Misplaced Pages

Green Line (Israel): Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 15:05, 2 July 2008 view sourceAmoruso (talk | contribs)13,357 edits rv, there are many different rv's here. you removed wiki links even.← Previous edit Latest revision as of 17:14, 18 November 2024 view source Davide King (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users103,934 editsm ce wls, WP:SEAOFBLUE 
(487 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Internationally recognized border between Israel and Palestine}}
{{POV|date=December 2007}}
{{pp-30-500|small=yes}}
]
] referenced in the respective agreements.]]
The term ''']''' is used to refer to the ] established between ] and its neighbours (], ], ] and ]) after the ]. The Green Line separates Israel not only from these countries but from territories Israel would later capture in the ] ], including the ], ], ] and ] (the latter has since been returned to ]). Its name is derived from the green pencil used to draw the line on the map during the talks.<ref>Green Line: the name given to the 1949 Armistice lines that constituted the de facto borders of pre-1967 Israel &mdash; , '']''</ref><ref>Eli E. Hertz, , ''Myths and Facts'', ], ]</ref>
]


The '''Green Line''', or '''1949 Armistice border''',<ref>{{cite journal | url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/4283114 | jstor=4283114 | title=Custodians and Redeemers: Israeli Leaders' Perceptions of Peace, 1967-79 | last1=Sella | first1=Amnon | journal=Middle Eastern Studies | date=1986 | volume=22 | issue=2 | pages=236–251 | doi=10.1080/00263208608700661 }}</ref> is the ] set out in the ] between the armies of ] and those of its neighbors (], ], ], and ]) after the ]. It served as the '']'' borders of the State of Israel from 1949 until the ] in 1967, and continues to represent Israel's internationally recognized borders with the two ]: the ] and the ].<ref>{{Cite news |title=Netanyahu Coalition to Recognize, Fund W. Bank Settlements Lacking Official Status |language=en |work=Haaretz |url=https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-08-18/ty-article/.premium/netanyahu-coalition-to-fund-w-bank-settlements-lacking-official-independent-status/0000018a-07be-d18f-a3fb-17ff3b0b0000 |access-date=2023-08-18}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Human rights situation in the OPT - Sp. Rapporteur (Dugard) - Report, SecGen note |url=https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-177326/ |access-date=2023-08-18 |website=Question of Palestine |language=en-US}}</ref>
==Overview==
The Israeli side of the Green Line encompasses 78.5% of what was ]. Although the line does not denote an official border, as is explicitly stated in ("military considerations only"), in practice it is largely used to differentiate between those areas within the Israeli side of the Line, which are administered as part of the State of Israel, and the areas outside it, which are either administered by the ] or in agreements with the ].<ref name="yuval">Yisrael Ya'akov Yuval, , ''Two Thousand'', Vol. 29, no. 971, ] {{he icon}}</ref><ref>Akiva Eldar, , '']'', ], ] {{he icon}}</ref> The extended municipality of ] constitutes one exception to this: although the parts ] fall outside the Green Line, Israel has informally annexed them according to the ] ] (]). Other nations' ] vary.


The Green Line was intended as a demarcation line rather than a permanent border. The 1949 Armistice Agreements were clear (at Arab insistence)<ref name=Lewis>{{cite book |title= Islam in history: ideas, people, and events in the Middle East |publisher= Open Court Publishing |author= Bernard Lewis |year= 1993 |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=xUQdbUlidegC&pg=PA164 |pages=164 |isbn= 978-0-8126-9518-2}}</ref> that they were not creating permanent borders. The Egyptian–Israeli agreement, for example, stated that "the Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary, and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question."<ref name=EgyIsr> {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140525024736/http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/9EC4A332E2FF9A128525643D007702E6 |date=2014-05-25 }} Armistice Agreement UN Doc S/1264/Corr.1 23 February 1949</ref> Similar provisions are contained in the Armistice Agreements with Jordan and Syria. The Agreement with Lebanon contained no such provisions, and was treated as the international border between Israel and Lebanon, stipulating only that forces would be withdrawn to the Israel–Lebanon border.
The ] are another exception, having been informally annexed with the ] (]). ]s are also subject to the laws of the State of Israel rather than its military or the PNA's laws. As of ], the Line formally divides the areas of operation of the Israeli ] and the ], although the former is still responsible for care in Israeli settlements.<ref>, '']'', ], ]</ref>

The Green Line is often referred to as the "'''pre-1967 borders'''" or the "'''1967 borders'''" by many international bodies and national leaders, including former United States president ],<ref>"Obama calls for Israel's return to pre-1967 borders" By Tom Cohen, CNN, May 19, 2011 </ref> Palestinian president ],<ref>{{Cite news |date=2012-11-02 |title=Palestinian leader Abbas affirms hope for state in pre-1967 lines |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20179980 |access-date= |work=BBC News}}</ref> the ] (UN) in informal texts,<ref>"The Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People (CEIRPP) is mandated by the UN General Assembly to (...) support the peace process for the achievement of the two-State solution on the basis of pre-1967 borders..." {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151025110433/http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/home.htm|date=2015-10-25}}</ref> and in the text of ] resolutions.<ref>For example, "A/RES/67/120 Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan" Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 18 December 2012 </ref> The name comes from the green ink used to draw the line on the map during armistice talks.<ref>Green Line: the name given to the 1949 Armistice lines that constituted the ''de facto'' borders of pre-1967 Israel &mdash; , '']''</ref> After the Six-Day War, the territories captured by Israel beyond the Green Line came to be designated as ], the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and the ]. These territories are often referred to as ]. The ], which was also captured at that time, has since been returned to Egypt as part of the ].

==History==
]]]

The Green Line refers to the ]s, rather than permanent borders, between ]i forces and those of its neighbors.<ref name=Lewis/> All movement across the demarcation lines was banned and monitored by the ]. Most commonly, the term was applied to the boundary between ]-controlled ] and the ] and Israel. The drawing of the Green Line superseded entirely the partition lines proposed and voted on by the ] of 1947 and which Israel had accepted in the ]. The Palestinian and Arab leaders had repeatedly rejected any permanent partition of ].

