Tag Archives: Jerusalem

The Case for a United Jerusalem

Dividing the holy city as part of a final-status agreement between Israelis and Palestinians ignores key realities on the ground. by Nathan Diament – Nathan Diament is the executive director for public policy at the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America.

Proponents of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict often insist that the only way to resolve competing claims over the holy city of Jerusalem is to divide it, with each half respectively serving as the capital of Israel and a future Palestinian state. Those who advocate this approach often try to make it more palatable by asserting, as Terrestrial Jerusalem founder Daniel Seidemann recently wrote in The Atlantic, that while many Israelis speak of Jerusalem being a “united” city since its eastern half came under Israeli sovereignty in 1967, such a perception is a “myth” because, in fact, Jerusalem is divided between largely homogeneous and internally contiguous Jewish and Arab neighborhoods across which the two groups rarely venture. Thus, they argue, a border could be drawn relatively easily along demographic lines, re-dividing the city between the two states.

The reality, however, is that Jerusalem today is a demographically intertwined city. To be sure, there are neighborhoods, particularly east of the security barrier, where Jews seldom venture. But modern-day Jerusalem is far more an interwoven checkerboard of Jewish and Palestinian enclaves. The Arab neighborhood of Beit Safafa, for example, lies between the Jewish neighborhoods of Talpiot and Gilo, while the Arab neighborhood Sheikh Jarrah lies between the Old City and the Jewish neighborhood of French Hill. Separating these neighborhoods between two countries would create an unwieldy and unsustainable border. While creative solutions have been proposed to ensure that a re-divided Jerusalem would remain interconnected, as any urban center must to thrive, experience shows that divided cities, such as Berlin and Baghdad, are fragile at best and combustible at worst.
One significant reason against dividing Jerusalem is that many of the Palestinians who live in East Jerusalem wish to remain under Israeli sovereignty. Recent polling indicates that, despite the fact that municipal resources and services have not been evenly allocated between Jewish and Arab Jerusalem segments of the city, a plurality of Palestinians residing in eastern sections of Jerusalem would move from Palestinian Jerusalem to Israeli Jerusalem, if given the opportunity, should the city be re-divided. According to one of the pollsters:
For most Palestinians who said they wanted to be citizens of Israel, approximately 35 percent said it was practical issues that dominate — freedom of movement, higher income, health insurance, job opportunities, prosperity, more shops…
People were concerned that if they became a citizen of Palestine, they had significant worries about losing employment in Israel, free movement in Israel, Israeli health care, and reduction in city services. …
Three-quarters of east Jerusalem Arabs are at least a little concerned, and more than half are more than a little concerned, that they would lose their ability to write and speak freely if they became citizens of a Palestinian state rather than remaining under Israeli control.
But more contentious than the fate of Jerusalem’s residential neighborhoods is the debate over the fate of the Old City – home to Judaism’s holiest sites and among Islam’s holiest sites. On a practical level, dividing the Old City along demographic lines would put Jewish holy sites on the Palestinian side and Muslim holy sites on the Israeli side. Israelis are understandably cautious about putting these sites solely under Arab control; when Arabs last controlled the Old City, from 1948 to 1967, Jews were barred from access.
To address this concern, numerous groups have proposed “special arrangements,” such as international or joint Israeli-Palestinian administration over the Old City, to ensure protection of and access to these sites. But these proposals rely on international community support and enforcement to guarantee security and access, which Israel has legitimate grounds to doubt given the lackluster performance of the United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF) in the Sinai (who evacuated their posts in the lead-up to the June 1967 War) and the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) along Israel’s northern border (who have failed in their mandate to prevent the re-arming of Hezbollah).  Furthermore, the international community has consistently shown little regard for the Jewish attachment to holy sites, most recently seen in UNESCO’s 2010 declaration that the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron is “an integral part of the Palestinian territories.”
An additional problem with “special arrangement” proposals is that they tend to require more intimate and extensive cooperation between Israelis and Palestinians rather than granting the “divorce” from one another that both sides seem to be seeking through a peace deal. And this cooperation must succeed in the most sensitive of all locations.
Unlike these untested proposals, Israel has proven over the past four decades that its authority over all of Jerusalem can ensure protection of and access to holy sites. Since Jerusalem was reunited in 1967, pilgrims of all faiths have generally been allowed to visit the holy places of all religions. Muslim mosques, even those built atop the mount where Judaism’s Holy Temple once stood, operate relatively freely – and under Islamic religious oversight. While some might contest that Israel does periodically place security restrictions upon entrance to holy sites, free access is the default policy under Israeli rule.
But resolving the status of the Old City of Jerusalem is not just about geography nor about the practicalities of access to a single site; it is deeply intertwined with questions of national identity, history, and theology. Proposals for joint sovereignty, deferred sovereignty, or even divine sovereignty ignore the deep-rooted significance of the holy city. The search for a “split the difference” compromise also ignores the fact that the Old City of Jerusalem has been the national capital of the Jewish people for the past 3000 years and is Judaism’s holiest site, while it is Mecca that plays that role for Muslims. The international community would never expect the Islamic world to cede sovereignty over Mecca; the Jewish people ought to be accorded no less respect with regard to the Old City of Jerusalem.
One reason peace in the Middle East has not yet been possible is because most efforts to achieve it have been aspirational but untethered from reality. It is clear that re-dividing Jerusalem is neither feasible nor prudent. The international community must take off the table the option of dividing Jerusalem, in the same way that they have ended the debate over a “right of return” to Israel for Palestinian refugees. A sustainable peace can only be achieved with the entirety of Jerusalem under Israeli sovereignty.
Editor’s Note: This article was corrected to refer to the United Nations Emergency Force, not the Multinational Force and Observer.

First Stop on the Hamas 2011 Tour

UPDATE 1

He is supposed to visit Egypt, Sudan, Turkey, Qatar, Tunisia and Bahrain.
 According to the virulently anti-Hamas but usually reliable Palestine Press Agency website, Haniyeh is running into problems.
 Apparently, the Damascus-based Hamas leader Khaled Meshal is not happy that, after he has been talking about unity with Fatah, Haniyeh is acting like the Palestinian prime minister.
 Apparently because of pressure from Meshal, Haniyeh is meeting much lower level officials than he had hoped to. Both Qatar and Turkey asked him to postpone the trip and are not planning to receive him in any official capacity. Similarly, he has not met with political leaders in Khartoum or in Cairo. And Tunisia has informed him that he can meet with Islamic party officials but not with government officials.

Original post

Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh left Gaza Sunday on a tour of several Muslim countries, his first since his militant Islamist movement seized control of the coastal enclave in June 2007. Haniyeh will visit Egypt, Sudan, Tunisia, Bahrain and Turkey, his aide Yousef Rizqah said in a statement. The aim is to garner support for the Palestinians and for Gaza Strip. And don’t forget bash Israel.

His first stop in Egypt, he was greeted with street banners and crowds of adoring Muslim Brotherhood fans. Speaking to journalists in Cairo after two days of meetings with Egyptian officials, Haniyeh slammed Israel for the “demolition of houses, villages and ethnic cleansing” in Jerusalem, pan-Arab news outlet Elaph reported. He called on Arab states to step up efforts to stop the “Judaization” of Jerusalem, a city many Palestinians see as the future capital of a Palestinian state, through financial and political means, according to Elaph. Haniyeh also mentioned the “muezzin bill,” a law that would ban the use of a PA system for the Muslim call to prayer. The Hamas prime minister said this law, as well as the issue in Jerusalem, were proof of Israel’s campaign against “Muslim symbols.”

As part of the recent celebration of its 24th anniversary, Hamas held a mass rally in Gaza in which the terror group expressed an intransigent commitment to the jihad against Israel. In his speech at the rally, Hamas’ Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh called for the establishment of “the al-Quds Army for the liberation of Palestine.”

There have been scattered reports on bits and pieces of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh’s speech at Hamas’ 24th anniversary rally on December 14th, but Palestinian Media Watch put it all together. It is a must-read for every Western politician and Middle East pundit – who will of course ignore and/or excuse what he says as just rhetoric.

“We say today, explicitly, so it cannot be explained otherwise, that the armed resistance and the armed struggle are the path and the strategic choice for liberating the Palestinian land, from the [Mediterranean] sea to the [Jordan] river, and for the expulsion of the invaders and usurpers [Israel] from the blessed land of Palestine. The Hamas movement will lead Intifada after Intifada until we liberate Palestine – all of Palestine, Allah willing. Allah Akbar and praise Allah. We say with transparency and in a clear manner, that Palestinian reconciliation – and all sides must know this – cannot come at the expense of [our] principles, at the expense of the resistance. These principles are absolute and cannot be disputed: Palestine – all of Palestine – is from the sea to the river. We won’t relinquish one inch of the land of Palestine. The involvement of Hamas at any stage with the interim objective of liberation of [only[ Gaza, the West Bank, or Jerusalem, does not replace its strategic view concerning Palestine and the land of Palestine.”

In an announcement published on Hamas’ official website on Monday, Hamas’ refugees department suggested that the Arab refugees would be the pioneers of the future al-Quds Army. All Arab states, and particularly those which host the refugees, were called upon to take the initiative to start building the “Arab Liberation Army.” The first steps in this direction, according to Hamas, should include recruiting volunteers to the future al-Quds Brigades in each Arab country and establishing a supreme military command which will be assigned to draw the liberation plan of Palestine militarily and politically. Hamas’ refugees department also stressed that the Palestinian people will spearhead the confrontation with Israel, saying that “We are confident that the battle to liberate al-Quds (Jerusalem) is closer than ever and that we are nearing a victory with the support of Allah.”

At what point does the resident at 1600, along with the EU decide that pushing the Israeli’s to stop building apartments and give more concessions to these terrorists is not what needs to be done? With Egypt’s rapid fall to the Islamists and the peace treaty in jeopardy, maybe its time to transfer the Gazans across the canal and annex it all, securing the south and pushing the rest across the river into Jordan.  There is no peace process with genocidal madmen aspiring die through martyrdom, it’s time the world accepts reality, and Israel lays claim to what is rightfully hers to begin with.

Stay tuned…