Introduction
‘Settlements have to be stopped in order for us to move forward. That’s a difficult issue and I recognize that. But it’s important and it has to be addressed- Barack Obama’ (Haklai & Loizides, 2015);
Opening the book, Settlers in contested Lands: Territorial Disputes and Ethnic Conflicts, with the lines above, the problem of settlement in contested territories is an issue that authors and editors, Oded Haklai and Neophytos Loizides understand well. The editors of this compilation are both renowned scholars and researchers in the field of political science. Dr. Oded Haklai, is an Associate Professor at Queen’s university in the department of Political Science. He has many research projects on the politics of settlers and territorial disputes, state-minority relations, and Israeli politics. (Queen's University, 2018). Dr. Neophytos Loizides is an expert on International Conflict Analysis and is a professor at the University of Kent. Dr. Loizides has offered expert advice to a number of organizations, including the Greek and Turkish Cypriot Negotiating team. (University of Kent, 2018). The book is a compilation of discussions on territorial disputes, with each having its own independent contributor. The contributors are all expert researchers on the chapters assigned to them and come from diverse academic institutions across the globe. (Haklai & Loizides, 2015)
The book aims to understand the problem of settlers and their importance for the resolving of territorial disputes. The study highlights how carefully organized or even sporadic settlements of new ethnic groups in a disputed territory can have far reaching consequences not just on the states or people disputing the territory, but the settlers themselves. It is one of the first compilations, that attempts to view the problems of settlement through the prism of the ‘settlers’. It is a comparative study of the various disputes and the diverse effects the roles of settlers have on these disputes. Most importantly, through this compilation, the authors wish to understand, analyze and compare the trifecta of relations that exist between the ‘sending- nation’ (the state carrying out the demographic change) and ‘settlers’ (those people sent to carry out the demographic change), ‘natives’ (the existing inhabitants of the place) and ‘settlers’ and ‘sending- nation’ and ‘natives’. The focus, therefore, is that by gaining a greater understanding of every facet of the problem, the means to a solution may be offered to existing territorial conflicts.
Each of the conflicts discussed in the book have been studied in- depth by various scholars and researchers. However, few other books or scholarly articles that discuss the ‘problems of the settler’ in a comparative manner such as this can be found. A few books that deal with disputed lands and territorial conflicts such as Sumantra Bose’s, Contested Lands: Israel-Palestine, Kashmir, Bosnia, Cyprus, and Sri Lanka, though covers more or less the same disputes, steers clear of the important role that settlers play in the conflict. (Bose, 2010). Most of the authors of various chapters in the book have built upon their own previous published work and research. Notable among these is Ian Lustick’s work on territorial dispute in Britain, France and West Asia, which talks about three types of settlers, the ideologically driven, politically and economically connected and the underprivileged populations (Lustick, 1993) and Zunes and Mundy’s, Western Sahara: War, Nationalism, and Conflict Irresolution. (Zunes & Mundy, 2010).
Summary
All the chapters in the book explore the idea of demography, sovereignty and territory and how these three terms are inter-connected with each other. ‘Settlements’ are seen as deliberate attempts to alter the ethnic or demographic make- up of the disputed territory to be able to back their claims of territorial sovereignty. This is constantly referred to in the book as ‘changing facts on ground’. The authors early on in the book, make the clear distinction that ‘settlers’ are not ‘immigrants’. ‘Conventional immigrants typically acknowledge and accept the existing sovereignty pattern in the place to which they are moving; their movement is not a facet in contestation over the land of destination. Settlement projects, in contrast, are political by definition (even when the settlers themselves are not politicized) and frequently rely on presenting another population’s homeland as “empty land” (Haklai & Loizides, 2015). Thus, the book has three key players, the central state (the state that sends the settlers), the settlers (people sent by the state to occupy another’s land) and the natives (the people whose land is being occupied). The various chapters in the book can be summarized under three broad categories, based on the trifecta of relationships between the three key players.
The first three cases in the book, that of Israel – Palestine, Italy- Libya and South Tyrol and Morocco and Western Sahara concentrate on the relationship between the ‘central state and settlers’. In all three cases, the dynamics of the relationship between the settlers and the state played an important role in the progression of the conflict. In the case of the Jewish settlers, they have become a highly politicized group, that most often, do not comply with the government at the center. Thus, the author argues that the indecisiveness of the government made the settlers more powerful, presenting the rare instance where settlements took place without the complete support of government. In the case of Italy and Libya, the author argues that settlers often seen themselves as doing a favour for their government and therefore demanded various rights and concessions. Even though the terms and conditions imposed on settlers by the Italian government were strict, the settlers tried to break these terms and conditions for individual gains. In Western Sahara, the Moroccan government sent the ethnically Sahrawi people of Southern Morocco into the Western Sahara, where Sahrawi people were natives. They hoped that these Moroccan Sahrawi’s would be devoted Moroccans and when allowed to vote in a referendum for or against the unification of Western Sahara into Morocco, would vote in favour of Morocco. The authors of this chapter however, argue that the Moroccan government is now fearful of holding a referendum as they believe that their plan to infiltrate the native population may backfire, with a majority of the Sahrawis (both ethnic and native) voting for the creation of a separate Sahrawi state.
