizens – the Bedouin.

Source

I recommend reading the entire exchange. Might (emphasis on "might") do something about that "ignorence" problem.

[pelsar]

16. what deflection?

the reality of an ex nomadic people being forced to live in a state defined towns...and some not argeeing to it....prefering to make their own on now public lands.....

similar story throughout the world when a state tries to regulate its land use.....

i do realize its hard for some to accept that some things that israel does is actually done by every country around the world at sometime or another.....its probably better to pretend that its not just a special israeli problem but related to the I/P conflicts as well....(somehow, sort of......)

[papau]

12. Interesting - thanks for posting. The Jordan basin has a bigger problem of

Interesting - thanks for posting. The Jordan basin has a bigger problem of the feeders to the Dead Sea being diverted - and not just by Israel.

One of the nice things about Taba - and Geneva as son of Taba - were the side agreements on water.

[nicoll]

25. Mr carpenter can we talk

From looking at posts made by you on the Israel Palestine forum you seem to be well informed on the subject. It is about 10.30pm in England at the moment and I will be signing back in at about mid day tomorrow. I just want to run something by you to see if you think it will work if it was implemented in the Middle East, and if it is legally possible. Will gets all the details and let you know tomorrow.

Thanks John

[Douglas Carpenter]

27. sure, just send me a msg if you like

but I don't know how much help I can be. but I will try

[nicoll]

26. This is my idea, what do you think?

I posted a thread today to establish the actual legal status of the West bank and Gaza Strip, but have only had views and no replies.

The reason I posted it was to establish what the legal status is and what people actually think it is.

To my understanding the West Bank and Gaza Strip does not actually belong to any country, but is under control by Israel who is the occupying force in the W B and G S. Does this mean that the land has the same status as all of the partitioned land immediately after the British left and just before the Israeli declaration of Independence? To my understanding it does. This being the case if the Palestinians followed the same rules as the Jewish people did in making their declaration of independance for the state of Israel it should be accepted by the international community as being valid. The declaration of Independence of the Israeli state in 1947 sets the bench mark for what the Palestinians need to do to declare their own state out of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

I have tried to find the exact amount of land the Jewish state laid claim over in 1947 with the declaration of Independence of the state of Israel. Of course the boundaries of which were clearly defined in december of 1947 by the UN anyway. The Palestinian leader has said that he wants Eastern Jerusalem all of the West Bank and Gaza Strip to make up a newly formed Palestinian state. The main obstacle for him doing this is the 400,000 Jewish settlers living in Eastern Jerusalem and parts of the West Bank. This seems like a mission impossible for him to achieve as Israel wants to keep a large proportion of it settlers there. This can be achieved but through the back door so to speak - when you have an obstacle instead of stopping just go round it to solve it. With this I mean that he does not have to have the Jewish settlers leave the West Bank and Eastern Jerusalem to be able to establish a Palestinian State out of all of the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Eastern Jerusalem. All he needs to do is change the status of the Jewish Settlers.

In 1947 there was anything up to 1,000,000 Arabs living on the land that was to be partitioned in december 1947 and there status could be said to be the same as the Jewish settlers living now in Eastern Jerusalem and on parts of the west Bank. Both on land that does not belong to any individual country or state and such international land. Who is to say that a Palestinian state has to be just for Arabs. Habbas could offer the Jewish settlers the choice to be able to stay in a newly formed Palestinian state has Palestinian citizens (or to have joint Israeli/Palestinian citezenship). There are approx 1,000,000 Arab Israeli's residing in Israel at present. The settlers would be given the same right as the Arab Palestinian citizens. The thing is he would be offering a choice to the settlers to remain in their homes and villages. It would be their choice to stay as Palestinian citizens or to leave. When saying about bench mark decisions you have to look at the declaration of independance of Israel and the UN partition of land to form the state of Israel in december 1947. The arab villages were spread out over practically all of the soon to be partitioned land. Both had Arabs living on the land at the time who might well have objected to the state of Israel being formed on top of there existing homes. I do not know when Arabs living in Israel were offered the choice to have Israeli citenship, but they were - so the same should be allowed to be offered to the Jewish settlers in the West Bank and Eastern Jerusalem. If they do not want to then of course they would have to leave, but then it would be their choice in doing this. An international force could be set up to protect the Jewish settlers from any form of attack as well as Palestinian authority troops, becasue all Israeli troops and IDF members would officily have to leave a newly formed Palestinian state. The majority of the world comunity wants a Palestinain state to be established in the Middle East and an end to the conflict. Habbas should use this to his advantage and just go round the problem of Jewish settlers in the West Bank and Eastern Jerusalem. Can you give me two responses - one whether you think it can work and one whether it is actually legally possible to do.

1) Regonistion of the right of Israel to exist within the borders of the 1967 UN partition plan.

2) Declaration not to attack the state of Israel and to actively stop any such attacks from possible militant factions from within the newly formed state of Palestine.

3) To offer the right of choice to Jewsih settlers residing in the West Bank and Eastern Jerusalem to have joint Palestinan/Israeli citenship. They would have equal status along side the Arab Palestinian Citezens, but would have to abide by Palestinian law and not Israeli law as they would be now residing in Palestine has Jewish Palestinian citizens.

4) To protect the safty of any Jewish Palestinian Citizens residing within the newly formed state of Palestine.