In 1967, after Israel seized all the territories, other than the ], of the former Mandatory Palestine, as well as other territories, the demarcation lines became militarily irrelevant, and the status of the Green Line became uncertain.

Although Israel has always formally argued that the Green Line has no legal significance, the Green Line continued to have political, legal and administrative significance. Israel regarded the territories beyond the Green Line, unlike those within the Green Line, as ], and they were not incorporated into Israeli political and civilian administrative systems. The territories beyond the Green Line were administered by the ] or later also by the ].<ref name="Yuval">{{Cite web |last=Yisrael Ya'akov |first=Yuval |date=2005 |title=Where is the Green Line |url=https://www.am-oved.co.il/product?BSP=13468&C1010=15881 |access-date= |website=Two Thousand |language=he-il}}</ref><ref>Akiva Eldar, {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110605050548/http://www.haaretz.co.il/hasite/pages/ShArtPE.jhtml?itemNo=797884 |date=2011-06-05 }}, '']'', July 21, 2006 {{in lang|he}}</ref> Citizenship by residence, for example, was determined with reference to the Green Line, as well as a person's refugee status.

The extension of the municipal boundary of Jerusalem in 1980 was an exception to this position. Although Jerusalem was a part of territory beyond the Green Line that was ], Israel declared Jerusalem "complete and united" as the capital of Israel according to the 1980 ] ].<ref name=Aust/><ref name=lustick/> This claim has not been recognised by any country or by the ] (UN) ].<ref name=Aust>{{cite book |last= Aust |first= Anthony |title= Handbook of International Law |publisher=] |year= 2010 |page= 27 |isbn= 978-0-521-13349-4 |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=74Zmct-7hGIC&pg=PA27 |access-date= 20 February 2021}}</ref><ref name="lustick">{{cite journal |author=Lustick |first=Ian |author-link=Ian Lustick |date=January 1997 |title=Has Israel Annexed East Jerusalem? |url=http://www.mepc.org/journal_vol5/9701_lustick.asp |journal=Middle East Policy |volume=V |issue=1 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070610193118/http://www.mepc.org/journal_vol5/9701_lustick.asp |archive-date=2007-06-10 |access-date=2007-07-08}}</ref> A notional Green Line continues to divide Jerusalem at the boundary of ].

The Golan Heights are another exception, having been informally incorporated by Israel with the 1981 ]. The UN Security Council declared this to be null and without any international legal effect.<ref name=Karoubi>{{cite book |last= Karoubi |first= Mohammad Taghi |title= Just or unjust war? International Law and Unilateral Use of Armed Force by States at the Turn of the 20th Century |publisher= Ashgate Publishing |year= 2004 |page= 120 |isbn= 978-0-7546-2375-5 |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=D9mI3Nqug5EC&pg=PA120 |access-date= 11 August 2017}}</ref>


==Impact== ==Impact==
The sections of the Line that delineate the boundaries between Israel on the one hand, and the West Bank and Gaza on the other, separated heavily populated regions. As such, drawing the precise line was complicated and the harm caused to settlements on its periphery was great. The majority of the line corresponds to the military front of the 1948 War, and while the considerations dictating its placement were primarily military, it soon became clear that in many places it divided towns and villages and separated farmers from their fields. Consequently, the Green Line underwent various slight adjustments, and special arrangements were made for limited movement in certain areas.<ref name="bl">Yossi Alpher, et al., , ''Palestinian-Israeli crossfire'', Edition 8, ], ]</ref> The sections of the Green Line that delineate the boundaries between Israel, the West Bank and ] run through heavily populated regions. The Line corresponds to the military front of the 1948 War, and while the considerations dictating its placement were primarily military, it soon became clear that in many places it divided towns and villages, and separated farmers from their fields. Consequently, the Green Line underwent various slight adjustments, and special arrangements were made for limited movement in certain areas.<ref name=b>Yossi Alpher, et al., , ''Palestinian–Israeli crossfire'', Edition 8, February 24, 2003</ref>


Most impacted were (and for the most part, remain) ], which the Line divided in half, into ] and ]; the city of ], which virtually became a Jordanian enclave within Israel, with only a narrow passage connecting it with the West Bank; and the village of ], which, partially due to errors on the map, was left with one third of its area on the Israeli side and two thirds outside of it. ] ] was left almost enitrely outside the Israeli portion of the Green Line.<ref name="bl"/> ] was divided in half, into ] and ]. The village of ], partially due to errors on the map, was left with one third of its area on the Israeli side and two thirds outside of it. <ref name=b/>

According to ], in March 1949 as the Iraqi forces withdrew and handed over their positions to the Jordanian legion, Israel carried out Operation ''Shin-Tav-Shin'' which allowed Israel to renegotiate the ceasefire line in the ] area of the northern West Bank in a secret agreement that was incorporated into the General Armistice Agreement. The Green Line was redrawn in blue ink on the southern map to give the impression that a movement in the green line had been made.<ref>The Politics of Partition; King Abdullah, The Zionists, and Palestine 1921–1951 Avi Shlaim Oxford University Press Revised Edition 2004 {{ISBN|978-0-19-829459-7}} pp. 299, 312</ref>


===Jewish population=== ===Jewish population===
]]]
During the war, a number of male Jews who resided east of the Line, including the ] of the ], were taken prisoner by the Jordanians, while women and children were allowed safe passage. Many of the Gush Etzion ]. The prisoners were returned to Israel after the war.<ref name="yuval"/>


In ], ], the Jewish inhabitants of ] and ] were evacuated by Israel due to military pressure by Egypt and Jordan respectively. Israel also withdrew villages in the ] Upper ], whereas Syria withdrew from ]. During the war in 1947–48, Jews residing east of what subsequently became the Line, including the ] of the ], were taken prisoner by the Jordanians. All but a few of the ] ]. The prisoners were returned to Israel after the war.<ref name=Yuval/> On July 8, 1948, the Jewish inhabitants of ] and ] were evacuated by Israel due to military pressure by Egypt and Jordan. Israel also withdrew from villages in the Lebanese Upper ], whereas Syria withdrew from ].


