What occupation?

From the context of the use of the word "occupation" in some of the new text books being published for teaching in Palestinian classrooms, it is clear that this term refers to the territory of the State of Israel. So there are two kinds of "occupation" as far as the Arabs are concerned, that which constitutes the sovereign State of Israel and that which comprises the so-called "territories" of Gaza and the West Bank, that were captured by Israel in 1967 as a result of a defensive war.
The deliberate ambiguity of the use of this politically charged term "occupation" should be clarified in the minds of those Westerners who blame part or all (!) of the Arab-Israel conflict on Israel's "occupation." What areas are they specifically referring to?
It can't be Gaza, because less than 2 years ago Israel removed all settlements, all settlers and all IDF from the Gaza Strip, and even though the ceasefire has not been kept by the Palestinian side (rockets are still being fired every day into the western Negev), Israel has not returned any IDF troops to Gaza. Some anti-Israel elements talk about IDF forces surrounding Gaza as "occupation" but that is nonsense, since they are defensively located on sovereign Israeli territory, and once again it is an obfuscation of the use of the term "occupation."
In the West Bank, IDF forces operate most of the time, and now there is a sustained IDF Operation in Nablus, which has become after Jenin the center for terrorist activity in the West Bank. Can these forces be called an "occupation force"? In two senses they cannot!
First, the areas where 90% of the West Bank Palestinian population is living, in the cities of Ramallah, Nablus, Jericho, Tulkarm, Jenin and Kalilya, are all part of the PA and are under its authority. The fact that the PA Government not only declares that it will never recognize Israel's right to exist and allows terrorist groups to operate freely from its territory, does not obscure the fact that Israel currently is not occupying their territory. Such operations are temporary and do not constitute permanent "occupation." In the past two days two large explosives factories have been found and destroyed in Nablus, hence the need for such incursions.
Second, Israel has a strong legitimate claim on the West Bank territory based on the legal thread that stretches from the Balfour Declaration of 1917 to the British Mandate of Palestine from 1920-48 (when the ceasefire lines that delineate the "occupation" did not exist) and the UN resolution recognizing the existence of the sovereign State of Israel, but with undefined borders. These borders can only be negotiated by Israel and the Arabs, and could include or exclude parts of the West Bank (Judea and Samaria), depending on the outcome. So at least part of Israel's current "occupation" of the West Bank will turn out to be occupation of its own sovereign territory, and this is likely to include those densely Jewish populated areas of Ma'ale Adumim (near Jerusalem), Kfar Etzion (that was Jewish owned from the 1930s), and Ariel (a city of ca. 30,000 Jews).
So what precisely is Israel "occupying" that constitutes in the minds of many Arabs and their liberal and leftist supporters in the West, a continuing and constant "causus belli" by the Palestinian terrorists. It is certainly the mere existence of the State of Israel itself that is anathema to Pres. Ahmedinejad of Iran and his followers, as well as to terrorist groups such as al Qaeda, Hizbollah, Islamic Jihad and Hamas.
So when next an Arab or Muslim provocateur decries Israel's "occupation" of territory, either ask him to define the territory occupied, or see this slogan for what it is, an excuse to avoid peace.