HOW TO UNITE JERUSALEM
Jerusalem is back in the news. It's probable that the government of Bibi Netanyahu decided to give the legal green light to settler-support Irwin Moskowitz to build in the mostly Palestinian neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah to strengthen Bibi's right flank. But, he is playing with fire to do this. I have an opinion piece in this weekend's Haaretz newspaper about the subject of Jerusalem:
More than a theme park
The mantra of many in the Jewish community, and especially of the current Israeli government, that Jerusalem is the eternal, undivided capital of the Jewish people, does nothing to resolve the current stalemate over the city's status. Nor does saying those words make Jerusalem truly undivided. Most Jews - including those who live there - never experience the full breadth and depth of Jerusalem. Rather, they stop at the imaginary line where a wall once divided west from east before 1967, as if it were still a divided city.
The sad truth is that today, Jerusalem is not only divided between the Jewish part in the west and the Palestinian east. It is also divided between Haredim and all other Jews, with each community only paying attention to the others on rare occasions when there is friction between them. This summer's war between the Haredim and the state only serves to show how truly divided the body politic is in the Holy City.
This reality strikes me each year when I visit Israel, partly because, although I am Jewish, I always choose to stay in East Jerusalem during part of my trip. It's not a political statement; I just enjoy being in a part of the city with so much diversity. And because my friends live in both parts of the city, I have the opportunity to experience the two very different existences of East and West Jerusalemites.
Advertisement
Yet it never fails to surprise me how unfamiliar Jews are with East Jerusalem. Just two weeks ago, for instance, I suggested to some friends from a kibbutz near Ashdod that we have dinner at a restaurant in a hotel on Nablus Road in East Jerusalem. They had never heard of either the hotel or the restaurant, though it is one of the largest and most popular in that part of the city. Indeed, some of the most beautiful outdoor spaces for enjoying a drink or a meal are in East Jerusalem hotels, and their clientele is an international one, comprising academics, journalists and diplomats, not merely folks from the neighborhood. Increasingly, Israelis are frequenting these hotels and restaurants, especially on weekends, but for the most part, the entertainment divide remains.
During my visit last summer, I spent a morning at Yad Vashem with a good friend from a prominent East Jerusalem Palestinian family, who had visited there before but wanted me to accompany him while he spent more time in the exhibits. It wasn't my first time either, but there was no more meaningful way for me to visit it than with my friend from Sheikh Jarra. However, as with even the most inviting places in West Jerusalem - the Israel Museum, the Cinematheque, the Jerusalem Theater - visitors to Yad Vashem from the eastern part of the city are rare.
Nor do most Jewish tourists in Jerusalem make their way to the east, except to the Old City, and thus they miss out on the opportunity to witness daily life there among Palestinians who also call Jerusalem their home. As one American rabbi friend of mine once quipped, "Jerusalem is Disneyland for grown-ups." But this eternal city beloved by Jews - and Christians and Muslims - the world over, deserves more than a theme-park status. And if there is ever to be true peace, the different types of people who make up the city's mosaic need to be acknowledged with respect.
Yet 42 years after "reunification," the cultural divide is still tremendous and points of reference for daily life are nearly completely different, even among the educated and secular classes on both sides. That is, East Jerusalemites read different newspapers, watch different television programs and if they need public transportation, use different bus lines than the residents of West Jerusalem. There are two downtowns in Jerusalem - one for the East and one for the West - although only one is currently being dug up so that it can accommodate a light-rail system. And, when my Arab friends from the East want to go out to dinner, they are more likely to drive across checkpoints to Bethlehem for kebab, as they are to drive to the German Colony or Shlomzion Hamalka Street, just minutes away. In fact, many Palestinians who are cosmopolitan and well traveled are more comfortable in the nonparochial, open atmosphere of Tel Aviv than on the west side of their own city.
For those who can appreciate the grand wealth of Jerusalem's cultures, an undivided city could be a true gift - and should be a dream. Because there truly is no city like it, where cultures and religions can and should mix together. But for Jerusalem to be undivided, there must be an acknowledgment that it is presently divided. Furthermore, to keep it unified, each culture and religion must be treated by the others with justice and respect. The yearnings of East and West must be met, and this can be accomplished by a unified city that also functions as the capital of two peoples.
Can you be more specific? How Israel can control its borders, prevent illegal immigration, terrorist infiltration. Who will provide the security? Who will pay for health care for the residents of Jerusalem? Who will pay for road maintenance? Who will be allowed to live in Jerusalem. Will any Palestinian be allowed to to move from West Bank or Gaza to West Jerusalem? Practically, don't you really advocate the destruction of the Jewish state of Israel and creation of an Arab majority single stare?
