This report argues, on the basis of strategic and political realities, that Israel should maintain control over the "West Bank" region. In terms of international law, these territories are not Israeli occupied territories of some other state, but portions of a "historic Palestine" whose political status has never been formally settled. Politically, to abandon them would be a major Israeli concession, yet yielding them would meet no fundamental Arab demand. Strategically, control of these territories is needed to give Israel even a minimal range of defensive options. Therefore, both practical concerns and considerations of international law and morality support continued Israeli administration of these territories for the foreseeable future.
To religious Jews, it is known as Judea and Samaria, the true historical cradle of the Jewish people. To Arabs and Palestinian sympathesizers, it is the Occupied Territories. To more neutral observers, it is called simply the West Bank the portion of historic Palestine that fell under Jordanian administration after Israel's 1948 war of independence, and passed into Israeli hands following its 1967 victory over an Arab coalition. It is a small parcel of land, measuring roughly twenty five by seventy five miles but it has become one of the most contentious pieces of real estate in the world.
To understand the basis for conflicting rights and claims over the West Bank, it is necessary to briefly outline its modern history. The 1967 war left Israel in occupation of several parcels of formerly Arab held territory. Two of these, the Sinai Peninsula and the Golan Heights, were formerly internationally recognized territories of Egypt and Syria, respectively. The Sinai was ceded back to Egypt under the terms of the Camp David accords. The Golan Heights remains under Israeli occupation.
Because of the strategic importance and past history of the Golan Heights ...