Diagram of Israel's security fence separating Palestine from Israel

The barrier between Israel and Palestine has been called many things, few actually good, but the fact is the idea for it was created out of good faith between the two leaders who came together to try and make peace. While the Israeli leader lost his life trying to make the peace, the intention was to build the wall along the 1967 borders so the lines were clearly demarcated, but Arafat's suicide bombers and indiscriminate shooters changed the nature of what it was to be.

“The West Bank Barrier” and “Apartheid Wall” are just some of the foreign names given for the Israeli-built separation fences between Israel and some of the autonomous Palestinian Authority zones that border it. A fraction of the fence is indeed concrete while the majority of it is, well...a fence. Meanwhile, The Israeli government itself has differed on the terminology for the network of fences and walls, which have proven to be effective in preventing Palestinian terrorism. On top of the evident security benefits to Israel in preventing terrorist attacks, perhaps it's crucial for Palestinian activists around the world to see the importance of this barrier as the singular aspect of Judea and Samaria outlining a sovereign Palestinian entity.  

The barrier, while being highly controversial on the global stage, has a far more colorful background in Israeli politics. The “separation fence” as initially called was first brought up by the Rabin government in 1995. Many in Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin’s coalition saw the building of a physical border essential to carrying through with the Oslo Accords signed just a year before. As a result, a commission led by Minister Moshe Shahal was appointed to discuss the matter. Rabin’s assassination, later that same year, would temporarily stump any efforts of creating a plausible plan. 

Virtually all Israeli governments from 1995 onwards pushed in some way for building the barrier, but it wasn’t until Ariel Sharon’s government at the height of the Intifada that Israel would begin construction. The constant unsettling terrorism in the early 21st century raised another valid reason for building the wall on top of the initial diplomatic gesture of goodwill, and this security aspect resonated deeply with Israeli centrists and moderate right-wing who dominated public opinion.

It’s worth noting just how difficult building such a complex barrier within a highly-populated region is. In the process, which ended in 2006, the Israeli government would get slack from both Palestinians and Israelis in Judea and Samaria for either including or excluding them from the wall’s plans. Unfortunately, some Arab villages were split into two by the barrier, along with a number of Israeli communities that were left wholly unprotected by its creation. 

Today, 17 years to the completion of Israel’s wall and still the extremely diverse population on both sides of the fence cannot make up their mind. Israelis who strongly believe in the full annexation of all territories would like to see the wall taken down to allow for communities in Judea and Samaria to expand; and Palestinians and Israelis who are against what they refer to as “occupation” want to take the wall down in the spirit of ending 'apartheid' and statesmen both in Israel and the PA prefer to maintain the “Status Quo”. The public opinion on the wall even debates its importance in regard to environmentalism. 

Meanwhile, between all the heterogeneous conflicts of interest surrounding the wall in Israel, a fabricated consensus on the wall has been created internationally concluding at the very least the wall is a stain on Israel’s statehood, if not a full-blown act of appalling racialism. What began as an act of good faith, along with a potential public relations boost, has been turned into the photogenic media sensation called “The Israeli occupation of Palestine.” Yet, the fact remains many countries have an artificial separation between their borders and another.

Still, if the Pro-Palestinian media and global activists feel that the wall must be taken down at all costs, Netanyahu’s 6th ( and probably last) coalition could potentially help get the job done. Minister Itamar Ben Gvir, who is “prone to brandishing a pistol at nearby Arabs” according to The Atlantic, has a history of wishing the wall would be no more. While protesting the construction of an extra chain of the barrier that crossed through Jewish-owned property in 2009, Ben Gvir told “Walla” reporters "The residents of B'ilin [nearby Arab village] are enemies who come claiming that the land belongs to them, when we are sure that the land belongs to us." He later added, "The Land of Israel does not belong to the Arabs or to the Netanyahu government, but to the entire Jewish people."

In addition to Ben Gvir’s former statements regarding the wall, a large chunk of the new Netanyahu government is determined to at first aggravate and eventually rip the “Status Quo” in pieces including but not limited to the separation barrier. And if they succeed, Palestinian statehood would lose the last physical and visual reminder of how they almost got what they wanted close to 3 decades ago when the barrier was thought to be a gesture of peace; Be careful what you wish.

Sign Up For The Judean Newsletter

I agree with the Terms and conditions and the Privacy policy