Mapping the Israeli-Palestinian

Conflict Solution
The question of borders

Part 1: How the Sides Look at

Borders
Presented by
S. Daniel Abraham’s Center for Middle East Peace

Prepared by Dan Rothem

In collaboration with Lara Friedman
 Borders
• Both Israelis and Palestinians come to negotiations over borders with
positions that are informed by their own experiences and understandings
of the current territorial situation, their own sense of ‘reasonable’
concessions for each side, and their own ‘red lines’ (real and perceived).
• These experiences and understandings form the basis for each side’s
“classic approach” to negotiating the issue.
• An examination of these ‘classic approaches’ to borders can help in
understanding the areas of potential agreement, the real negotiating ‘red
lines,’ and the areas where compromises are necessary and possible.
• This examination also demonstrates the fact that borders may be the final
status issue on which agreement between the sides is the least difficult.
 Classic Palestinian borders approach
(reflecting traditional claims and grievances)
 Classic Palestinian borders approach
(reflecting traditional claims and grievances)

The Basic map of historic Palestine

(shaded in yellow)
and its environs
 Classic Palestinian borders approach
(reflecting traditional claims and grievances)

The Peel Commission of 1937

A plan (not implemented) to divide
historic Palestine into:
• a Jewish state in the north on 20%
of the land (shaded in blue)
• An Arab state in the south on 73%
of the land (shaded in yellow)
• 7% of the land, including
Jerusalem and a land corridor to
the Mediterranean, left under
international mandate (shaded in
pink)
 Classic Palestinian borders approach
(reflecting traditional claims and grievances)

UN Resolution 181 (1947)

Dividing historic Palestine to create:
• a non-contiguous Jewish state in
52% of the land (shaded in blue)
• a smaller, non-contiguous Arab
state in 46% of the land (shaded in
yellow)
• 2% of the territory, including
Jerusalem, set aside as “Corpus
Separatum” (shaded in pink)
 Classic Palestinian borders approach
(reflecting traditional claims and grievances)

1949 Armistice Lines

(finalized in 1951)
These lines reflected the situation on
the ground until June 4, 1967, i.e.,
the de facto division of historic
Palestine, following Arab rejection of
the UN partition plan – Resolution
181 – and the ensuing Israeli War of
Independence. This map
comprises:
• A contiguous Jewish state on 78% of
the land (blue)
• Arab (Jordanian and Egyptian)
control over 22% of the land (non-
contiguous), including East
 Classic Palestinian borders approach
(reflecting traditional claims and grievances)

The Post-1967 War Map

As a result of the 1967 War, the map
became:
• The sovereign state of Israel on
78% of the land (dark blue)
• Israeli-occupation of the remaining
22%, comprised of the West Bank
(including East Jerusalem) and Gaza
(turquoise)
(Israeli occupation of the Sinai
Peninsula and the Golan Heights –
both outside the scope of this
presentation)
 Classic Palestinian borders approach
(reflecting traditional claims and grievances)

2007 Reality:
• Israeli control over 88% of
historic Palestine, including all of
East Jerusalem and its environs,
plus settlement blocks, the
security barrier, and other
infrastructure and security
measures (shaded in light blue).
• Palestinian partial or limited
control over 12% of the land of
historic Palestine (shaded in light
green).
 Elements of the Classic Palestinian
Approach to Borders
• Since the Peel Commission, each historical development has diminished
the land under Palestinian control and increased the land under
Jewish/Israeli control.

• Recognition of the 1967 line as the legitimate border and the basis of
negotiations – in essence, Palestinian acceptance of Israel on 78% of the
land of historic Palestine – constitutes an historic concession to Israel.

• All Israeli settlement activity beyond the 1967 line violates international
law, including in East Jerusalem.

• The West Bank and Gaza Strip must be considered a single territorial unit
and a safe passage must be established to allow unimpeded movement
between them.
 Expected Palestinian Positions in
Negotiations
•these
Any agreement must be based on the 1967 lines and must refer explicitly to
lines.