July 31, 2009 3:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
I will be specific. AnnaA, this is Zionism: http://mondoweiss.net/2009/08/i-am-homeless-this-is-a-jewish-country-voices-from-the-evictions-in-e-jerusalem.html
August 3, 2009 2:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nowhere in this piece is there a discussion on why the city is divided between Jewish West and Arab East in the first place.
For 19 years, from the time of Israel's independence until the city was conquered in 1967, Jews were prevented from travelling to the Eastern part of the city. Not only were Jews prevented from coming to the Old City and praying at the Wailing Wall, but synagogues and other evidence of Jewish life in the Eastern part of the city were systematically destroyed by the Jordanian authorities.
It is the memory of that situation, more than anything else, that drives Israelis to take what can appear to outsiders as an unreasonable position on Jerusalem. Why, after all, do Israelis even want control of those Arab neighborhoods?
Yes, the prospect of Jews being denied access to the Wailing Wall seems remote now, and of course the Palestinians say that they won't interfere with Jewish holy sites in any future deal. But the memory of 1948-1967 is still, even 42 years later, fresh enough to raise a visceral suspicion among Jews - even ones that are not out-and-out right-wingers - about dividing Jerusalem again. If you talk to most Israeli Jews, not just left-wing Meretz types, and ask them what's the big deal about dividing Jerusalem along ethnic lines, chances are they will bring up what happened in 1948-1967.
In all JoAnn's efforts to "understand" the Palestinians and empathize with them (Staying in East Jerusalem is not a political statement? Sure, JoAnn, sure...), she seems to be unable to understand and empathize with Jews just as much. As a secular Jew, she is probably unable to understand the passion generated by the Temple Mount and the Wailing Wall. As an American, she is probably unable to appreciate how the wiping out of Jewish life in the East was emblematic of the extreme hatred and contempt of the Arabs for Jews and their refusal to accept Israel. Hatred and contempt, I might add, that even today goes unacknowledged by the Palestinians, let alone apologized for.
I await the speech by Mahmoud Abbas or some similar figure aimed directly at the Jewish people where he acknowledges and apologizes for the destruction of Jewish life in East Jerusalem and gives a solemn pledge to respect the right of Jews in the city in any future deal. Such a speech would go some distance to allaying suspicions.
If the past is a guide, I won't be holding my breath.
July 31, 2009 10:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Given Jo Ann's description of East Jerusalem, who wouldn't want to stay there? It actually sounds like one of the "fun" places that Olmert was noodling on about.
Neither Abbas nor bibi will be giving any apologetic speeches about historical wrongs anytime soon. So what's the point?
July 31, 2009 5:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the backgrounder. It explains why any resolution would have to have strong guarantees of access for the different relgions. Prossibly some sort of strong international ones. Of course this won't satisfy zealots from either side.
August 1, 2009 2:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
This fits under the catagory of "Yeah, right."
BTD: "Such a speech would go some distance to allaying suspicions."
And you would stop stealing Palestinian land after the speech?
August 3, 2009 2:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jo-An, Jo-An, blessed are you, who would be a peacemaker. Your hope for reconciliation between these two peoples is a noble endeavor. I wish you the best in your efforts.
I have felt it too. I have stood at the wailing wall and felt the weight of that lost glory and that present sorrow. And I have walked, with my family, up the nearby ramp, where I was told that Jews could not enter. But I could enter because (I don't know why...perhaps because I'm an American?) And I have entered the top of the Mount where Al Aqsa is seen, and where the Dome shines brightly, and the ancient site of the Temple is trod lightly. And I have walked across the Kidron valley and looked back westward to the Holy City and remembered words spoken long ago: "Oh Jerusalem, Jerusalem...I wanted to gather your children together, just as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not have it!"
Hey,Jo-An I share your burden, and I would nurture your hope. But when I was in that sacred place, I did not do what, perhaps, needs to be done...which is that one brave soul would stand upon that wall and declare:
"I have a dream!...that all God's children...
No, I did not do it. I did not stand upon that wall and boldly declare peace and reconciliation as Dr. King might have done, had he lived to see Jerusalem. No, I did not accept that call, because the cost of such courage requires of one the last full measure of devotion. And that is a price too dear to pay. We have seen what happens to such people.
But I thank you for all your efforts. May others come to appreciate your challenges as well, as time goes by. Don't give up.
July 31, 2009 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually you do know why...perhaps because you are an American.
Why don't you tell Obama, Tear down this wall Mr. Obama, the wall between US and Mexico. I have a dream!...that all God's children... Open US borders first, then ask Israel to open its borders. But
you will not accept that call, because the cost of such courage requires of you the last full measure of devotion.