The second categorization of the book focuses on the relationship between the settler and native populations and the consequences of that relationship. It analyses the impact that forced settlement had on the natives. The chapters on Indonesia- East Timor and Iraq- Kirkuk conflicts are part of this categorization. In the Iraq- Kirkuk conflict, the Kurds had in earlier times not seen Kirkuk as central to their land, but rather as a multi- ethnic city. However, the forced ‘Arabization’ of Kirkuk and intentional change in demography to favour the Arabs, was perceived as a threat to the ‘social identity’ of the Kurds. Kirkuk became a central region for Kurds and they wanted to take it back from the Arabs (Iraqis) which resulted in a civil war (Sambanis & Shayo, 2013).In the case of Indonesia and East Timor, the Indonesian government had hoped that economic and social development of East Timor economy would lead to the people of East Timor wanting to be a part of Indonesia. The people of East Timor became agitated with the Indonesian settlers as they held high positions in the administration and industries, whereas the natives held lowly positions. The natives began to see the settlers as taking away resources that rightly belonged to them. This grievance led to the natives voting for a separate state in the referendum, in spite of heavy propaganda from the Indonesian state. These cases are examples where the soured relationship between the settlers and the natives led to having the opposite effect of what the government desired.
The third relationship in this trifecta is the ‘natives – central state’ relationship. This has been explored in the chapters that cover Turkey – Greek Cyprus and Sri Lanka – Tamil conflict. In both the cases the settlers were mere state instruments that delivered eventually the goal of the sending state and therefore have not been discussed. In the case of Sri Lanka, the forced settlement of ethnic Sinhalese in Sri Lankan Tamil and Moor territories led to a prolonged civil war between the Sri Lankan state and a military front of the Sri Lankan Tamils, in which, the Sri Lankan state emerged victorious. In the case of Greek Cyprus and Turkey, the settlers were able to become a sizeable majority to the effect that Greek Cyprus could not be a part of Greece. Thus, here again the state was able to achieve its goal to some extent.
All the authors put forth the argument that recognizing the ‘settlers’ are self- interested actors makes the conflict more protracted, complex and difficult to solve.
Critique
The book seeks to fill the existing gap in literature in works dealing with the effect of settlers on the conflict and a comparative study of this between various conflicts. However, the book does not delve deeply into the historical aspects of the conflict. Readers would have to have prior knowledge of the conflict in order to understand the various points the book makes. This is particularly true for Oded Haklai’s chapter on Israel- Palestinian settlers. The book also makes only partial reference to international organizations and their frameworks to deal with settler issues in conflicted territories. The reference to the absence of a strong framework to deal with such issues has only been made in chapter one. (Haklai & Loizides, 2015).
As a work based largely on the importance of demography and geography, many chapters lack statistical data, graphs and maps that would make the case much more compelling and easy to understand. Only chapters on Indonesia- East Timor, Iran- Kirkuk, Sri Lanka, Turkey and Cyprus, use good amount data represented by graphs or tables and have maps of the present day and historical maps included in their chapters. The chapter on Moroccan settlements in Western Sahara acknowledges the lack of sufficient data and the perils of gathering on ground data. However, all the chapters of the book follow an easy to follow, uniformed structure. The end notes are very useful to gain further insight into the methods used by the authors and for any clarifications.
All chapters draw parallels or comparisons from each other and use the work of the other as reference. This is good for the compilation as it looks like a holistic work on the subject and not as a patchwork of the views and research of various authors. Some statements however have in my opinion not been provided with an empirical justification, for e.g. the statement by the author that the Moroccan government is preventing a referendum because they are sure that the ethnic Sahrawis, who are Moroccan nationals will not vote in their favour, has no empirical basis. It becomes further contrary as the author himself contended there are possibly three other justifications why the Moroccan government is reluctant to hold a referendum and that his assumption does not have enough data backing it. (Mundy & Zunes, 2015) The book fails to cover the economic angle in the settler disputes as well as the role of corporations, external non-state actors as well as other states. The book however does cover most of its aims and is fine piece of academic writing.
Conclusion
The book is seamlessly compiled considering the regional and periodic variations that exist among the different chapters. It is an interesting read with a fresh perspective and comparative analysis. It is however more suitable for advanced readers or for academic purposes as it requires prior knowledge of the conflict and contains heavy academic jargon. The book is relevant for current academic debates surrounding the issues of contested territories and settlers and can help those involved in conflict resolution come up with suitable solutions, preferably ones that include the rights of the settlers as well. The book succeeds in portraying how the ‘settlers’ are active actors in the dispute and not mere passive tools of governments. Each chapter is well researched and makes ‘settlers’ and the issue of settlement, the pivot of the chapter. The book has thus opened up a whole new avenue for research concentrating on settlers in the field of international development and conflict resolution.