| Part of a series on the Israeli–Palestinian conflict |
| Israeli–Palestinian peace process |
|---|
In 2005, 21 Israeli settlements in the Gaza Strip and four Israeli settlements in the West Bank were unilaterally dismantled.[1] Israeli settlers and army evacuated from inside the Gaza Strip, redeploying its military along the border.[2] The disengagement was conducted unilaterally by Israel; in particular, Israel rejected any coordination or orderly hand-over to the Palestinian Authority.[3] Despite the disengagement, the Gaza Strip is still considered to be occupied under international law.
The disengagement was proposed in 2003 by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, adopted by the government in June 2004, and approved by the Knesset in February 2005 as the Disengagement Plan Implementation Law.[4] The motivation behind the disengagement was described by Sharon's top aide as a means of isolating Gaza and avoiding international pressure on Israel to reach a political settlement with the Palestinians. The disengagement plan was implemented in August 2005 and completed in September 2005. Israeli security forces, over a period of several days, evicted settlers who refused to accept government compensation packages and voluntarily vacate their homes prior to the August 15, 2005 deadline.[5] The eviction of all Israeli residents, demolition of the Israeli residential buildings and evacuation of associated security personnel from the Gaza Strip was completed by September 12, 2005.[6] The eviction and dismantlement of the four settlements in the northern West Bank was completed ten days later. Over 8,000 Jewish settlers from the 21 settlements in the Gaza Strip were relocated.
Palestinians celebrated amid skepticism that the withdrawal would take place.[7] Israeli polls on support for the plan during the time showed support for the plan in the 50–60% range and opposition in the 30–40% range.[8] The Israeli military met heavy resistance and riots from settlers while pulling out. Two far-right Israelis self-immolated.[9][10] Benjamin Netanyahu resigned from Sharon's government over the pullout.[11][12]
The United Nations, international human rights organizations, many legal scholars, and a “majority of academic commentators” regard the Gaza Strip to still be under military occupation by Israel.[13] The International Court of Justice (ICJ) reaffirmed this position on the basis of Israel's continued control of the Gaza Strip. The 2024 ICJ advisory opinion, Article 42 of the Hague Relations and precedent in international law maintain that a territory remains occupied so long as an army could reestablish physical control at any time.[14][15]
- ^ "Israel's disengagement from Gaza (2005) | Withdrawal, Map, & Hamas | Britannica". britannica.com. Retrieved May 12, 2024.
- ^ Sara M. Roy (2016). The Gaza Strip. Institute for Palestine Studies USA, Incorporated. pp. xxiii. ISBN 978-0-88728-321-5.
- ^ Mouin Rabbani (April 16, 2024). Deluge. OR Books. ISBN 978-1-68219-619-9.
Israel's 2005 "disengagement" from the Gaza Strip was not only conducted unilaterally, but deliberately rejected coordination with the PA or an orderly handover of the territory to it.
- ^ "Knesset Approves Disengagement Implementation Law (February 2005)". jewishvirtuallibrary.org.
- ^ "Jewish Settlers Receive Hundreds of Thousands in Compensation for Leaving Gaza". Democracy Now. August 16, 2005. Archived from the original on May 9, 2007. Retrieved May 5, 2007.
- ^ "Demolition of Gaza Homes Completed". Ynetnews.com. September 1, 2005. Retrieved May 5, 2007.
- ^ Cite error: The named reference
independent2was invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ Cite error: The named reference
Angus-Reid.comwas invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ "For the Land She Loved to Death". Haaretz. Retrieved February 16, 2024.
- ^ וייס, אפרת (September 6, 2005). "מת מפצעיו הצעיר שהצית עצמו בגלל ההתנתקות". Ynet (in Hebrew). Retrieved February 16, 2024.
- ^ Erlanger, Steven (August 7, 2005). "Netanyahu Quits Sharon's Cabinet to Protest Gaza Pullout". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved May 14, 2024.