Since Israel's victory in the ], Israel has established settlements south and east of the Line. These have been strongly criticised by other nations.
Since the victory in the Six-Day War in 1967, successive Israeli governments have promoted the establishment of ] south and east of the Line. From ] to ], Israel ] from the Gaza Strip and evacuated the Jewish population who lived south of the Line in Gaza back to sovereign Israeli territory. In 2006, with ]'s ], Israel had future plans to disengage (if necessary, unilaterally) from much of the West Bank (east of the Line), by ] or ]. Following the ] and the ], however, the plan increasingly fell off the national agenda. Unlike the Gaza disengagement, this was expected to correspond much less with the Green Line, primarily by retaining Israeli sovereignty over East Jerusalem &mdash; forming, together with West Jerusalem, Israel's united capital in accordance with Israel's domestic 1980 ] &mdash; and the large Jewish settlement blocks in the West Bank. As well, some of the border was likely to be drawn in relation to the ]. (''See ]'')

Many Israelis believe that the settlements are important to Israel's security and also support the settlements ideologically. In contrast, many Israelis believe the settlements are an economic burden and a barrier to peace.<ref>{{cite news|title=סקר: יותר ישראלים רואים במתנחלים "מכשול לשלום"|url=http://news.walla.co.il/item/2650176|access-date=10 October 2016|work=]|date=11 June 2016}}</ref>

From August to September 2005, Israel implemented a ] in which the entire Jewish population of the ] was evacuated. In 2006, ] proposed a ] that called for Israel to disengage, unilaterally, if necessary, from much of the West Bank (east of the line).


===Arab population=== ===Arab population===
The majority of ]s who had inhabited what became the Israeli side of the Line either ] during the war. Those Arabs who remained generally became Israeli citizens. The ]-]-] area, known in Israel as "the Triangle," was originally designated to fall under Jordanian jurisdiction, but Israel insisted on having it within its side of the Line, due to military and strategic reasons. To achieve this, a territorial swap was negotiated with ], giving the latter Israeli territory in the southern hills of ] in exchange for "the Triangle" villages in Wadi Ara.<ref name="yuval"/> The majority of ] on the Israeli side of the Line ] during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War (around 720,000). Those who remained became Israeli citizens and now comprise approximately 20 per cent of Israel's total citizenry. The ]–]–] area, known as the "]," was originally designated to fall under ]ian jurisdiction, but Israel insisted on having it within its side of the Green Line side due to military and strategic reasons. To achieve this, a territorial swap was negotiated, ceding to Jordan the Israeli territory in the southern hills of ] in exchange for the Triangle villages in ].<ref name=Yuval/>

In the Six-Day War, Israel occupied ] that were inhabited by over a million Palestinian Arabs, including refugees from the 1947–1949 war.<ref>The new territories more than doubled the size of pre-1967 Israel, placing under Israel's control more than 1 million Palestinian Arabs ... In November 1967 ... UN Security Council Resolution 242, called for "withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict" in exchange for Arab acceptance of Israel &mdash; , '']''</ref> The Green Line remained the administrative border between these territories (with the exception of Jerusalem) and the areas on the Israeli side of the Green Line.

In 1967, Israel annexed East Jerusalem and gave its Arab inhabitants ] status. They were also entitled to apply for Israeli citizenship. Domestically, Israel attempted to emphasize the status of East Jerusalem as part of Israel by its 1980 Jerusalem Law. ] deemed the law null and void, and this status has not been recognised by any other nation.<ref>{{Cite web|title=S/RES/476 (1980) of 30 June 1980 |url=http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/b86613e7d92097880525672e007227a7/6de6da8a650b4c3b852560df00663826?OpenDocument |website=domino.un.org |access-date=2015-10-01 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120509221911/http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/b86613e7d92097880525672e007227a7/6de6da8a650b4c3b852560df00663826?OpenDocument |archive-date=9 May 2012 }}</ref>

In 1981, the ] enacted the ], ostensibly as a reaction to Syrian provocations. This extended the Israeli ] to the Golan Heights.<ref name=Golan>{{Cite news|title = The Golan Heights Annexed by Israel in an Abrupt Move |url= https://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/big/1214.html|newspaper = The New York Times|access-date = 2015-10-01}}</ref> (It was also thought to have been motivated by the recent US AWACS sale to Saudi Arabia.<ref>{{Cite web|title = Golan Heights Law - Center for Israel Education|url = http://israeled.org/golan-heights-law/|access-date = 2015-10-01}}</ref>) This act was widely considered an informal annexation. It was criticized by the United States as a violation of the Camp David Accords<ref name=Golan/> and condemned by the UN Security Council in ].<ref>{{Cite web|title=S/RES/497 (1981) of 17 December 1981 |url=https://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/73D6B4C70D1A92B7852560DF0064F101 |website=unispal.un.org |access-date=2015-10-01 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120612120152/http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/73D6B4C70D1A92B7852560DF0064F101 |archive-date=12 June 2012 }}</ref>

===Official maps===
]
In October and November 1967, the Israeli security cabinet passed resolutions to remove the Green Line from official maps.<ref name="Akevot">{{cite web |author= |title=Erasure of the Green Line |url=https://www.akevot.org.il/en/article/erasure-of-green-line/?full |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211129113607/https://www.akevot.org.il/en/article/erasure-of-green-line/?full |archive-date=29 November 2021 |access-date=15 September 2021 |website=Akevot |publisher=Institute for Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Research}}</ref> The decision was classified "top secret" and a media blackout was imposed.<ref name=Akevot/> Printing of the new maps was delayed until a UN General Assembly meeting finished.<ref name=Akevot/> As a consequence of the decision, the ]'s official maps began to omit the Green Line and the armistice line with Egypt, while the armistice lines with Jordan and Lebanon were relabeled as ceasefire lines.<ref name=Akevot/><ref>Survey of Israel, 1:50,000 map series, 1965–1970.</ref><ref>{{cite news |author=Raz |first=Adam |date=September 9, 2022 |title=Why Israel Secretly Decided to Erase the Green Line |url=https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2022-09-09/ty-article-magazine/.highlight/why-israel-secretly-decided-to-erase-the-green-line/00000183-1ec6-da20-a1f3-def77b8d0000 |newspaper=Haaretz}}</ref>

In 2022, the ] sent maps to its schools that indicated the Green Line contrary to usual practice.<ref name="Schools2022">{{cite news |author=Kashti |first=Or |date=August 23, 2022 |title=Tel Aviv and the Israeli Government Spar Over School Maps Showing 1967 Borders |url=https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2022-08-23/ty-article/.highlight/tel-aviv-schools-barred-from-using-map-of-israel-showing-green-line/00000182-c71f-dae5-a58e-d79fc42e0000 |newspaper=Haaretz}}</ref> The mayor explained the decision as "It's important to us that students know Israel's sovereign borders and the complex reality in areas where Jewish citizens of Israel and Arabs under the Palestinian Authority's control live side by side".<ref name=Schools2022/> However, the ] told the municipality that the maps must not be used "even as a poster on the wall".<ref name=Schools2022/>

==Israeli–Palestinian conflict==
In a December 1969 speech, US Secretary of State ] said that "any changes in the pre-existing lines should not reflect the weight of conquest and should be confined to insubstantial alterations required for mutual security. We do not support ]."<ref name=Schwebel/> ] law professor ] responded that "...modifications of the 1949 armistice lines among those States within former Palestinian territory are lawful (if not necessarily desirable), whether those modifications are...'insubstantial alterations required for mutual security' or more substantial alterations&mdash;such as recognition of Israeli sovereignty over the whole of Jerusalem." In a footnote, he wrote: "It should be added that the armistice agreements of 1949 expressly preserved the territorial claims of all parties and did not purport to establish definitive boundaries between them."<ref name=Schwebel>{{cite journal
|last= Schwebel |first= Stephen M. |author-link= Stephen M. Schwebel |title= What weight to conquest? |journal= American Journal of International Law |year= 1970 |pages = 344–347 |volume= 64|issue= 2 |doi= 10.2307/2198669 |jstor= 2198669 |s2cid= 204351205 }}; reprinted in {{cite book |title= Justice in international law: selected writings of Stephen M. Schwebel |publisher= Cambridge University Press |author= S. M. Schwebel |year=1994 |page= 524 |isbn= 978-0-521-46284-6 |url= https://archive.org/details/justiceininterna0000schw/page/524 |access-date= 20 February 2021}}</ref>


The question of whether, or to what extent, Israel should withdraw its population and forces to its side of the Green Line remains a crucial issue in some discussions surrounding the ]. There is a near-unanimous international consensus that Israel should withdraw to its side of the line. This has been expressed in the yearly ] vote on the Peaceful Settlement of the Question of Palestine.<ref>Moughrabi, Fouad, , ''Journal of Palestine Studies'', 1987</ref> Although disputed by Israel, ] (UNSC 242)<ref>{{Cite web |last=Black |first=Eric |year=1992 |title=Parallel Realities - Resolution 242 And The Aftermath Of 1967 {{!}} Shattered Dreams Of Peace |url=https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/oslo/parallel/8.html |access-date= |website=PBS/]}}</ref> has declared the interpretation of international law regarding ].
During the ], Israel ] territories outside the Green Line which were inhabited by over a million ]s, including refugees from the ]-] war.<ref>The new territories more than doubled the size of pre1967 Israel, placing under Israel's control more than 1 million Palestinian Arabs ... In November 1967 ... UN Security Council Resolution 242, called for "withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict" in exchange for Arab acceptance of Israel &mdash; , '']''</ref> The Green Line remained the administrative border between these territories (with the exception of Jerusalem) and the areas inside the Israeli side of the Green Line.


The Palestinians were not party to the drawing of the Green Line and they rejected UNSC 242, saying that it did not call for an independent Palestinian state, and referred to them as refugees. Since 1976, most elements in the ] have accepted the pre-June 1967 line as a basis for the establishment of a Palestinian state.<ref> Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Retrieved 22 September 2010</ref>
In 1967, East Jerusalem was annexed into Israel, with its Arab inhabitants given ] status. They could apply for Israeli citizenship, but virtually none of them chose to do so {{Fact|date=January 2008}}. Domestically, the status of East Jerusalem as part of Israel was further entrenched with the Jerusalem ] of ]. ] , although non-binding, determined the law null and void. In ], the ] of the State of Israel was extended to the Golan Heights with the ] in what can be seen as an informal annexation.


In the early 1980s, American intellectual ] argued that Israeli claims that the Palestinian leadership rejected the international consensus calling for a Palestinian state, with borders along the Green Line, were not consistent with the documented record.<ref>Chomsky, Noam, ''The Fateful Triangle: The United States, Israel and the Palestinians'', South End Press 1983/1999 pp. 95–173. {{ISBN|978-0-89608-601-2}}</ref> In 2008 ''Al Jazeera'' and ''Haaretz'' both reported that elements in the Palestinian leadership, even inside ], have called for a two-state settlement based on the pre-June 1967 borders (the Green Line).<ref>, ''Al Jazeera,'' 22 April 2008</ref><ref>{{cite news |last= Hass |first= Amira |author-link= Amira Hass |title= Haniyeh: Hamas willing to accept Palestinian state with 1967 borders |newspaper=] |date=9 November 2008 |url= http://www.haaretz.com/news/haniyeh-hamas-willing-to-accept-palestinian-state-with-1967-borders-1.256915 |access-date= 20 February 2021}}</ref> Although Hamas' official policy is committed to Israel's destruction, ], the prime minister of the ] until June 2007, suggested that a long-term truce with Israel could be achieved if Israel withdrew from territory occupied in 1967.<ref>{{Cite news |date=2007-06-17 |title=Palestinian rivals: Fatah & Hamas |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5016012.stm |access-date=2011-07-28 |work=BBC News}}</ref>{{clarify |Hamas stated that its charter is no longer relevant|date=January 2014}}
==The Green Line and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict==
{{Unreferencedsection|date=November 2007}}
The question of whether or to what extent Israel should withdraw its population and forces to its side of the Green Line remains a crucial issue in the ]. Although the Palestinians were not party to the drawing of the Line, its existence plays a key role for the boundaries of the ] they seek.


