On the one hand, the forcible transfer policies carried out in 1948 Palestine are practiced within the ‘statehood’ of Israel and the ‘sovereignty’ it has over the territory, central to which is its construction and subsequent manipulation of domestic legislation and courts. As for the oPt, Israel focuses on operating within the veil of legality that it has gained as a result of the Oslo peace process – a process of Israeli-PA peace deals and negotiations that was initiated in 1993 and brokered by the United States (US). Although it has admittedly failed to create peace, it continues to dictate all political, economic, and social matters in the oPt, control Palestinians’ lives, and normalize the Israeli occupation. 65 It has, as such, transformed the internationally-assumed shortterm nature of occupation into a seemingly immortal occupation that facilitates Israeli colonial expansion, where neither the Oslo-instituted PA in the West Bank 66 nor the de facto Hamas government in Gaza 67 have any real sovereignty. Regardless of Israel’s differing modes of application of its forcible transfer policies throughout Palestine, the goal remains identical, which is to create a coercive environment that makes life for Palestinians in Mandatory Palestine unbearable and ultimately leads to their forced transfer. 68 Israel’s forcible transfer policies do not only violate a host of basic human rights, but the force derived from the impending coercive environment is recognized as force by international law, and when displacement or transfer does occur, it constitutes either a crime against humanity or a war crime. To this end, BADIL has identified nine main interrelated Israeli policies which constitute the pillars of a strategy aimed at incrementally displacing the remaining Palestinian population in Mandatory Palestine and sustaining their displacement and exile, with the ultimate aim of changing the demographic composition of Mandatory Palestine. 65 See BADIL, Palestinian Youth Perspectives on the Oslo Peace Process: Successes, Failures and Alternatives (Working Paper No. 27, BADIL 2021) [hereinafter, BADIL, Palestinian Youth Perspectives] <https://www.badil.org/cached_uploads/ view/2021/09/15/wp27-pal-youth-vs-oslo-eng-1631700884.pdf> accessed 3 October 2022. 66 The PA was created by the Oslo Accords in 1994 as a five-year interim body whose function was limited self-governance over parts of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. In these Accords, the West Bank was divided into three areas where Area A (18 percent) is under Palestinian self-rule, Area B (22 percent) is under Israeli security control and Palestinian civil control, and Area C (60 percent) is under full Israeli control. This division was temporary, and its professed purpose was enabling an incremental transfer of authority to the PA, intended to unfold as so-called final-status issues were negotiated. As the process reached a deadlock and further negotiations faltered, incremental transfer of the territory to the PA never materialized. Rather, Israel now has control not only over Area C (which allows it to carry out its colony expansion), but also over Areas A and B, with limited civilian responsibilities exercised by the PA. 67 Hamas has been effectively in power in the Gaza Strip since the PA’s government collapse in June 2007 whereby Israel has responded by imposing a full military blockade over the territory. 68 BADIL and Kairos Palestine, Palestinian Christians - Ongoing Forcible Displacement and Dispossession… until When?, (BADIL and Kairos Palestine 2012) <https://www.badil.org/cached_uploads/view/2021/04/20/wp-kairosbadil-1-1618907352.pdf> accessed 3 October 2022. 13 1 Chapter application of these policies in 1948 Palestine, which is under full Israeli colonization and subjugation, are to some degree enforced differently from the ones utilized in the West Bank, including east Jerusalem, and Gaza Strip, with the former under military occupation and the latter under a full military blockade.