The Ikrit and Biram case took another step sideways today when the Supreme Court handed down a ruling that fully satisfied neither side. The Arab residents of the two northern Galilee villages left their homes when Israel captured the area during the War of Independence. They have been demanding to return ever since - and today the judges ordered the government to produce within 90 days a plan for alternative lands and monies with which to compensate the Arabs. The judges emphasized that they regard the case as merely another \"property dispute,\" and that it has nothing to do with the Arab demand for lands conquered in 1948 and the \"right of return.\"
The Arabs rejected today\'s Supreme Court ruling, saying that they are attached to the original lands, including the church and the cemetery there. Ikrit and Biram last saw Arabs over 53 years ago, and the petitioners, who protested today\'s ruling with yells and threats, are mostly the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of the original inhabitants.
Back in 1951, Israel\'s Supreme Court ruled in favor of the former Ikrit and Biram inhabitants. The decision was never implemented, however, and in fact the Golda Meir government decided that the Arabs might not return. Later, Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin decided to allot 12,000 dunams (3,000 acres) to 600 families of the two villages. The Arabs rejected the offer, saying that the amount of land offered was not sufficient. Still later, an Ehud Barak-appointed committee found that the Arabs should return, followed this year by another committee headed by Cabinet Secretary Gideon Sa\'ar that concluded the opposite. The Sa\'ar Committee found that allowing the Arabs to re-settle the areas would be liable to harm Israeli security and would give an official stamp of approval to an Arab \"right of return.\" Then came today\'s ruling offering alternate lands and compensation.
The situation of Ikrit and Biram is unique in that the residents were asked in November 1948 to temporarily leave their homes to enable a security zone to be formed along the Lebanese border. The Arab residents contend that the government promised that they would return. However, the lands to which the Arabs wish to return are today owned and worked by the Jewish farmers of five northern communities, including Shomera, some 15 kilometers east of Rosh HaNikra on the Mediterranean coast and less than ten north of Ma\'alot. A representative of Shomera explained to Arutz-7:
\"The residents of Ikrit are not displaced persons. They actively fought against the Israel Defense Forces, and only when they realized that they would lose the battle and suffer heavy casualties, did they surrender unconditionally. I have a copy of the document of surrender written and signed by the village representatives... We have paid a heavy price of blood to live here. Children have been killed by enemy fire. [To give them land in an] attempt to correct an injustice [would be] creating a bigger one.\"
Merom HaGalil Regional Council head Aharon Ma\'atuk said that it was true that the government had made a promise to the Arabs, \"but it seems that we are forgetting one issue, perhaps the most important matter of all: We are, little by little, losing our grip on the Jewish state... [In addition to the national and demographic blow], allowing these people to return to land currently worked by Jewish farmers would be very damaging. The economic situation of our residents is poor... The government [planned] to bring here an Arab population that has already become established in the larger cities, and bringing them here will create a large gap between the Jewish and Arab residents...\" He said that the objections in Merom HaGalil transcend political boundaries, and that both right- and left-wingers are against allowing Arabs to return to the areas they left over 50 years ago.
The Arabs rejected today\'s Supreme Court ruling, saying that they are attached to the original lands, including the church and the cemetery there. Ikrit and Biram last saw Arabs over 53 years ago, and the petitioners, who protested today\'s ruling with yells and threats, are mostly the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of the original inhabitants.
Back in 1951, Israel\'s Supreme Court ruled in favor of the former Ikrit and Biram inhabitants. The decision was never implemented, however, and in fact the Golda Meir government decided that the Arabs might not return. Later, Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin decided to allot 12,000 dunams (3,000 acres) to 600 families of the two villages. The Arabs rejected the offer, saying that the amount of land offered was not sufficient. Still later, an Ehud Barak-appointed committee found that the Arabs should return, followed this year by another committee headed by Cabinet Secretary Gideon Sa\'ar that concluded the opposite. The Sa\'ar Committee found that allowing the Arabs to re-settle the areas would be liable to harm Israeli security and would give an official stamp of approval to an Arab \"right of return.\" Then came today\'s ruling offering alternate lands and compensation.
The situation of Ikrit and Biram is unique in that the residents were asked in November 1948 to temporarily leave their homes to enable a security zone to be formed along the Lebanese border. The Arab residents contend that the government promised that they would return. However, the lands to which the Arabs wish to return are today owned and worked by the Jewish farmers of five northern communities, including Shomera, some 15 kilometers east of Rosh HaNikra on the Mediterranean coast and less than ten north of Ma\'alot. A representative of Shomera explained to Arutz-7:
\"The residents of Ikrit are not displaced persons. They actively fought against the Israel Defense Forces, and only when they realized that they would lose the battle and suffer heavy casualties, did they surrender unconditionally. I have a copy of the document of surrender written and signed by the village representatives... We have paid a heavy price of blood to live here. Children have been killed by enemy fire. [To give them land in an] attempt to correct an injustice [would be] creating a bigger one.\"
Merom HaGalil Regional Council head Aharon Ma\'atuk said that it was true that the government had made a promise to the Arabs, \"but it seems that we are forgetting one issue, perhaps the most important matter of all: We are, little by little, losing our grip on the Jewish state... [In addition to the national and demographic blow], allowing these people to return to land currently worked by Jewish farmers would be very damaging. The economic situation of our residents is poor... The government [planned] to bring here an Arab population that has already become established in the larger cities, and bringing them here will create a large gap between the Jewish and Arab residents...\" He said that the objections in Merom HaGalil transcend political boundaries, and that both right- and left-wingers are against allowing Arabs to return to the areas they left over 50 years ago.