December 17, 2012
NYT Corrected E1 Falsehood. Will the Economist?
The Economist was yet another media outlet which falsely reported that E-1 construction between Jerusalem and Maaleh Adumim would bisect the West Bank. The Economist wrongly writes about construction in
the E-1 corridor, a swathe of desert and rock separating Jerusalem from Maale Adumim, a large Israeli settlement to the east, which would bisect the West Bank’s northern and southern halves (see map).
Funny thing, then, that the writer advises us to see the map. The map shows, in fact, that even if construction were to fill the entire E-1 area (and plans call for construction on only 1/3 of the land), an additional 15 kilometers of contiguous West Bank land exists east of Maaleh Adumim, and would be totally unaffected by the construction. Here's a screen capture of the Economist error, including the map, which refutes the writer's baseless claim:
As CAMERA explained:
On the above map, an arrow points to a blue mark indicating the rough location of the proposed E1 corridor between Jerusalem and Maaleh Adumim. This corridor sits within the proposed route of the security barrier encircling Ma'aleh Adumim and Jerusalem, indicated with a pink and purple line. The purple line shows the section of the security barrier that is already built and the pink line shows the section not yet built and subject to revision. The construction of homes would take place in a small subsection of E1.
The green line indicates a route between northern and southern West Bank cities that lies outside E1 and the territory that might be encompassed by the proposed security barrier. Those who charge that Israeli building west of Ma'aleh Adumim severs north-south contiguity disregard the fact that the northern and southern parts of the West Bank are connected by land east of Ma'aleh Adumim (marked on the map) that is at its narrowest point also about 15 km wide.
The New York Times has already responded to CAMERA's calls to issue a correction, commendably clarifying that E-1 construction "would not divide the West Bank in two." Will the Economist likewise set the record straight?
Posted by TS at December 17, 2012 04:40 AM
What is the large green blob (meaning "Israeli Settlement") that appears between Jericho and the northern end of the Dead Sea on The Economist's map? This doesn't appear on the Israeli map you posted, but if it's really there then I could appreciate that the Palestinian neck is very thin at that point.
Posted by: Joe in Australia at December 17, 2012 06:26 AM
I'm not sure what the large green blobs on the Economist map refers to. It appears to be a random large blob encompassing individual settlements. And, of course there are scattered settlememts in the Jordan valley. Their status, however, is completely independent of the E1 corridor and is to be negotiated with the Palestinians. It is only the final negotiations that will determine the status of other settlements in the West Bank. Therefore it is disingenuous to talk about E1 bisecting the West Bank. It is a conflation of many other factors. A) If it is decided that every single settlement remain under Israel's jurisdiction and B) it is decided that Israel will close every single road to Palestinians in the entire area surrounding all the settlements to Palestinian traffic, and C)it is agreed that no other road will ever be built for Palestinians, then yes, the Palestinians would have a non-contiguous state, but that would be entirely independent of anything going on in the E1 corridor.
Posted by: rh at December 17, 2012 02:59 PM
I just read in the French newspaper "Le Monde" in today's paper,they still wrote the same canard that E1 is going to cut the West Bank in two.. I can't respond because I am not a subscriber and they won't take my response.I just wish that someone could answer their lie!
Posted by: Henry Federman at December 17, 2012 06:32 PM
Guidelines for posting
This is a moderated blog. We will not post comments that include racism, bigotry, threats, or factually inaccurate material.