4. The report fails to mention that Har Homa is located within the municipal boundaries of Jerusalem, that 78 percent of the land was expropriated from Jewish owners, and that compensation of approximately $6.7 million was offered and paid to landowners in exchange for their land. If Palestinian landowners have not been compensated it is because they have refused to avail themselves of this option.

5. The contention that the building of the Har Homa neighborhood "prejudices final status negotiations" is unfounded. Nothing in the agreements which Israel has signed with the Palestinians prohibits the building of housing by either side within the areas under their respective control.

6. The contention that the Har Homa project will isolate Jerusalem from the West Bank is baseless. If anything, access to Jerusalem will be improved as significant additions to the transportation infrastructure are part and parcel of the plans.

7. While claiming that Har Homa "appears to represent in the view of the Palestinian people the largest single negative factor in the breakdown of the peace process" some attention should have been given to the continuing Palestinian violations of the agreements, as mentioned previously, as well as to the basic fact that the difficulties presently encountered in the peace process are the direct result of the Palestinians' refusal to return to the negotiations.

8. The resort to the United Nations represents a Palestinian attempt to circumvent direct negotiations and bring outside pressure to bear upon Israel.

9. Regarding Arab housing in Jerusalem - The report makes only cursory reference to the Government of Israel's commitment to build 3,500 housing units for Palestinians in Jerusalem as well as an additional 2,500 units to be built for Arabs as part of the Har Homa project.

10. The best picture regarding the state of Arab housing in Jerusalem is provided by the municipal tax records which indicate that in 1967 there were 12,200 apartments in the Arab sector while in 1995 the number had reached 27,066 - an increase of 122 percent. The growth in the Jewish sector during this time period was 113 per cent.

11. Regarding settlement activity - No new settlements have been established by the current Israeli government in the West Bank or the Gaza Strip. Israel does not expropriate private land for the purpose of establishing settlements. Settlements have been established on public land after confirmation that no private rights have been infringed.

12. Regarding Palestinian residents of Jerusalem - Israel has not revoked the residency of any Palestinian who is a legal resident of Jerusalem. These Palestinians, as any other individual who has lived in Israel continuously, can continue to do so without the loss of any benefit to which they are entitled. These provisions apply to all permanent residents of Israel and not only to "non-Jews".

13. The Fourth Geneva Convention - The report charges that Israel has not "accepted the de jure applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949" to the territories. Israel's position is that the Convention is only applicable to territory of a High Contracting Party. Neither the West Bank nor Gaza were previously under the control of a legitimate sovereign hence the nonapplicability of the Convention. Nevertheless, Israel has undertaken to act de facto in accordance with the humanitarian provisions of the Convention.

The report leaves the impression that the application of the Fourth Geneva Convention is the norm in cases of occupation. In fact, despite the many examples of actual occupation by signatories of the Convention, the application of the Convention's provisions by Israel is the first and only time they have been applied in the history of the Convention.

14. Restrictions on movement - It should be remembered that such restrictions were put in force following a spate of suicide bombings which claimed the lives of over sixty people, Israelis and others, including Palestinians. Moreover these bombings occurred as previous restrictions on the movement of Palestinians into Israel were being relaxed and one was the specific result of the exploitation of a transfer point for goods from Gaza to Israel.

At the present time there is in fact no closure per se. Almost 130,000 Palestinians work in Israel, the largest number of Palestinian workers to do so in 24 months. This number continues to increase, and the flow of goods to and from the Palestinian areas is unimpeded. Security checks have become more efficient, enabling trucks carrying commercial cargo to move on the roads without any undue delay or hindrance.

15. Safe passage, Gaza seaport, and Dahaniya airport - The Report's reference to the fact that safe passage arrangements have not been established and sea port and airport arrangements have not been agreed is disingenuous, to say the least. In order to be implemented these three subjects require a series of issues to be resolved between the two sides. The refusal of the Palestinian side to conduct negotiations with Israel on these issues is the only obstacle to their implementation.

16. Further redeployment - The extent of the first two stages of further redeployment, and the question as to which areas will be redeployed from is not set out in the Interim Agreement but rather left, in the Agreement, to be determined exclusively by Israel.

17. Security measures - The Report sees fit to raise charges of administrative detention, mistreatment, curfews and house demolition against Israel but not to mention the inseparable fact that terrorist attacks since the start of the peace process have killed 241 Israelis, 143 of them civilians. In the same period terrorists have injured 1,343 Israelis, 669 of them civilians. Nor did the Report see fit to even consider the agonizing dilemma facing the State of Israel in balancing its duty to protect the lives of its inhabitants from terrorist attacks and its obligation to respect basic human rights, including those of terrorists under investigation.

18. Conclusion - The Report presents uncorroborated reports as fact and parrots partisan political views without question or criticism. The focus of the Report is deliberately blinkered: it focuses on Israel's security measures in response to terrorist attacks without even considering the terrorism and incitement that create the need for such measures. In a deeply troubling display of irresponsibility it blames Israel for "fomenting unrest" in the territories - thus absolving the Palestinian side from any responsibility for inciting and escalating such violence.