- ^ Service, Yossi Verter Haaretz (August 7, 2005). "Netanyahu quits government over disengagement". Haaretz. Retrieved May 14, 2024.
- ^ Sanger, Andrew (2011). "The Contemporary Law of Blockade and the Gaza Freedom Flotilla". In M.N. Schmitt; Louise Arimatsu; Tim McCormack (eds.). Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law – 2010. Vol. 13. Springer Science & Business Media. p. 429. doi:10.1007/978-90-6704-811-8_14. ISBN 978-90-6704-811-8.
Israel claims it no longer occupies the Gaza Strip, maintaining that it is neither a State nor a territory occupied or controlled by Israel, but rather it has 'sui generis' status. Pursuant to the Disengagement Plan, Israel dismantled all military institutions and settlements in Gaza and there is no longer a permanent Israeli military or civilian presence in the territory. However, the Plan also provided that Israel will guard and monitor the external land perimeter of the Gaza Strip, will continue to maintain exclusive authority in Gaza air space, and will continue to exercise security activity in the sea off the coast of the Gaza Strip as well as maintaining an Israeli military presence on the Egyptian-Gaza border, and reserving the right to reenter Gaza at will. Israel continues to control six of Gaza's seven land crossings, its maritime borders and airspace and the movement of goods and persons in and out of the territory. Egypt controls one of Gaza's land crossings. Gaza is also dependent on Israel for water, electricity, telecommunications and other utilities, currency, issuing IDs, and permits to enter and leave the territory. Israel also has sole control of the Palestinian Population Registry through which the Israeli Army regulates who is classified as a Palestinian and who is a Gazan or West Banker. Since 2000 aside from a limited number of exceptions Israel has refused to add people to the Palestinian Population Registry. It is this direct external control over Gaza and indirect control over life within Gaza that has led the United Nations, the UN General Assembly, the UN Fact Finding Mission to Gaza, International human rights organisations, US Government websites, the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office and a significant number of legal commentators, to reject the argument that Gaza is no longer occupied.
* Scobbie, Iain (2012). Elizabeth Wilmshurst (ed.). International Law and the Classification of Conflicts. Oxford University Press. p. 295. ISBN 978-0-19-965775-9.Even after the accession to power of Hamas, Israel's claim that it no longer occupies Gaza has not been accepted by UN bodies, most States, nor the majority of academic commentators because of its exclusive control of its border with Gaza and crossing points including the effective control it exerted over the Rafah crossing until at least May 2011, its control of Gaza's maritime zones and airspace which constitute what Aronson terms the 'security envelope' around Gaza, as well as its ability to intervene forcibly at will in Gaza.
* Gawerc, Michelle (2012). Prefiguring Peace: Israeli-Palestinian Peacebuilding Partnerships. Lexington Books. p. 44. ISBN 9780739166109.While Israel withdrew from the immediate territory, it remained in control of all access to and from Gaza through the border crossings, as well as through the coastline and the airspace. In addition, Gaza was dependent upon Israel for water, electricity sewage communication networks and for its trade (Gisha 2007. Dowty 2008). In other words, while Israel maintained that its occupation of Gaza ended with its unilateral disengagement Palestinians – as well as many human rights organizations and international bodies – argued that Gaza was by all intents and purposes still occupied.
- ^ Noura Erakat (2019). Justice for Some. Stanford University Press. ISBN 978-1-5036-1357-7.
However, according to Article 42 of the Hague Regulations (1907), a belligerent has effective control of a territory so long as it has established its authority and has the ability to exercise it, regardless of the continuous presence of ground troops. The Nuremberg Tribunal and the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), are among the tribunals that have affirmed that a territory remains occupied so long as an army could reestablish physical control of that territory "at any time."
- ^ Cuyckens, Hanne (2016). "Is Israel Still an Occupying Power in Gaza?". Netherlands International Law Review. 63 (3): 275–295. doi:10.1007/s40802-016-0070-1. ISSN 0165-070X.