•claim
The starting point of any agreement must be recognition of the Palestinian
to 100% of the land of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, based on the
1967 lines and constituting 22% of historic Palestine.

•represents
The Palestinian concession regarding the remaining 78% of historic Palestine
the final Palestinian position regarding the amount of territory it
will concede.

•compensated
Any deviations from the 1967 lines must be mutually agreed on and
by land swaps that are equal in quantity and quality.

•Such land swaps should be minimal (2% or less of the total land area).
•established.
A safe passage route between the West Bank and Gaza Strip must be
 Classic Israeli Borders Approach
(reflecting traditional military thinking)
 Classic Israeli borders
approach
(reflecting traditional military
thinking)

The basic map

of the West
Bank and
Gaza,
showing:
• Israeli settlements
(in blue)
• Palestinian
localities (in
green)
• the 1967 line (in
bold green)
 Classic Israeli borders
approach
(reflecting traditional military
thinking)

The basic map,

showing:
• the current
approved route
of the West Bank
security barrier
(in red)
• Settlement
blocks that
Israeli wishes to
annex (shaded in
blue)
 Classic Israeli borders
approach
(reflecting traditional military
thinking)

Traditional
Israeli view of
territorial
demands:
• Annexation of
settlement blocks
(in dark blue)
• Israeli control over
or annexation of
the Jordan Valley
and a land
corridor to
Jerusalem (in
bright blue)
 Classic Israeli borders
approach
(reflecting traditional military
thinking)
Traditional
Israeli territorial
demands:
• Annexation of
settlement blocks
(in dark blue)
• Israeli control over
(or annexation of)
the Jordan Valley
and a land corridor
to Jerusalem (in
turquoise)
• Israeli control over
additional
settlements and
land corridors into
 Classic Israeli borders
approach
(reflecting traditional military
thinking)

Traditional
Israeli view of
potential
territorial
concessions :
• Palestinian control
over roughly 45% of
the West Bank, in
three disconnected
areas (dark green)
• Israeli control
and/or annexation
of roughly 55% of
the West Bank
(various shades of
 Classic Israeli borders
approach
(reflecting traditional military
thinking)

Variation on
traditional Israeli
view of territorial
concessions :
• Palestinian control
over roughly 80% of
the West Bank, in
three disconnected
areas (dark green)
• Israeli control and/or
annexation of
roughly 20% of the
West Bank
(maintaining control
over a smaller area
of the Jordan Valley)
 Classic Israeli borders approach

• The 1967 lines have no legal standing and are not sacred.

• The fate of the territories will be resolved in negotiations, without regard to

prior claims by the Palestinians.

• Israeli interests require the annexation of large, expanded settlement

blocks and areas around Jerusalem.

• Israeli security requires a long-term presence in all or part of the Jordan

Valley.
 Expected Israeli Position in Negotiations
• Israel may accept the legitimacy of the 1967 lines, as mentioned in the
Bush speech of 2002 and as referenced in the 2004 Israeli-US exchange
of letters (referred to as the 1949 Armistice Line).

• Israel will be prepared to make “painful compromises” and evacuate

many West Bank settlements (with the route of the barrier as the likely
starting point), but will not compromise on some land that it views as
strategically vital or that is home to large settler populations.

• Land swaps will be considered, but not according to a 1:1 ratio.

• Safe passage between the West Bank and Gaza Strip will not be viewed
as a Palestinian entitlement but rather as an Israeli concession that will
be used as negotiating leverage.
 Possible points of agreement on borders
A model formula:

Borders will be based on the 1967 lines with agreed-

upon modifications that will include land swaps equal in
size (1:1) and will take into consideration the parties’
security and demographic interests while maintaining
• Includes explicit reference to 1967 (as demanded
territorial contiguity. by the
Palestinians)
• Includes idea of modifications to 1967 borders (as demanded by the
Israelis)
• Includes concept of 1:1 land swaps (as demanded by the
Palestinians)
• Places no limitation on size of modifications and swaps (as
demanded by the Israelis)