The majority of the Israeli public opposes reverting to pre-1967 borders. A 2011 study found that, because of security concerns, 77 per cent of Israelis oppose returning to pre-1967 lines, even if it would lead to peace between Israel and neighboring Arab states.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Hoffman|first1=Gil|title=Poll: 77% of Israelis oppose going back to pre-'67 lines|url=http://www.jpost.com/Diplomacy-and-Politics/Poll-77-percent-of-Israelis-oppose-going-back-to-pre-67-lines|website=jpost.com|date=6 June 2011 |publisher=Jerusalem Post|access-date=16 June 2015}}</ref>
From the early ] on, some elements in the Palestinian national movement, notably in ] and the ] (DFLP), mooted the possibility of the establishment of a Palestinian state on the territories occupied in 1967. Nevertheless, the ] did not recognize it as a prospective border between a Palestinian state and an Israeli state until the ] in ], where this was hinted at. This was further highlighted in the ] in ].


The ] constructed in the early 21st century is, in parts, kilometres away from the Green Line and most lies within Palestinian territory.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Barahona|first=Ana|title=Bearing Witness - Eight Weeks in Palestine|publisher=Metete|location=London |isbn= 978-1-908099-02-0|year=2013|page=52}}"The Green Line"</ref>
Unlike Fatah, ], which following the ] controls the ] and ] (Fatah controls the ]), formally refuses to see the Green Line or one roughly corresponding to it as a prospective border between Israel and a future ]. Smaller parties and groups such as the ], the ], and ] lean more toward Hamas than Fatah's position.
]


==Physical and social perceptions of the Green Line==
During ], Hamas' political branch issued statements which claimed that ] inside Israel corresponded to a temporary phase of the struggle and are not expected to ensue indefinitely (or until the destruction of Israel, following its official platform) {{Fact|date=January 2008}}. This was, however, quickly contradicted and rejected by the military wing of Hamas.
According to ] geographer Ilan Salomon, the Green Line can be discerned from space via satellite; it is marked by pine forests planted by the ] to demarcate Israeli territory. Salomon and Larissa Fleishman conducted a 2006 study regarding Israeli students' knowledge of the location of the Green Line, and they found that not much more than one third could identify its placement. They learned that "students who identify with left-leaning parties are more familiar with the location of the ] and the ], can sketch them more accurately and are also more aware of the nature of borders."<ref>Eldar, Akiva. Haaretz, December 8, 2006</ref>


== Works ==
In Israel, following the ], it is likely that at least 68 of the ]'s 120 members will favour a unilateral withdrawal to borders roughly corresponding to the Green Line. One striking development of the election was that ], who for decades subscribed to the concept of ] which ignores the Line, and before the split leading to the founding of ] was the ruling and largest party, saw its numbers diminish to one quarter its former strength, its lowest point ever. Thus, only 35 MKs can be seen to be ideologically committed to opposing unilateral withdrawal.
* '']''


==See also== ==See also==
{{Portal|Israel|Palestine}}
* ]
* ] * ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ] * ]
* ], the ceasefire line between Israel and Syria after the 1967 Six-Day War
* ] (UNTSO)
* ], segment of the Green Line that divided the city of Jerusalem from 1948 to 1967
* ], areas in the West Bank located east of the Green Line and west of Israel's separation barrier


==Notes== ==References==
{{reflist}} {{Reflist}}


==Further reading== ==Further reading==
*Gad Barzilai and Ilan Peleg, , '']'', Vol. 31, No. 1 (]), pp. 59-73 *Gad Barzilai and Ilan Peleg, , '']'', Vol. 31, No. 1 (February 1994), pp.&nbsp;59–73
*Bornstein, Avram S. '''', ], 2001; by Steven Plaut, '']'', Vol. 10, No. 3, (Spring 2003); by Matthew S. Gordon, ''Journal of Colonialism and Colonial History'', Vol. 4, No. 2 (Fall 2003)
*Ilan Peleg and Paul Scham, , ''Association for Israel Studies'', ], ]
*S. Brian Willson, , ''Most Dangerous of Rogue Nation'', 1992, Revised May 2002
*Bornstein, Avram S. '''', ], ]; by Steven Plaut, '']'', Vol. 10, No. 3, (Spring ]); by Matthew S. Gordon, '']'', Vol. 4, No. 2 (Fall 2003)
*David Newman, {{dead link|date=October 2017 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}, ''Boundary & Territory Briefings'', Vol. 1 no. 7, 1995.
*S. Brian Willson, , ''Most Dangerous of Rogue Nation'', ], Revised ]
*David Newman, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080306142832/http://www.geog.bgu.ac.il/ncrd/bib/Show.asp?Action=Chapter&id=446 |date=2008-03-06 }}; from Schofield C.H. and Schofield R.N. (eds.). '''', ], London, 1995 ({{ISBN|978-0-415-08839-8}})
*David Newman, , ''Boundary & Territory Briefings'', Vol. 1 no. 7, ].
*Nadim Rouhana, , '']'', Vol. 19, No. 3 (Spring 1990), pp.&nbsp;58–75
*David Newman, ; from Schofield C.H. and Schofield R.N. (eds.). '''', ], ], ] (ISBN 0415088399)
*Amb. Alan Baker,
*Nadim Rouhana, , '']'', Vol. 19, No. 3 (Spring ]), pp. 58-75
*Amb. Dore Gold, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150930120119/http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/land-swaps-and-1967-lines_574942.html |date=2015-09-30 }}
*Ben-Dror, Elad (2015). Ralph Bunche and the Arab–Israeli Conflict: Mediation and the UN 1947–1949,. Routledge. {{ISBN|978-1-138-78988-3}}.


