Skip to main content

Sign up for our newsletter.

Quality journalism. Progressive values. Direct to your inbox.

If you’ve been waiting for the right time to support our work—that time is now.

Our mission is simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.

But without the support of our readers, this model does not work and we simply won’t survive. It’s that simple.
We must meet our Mid-Year Campaign goal but we need you now.

Please, support independent journalism today.

Join the small group of generous readers who donate, keeping Common Dreams free for millions of people each year. Without your help, we won’t survive.

Sheikh Jarrah

Palestinians and supporters protest outside the Israeli Supreme Court over its postponement of a decision on the expulsion of Palestinian families from the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood in unlawfully occupied East Jerusalem. (Photo: Mostafa Alkharouf/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images)

'We Are the Owners': Palestinians Refuse to Concede Land Rights to Israelis in Sheikh Jarrah

"The minute we pay rent for our homes, it means we have given up ownership," said one woman who could be expelled to make way for Jewish settlers.

Brett Wilkins

Palestinian families facing ethnic cleansing from their Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood in occupied East Jerusalem on Monday rejected a so-called "compromise" offer from Israel's Supreme Court, which would allow them to remain in their homes if they recognize as rightful owners the Israeli settler group trying to steal the properties.

Under the Israeli high court proposal, four Palestinian families and dozens of others threatened with forced expulsion from the Sheikh Jarrah area would remain in the neighborhood as "protected tenants" who could not be evicted, as long as they acknowledged that Nahalat Shimon Company—a right-wing settler organization dating back to the early years of Zionist colonization of Palestine—as the lawful owner, and paid it NIS 1,500 ($465) in annual rent.

As Israeli journalist Nir Hasson wrote for Haaretz on Tuesday:

The problem isn't the money but the question of recognizing Nahalat Shimon as the owner. The Palestinians refuse to. For their part, representatives of the settlers demanded explicit Palestinian recognition of ownership of the land under the buildings and a promise not to raise further claims in the future. The Palestinians resolutely refused.

"The minute we pay rent for our homes, it means we have given up ownership," Alaa Salayma, who faces eviction from Sheikh Jarrah, told Middle East Eye. "This is not an option. We are the owners of these homes."

Palestinian writer Mohammed El-Kurd—whose family's harassment by an Israeli settler admitting on video to trying to steal their home made global headlines in May—told Middle East Eye, "I don't think this system will ever be fair or just to me."

El-Kurd added that "this entire country was established on land theft and stealing homes from Palestinians," who were ethnically cleansed from what became the modern state of Israel in 1948-49, 1967, and during home demolitions and settlement expansion, which are ongoing.

It was during the 1967 conquest of territories including the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem that Israel seized and occupied Sheikh Jarrah. Israel illegally annexed East Jerusalem in 1980. Lower Israeli courts have upheld the planned expulsion of Palestinians from the neighborhood.

"This entire country was established on land theft and stealing homes from Palestinians."
—Mohammed El-Kurd, Sheikh Jarrah resident

However, in May, the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) Spokesperson Rupert Colville, citing the Fourth Geneva Convention's prohibition on the forcible transfer of populations by occupying powers—under which Israel's occupation of Palestine and its settlement activity are illegal—said that any Sheikh Jarrah expulsions "may amount to a war crime."

El-Kurd told the BBC that residents faced "a lot of pressure" to "reach an agreement with the Israeli settlers in which we would be renting from the settler organizations. Of course this is rejected."

"We would be living at the mercy of settlers, paying rent to live in our own homes, and dealing with all kinds of arbitrary policies," he told Democracy Now!, adding that he believes the Israeli high court is "evading its responsibilities" by refusing to issue an ownership ruling.

While Israeli Supreme Court Justice Yitzhak Amit said that the court's offer "will give us breathing room," Nahalat Shimon—which wants to resettle Sheikh Jarrah with Jews—also rejected the proposal, with Ilan Shemer, an attorney for the group, calling it "an empty arrangement."

Haaretz's Hasson wrote:

In the end, the Sheikh Jarrah legal battle revolves around one question. Is it simply a real estate dispute, as the settlers assert, or is it part of a campaign by the state—its official arms (the custodian general, Land Registry, the Israel Police) and its unofficial ones (the Nahalat Shimon Company) to dispossess the Palestinians and Judaize the neighborhood? If it's the latter, it's a campaign based on discrimination and unjust laws.

The imminent expulsions of families in Sheikh Jarrah and Al-Bustan earlier this year, as well as simultaneous attacks on worshippers at the Al-Aqsa mosque compound, sparked worldwide protests and escalating Israeli attacks and Palestinian resistance.

In May, Israeli forces bombarded Gaza for 11 days, killing 260 Palestinians including at least 66 children, while 13 Israelis died, mostly from Palestinian rocket attacks.

Last week, Human Rights Watch accused Israeli forces of committing "apparent war crimes" during the Gaza assault.

The two sides' rejection of the justices' Sheikh Jarrah offer means the Israeli high court must now make a final decision in the case.

Asked about the court's offer during a daily press briefing on Monday, Stéphane Dujarric, spokesperson for United Nations Secretary-General António Gutteres, said, "What has always been our standpoint is that all settlement activities, including evictions [and] demolitions, are illegal under international law."

The United States also commented on the case on Monday, as State Department Spokesperson Ned Price said that "families should not be evicted from homes in which they have lived for decades."


Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

"I'm sure this will be all over the corporate media, right?"
That’s what one longtime Common Dreams reader said yesterday after the newsroom reported on new research showing how corporate price gouging surged to a nearly 70-year high in 2021. While major broadcasters, newspapers, and other outlets continue to carry water for their corporate advertisers when they report on issues like inflation, economic inequality, and the climate emergency, our independence empowers us to provide you stories and perspectives that powerful interests don’t want you to have. But this independence is only possible because of support from readers like you. You make the difference. If our support dries up, so will we. Our crucial Mid-Year Campaign is now underway and we are in emergency mode to make sure we raise the necessary funds so that every day we can bring you the stories that corporate, for-profit outlets ignore and neglect. Please, if you can, support Common Dreams today.

 

'We WILL Fight Back': Outrage, Resolve as Protests Erupt Against SCOTUS Abortion Ruling

Demonstrators took to the streets Friday to defiantly denounce the Supreme Court's right-wing supermajority after it rescinded a constitutional right for the first time in U.S. history.

Brett Wilkins ·


80+ US Prosecutors Vow Not to Be Part of Criminalizing Abortion Care

"Criminalizing and prosecuting individuals who seek or provide abortion care makes a mockery of justice," says a joint statement signed by 84 elected attorneys. "Prosecutors should not be part of that."

Kenny Stancil ·


Progressives Rebuke Dem Leadership as Clyburn Dismisses Death of Roe as 'Anticlimactic'

"The gap between the Democratic leadership, and younger progressives on the question of 'How Bad Is It?' is just enormous."

Julia Conley ·


In 10 Key US Senate Races, Here's How Top Candidates Responded to Roe Ruling

While Republicans unanimously welcomed the Supreme Court's rollback of half a century of reproductive rights, one Democrat said "it's just wrong that my granddaughter will have fewer freedoms than my grandmother did."

Brett Wilkins ·


Sanders Says End Filibuster to Combat 'Outrageous' Supreme Court Assault on Abortion Rights

"If Republicans can end the filibuster to install right-wing judges to overturn Roe v. Wade, Democrats can and must end the filibuster, codify Roe v. Wade, and make abortion legal and safe," said the Vermont senator.

Jake Johnson ·

Common Dreams Logo