In land disputes with Israel, Arabs often claim "historic rights” often repeating the mantra that their grandfathers had lived on a given tract of land "for centuries"
Since the claim made by the advocates of Arab Susya focus attention only on that "historic claim", it might be appropriate to ascertain what the Ottoman and British records would attest to that claim.
A check with the researcher and Jerusalem Post journalist Dr. Seth J. Frantzman, co-author of “Bedouin Settlement in Late Ottoman and British Mandatory Palestine: Influence on the Cultural and Environmental Landscape, 1870-1948 was made in order to ascertain what the Ottoman and British records show about Susya.
across any village, hamlet or settlement at Susya.
For example, the village Rahiya, near Yatta, was founded in the late 19th century or early 20th century.
Yet there is no evidence, however, from records examined he Ottoman Empire period or British mandate period, of any village or settlement ever existing at Susya.
There are five documents attached:
As can be seen from the Palestine Exploration Fund, which carried out a thorough and widely respect survey of the country from 1871-77 did not show any village or settlement in the area of Susya.
Instead they noted only the ruins of ancient Susya.
Their map and memoirs both indicate only a ruin.
Had there been a village it would have been indicated the say Samu was on the map.
Later maps from Mandate, from 1942 and 1948, show no village in the area of Susya, but once again show villages at Samu and Yatta.
An aerial photo from 1945 does not even show a village or even tents at the site.
In short, the conclusion of Dr. Frantzman’s study is that there was no settlement at Susya, no village and no houses from the 19th century through 1948.
While Susya's advocates write in various publications claim to have lived in a "village" at the site since the 1830s, there is no record of any such "village".
Dr. Frantzman noted that “It is surprising that so little was constructed from the period 1830-1948”.
Photos from today show construction that is likely much more modern.
Dr. Frantzman observed "The allegation that the villagers were prevented from building or "built illegally" in Area C, begs the question, didn't they build anything before Area C was created in the 1990s? Where are the old houses from 1830,from 1920, 1940, 1960, and 1970? Was not the settlement in fact a
seasonal settlement of tents and non-permanent dwellings?"
These are the questions that should be raised.
More evidence in the way of photos from the 1960s and after would surely shed light on this.
mandatory maps from 1917”
No one could provide any such evidence.
In other words, the issue at hand today revolves around whether the Israel Civil Administration is legally mandated to demolish homes that were built without authorization and without any permit.
Over the past few years, the Israel Civil Administration has destroyed hundreds of Jewish homes because they were built without a permit recognized by the Israel Civil Administration, despite historic claims of Jews to the land where they had made their home.
And who can forget the Oct. 27, 2004 decision of the
government of Israel to revoke permits for settlement in Gush Katif and four Jewish communities in Northern Samaria, which resulted in the demolition of all 21 Jewish communities in Gush Katif and all four
Northern Samarian communities.
In other words, the precedent for Susya’s demolition has been established by the stringent way in which the Israel Civil Administration has applied the letter of the law to Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza.
From: Center For Near East Policy Research Lt <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 4:33 AM
Subject: Fwd: : מחקר אקדמי מוכיח: לא היה סוסיה ערבי
To: Center For Near East Policy Research Lt <CtrForNearEastPolicyResearch@gmail.com>