==External links== ==External links==
{{commons category}}
*
* *
*
* A fundraising event of ]


{{Egypt–Israel relations}}
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]


]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]

Latest revision as of 17:14, 18 November 2024

Internationally recognized border between Israel and Palestine

1955 United Nations map showing the Armistice Agreements, with original map reference points ("MR") on the Palestine grid referenced in the respective agreements.
Israel's 1949 Green Line (dark green) and demilitarized zones (teal)

The Green Line, or 1949 Armistice border, is the demarcation line set out in the 1949 Armistice Agreements between the armies of Israel and those of its neighbors (Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria) after the 1948 Arab–Israeli War. It served as the de facto borders of the State of Israel from 1949 until the Six-Day War in 1967, and continues to represent Israel's internationally recognized borders with the two Palestinian territories: the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

The Green Line was intended as a demarcation line rather than a permanent border. The 1949 Armistice Agreements were clear (at Arab insistence) that they were not creating permanent borders. The Egyptian–Israeli agreement, for example, stated that "the Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary, and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question." Similar provisions are contained in the Armistice Agreements with Jordan and Syria. The Agreement with Lebanon contained no such provisions, and was treated as the international border between Israel and Lebanon, stipulating only that forces would be withdrawn to the Israel–Lebanon border.

The Green Line is often referred to as the "pre-1967 borders" or the "1967 borders" by many international bodies and national leaders, including former United States president Barack Obama, Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas, the United Nations (UN) in informal texts, and in the text of UN General Assembly resolutions. The name comes from the green ink used to draw the line on the map during armistice talks. After the Six-Day War, the territories captured by Israel beyond the Green Line came to be designated as East Jerusalem, the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and the Golan Heights. These territories are often referred to as Israeli-occupied territories. The Sinai Peninsula, which was also captured at that time, has since been returned to Egypt as part of the 1979 peace treaty.

History

A border sign in Jerusalem, 1951; in the background: Tower of David

The Green Line refers to the demarcation lines, rather than permanent borders, between Israeli forces and those of its neighbors. All movement across the demarcation lines was banned and monitored by the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization. Most commonly, the term was applied to the boundary between Jordan-controlled Jerusalem and the West Bank and Israel. The drawing of the Green Line superseded entirely the partition lines proposed and voted on by the United Nations in the Partition Plan of 1947 and which Israel had accepted in the Israeli Declaration of Independence. The Palestinian and Arab leaders had repeatedly rejected any permanent partition of Mandatory Palestine.

In 1967, after Israel seized all the territories, other than the Emirate of Transjordan, of the former Mandatory Palestine, as well as other territories, the demarcation lines became militarily irrelevant, and the status of the Green Line became uncertain.

Although Israel has always formally argued that the Green Line has no legal significance, the Green Line continued to have political, legal and administrative significance. Israel regarded the territories beyond the Green Line, unlike those within the Green Line, as occupied territories, and they were not incorporated into Israeli political and civilian administrative systems. The territories beyond the Green Line were administered by the Israeli military or later also by the Palestinian Authority. Citizenship by residence, for example, was determined with reference to the Green Line, as well as a person's refugee status.

The extension of the municipal boundary of Jerusalem in 1980 was an exception to this position. Although Jerusalem was a part of territory beyond the Green Line that was ruled by Jordan until 1967, Israel declared Jerusalem "complete and united" as the capital of Israel according to the 1980 Basic Jerusalem Law. This claim has not been recognised by any country or by the United Nations (UN) Security Council. A notional Green Line continues to divide Jerusalem at the boundary of East Jerusalem.

The Golan Heights are another exception, having been informally incorporated by Israel with the 1981 Golan Heights Law. The UN Security Council declared this to be null and without any international legal effect.

Impact

The sections of the Green Line that delineate the boundaries between Israel, the West Bank and Gaza run through heavily populated regions. The Line corresponds to the military front of the 1948 War, and while the considerations dictating its placement were primarily military, it soon became clear that in many places it divided towns and villages, and separated farmers from their fields. Consequently, the Green Line underwent various slight adjustments, and special arrangements were made for limited movement in certain areas.

Jerusalem was divided in half, into East and West Jerusalem. The village of Barta'a, partially due to errors on the map, was left with one third of its area on the Israeli side and two thirds outside of it.

According to Avi Shlaim, in March 1949 as the Iraqi forces withdrew and handed over their positions to the Jordanian legion, Israel carried out Operation Shin-Tav-Shin which allowed Israel to renegotiate the ceasefire line in the Wadi Ara area of the northern West Bank in a secret agreement that was incorporated into the General Armistice Agreement. The Green Line was redrawn in blue ink on the southern map to give the impression that a movement in the green line had been made.

Jewish population

Barbed wire separating East and West Jerusalem at Mandelbaum Gate

During the war in 1947–48, Jews residing east of what subsequently became the Line, including the Jewish Quarter of the Old City, were taken prisoner by the Jordanians. All but a few of the Gush Etzion defenders were massacred. The prisoners were returned to Israel after the war. On July 8, 1948, the Jewish inhabitants of Kfar Darom and Naharayim were evacuated by Israel due to military pressure by Egypt and Jordan. Israel also withdrew from villages in the Lebanese Upper Galilee, whereas Syria withdrew from Mishmar HaYarden.

Since Israel's victory in the Six-Day War, Israel has established settlements south and east of the Line. These have been strongly criticised by other nations.

Many Israelis believe that the settlements are important to Israel's security and also support the settlements ideologically. In contrast, many Israelis believe the settlements are an economic burden and a barrier to peace.

From August to September 2005, Israel implemented a unilateral disengagement plan in which the entire Jewish population of the Gaza Strip was evacuated. In 2006, Ehud Olmert proposed a convergence plan that called for Israel to disengage, unilaterally, if necessary, from much of the West Bank (east of the line).

Arab population

The majority of Palestinian Arabs on the Israeli side of the Line fled or were expelled during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War (around 720,000). Those who remained became Israeli citizens and now comprise approximately 20 per cent of Israel's total citizenry. The Umm al-Fahm–Baqa al-Gharbiyye–Tira area, known as the "Triangle," was originally designated to fall under Jordanian jurisdiction, but Israel insisted on having it within its side of the Green Line side due to military and strategic reasons. To achieve this, a territorial swap was negotiated, ceding to Jordan the Israeli territory in the southern hills of Hebron in exchange for the Triangle villages in Wadi Ara.

In the Six-Day War, Israel occupied territories beyond the Green Line that were inhabited by over a million Palestinian Arabs, including refugees from the 1947–1949 war. The Green Line remained the administrative border between these territories (with the exception of Jerusalem) and the areas on the Israeli side of the Green Line.

In 1967, Israel annexed East Jerusalem and gave its Arab inhabitants permanent residency status. They were also entitled to apply for Israeli citizenship. Domestically, Israel attempted to emphasize the status of East Jerusalem as part of Israel by its 1980 Jerusalem Law. United Nations Security Council Resolution 478 deemed the law null and void, and this status has not been recognised by any other nation.

In 1981, the Knesset enacted the Golan Heights Law, ostensibly as a reaction to Syrian provocations. This extended the Israeli rule of law to the Golan Heights. (It was also thought to have been motivated by the recent US AWACS sale to Saudi Arabia.) This act was widely considered an informal annexation. It was criticized by the United States as a violation of the Camp David Accords and condemned by the UN Security Council in Resolution 497.

Official maps

Erasure of the Green Line on official Israel maps after 1967 (Galilee pan-handle example)

In October and November 1967, the Israeli security cabinet passed resolutions to remove the Green Line from official maps. The decision was classified "top secret" and a media blackout was imposed. Printing of the new maps was delayed until a UN General Assembly meeting finished. As a consequence of the decision, the Survey of Israel's official maps began to omit the Green Line and the armistice line with Egypt, while the armistice lines with Jordan and Lebanon were relabeled as ceasefire lines.

In 2022, the Tel Aviv-Yafo Municipality sent maps to its schools that indicated the Green Line contrary to usual practice. The mayor explained the decision as "It's important to us that students know Israel's sovereign borders and the complex reality in areas where Jewish citizens of Israel and Arabs under the Palestinian Authority's control live side by side". However, the Education Ministry told the municipality that the maps must not be used "even as a poster on the wall".

Israeli–Palestinian conflict

In a December 1969 speech, US Secretary of State William P. Rogers said that "any changes in the pre-existing lines should not reflect the weight of conquest and should be confined to insubstantial alterations required for mutual security. We do not support expansionism." Harvard law professor Stephen M. Schwebel responded that "...modifications of the 1949 armistice lines among those States within former Palestinian territory are lawful (if not necessarily desirable), whether those modifications are...'insubstantial alterations required for mutual security' or more substantial alterations—such as recognition of Israeli sovereignty over the whole of Jerusalem." In a footnote, he wrote: "It should be added that the armistice agreements of 1949 expressly preserved the territorial claims of all parties and did not purport to establish definitive boundaries between them."

The question of whether, or to what extent, Israel should withdraw its population and forces to its side of the Green Line remains a crucial issue in some discussions surrounding the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. There is a near-unanimous international consensus that Israel should withdraw to its side of the line. This has been expressed in the yearly UN General Assembly vote on the Peaceful Settlement of the Question of Palestine. Although disputed by Israel, United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 (UNSC 242) has declared the interpretation of international law regarding Palestinian Territory.

The Palestinians were not party to the drawing of the Green Line and they rejected UNSC 242, saying that it did not call for an independent Palestinian state, and referred to them as refugees. Since 1976, most elements in the PLO have accepted the pre-June 1967 line as a basis for the establishment of a Palestinian state.

In the early 1980s, American intellectual Noam Chomsky argued that Israeli claims that the Palestinian leadership rejected the international consensus calling for a Palestinian state, with borders along the Green Line, were not consistent with the documented record. In 2008 Al Jazeera and Haaretz both reported that elements in the Palestinian leadership, even inside Hamas, have called for a two-state settlement based on the pre-June 1967 borders (the Green Line). Although Hamas' official policy is committed to Israel's destruction, Ismail Haniyeh, the prime minister of the Palestinian unity government until June 2007, suggested that a long-term truce with Israel could be achieved if Israel withdrew from territory occupied in 1967.

The majority of the Israeli public opposes reverting to pre-1967 borders. A 2011 study found that, because of security concerns, 77 per cent of Israelis oppose returning to pre-1967 lines, even if it would lead to peace between Israel and neighboring Arab states.

The Israeli West Bank barrier constructed in the early 21st century is, in parts, kilometres away from the Green Line and most lies within Palestinian territory.

Barbed wire fence separating Palestinian Authority from Israel at the former Israeli-Jordanian Green Line

Physical and social perceptions of the Green Line

According to Hebrew University geographer Ilan Salomon, the Green Line can be discerned from space via satellite; it is marked by pine forests planted by the Jewish National Fund to demarcate Israeli territory. Salomon and Larissa Fleishman conducted a 2006 study regarding Israeli students' knowledge of the location of the Green Line, and they found that not much more than one third could identify its placement. They learned that "students who identify with left-leaning parties are more familiar with the location of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, can sketch them more accurately and are also more aware of the nature of borders."

Works

See also

References

  1. Sella, Amnon (1986). "Custodians and Redeemers: Israeli Leaders' Perceptions of Peace, 1967-79". Middle Eastern Studies. 22 (2): 236–251. doi:10.1080/00263208608700661. JSTOR 4283114.
  2. "Netanyahu Coalition to Recognize, Fund W. Bank Settlements Lacking Official Status". Haaretz. Retrieved 2023-08-18.
  3. "Human rights situation in the OPT - Sp. Rapporteur (Dugard) - Report, SecGen note". Question of Palestine. Retrieved 2023-08-18.
  4. ^ Bernard Lewis (1993). Islam in history: ideas, people, and events in the Middle East. Open Court Publishing. p. 164. ISBN 978-0-8126-9518-2.
  5. Egypt Israel Archived 2014-05-25 at the Wayback Machine Armistice Agreement UN Doc S/1264/Corr.1 23 February 1949
  6. "Obama calls for Israel's return to pre-1967 borders" By Tom Cohen, CNN, May 19, 2011
  7. "Palestinian leader Abbas affirms hope for state in pre-1967 lines". BBC News. 2012-11-02.
  8. "The Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People (CEIRPP) is mandated by the UN General Assembly to (...) support the peace process for the achievement of the two-State solution on the basis of pre-1967 borders..." Archived 2015-10-25 at the Wayback Machine
  9. For example, "A/RES/67/120 Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan" Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 18 December 2012
  10. Green Line: the name given to the 1949 Armistice lines that constituted the de facto borders of pre-1967 Israel — "Glossary: Israel", Library of Congress Country Studies
  11. ^ Yisrael Ya'akov, Yuval (2005). "Where is the Green Line". Two Thousand (in Hebrew).
  12. Akiva Eldar, "What is the Green Line" Archived 2011-06-05 at the Wayback Machine, Haaretz, July 21, 2006 (in Hebrew)
  13. ^ Aust, Anthony (2010). Handbook of International Law. Cambridge University Press. p. 27. ISBN 978-0-521-13349-4. Retrieved 20 February 2021.
  14. ^ Lustick, Ian (January 1997). "Has Israel Annexed East Jerusalem?". Middle East Policy. V (1). Archived from the original on 2007-06-10. Retrieved 2007-07-08.
  15. Karoubi, Mohammad Taghi (2004). Just or unjust war? International Law and Unilateral Use of Armed Force by States at the Turn of the 20th Century. Ashgate Publishing. p. 120. ISBN 978-0-7546-2375-5. Retrieved 11 August 2017.
  16. ^ Yossi Alpher, et al., "The green line", Palestinian–Israeli crossfire, Edition 8, February 24, 2003
  17. The Politics of Partition; King Abdullah, The Zionists, and Palestine 1921–1951 Avi Shlaim Oxford University Press Revised Edition 2004 ISBN 978-0-19-829459-7 pp. 299, 312
  18. "סקר: יותר ישראלים רואים במתנחלים "מכשול לשלום"". Walla!. 11 June 2016. Retrieved 10 October 2016.
  19. The new territories more than doubled the size of pre-1967 Israel, placing under Israel's control more than 1 million Palestinian Arabs ... In November 1967 ... UN Security Council Resolution 242, called for "withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict" in exchange for Arab acceptance of Israel — "Israel: 1967 and Afterward", Library of Congress Country Studies
  20. "S/RES/476 (1980) of 30 June 1980". domino.un.org. Archived from the original on 9 May 2012. Retrieved 2015-10-01.
  21. ^ "The Golan Heights Annexed by Israel in an Abrupt Move". The New York Times. Retrieved 2015-10-01.
  22. "Golan Heights Law - Center for Israel Education". Retrieved 2015-10-01.
  23. "S/RES/497 (1981) of 17 December 1981". unispal.un.org. Archived from the original on 12 June 2012. Retrieved 2015-10-01.
  24. ^ "Erasure of the Green Line". Akevot. Institute for Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Research. Archived from the original on 29 November 2021. Retrieved 15 September 2021.
  25. Survey of Israel, 1:50,000 map series, 1965–1970.
  26. Raz, Adam (September 9, 2022). "Why Israel Secretly Decided to Erase the Green Line". Haaretz.
  27. ^ Kashti, Or (August 23, 2022). "Tel Aviv and the Israeli Government Spar Over School Maps Showing 1967 Borders". Haaretz.
  28. ^ Schwebel, Stephen M. (1970). "What weight to conquest?". American Journal of International Law. 64 (2): 344–347. doi:10.2307/2198669. JSTOR 2198669. S2CID 204351205.; reprinted in S. M. Schwebel (1994). Justice in international law: selected writings of Stephen M. Schwebel. Cambridge University Press. p. 524. ISBN 978-0-521-46284-6. Retrieved 20 February 2021.
  29. Moughrabi, Fouad, "The International Consensus on the Palestine Question", Journal of Palestine Studies, 1987
  30. Black, Eric (1992). "Parallel Realities - Resolution 242 And The Aftermath Of 1967 | Shattered Dreams Of Peace". PBS/Star Tribune.
  31. "Draft Resolution 'The Middle East problem', Security Council document S/11940, 23 January 1976" Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Retrieved 22 September 2010
  32. Chomsky, Noam, The Fateful Triangle: The United States, Israel and the Palestinians, South End Press 1983/1999 pp. 95–173. ISBN 978-0-89608-601-2
  33. "Hamas ready to accept 1967 borders", Al Jazeera, 22 April 2008
  34. Hass, Amira (9 November 2008). "Haniyeh: Hamas willing to accept Palestinian state with 1967 borders". Haaretz. Retrieved 20 February 2021.
  35. "Palestinian rivals: Fatah & Hamas". BBC News. 2007-06-17. Retrieved 2011-07-28.
  36. Hoffman, Gil (6 June 2011). "Poll: 77% of Israelis oppose going back to pre-'67 lines". jpost.com. Jerusalem Post. Retrieved 16 June 2015.
  37. Barahona, Ana (2013). Bearing Witness - Eight Weeks in Palestine. London: Metete. p. 52. ISBN 978-1-908099-02-0."The Green Line"
  38. Eldar, Akiva. "Putting back the Green Line – once we find it" Haaretz, December 8, 2006

Further reading

External links

Egypt Egypt–Israel relations Israel
Diplomatic posts
Diplomacy
Conflicts
Incidents
Related
Category:Egypt–Israel relations
Categories: