The Cartographic Crux of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Maps are incredibly powerful instruments. In addition to conveying geographical information, maps, ab aeterno, manifest political, philosophical, actual and imagined snapshots of time. And nowhere on Earth is the meaning of maps more powerful and more controversial than in the Middle East, particularly when it comes to Israel and its Arab neighbors.

A very public controversy with regard to a map of Israel erupted last month in London. The Israeli Ministry of Tourism placed an advertisement throughout the London Underground showing a map of Israel, the West Bank, Gaza Strip and the Golan Heights in the same yellow color, giving the impression that Israel's vast geography did not include occupied Palestinian territory. Obviously misrepresentative, because a British tourist cannot sunbath on the pristine beaches of Gaza or shop the markets of Ramallah, all the while traveling from Eilat to Tel Aviv to Jerusalem to Haifa. After mass protests, the Israeli Ministry removed the posters, calling them a "professional mistake." However, Ministry officials most likely see the incident as a market miscalculation rather than an issue related to the borders of their country.

A similar incident occurred when I was traveling through Israel a few months ago. I noticed that my travel map, published by Hertz, all but erased the existence of the occupied Palestinian territory. After my short blog-piece on Huffington Post, Hertz management went through an internal process to adjust its map. Hertz, a U.S. based company, made the decision that its travel maps should represent as accurately as possible the geography of the state(s) in which it does business, and ignoring international legal realities of occupation was clearly not acceptable. Having been privy to the subsequent drafts, it was fascinating to see how Hertz's Israeli cartographer struggled to identify Palestinian areas, settlements roads, the Green Line that divides Israel proper from the occupied West Bank, the armistice line with Syria, and other important foundations for the yet to be agreed upon borders of the State of Israel. In the end, Hertz is now publishing a map that identifies all of the above.

Both these incidents are outgrowths of the most controversial cartographic event in the past century: the partition of Palestine and the establishment of the state of Israel. For 60 years, Israel and her neighbors have been at war. For 40 years, the Palestinians have lived under occupation without self-determination and dignity, and without a map that gives them a state on their own. As President Obama prepares to seek a revival of the Middle East peace process, he should therefore turn his attention primarily to the map. With the Green Line as his guide, Obama can redraw the reality of the map of the Middle East -- wisely and accurately. Borders are important. We tend to forget that Israel has no permanent borders except those with Egypt and with Jordan -- and those came as the result of peace treaties that enshrined and legitimized the map of the Middle East that shows Israel.

Israel should thus publicly commit to permanent borders -- and then take necessary action, such as freezing all settlement activity, including natural growth (as called for by the Road Map), and launch permanent status negotiations with the Palestinians. In parallel, and in line with the Arab Peace Initiative launched in 2002, the Arab States and members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference should revise their own maps to represent Israel adequately -- thus implying the recognition they have committed to bestow on Israel in exchange for decisive steps towards the two-state solution.

In recent months, Israel has downplayed the necessity to make peace with the Palestinians in deference to the concern over Iran's nuclear ambitions. With the ubiquitous statement by Iranian President Ahmadenijad in his desire to "wipe Israel off the map," the urgency is understandable. This, however, is a mistake. What better tool to combat the influence of Iran than to change the map. Imagine, Israeli daily newspapers including Palestine on its weather maps, or geography text books in Damascus referring to Israel as a legitimate state amongst its neighbors, finally recognizing the notion of two states, two peoples.

These are not mere cosmetic adjustments. The fraught political realities on the ground that are captured in the mapmaking process lie at the very heart of the problem. Combined, these (cartographic) steps would allow for a re-drawing of the political realities of the Middle East and set the stage for a comprehensive and lasting peace that would not only accord the Palestinians their state, but also provide Israel with permanent borders and the recognition, security and stability it justly deserves. Until the map is redrawn to reflect a genuine two state solution, we can anticipate further clashes about how the map of the region is drawn.

Comments

[popart]

I really don't see any hope for Israel as a nation to live in harmony with its arab neighbors.­...as long as everyone on all sides remain tied to their religious beliefs...­and the rigeousness of their posistion with their god. In a way they deserve each other...th­ey are more alike than different and don't even know it.

[BubbaC33]

Israel accepted the UN patition plan and we were attacked by our Arab neighbors. In 1967, when we lived inside the "magical" pre-67 borders, Nasser massed over 100,000 soldiers on the Israeli border we had not provoked our Arab neighbors, other than our existence. In 1973 Egypt and Syria again invaded Israel. These attacks had little to do with religious beliefs, the attacks had everything to do with the destruction of Israel.

[dmcohen]

"For 40 years, the Palestinians have lived under occupation without self-determination and dignity, and without a map that gives them a state on their own."

Actually for all of their history the Palestinians have lived under occupation without self-determination [I can't speak to dignity], and without a map that gives them a state on their own.

The only independent states that have ever existed in the area, unoccupied by foreign empires, were:
1) The biblical kingdoms of Judah and Israel,
2) The Maccabean state of Judea, and
3) the modern state of Israel.

[forpeacealways]

2 States for 2 people is an incorrect Statement. There are about a million Palestinia­n-Israelis living in Israel (thats obviously not including the West Bank). Also about 70% of Jordan's population is Palestinian. I am not saying that isn't cool, I am just saying leaders should stop saying the 2 states for 2 peoples punch line because its very incorrect unless they think that Israel is going to give up Arab-Israeli areas in a final agreement and Jordan is going to give up all their Palestinian areas . In that case then their will be a "land swap", where Israel annexes settlements in the West Bank and in exchange the Palestinian State will annex Israeli-Arab areas.

[batguano]

Its unfortunate that the writer perpetuates the mistranslation of Ahmadinejad's words by repeating as fact the comment;

"the ubiquitous statement by Iranian President Ahmadenijad in his desire to "wipe Israel off the map".

For an in-depth examinationof the issue please see:
http://goatmilk.wordpress.com/2008/07/22/israel-wiped-off-the-map-lost-in-translation/


The perpetuation of inflamatory rhetoric impedes the search for peace. The fact, IMO, that Israel has intentionally sabotaged peace efforts for many years to continue their occupation and illegal colonization of the West Bank has been ignored by many in power in the west in thrall to Israeli goals and supporters. The latest rejection of President Obama's efforts by Netanyahu is only a continuation of numerous intentional acts to thwart peace; your statement and misrepresentation does not help.

.

[Michael Shtender-Auerbach - Huffpost Blogger]

That misses the point. While I hadn't read Cole or Steele's article on the translation, the sentiment and the inflammatory nature of the comment is the same. And that Iran is viewed, wrongly or rightly, as an existential threat to Israel. My point was that by negotiating permanent borders with the future Palestinian State, those statements become irrelevant and beside the point!

[BubbaC33]

If a Palestinian state came into existence tomorrow Israel would still be at risk. In 1967 the combined armies of several Arab nations, led by Egypt's Nasser, massed on the Israeli border following the closing of the Starits of Tiran by the Egyptian military, the actual first shots of the Six Day War. The point is this, the primary offense Israel has committed is our continued existence.
The words of an ignorant leader in Iran or one of the Arab nations aren't that important, in the bigger picture. What is important is there can be no peace until and unless our Arab neighbors accept our right to exist and to exist within defensable borders.

[zaz33]

If Israel doesn't allow for a just Palistinian state now, the Palistinial babies born today will likely raise their famlies in "greater Palistine"

[forpeacealways]

Was that a threat to Jordan & Israel?

[Princeton123]

Iranian President Ahmadenijad in his desire to "wipe Israel off the map,"

Ahmedenijad may have desired to wipe Israel off the map; but Israel is aggressively busy wiping off the map any sign of Palestine. Actions speak louder than the words.

[piul05]

Shame, it's was going well until the "wipe off the map" remark...

Anyway, there won't be a two-state solution; in their drive to reify some biblical cartography, the Israelis rendered the creation of a Palestinian state inviable.

So, apart from deluded idea of a few, who would like the Palestinians to be absorbed by Jordan, they pretty much know that this humpty-dumpty cannot be put together again. And, together with the border issue, the higher birth rate among the Arabs, the lower rate of Jewish immigration (due to greater integration in their countries of origin, to the reluctance to bring up their children in a country in permanent conflict, to a growing disenchantment with what Israel came to symbolise) and the higher rate of Jewish emigration (as many hold dual nationality) is creating a one-state fact on the ground.

The real challenge will be to overcome their mutual suspicion and start planning their future together.

[Michael Shtender-Auerbach - Huffpost Blogger]

See my comment above.

[WarSkeptic]

Yeah the maps and border issues are often quite interesting

I found it very funny how when Jimmy Carter included the map of the proposed partition during the Clinton administration which showed how the Palestinian lands would be separated from each other in his book. All the Israel supporters cried fowl. Saying that the map was fake (it wasn't) but refusing to provide a map of their own. They actually would come on TV and claim that they hadn't even discussed what the actual boundaries would be, and at the same time would claim that the deal was "everything the Palestinians wanted" It was quite comical

[Gewyne]

Lets be realistic, this process will continue to draw on and the West Bank will dwindle little by little. The only 2 state solution that will ever become a reality is Israel and Palestinian Gaza. Sometimes you just have to drop all the pretense and go with the realities.