Palestinians rioted throughout the territories to protest the fact that the prisoners Israel released were not all terrorists. Israel had never committed to this and, in fact, specifically ruled out releasing prisoners “with blood on their hands.” The United States agreed that Israel had fulfilled its commitment on the prisoner release, but the Palestinians remained angry.
The Israelis were not much happier. Again Israel gave up territory and did not see a peaceful response. Members of Netanyahu’s governing coalition were even more incensed by what they viewed as a capitulation to Arafat, to terrorism, and to U.S. pressure. The opposition supported the Wye agreement, but was dissatisfied by Netanyahu’s inability to keep the peace process moving toward a final resolution of all outstanding issues. The result was the collapse of Netanyahu’s government on December 21, 1998, and the decision to hold new elections in May 1999.
Movement on the peace process halted during the election campaign, which resulted in the landslide victory of Netanyahu’s opponent, Ehud Barak. A former chief of staff and Israel’s most decorated soldier, Barak promised to follow the path set by his mentor Yitzhak Rabin and to reinvigorate the negotiations with both the Palestinians and the Syrians. President Clinton, who had made no secret of his preference for Barak, quickly invited the new prime minister to the White House and U.S.–Israel diplomatic relations almost instantly improved.
Arafat’s Dream Approaches Reality
The Israeli election campaign was temporarily complicated by Yasser Arafat’s threat to unilaterally declare the establishment of a Palestinian state on May 4, 1999—the date when the negotiations over the fate of the territories were due to end. Virtually all Israelis opposed such a unilateral move, and the Netanyahu government, which strenuously objected to the creation of a Palestinian state, threatened its own unilateral measures, such as the cancellation of future redeployments and the annexation of the territory Israel now controlled if Arafat went through with this threat.
After the decision was made to call new Israeli elections, Arafat was reluctant to act out of fear that his declaration of independence would help Netanyahu be reelected. Arafat clearly preferred a Barak victory because the Labor Party leader appeared more willing to compromise. The Clinton administration also lobbied him to forego the announcement with promises of increased U.S.–Palestinian cooperation.
A Palestinian State Is Inevitable
Historically, Israelis have opposed the creation of a Palestinian state for a variety of reasons. After the decision was made by Rabin to withdraw from the West Bank, however, the fears narrowed to security concerns. If the Palestinians have a state, for example, they might launch terrorist attacks and become another Lebanon, or they might allow other Arab armies, such as the Syrians and Iraqis, to use their territory as a staging ground.
* * *
Mysteries of the Desert
One of the ironies of the peace process is that the man considered a hard-liner—and one of the founders of the party that promoted the concept of a “Greater Israel” that incorporated the West Bank—was most responsible for the likely creation of a Palestinian state. When Menachem Begin agreed to grant the Palestinians autonomy as part of the Camp David negotiations, he virtually assured this outcome. Despite Israeli opposition and insistence that the process could somehow be stopped, the reality is that once the Palestinians began to rule their own affairs, it became impossible to prevent the self-governing authority from becoming a state.
* * *
By the time Barak was elected, most members of the Israeli Labor Party had accepted the idea of a Palestinian state. An increasing number of security hawks, including Ariel Sharon, also began to come around to the idea that such an entity would be tolerable and is, furthermore, inevitable. Today, only a small minority of Israelis still oppose Palestinian independence.
The change of heart is in part because of the fact that Israel is today unquestionably the most powerful country in the Middle East and could crush any Palestinian attack. In addition, because the territories are economically dependent on Israel—because Palestinians will continue to need jobs in Israel and the flow of goods must remain uninterrupted—the Palestinian state will have an incentive to keep the peace.
Israel also recognizes that Jordan doesn’t want the Palestinians to threaten the monarchy and would have an interest in seeing the Palestinian state kept weak. Israel will certainly try to prevent the Palestinians from importing heavy weapons. Israeli supporters of a Palestinian state usually insist (naively) it should be demilitarized, but even if that effort fails, the Palestinians couldn’t hope to present a serious challenge to the IDF. Critics often point to the fact that Israel’s population centers would come into missile range of the Palestinians; but missiles fire in both directions, and the Palestinians do not have much space to conceal their weapons.
The Least You Need to Know
A Jewish extremist assassinated Yitzhak Rabin.
The Palestinian Authority held its first elections, and Arafat was easily elected president.
Despite his tough rhetoric, Netanyahu reached new agreements with Arafat to withdraw, when all redeployments are complete, from 40 percent of the West Bank.
Rabin reputedly reached an understanding for a peace agreement with Syria, but Assad was unwilling to make any concessions to his successors.
Chapter 24
O Jerusalem!
In This Chapter
Understanding Jerusalem’s past explains its present
Jordan pillages the holy city
Reunification and freedom of religion
The final status of Jerusalem
Perhaps the most contentious issue that remains in the Palestinian-Israeli negotiations is the final status of Jerusalem. Both peoples claim it as their capital. In addition, because of the city’s religious significance, the resolution of the question is of great interest. Muslim countries, for example, have never reconciled themselves to the idea of Jews controlling the site of their holy shrines. The Vatican, in particular, and many European countries have also been reticent, if not outright hostile, toward Israel’s establishment of its capital in the city and would prefer a settlement in which neither of the disputants control the city and it is put instead in the hands of some type of international body.
To understand these current political issues, it is important to step back in time and look at the role Jerusalem has played in the Middle East conflict. Given this background, it will be easier to assess some of the alternatives that might allow the city to become a symbol of peace rather than strife.
If I Forget Thee…
Ever since King David made Jerusalem the capital of Israel 3,000 years ago, the city has played a central role in Jewish existence. The Western Wall in the Old City—the last remaining wall of the Temple Mount, home of the ancient Jewish Temple, the holiest site in Judaism—is the object of Jewish veneration and the focus of Jewish prayer. Three times a day for thousands of years, Jews have prayed “To Jerusalem, thy city, shall we return with joy,” and have repeated the Psalmist’s oath: “If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning.”
* * *
Sage Sayings
To a Muslim there is a profound difference between Jerusalem and Mecca or Medina. The latter are holy places containing holy sites.
—British writer and historian, Christopher Sykes
* * *
By contrast, Jerusalem was never the capital of any Arab entity. In fact, it was a backwater for most of Arab history. Jerusalem never served as a provincial capital under Muslim rule, nor was it ever a Muslim cultural center. For Jews, the entire city is sacred, but Muslims revere one site—the Temple Mount and, more specifically, the Al Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock. Besides the Dome of the Rock, Jerusalem has no major Islamic significance.
Meanwhile, Jews have been living in Jerusalem continuously for nearly two millennia. They have constituted the largest single group of inhabitants there since the 1840s.<
br />
Jerusalem’s Population
A City Divided
When the United Nations took up the Palestine question in 1947, it recommended that all of Jerusalem be internationalized. The Vatican and many predominantly Catholic delegations pushed for this status, but a key reason for the UN decision was the Soviet Bloc’s desire to embarrass Transjordan’s King Abdullah and his British patrons by denying his claims to the city.
The Jewish Agency, after much soul-searching, agreed to accept internationalization in the hope that in the short run it would protect the city from bloodshed and the new state from conflict. Because the partition resolution called for a referendum on the city’s status after 10 years, and Jews composed a substantial majority, the expectation was that the city would later be incorporated into Israel. The Arab states were as bitterly opposed to the internationalization of Jerusalem as they were to the rest of the partition plan. Israeli prime minister David Ben-Gurion subsequently declared that Israel would no longer accept the internationalization of Jerusalem.
* * *
Sage Sayings
Never before have Arabs made a capital in a kind of holy city. Take Saudi Arabia. They have Mecca, Medina, to build their capital there. They took a village called Riyadh and turned it into a capital. The Jordanians had Jerusalem, but they built a capital in Amman and not Jerusalem.
—Teddy Kollek, former Jerusalem mayor
* * *
In May 1948, Jordan invaded and occupied east Jerusalem, dividing the city for the first time in its history and driving thousands of Jews—whose families had lived in the city for centuries—into exile. For the next 19 years the city was split, with Israel establishing its capital in western Jerusalem and Jordan occupying the eastern section, which included the Old City and most religious shrines. Because Jordan, like all the Arab states at the time, maintained a state of war with Israel, the city became, in essence, two armed camps, replete with concrete walls and bunkers, barbed-wire fences, minefields, and other military fortifications.
Denial and Desecration for Jews
In 1950, Jordan annexed all the territory it occupied west of the Jordan River, including East Jerusalem. The other Arab countries denied formal recognition of the Jordanian move, and the Arab League considered expelling Jordan from membership. Eventually, a compromise was worked out by which the other Arab governments agreed to view all the West Bank and East Jerusalem as held “in trust” by Jordan for the Palestinians. In the meantime, the Palestinians never demanded an end to the Jordanian occupation or the creation of a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital.
In violation of the 1949 Armistice Agreement, Jordan denied Israelis access to the Western Wall and to the cemetery on the Mount of Olives, where Jews have been burying their dead for 2,500 years. Jordan actually went further and desecrated Jewish holy places.
King Hussein permitted the construction of a road across the Mount of Olives cemetery. Hundreds of Jewish graves were destroyed by a highway that could have easily been built elsewhere. The gravestones, honoring the memory of rabbis and sages, were used by the engineer corps of the Jordanian Arab Legion as pavement and latrines in army camps. (Inscriptions on the stones were still visible when Israel liberated the city.) The ancient Jewish Quarter of the Old City was ravaged; 58 Jerusalem synagogues—some centuries old—were destroyed or ruined. Others were turned into stables and chicken coops. Slum dwellings were built abutting the Western Wall.
Christian Restraints
Jews were not the only ones who found their freedom impeded. Under Jordanian rule, Israeli Christians were subjected to various restrictions—with only limited numbers allowed to visit the Old City and Bethlehem at Christmas and Easter. Jordan also passed laws imposing strict government control on Christian schools, including restrictions on the opening of new schools, state controls over school finances and appointment of teachers, and requirements that the Koran be taught. Christian religious and charitable institutions were also barred from purchasing real estate in Jerusalem.
* * *
Tut Tut!
Given the restrictions that existed under Jordanian rule, Israelis do not take seriously suggestions that the status of Jerusalem must be changed now to make it more accessible to all faiths. Freedom of worship in Jerusalem has only been possible since Israel unified the city.
* * *
Because of these repressive policies, many Christians emigrated from Jerusalem, leading their numbers to dwindle from 25,000 in 1949 to fewer than 13,000 in June 1967. Under Israeli rule, the number has held steady while the Christian population in areas of the Middle East controlled by Arab and Islamic rulers has fallen dramatically.
Jerusalem Is Unified
In 1967, Jordan ignored Israeli pleas to stay out of the Six-Day War and attacked the western part of Jerusalem. But the Jordanians were routed by Israeli forces and driven out of East Jerusalem, allowing the city’s unity to be restored. As had been the case under previous Islamic rulers, King Hussein had neglected Jerusalem. The scope of his disregard became clear when Israel discovered that much of the city lacked even the most basic municipal services: a steady water supply, plumbing, and electricity. As a result of reunification, these and other badly needed municipal services were extended to Arab homes and businesses in east Jerusalem.
Freedom of Religion
After the war, Israel abolished all the discriminatory laws promulgated by Jordan and adopted its own tough standard for safeguarding access to religious shrines. “Whoever does anything that is likely to violate the freedom of access of the members of the various religions to the places sacred to them,” Israeli law stipulates, is “liable to imprisonment for a term of five years.” Israel also entrusted administration of the holy places to their respective religious authorities.
* * *
Ask the Sphinx
Israel has no control over the Dome of the Rock, Al Aqsa Mosque, or other Muslim holy places. The Muslim waqf has responsibility for the mosques on the Temple Mount. Similarly, Christian authorities administer their shrines.
* * *
Since 1967, hundreds of thousands of Muslims and Christians—many from Arab countries that remain in a state of war with Israel—have come to Jerusalem to see their holy places. Arab leaders are free to visit Jerusalem to pray if they wish, just as Egyptian president Anwar Sadat did at the Al Aqsa Mosque.
For Muslims
According to Islam, the prophet Muhammad was miraculously transported from Mecca to Jerusalem, and it was from there that he made his ascent to heaven. The Dome of the Rock and the Al Aqsa Mosque, both built decades after the Koran came to Muhammad, seemed to make definitive the identification of Jerusalem as the “Remote Place” that is mentioned in the Koran, and thus a holy place after Mecca and Medina. Muslim rights on the Temple Mount, the site of these shrines, have not been infringed. Although it is the holiest site in Judaism, Israel has left the Temple Mount under the control of Muslim religious authorities.
For Christians
Jerusalem is the place where Jesus lived, preached, died, and was resurrected. Although the heavenly rather than the earthly Jerusalem is emphasized by the Church, places mentioned in the New Testament, such as the sites of his ministry and passion, have drawn pilgrims and devoted worshipers for centuries. Among these sites are the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, the Garden of Gethsemane, the site of the Last Supper, and the Via Dolorosa with the 14 stations of the cross.
* * *
Mysteries of the Desert
The Church of the Holy Sepulcher is revered by Christians as the site of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. In the fourth century, Helena, the mother of Emperor Constantine and a convert to Christianity, traveled to Palestine and identified the location of the crucifixion; her son then built a magnificent church there. The church was destroyed and rebuilt several times over the centuries. The building standing today dates from the twelfth century. Inside are Stations X (where Jesus was stripped of his clothes
), XI (where he was nailed to the cross), XII (where he died), XIII (where Christ’s body was taken down), and XIV (Christ’s tomb).
* * *
The rights of the various Christian churches to custody of the Christian holy places in Jerusalem were defined in the course of the nineteenth century, when Jerusalem was part of the Ottoman Empire. Known as the “status quo arrangement for the Christian holy places in Jerusalem,” these rights remained in force during the period of the British mandate and are still upheld today in Israel.
Civil Liberties for Palestinians
Along with religious freedom, Palestinian Arabs in Jerusalem have unprecedented political rights. Arab residents were given the choice of whether or not to become Israeli citizens. Most chose to retain their Jordanian citizenship. Moreover, regardless of whether they are citizens, Jerusalem Arabs are permitted to vote in municipal elections and play a role in the administration of the city. Again, few take advantage of this right.
Arab East Jerusalem?
Before 1865, the entire population of Jerusalem lived behind the Old City walls (what today would be considered part of the eastern region of the city). Later the city began to expand beyond the walls because of population growth, and both Jews and Arabs began to build in new areas.
By the time of partition, a thriving Jewish community was living in the eastern part of Jerusalem, an area that included the Jewish Quarter of the Old City. This area of the city also contains many sites of importance to the Jewish religion, including the city of David, the Temple Mount, and the Western Wall. In addition, major institutions like the Hebrew University and the original Hadassah hospital are on Mount Scopus, in eastern Jerusalem.
The Complete Idiot's Guide to Middle East Conflict Page 39