Jerusalem
yosi
NYC Posts: 3,069
In light of the recent discussion regarding the need for a better tone when discussing Israel-Palestine (which I think is great, and very constructive) I'd like to say at the outset that I am posting this article because I think it shines a light on one of the key issues in any future two-state solution, namely Jerusalem. For full disclosure, I personally believe that the Palestinians should be able to make their capital in East Jerusalem, but that Israel should be able to retain the Jewish quarter of the Old City (and possibly more, depending on the wishes of the people living there (I am thinking of the Armenian quarter)). I would be uncomfortable with Israel giving up control of the Temple Mount, given that it is the holiest site in the Jewish religion (it would be akin to Saudi Arabia giving Israel control of Mecca), but I would personally be comfortable with something along the lines of what was being discussed at Camp David (i.e. a formulation whereby God is considered sovereign over the Mount, and the practical necessities of administering the site are shared between Jews and Muslims).
Now, to get to the contentious part...there is a real problem with how the Palestinians approach the issue of Jerusalem, which I think this article highlights. Basically, they not only seem unwilling to ever make a compromise over the Temple Mount, but they deny that Israel (and the Jewish people) have any connection to the site whatsoever, a position that is politically unhelpful as far as the peace process is concerned, irrational with regards to the very clearly established archeological record, and frankly somewhat offensive. This position is going to have to change for there to be a lasting peace.
(A side note...this isn't mentioned in this article, but I think it's somewhat relevant. Israel, while technically sovereign over the Temple Mount, allows the administration of the site (except for the security) to be done by the Waqf (Muslim custodians) with basically no oversight. The Waqf have for years now been digging on the Mount to create a new underground mosque, but are doing so with no regard for the archeological preservation or even cataloguing of what they dig up, simply tossing everything in a garbage heap. Israeli archeologists who have examined the debris in the dump have attested to the archeological significance of what they found there, specifically to remains from the Second Temple period and possibly from before that, but Israel hasn't done anything to stop the excavations for fear of sparking a violent outburst (remember that in the past claims of sinister Israeli intensions towards the Mount have been used to spark mass Palestinian riots). Many people have argued that the Waqf is acting in this way so as to destroy the as much of the archeological record as possible in an effort to undercut Jewish claims to the site. Whether or not that is true, these actions demonstrate the same lack of sensitivity shown in the article below.)
Palestinian official: Western Wall is not Jewish
Palestinian information minister says his 5-page report citing Muslim links to the shrine represents the official position of the PA.
By News Agencies
A senior Palestinian Authority official has issued a report saying the Western Wall in the Old City of Jerusalem has no religious significance to Jews and is in fact, holy Muslim property.
The contention could further inflame tensions over the disputed city and draw heavy rebuke from Israeli and Jewish leaders.
Archaeology has shown that the Western Wall, the holiest place where Jews can pray, is a remnant of the biblical Temple compound, but the five-page Palestinian study states that the site has no link to Judaism.
Al-Mutawakil Taha, deputy Palestinian information minister, said Wednesday that the document is the official position of the Palestinian Authority.
Israeli government spokesman Mark Regev described the report as incitement by denying a historic Jewish connection to Jerusalem.
Israel approved Sunday a five-year plan to the tune of NIS 85 million ($23 million) to renovate near the Western Wall and the adjacent Jewish quarter in the Old City of Jerusalem.
In announcing the plan, Regev said the budget would be for maintenance work only and does not cover areas that house disputed shrines holy to both Jews and Muslims.
The move nevertheless drew condemnation from the Palestinian Authority, which said it was bad for the peace process.
"Any Israeli activities in the occupied part of Jerusalem are illegal," PA spokesman Ghassan Khatib said.
"It's not healthy as far as the peace process is concerned because peace would require the end of the occupation of East Jerusalem," he added.
Now, to get to the contentious part...there is a real problem with how the Palestinians approach the issue of Jerusalem, which I think this article highlights. Basically, they not only seem unwilling to ever make a compromise over the Temple Mount, but they deny that Israel (and the Jewish people) have any connection to the site whatsoever, a position that is politically unhelpful as far as the peace process is concerned, irrational with regards to the very clearly established archeological record, and frankly somewhat offensive. This position is going to have to change for there to be a lasting peace.
(A side note...this isn't mentioned in this article, but I think it's somewhat relevant. Israel, while technically sovereign over the Temple Mount, allows the administration of the site (except for the security) to be done by the Waqf (Muslim custodians) with basically no oversight. The Waqf have for years now been digging on the Mount to create a new underground mosque, but are doing so with no regard for the archeological preservation or even cataloguing of what they dig up, simply tossing everything in a garbage heap. Israeli archeologists who have examined the debris in the dump have attested to the archeological significance of what they found there, specifically to remains from the Second Temple period and possibly from before that, but Israel hasn't done anything to stop the excavations for fear of sparking a violent outburst (remember that in the past claims of sinister Israeli intensions towards the Mount have been used to spark mass Palestinian riots). Many people have argued that the Waqf is acting in this way so as to destroy the as much of the archeological record as possible in an effort to undercut Jewish claims to the site. Whether or not that is true, these actions demonstrate the same lack of sensitivity shown in the article below.)
Palestinian official: Western Wall is not Jewish
Palestinian information minister says his 5-page report citing Muslim links to the shrine represents the official position of the PA.
By News Agencies
A senior Palestinian Authority official has issued a report saying the Western Wall in the Old City of Jerusalem has no religious significance to Jews and is in fact, holy Muslim property.
The contention could further inflame tensions over the disputed city and draw heavy rebuke from Israeli and Jewish leaders.
Archaeology has shown that the Western Wall, the holiest place where Jews can pray, is a remnant of the biblical Temple compound, but the five-page Palestinian study states that the site has no link to Judaism.
Al-Mutawakil Taha, deputy Palestinian information minister, said Wednesday that the document is the official position of the Palestinian Authority.
Israeli government spokesman Mark Regev described the report as incitement by denying a historic Jewish connection to Jerusalem.
Israel approved Sunday a five-year plan to the tune of NIS 85 million ($23 million) to renovate near the Western Wall and the adjacent Jewish quarter in the Old City of Jerusalem.
In announcing the plan, Regev said the budget would be for maintenance work only and does not cover areas that house disputed shrines holy to both Jews and Muslims.
The move nevertheless drew condemnation from the Palestinian Authority, which said it was bad for the peace process.
"Any Israeli activities in the occupied part of Jerusalem are illegal," PA spokesman Ghassan Khatib said.
"It's not healthy as far as the peace process is concerned because peace would require the end of the occupation of East Jerusalem," he added.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Jewish settlers move into house after Israeli police evict Palestinian family
Family of 14 driven out of house in Jabel Mukaber, an Arab neighbourhood targeted by ideologically motivated settler activists
Harriet Sherwood in Jabel Mukaber
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 23 November 2010
Jewish settlers today moved into a house in East Jerusalem after Israeli police evicted a Palestinian family of 14 and removed all their possessions.
The move will dismay US officials who are striving to discourage settler activity in East Jerusalem in an attempt to restart the stalled peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians.
Armed police arrived early this morning in the area of Jabel Mukaber, a new target for ideologically driven settler activists, following a court ruling that ownership of the house was now in Jewish hands. Three removal trucks took away the family's belongings as they watched from a neighbour's house.
Scores of heavily armed police surrounded the area, initially refusing to let non-residents through makeshift checkpoints.
At the property, several muscular Israeli men refused to identify themselves or explain what they were doing. One, who had carried two flak jackets inside, said: "This is a private home. Nothing is happening here. Have a good day." The sound of drilling and hammering could be heard while on ground outside the house men equipped with bolt-cutters measured up heavy-duty steel window-shields.
Fadi Kareem, 21, a member of the evicted family, said: "They came when I was asleep. Police came with loaded weapons aiming them at us, and told us to get out. We knew it was coming but had no warning of today. We knew settlers wanted to take over the place."
Asked how he felt, he said: "I can't even speak."
A neighbour, Raid Kareem, 36, said the newcomers were the first Jewish settlers in the area. "It's not good, it's a problem," he said. "Now they will bring in security. My children won't be able to play on the street. My son is already scared of the police."
Anti-settlement activists at the scene claimed that Elad, an organisation that finances Jewish settlement in Arab neighbourhoods of Jerusalem, was behind the purchase of the house.
The Kareem family claim the house was inherited by five siblings following the death of the owner, one of whom sold his stake to Wohl Investments, a company said to be a front for Elad. Other signatures to the sale were forged, they say. An Israeli court ruled the sale was legal.
Police spokesman Micky Roseneld said that the contents of the house had been removed on a court order "based on the fact that the house was sold by an Israeli-Arab family to a Jewish family". The family had not been in the house at the time, he added. Their possessions were removed in three vans in an operation which took three and a half hours. "The police presence was to prevent any disorder."
Assaf Sharon, an Israeli activist from the Sheikh Jarrah Solidarity Movement, said: "[The settlers] are now closing off the entrances, turning it into a fortress, bringing in guards. It's the usual drill – this is how they start a new settlement."
In a statement, he said: "The new settlement is without doubt meant to worsen the tensions between Washington and Jerusalem and set fire to the powder keg that is East Jerusalem. The residents of Jerusalem will pay the price for this despicable co-operation between the fundamentalist wing of the settlers' movement and the Jerusalem police."
There are already a number of highly volatile settlements in the heart of Arab neighbourhoods in East Jerusalem, such as in Sheikh Jarrah and Silwan. These are orchestrated by politically motivated activists, and are distinct from big Jewish settlements in the east of the city, although all are illegal under international law. East Jerusalem was captured by Israel in the 1967 Six-Day war and later annexed in a move not recognised internationally.
The US has made clear its disapproval of any expansion of Jewish presence in East Jerusalem. The issue has become a stumbling block for the resumption of talks. The Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, wants Barack Obama to exempt in writing East Jerusalem from a second temporary freeze on settlement construction. The US is so far refusing to do so.
>
...a lover and a fighter.
"I'm at least half a bum" Rocky Balboa
http://www.videosift.com/video/Obamas-Message-To-American-Indians
Edmonton, AB. September 5th, 2005
Vancouver, BC. April 3rd, 2008
Calgary,AB. August 8th, 2009
soo ... on the topic of setlling in east jerusalem ... obviously am adamantly opposed and i think it highlights the PR aspects of this topic ... these settlements get very little international fan fare but a suicide bomber would be front page news ... both actions equally counter-productive to any kind of peace ...
on the topic of the dig ... it ultimately falls on respect ... respect for each others culture and identity has all but dissipated ... for every time one can point to this palestinian disregard for historical artifacts there are places where jews have not respected palestinian history ... sad ...
it is all pettiness.
if both sides demanded a real peace, and treated each side with genuine dignity and respect, and if the rest of the world demanded it and even went as far as to issue direct orders and ultimatums then maybe something might happen. one of the conditions for even holding peace talks is that israel has not stopped construction in the settlements, and the palestinians have asked for that in order to come to the table. i think israel could have at least agreed to that as a sign of good faith that they want to negotiate, but they did not.
to me it just seems like both sides are merely tolerating each other and are only going through the motions.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
i am just asking because there are people in the world that would seriously ask that....
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
kinda like the undisputed heavyweight champion having to defend his belt....if it is undisputed, then why is there fighting??
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
if it isn't a muslim holy site, while a jewish focus, i don't think unthinkable to consider it jewish in some sort of peace agreement.
What's wrong with that idea?
that's how it used to be ... but it's like anything else ... it only takes one selfish group to contaminate the rest ...