Divide Jerusalem?
"Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni ...refused to meet demands from ...Orthodox Jewish leaders that she pledge not to discuss ceding parts of Jerusalem in any peace talks with the Palestinians. Giving in to that demand most likely would have led to collapse of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks..."
McClatchy Newspapers, Oct. 27, 2008
The question of whether to divide Jerusalem, ceding the majority Arab neighborhoods in the eastern part of the City to the Palestine Authority (PA) is certain to be a main issue in the coming Israeli elections. Unlike Neville Chamberlain, who sought to appease the Germans by giving away someone else's country (Czechoslovakia), Ehud Olmert and Tzipi Livni have been bent on giving up parts of their own country in the pursuit of peace with the Palestinians. Ironically, Olmert's defeatist policies were not the cause of his fall from power, but rather charges of personal corruption. Maybe this scandal at this particular time was "bashert" (fated) to remove him from power before he could give away any part of the Holy City.
Sinai was given back to Egypt, and the Golan Heights may soon be given back to Syria, but Jerusalem cannot be "given back" to anyone. Of the three powers that governed the City before Israel (the Ottoman Empire, Britain and Jordan), the first no longer exists, and the the latter two have renounced any claim to the land on which it is located.
Although Muhammad never visited Jerusalem, he initially decreed that Muslims pray toward it. (1) The landmark Dome of the Rock and iconic Al-Aqsa Mosque (2) are revered by Muslims all over the world. When Muslims (such as those leading the PA) talk of Jerusalem, they mean the Temple Mount (Haram al-Sharif), not some Arab neighborhood east of the Old City.
The separation barrier between the West Bank and Israel has been remarkably effective in reducing terrorism, even though it is not yet complete. All of Jerusalem is now on the Israeli side of the barrier. But if any part of the City is ceded to the PA, would this barrier be moved to a new line of demarcation between the Israeli and Palestinian sectors of the City?
If so, Jerusalem would essentially revert to its pre-1967 configuration, with a wall between neighborhoods. The difference is that now thousands of Jews live in East Jerusalem; no matter where the boundary would be drawn, many Jews would find themselves living under Arab rule. Homes, businesses, and yeshivas worth millions of dollars would have to be abandoned. Moreover, even a wall would not prevent the launching of rockets from Arab Jerusalem into the Jewish sector, which could become the new Sderot.
Without a wall, Jerusalem would become another Beirut at its most violent. Not only would Arab terrorists have access to all parts of Jerusalem, but they could also use the City as a gateway to the rest of Israel.
If the Palestinians will not talk peace unless Israel is prepared to surrender part of Jerusalem, then the onus should be on them for impeding peace. The pressure on Israel to make concessions is greatest while peace talks are underway, so perhaps the Jewish State is better off with the status quo and no negotiations. I just hope that the next Israeli government is wise enough and strong enough to recognize that reality.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Later in his life, Muhammad directed that Muslims pray toward Mecca.
(2) The mosque is named after a verse in the Quran that refers to the most distant mosque (al masjid al-aqsa), which was understood to refer to a location in Jerusalem.
McClatchy Newspapers, Oct. 27, 2008
The question of whether to divide Jerusalem, ceding the majority Arab neighborhoods in the eastern part of the City to the Palestine Authority (PA) is certain to be a main issue in the coming Israeli elections. Unlike Neville Chamberlain, who sought to appease the Germans by giving away someone else's country (Czechoslovakia), Ehud Olmert and Tzipi Livni have been bent on giving up parts of their own country in the pursuit of peace with the Palestinians. Ironically, Olmert's defeatist policies were not the cause of his fall from power, but rather charges of personal corruption. Maybe this scandal at this particular time was "bashert" (fated) to remove him from power before he could give away any part of the Holy City.
Sinai was given back to Egypt, and the Golan Heights may soon be given back to Syria, but Jerusalem cannot be "given back" to anyone. Of the three powers that governed the City before Israel (the Ottoman Empire, Britain and Jordan), the first no longer exists, and the the latter two have renounced any claim to the land on which it is located.
Although Muhammad never visited Jerusalem, he initially decreed that Muslims pray toward it. (1) The landmark Dome of the Rock and iconic Al-Aqsa Mosque (2) are revered by Muslims all over the world. When Muslims (such as those leading the PA) talk of Jerusalem, they mean the Temple Mount (Haram al-Sharif), not some Arab neighborhood east of the Old City.
The separation barrier between the West Bank and Israel has been remarkably effective in reducing terrorism, even though it is not yet complete. All of Jerusalem is now on the Israeli side of the barrier. But if any part of the City is ceded to the PA, would this barrier be moved to a new line of demarcation between the Israeli and Palestinian sectors of the City?
If so, Jerusalem would essentially revert to its pre-1967 configuration, with a wall between neighborhoods. The difference is that now thousands of Jews live in East Jerusalem; no matter where the boundary would be drawn, many Jews would find themselves living under Arab rule. Homes, businesses, and yeshivas worth millions of dollars would have to be abandoned. Moreover, even a wall would not prevent the launching of rockets from Arab Jerusalem into the Jewish sector, which could become the new Sderot.
Without a wall, Jerusalem would become another Beirut at its most violent. Not only would Arab terrorists have access to all parts of Jerusalem, but they could also use the City as a gateway to the rest of Israel.
If the Palestinians will not talk peace unless Israel is prepared to surrender part of Jerusalem, then the onus should be on them for impeding peace. The pressure on Israel to make concessions is greatest while peace talks are underway, so perhaps the Jewish State is better off with the status quo and no negotiations. I just hope that the next Israeli government is wise enough and strong enough to recognize that reality.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Later in his life, Muhammad directed that Muslims pray toward Mecca.
(2) The mosque is named after a verse in the Quran that refers to the most distant mosque (al masjid al-aqsa), which was understood to refer to a location in Jerusalem.
posted by Gerald S Glazer at 8:47 AM
2 Comments:
Very good but there is one clarification needed, that is the reason why Jews were not living in East Jerusalem at the beginning of 1967.
Between 1948 and 1967 the Arabs destroyed about 60 synagogues in Jerusalem and some were in East Jerusalam. Below is an excerpt from an article by Jeff Jacoby in 2001.
East Jeruslasm is primarily Arab today ONLY because the Arabs expelled the Jews from East Jerusalem after 1948 and because they destroyed the synagogues and other remnants of Jewish life there.
In addition, Jerusalem was always prmarily a Jewish city. At the turn of the 20th century the Turks took a census of Jerusalem and Jews outnumbered Arab Muslims 7:1, and outnumbered all Arabs 2:1 ("From Time Immemorial" by Joan Peters).
Ivan
Jeff Jacoby (January 9, 2001)
"When Jerusalem was Divided"
By May 15, the day Israel was born, Jerusalem was a battleground. Within days, the Jordanian Arab Legion, spurred by King Abdullah to capture Jerusalem, was bombarding the Old City's Jewish quarter.
Badly outnumbered, poorly armed, the Jews of East Jerusalem didn't have a prayer. When the United Nations called for a cease-fire, writes the renowned historian Sir Martin Gilbert, Jordan, "poised to overrun the Jewish Quarter," ignored it. "That day an Arab-language broadcast from Ramallah described in lurid detail the first stage of the long-drawn out destruction of the Hurva Synagogue."
The Hurva, first built in 1705, had been one of Jerusalem's great landmarks. Its destruction was a grim taste of what lay in store for the Jewish holy sites of the Old City.
By May 28, the conquest of Jewish East Jerusalem was complete. The remaining Jews -- some from families that had lived there for centuries -- were expelled. "As they left," Martin writes, "they could see columns of smoke rising from the quarter behind them. The Hadassah welfare station had been set on fire and despite [a] curfew, the looting and burning of Jewish property was in full swing."
For the next 19 years, Jerusalem was divided. West Jerusalem became Israel's capital. East Jerusalem, its Jewish Quarter now judenrein, was annexed by Jordan, which proceeded to erase the evidence that Jews had ever been there. In an orgy of desecration, 58 synagogues -- the oldest dated to the 13th century -- were ravaged. Those that weren't razed were ransacked, turned into stables and chicken coops, used as garbage dumps. The city's foremost Jewish shrine, the Western Wall, became a slum.
Do you really believe that Obama would be less apt to support a divided Jerusalem than McCain would be?
Sorry, Gerry - this post is a direct contradiction to your presidential endorsement. Do you not see that??
Me thinks you oughta' stick to your day job, or at least give this blogging a break until your powers of logic and reason return.
Post a Comment
<< Home