July 31, 2009 2:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're right, Anna. And I'm an armchair orator (aka dreamer), but I'm thinking hard about what you said.
And btw, thanks for the link to the George Gilder interview. I haven't looked through that perspective lately, and I admire Churchill. It's good to have you hear at TPM.
July 31, 2009 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
A nice statement, and a powerful indication of the potential that is being squandered by official Israel continuing to pander to its political extreme, and the US Congress continuing to mouth whatever that Israeli extreme feeds it.
July 31, 2009 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
These are nice sentiments and express a worthy ideal. Unfortunately, the truly united city you postulate seems a distant conception. The best I think we can hope for at this point would be a shared capital with Palestinian sovereignty over Arab neighborhoods and some form of international control over the holy basin.
Even that seems close to impossible at this point. According to this poll of Israelis and Palestinians, the parties are farther apart on the status of Jerusalem than any other issue. http://onevoicemovement.org/programs/documents/OneVoiceIrwinReport.pdf
91% of Palestinians describe as "essential" all of Jerusalem remaining part of Palestine and an additional 4% as "desirable." Among Israelis, 45% said it is "essential" that all of Jerusalem remain part of Israel with another 11% saying it is "desirable." The idea that ‘Jerusalem should be an ‘International City of Peace’ under the authority of the UN’ was deemed "unacceptable" by 78% of Palestinians and 69% of Israelis. The suggestion that the old city should be under international control was equally 'unacceptable' to both Israelis and Palestinians at 72% and 71% respectively. Similarly joint control of the Old City was not particularly attractive at 69% 'unacceptable' for Israelis and 59% 'unacceptable' for Palestinians.
It has been reported that Olmert's lame-duck offer to Abbas would have divided sovereignty in Jersusalem between Arab and Jewish neighborhoods with the holy basin under the management of an international committee. Abbas did not meaningfully respond. As far as I know, no Palestinian leader has ever accepted anything other than full control over the Temple Mount. Indeed, what particularly rankles is the unwillingness on the part of the Palestinian leadership to acknowledge any Jewish connection whatsoever to the site.
July 31, 2009 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Palestinian leadership cannot acknowledge a Jewish connection to the holy sites for the same reason that the Israeli government cannot push for a defined border. It is the same reason why the Republican party can't disown the birthers. In all cases, the party in question depends on support from people who are, quite frankly, nuts. To state the obvious and tell these people they're wrong would be undercut the group that forms the most solid bloc of support.
July 31, 2009 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Show me the offer in writing.
You can't.
Because it's as frauduent as the non-existent offer that Barak made.
Again, I challenge you. Show us the actual offer and the actual maps. You can't.
Typical Zionist liar.
August 3, 2009 2:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Typical Zionist liar"? Coming from another source, I'd be offended. But it's just par for the mythbuster course - content free, snark-filled propaganda. Saeb Erekat confirmed the substance of Olmert's offer - but I suppose he too is another typical Zionist liar, or one of your other favorites, hasbarist. See Aluf Been in Haaretz http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1095890.html
August 3, 2009 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, AG and Brad, you paint a pretty grim picture, and it is a realistic one.
Nevertheless...how many years did Germany and Berlin exist as a country divided by two hostile powers? Is there no comparison there?
July 31, 2009 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
No.
July 31, 2009 4:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right. The Germans weren't under the mass delusion that an Iron Age Sky God was their real estate agent thousands of years ago.
August 3, 2009 2:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Things can change quickly.
There was a time in the not so distant past when Jewish and Arab Jerusalemites (?) mixed. It's not inconceivable. And Olmert's proposal does indicate some flexibility on the issue.
July 31, 2009 6:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Show us the maps from Ohlmert's "proposal."
August 3, 2009 2:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
See above. Educate yourself.
August 3, 2009 4:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
The situations were quite different. Germany was a united country forcibly divided by external forces.
There was no ethnic conflict between East and West Germans per se, and the division really had nothing to do with them, but with the polticial conflict between the USA and the USSR.
August 1, 2009 9:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Israel is a terror state. It is openly and institutionally racist. People talk about Iran being a nuclear armed terror theocracy, ummmm, wtf is Israel? They need to settle the BASIC human rights violations and the CONTINUOUS violations of UN resolutions before this petty plan would make any sense.
From an above poster:
Q: "Who will provide the security? Who will pay for health care for the residents of Jerusalem? Who will pay for road maintenance?"
A: The United States who else? We bankroll this "state". MY tax dollars support Israel!
Also, I love when American "Jews" write about the Middle East. People like Feldman and Derschowitz and the author of this piece. They are SO objective, SO out of the loop.
August 1, 2009 10:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
No, Israel is not theocracy.
No, Israel is not in violation of any United Nations Security Council resolution.
No, We do not bankroll this "state". We give them some money to buy American weapons made by American union workers. It's sort of like a permanent stimulus.
Also, I hate when American "Jews" write about the Middle East. There are so many Israeli haters among them including Norman Finkelstein, M.J. Rosenberg and Max Blumenthal.
August 1, 2009 6:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
You hate a lot people, AmnaA. And all those people are better than you.
August 3, 2009 2:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
AnnaA
I did not say Israel is a Theocracy, but they themselves define it as a "Jewish" State. That is by definition exclusionary. As for Israel ignoring the UN http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Nations_resolutions_concerning_Israel
We bankroll Israel. No one denies Israel's economic dependence on the US. Netanyahu has said in speeches he wants to be economically independent but can't.
"We give them some money to buy American weapons made by American union workers. It's sort of like a permanent stimulus." A thoroughly ridiculous statement, but fine, then why don't we give the Palestinians F-15s?
I don't hate Israel, but I hate it's policy. Israel is like a alcoholic sibling, we enable it's bad behavior but can't really force them into more reasonable policy without cutting off the "allowance". If we do that the drunken sibling will start even more trouble. The drunken sibling also has nukes. Yes nukes, and in flagrant violation of treaties we and most other countries have signed.
I don't hate Israel, but if a Muslim state had nukes, was bombing Gaza, was continuing to settle the West Bank, WE would be bombing THEM. But no, they are Jews, so they can do whatever they want because 6 million were killed in WWII. No one seems to mention that 7 million poles were killed and we gave them to the Soviets on a platter. No one mentions the 20 million Russians killed.
AnnaA, think critically, not emotionally. This isn't about hating, this about peace and justice for everyone in the region, not just the Israelis.
Peace be with you AnnaA!
August 2, 2009 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
August 2, 2009 4:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
You might want to take a course in logic.
You ridicule the statement "I don't hate Israel, but I hate it's policy." with this statement:
"Sounds familiar: Love the Sinner, Hate the Sin - Homosexuality."
Sigh.
So I guess you don't hate the policies of the Islamic Republic of Iran, because....
"Sounds familiar: Love the Sinner, Hate the Sin - Homosexuality."
I swear, the Hasbaraniks are getting dumber every day.
August 3, 2009 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
This might help unite Jerusalem, esp if the police could somehow hook his American Cousin in
August 2, 2009 2:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
The only lasting solution to Jerusalem and Israel will be a one state democratic solution as the U.N. originally mandated. For a millennium and a half Judea or Israel has more often been a place of beneficent coexistence of Jews, Arabs and others. Jews and Palestinians can cohabitate as they have throughout their history. Mohammad chose the monotheistic Jewish God as his God and wrote that he wanted peace between Jews, Christians and his followers on the first page of the Koran.
The best first response to past injustice is justice today. I have seen both those raised to hate Jews and those raised to hate Muslims learn to dance with their neighbors. It is most difficult to take the first step on that journey, the rest of the steps get easier and easier. Isolate the extremists from both camps that preach war in the name of God. South Africa ended it's apartheid to the benefit of all South Africans, so can Israel. Truly following the golden rule is the best wisdom for what will otherwise be a continually festering situation.
August 3, 2009 12:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
The best first response to past injustice is justice today. I have seen both those raised to hate Americans and those raised to hate Mexicans learn to dance with their neighbors. It is most difficult to take the first step on that journey, the rest of the steps get easier and easier. Isolate the extremists from both camps that preach apartheid in the name of God. South Africa ended it's apartheid to the benefit of all South Africans, so can US. Truly following the golden rule is the best wisdom for what will otherwise be a continually festering situation. Let's tear down this wall of apartheid, open borders to all.
August 4, 2009 2:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
The borders are slowly fading away. I like borders myself, “Good fences make good neighbors.” But there are allot of borders that are not well founded. The border between Afghanistan and Pakistan is more a source of problems than serving the function of a good border. Many of the borders of the Middle East were carved up by the English with some assistance from the French after the World Wars. The intent of the colonial borders was to keep unity dependent on the foreign power. Anyway Persia sounds much better to the ear than Iran or Iraq. What is up with Kurdistan? What did they do to deserve their fate. And Trans-Jordan, what a place, its history is dependent on who you trust.
As for the Mexican border, intentional mismanagement. When a Mexican taxi driver or cop gets rewarded about the same as an American taxi driver or cop, the border will work much better.
August 4, 2009 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink