Israeli actions are turning Jerusalem into a settlement
For how much longer can Jews claim property east of the Green Line while Arabs are forbidden to reclaim land in Israel?
By Zeev Sternhell Tags: Israel news East JerusalemThanks to an attempted settler takeover of the Sheikh Jarrah quarter, that quiet neighborhood of East Jerusalem has turned into a kind of microcosm of the illnesses that are poisoning relations between Jews and Arabs. The worst of these is the refusal to recognize the finality of the situation that was created at the end of the War of Independence. It is possible to understand the settler right, whose existential aim is the continued conquest of the land. But how is it possible that state institutions will lend a hand to an act that destroys the very land under our feet?
Indeed, this time the settlement is not being carried out merely with brute force like in other parts of the West Bank, but with documents from the days of the Ottoman Empire. The settlers appeared in court armed with Turkish title deeds, which originally were in the hands of the Committee of Sefardic Jews, and on this basis eviction orders were issued for the Arab residents. The Jews came to prove a principle - land that was once owned by Jews is required to be returned to the hands of Jews. The question is, how much longer will it be possible to maintain a situation in which the Jews will have the right to demand ownership of Jewish property that has been left on the eastern side of the Green Line, while the Arabs are forbidden to demand rights of ownership to their property that has been left on the western side of that same line?
After all, there are Palestinians, among them those who live in East Jerusalem, who have title deeds to homes in Talbieh, Old Katamon, Baka, and other neighborhoods in the western part of the city. If Jerusalem is a united city and all its residents, as the authorities claim, are equal before the law, on what moral basis can they decide that what is permitted to the Jews is forbidden to the Arabs? The state institutions now have a golden opportunity not only to show that equality in the eyes of the law is more than an empty, flowery phrase, but also to declare that there is no way back from the political and legal situation that was created in 1949. Any other approach will be considered intolerable discrimination and will serve as a preface to endless appeals to international institutions.
Sheikh Jarrah has symbolic significance also from a different point of view. The 28 homes that are earmarked for rapid evacuation are those of refugees from 1948 from all over the country. In return for the strip of land on which every family built its house, the residents renounced their status as refugees and the assistance that accompanies this status. These people who are about to be evicted, in actual fact, realized an Israeli interest of first-rate importance - they stopped being homeless and receiving welfare and became integrated in the fabric of life at their place of residence. Had this path been followed in Lebanon or in the Jordanian West Bank, a large part of the problems facing us now would have been solved a long time ago. Therefore, what is better from Israel's point of view - Sheikh Jarrah as a residential neighborhood through which hundreds of Israelis pass daily on their way to the Hebrew University and the government offices or Sheikh Jarrah as another refugee camp that is poverty-stricken and filled with hatred?
Instead of turning Sheikh Jarrah into a paragon of coexistence, Israel is about to enable the settlers to reinstate its residents with refugee status and to turn the entire area into a new symbol of Israeli arbitrariness, aggressiveness and distortion of justice.
Indeed, Jerusalem is not a settlement, but those who are turning it into a settlement now are the settlers themselves. It is not difficult to forecast how this additional fuel will fan the growing flames of delegitimization of Israel in the world.
In this context it is worth noting a fact that was published at the beginning of the week. One of the institutes studying anti-Semitism reported a dramatic increase, in the wake of Operation Cast Lead, of incidents defined as anti-Semitic. It is highly doubtful whether in all the cases, or even most of them, the motives were indeed anti-Semitic. It is reasonable to assume that part of the incidents were caused by growing anti-Israeli feelings. One of the characteristics of anti-Semitism is that it is not conditional on objective acts on the part of Jews or even on their presence. Anti-Semitism existed even in places where they did not see Jews. On the other hand, there is a clear and consistent connection between hostility toward Israel and Israel's actions.
It is no coincidence that "anti-Israelism" is a phenomenon of this generation and its source lies in the intensification of the occupation and the feeling that is taking root, even among veteran supporters of Zionism in the world, that Israel does not have the desire or the capability of putting an end to the control over the lives, freedom and independence of another people. That, too, is something worth dwelling on, between Holocaust Remembrance Day and Independence Day.
|
East Jerusalem neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah. |
| Photo by: (Daniel Bar-On) |
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
And Moishe, how about You and other Jews bieig kicked out of Canada and returned to your mythical homeland. Sound good to you? Start packing!
How about now! Do they want to move back? Of course all the Pals that have deeds in Tel Aviv and elseware in Israel will have to be allowed to return. Sound good to you Mark? Arab countries will gladly do a "tit for tat".
Arabs living in East Jerusalem are denied building permits, and their homes are bulldozed. Jews wishing to build in East Jerusalem are never denied. This is not news it has been going on for a very long time.
despite the lefts best hopes that this is not so. There are Arab individuals and small groups that want peace but they are not a movement or a party to be counted. Get a grip of it.
Haaretz reports that Elie Wiesel wrote in an ad published in fridays Washington Post that "Jews Christians and Muslims are able to build their homes anywhere in Jerusalem". and yet; here we have an article which completely contradicts Mr. Wiesels claim. What is Wiesel thinking? Is it possible Weisel isn't aware of the reality on the ground? I doubt it. Is he a zionist propagandist? Is he being used? If the purpose of his ad in the Post was disinformation it probably worked to some extent, but it is also a good example of the kind of pro Israel bias so prevalent in US media. If the truth hurts, too bad.
To this article as well. I provided a link in my answer to a good Haaretz article called hitching a ride on the magic carpet. My answer was not let through.
By the very same token, the jews have no biblical right to Israel. Since the Palestinians were already there when Israel was declared, they have senior right to the Israelis. The Palestinians giving Israel land up the '67 lines is VERY generous indeed!
The term "present absentees" (i.e. people who are present in the country but nevertheless are called 'absentees') refers to Arab residents of Palestine who were present in the country but not residing at their homes during the 1948 War of Independence. Such people today are citizens of Israel but their "abandoned" property was taken from them and they cannot get it back. Mostly they left their homes temporarily because of the war-situation, but this was a tragic "mistake" on their part. This law applies to Arabs and not to Jewish Israelis. (Israeli basic laws do not impose legal equality between the group. Once Jerusalem was annexed, the prevailing law became the Israeli law rather than the Jordanian law. Jordanian law must have recognized the ownership of the local residents residing in abandoned Jewish homes even if it was not written in the books. (such a "chazaka" is recognized in Talmudic law). In any case, there is a vast number of "present absentees" in Israel proper.Why cry over a few Arab families in Sheikh Jarrach?
... that no further comment is necessary, except toda raba...
"The question is, how much longer will it be possible to maintain a situation in which the Jews will have the right to demand ownership of Jewish property that has been left on the eastern side of the Green Line, while the Arabs are forbidden to demand rights of ownership to their property that has been left on the western side of that same line?" Answer: Jews were illegally expelled by the illegal Jordanian authorities after Jordanian successful aggression against the Jews. Consequently, property was returned to their rightful owners - Jews. To the contrary: Arabs committed aggression against Jews, but lost the war and run away from the land and consequently lost any rights to the ownership.
Without making a moral statement either way, the flaw in Sternhell's argument is very simple. Jordanian acts of confiscation were done outside of Israeli law, whereas Israeli confiscation (if it was that) was done within Israeli law. Israeli law is the law of the land in Jerusalem, and therefore only that law applies.
Haaretz article: "An intensive campaign to secure official political and legal recognition of Jews from Arab lands as refugees has been going on for the past three years. This campaign has tried to create an analogy between Palestinian refugees and Mizrahi Jews, whose origins are in Middle Eastern countries - depicting both groups as victims of the 1948 War of Independence. The campaign's proponents hope their efforts will prevent conferral of what is called a "right of return" on Palestinians, and reduce the size of the compensation Israel is liable to be asked to pay in exchange for Palestinian property appropriated by the state" guardian of "lost" assets". "The idea of drawing this analogy constitutes a mistaken reading of history, imprudent politics, and moral injustice.", etc. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=329736 http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=329736
"you must be kidding..all jewish population in middle eat is less than 800.000" You must be kidding -- or stupid. The Jewish population of Israel is almost 6 million, about half of the world's total Jewish population. Last I check, Israel is in the Middle East. The 800,000 figure is the number of Jews exiled from Arab lands in 1948. It has been documented many times over.
"800,000 Sephardic Jews who were 'supposedly' evicted illegaly from their homes in Muslim countries?" There is no "supposedly" about it. This is documented history. It was well documented in the world press at the time. Go back and read press accounts from 1948. You will be surprised.
or do only Jews have to return land to aggressors, Professor?
The only settlers and settlements I know and learned in school are in the USA, where settlers still live on Indian properties and have no intention to give it back! Israel has no settlers but citizen!
Estimated current market value several million USD. I have the Ottomon-era title deeds. Trust me Israelis you dont want to open this can of worms
You do not even have to look at Sheikh Jarrah. The management of the city is inextricably corrupted. The example of the despisable holyland affair should suffice. You cannot put the blame on Palestinians. And yet, the two affairs are not unrelated on a more general level. Occupation and oppression unavoidably leads to corruption. Like it or not.
you must be kidding..all jewish population in middle eat is less than 800.000 .. so from how you take their homes and use them as yours ?
The Shepherd hotel is in Sheikh Jarrah. It could justifiably be considered American property, as it was acquired by an American Jew. It certainly is not Palestinian property. The sheikh Jarrah Arabs were the ones that attacked the doctors convoy to the Hadassah hospital on Mount Scopus. talk about integration!. In addition The partition plan was rejected by the Arabs, indicating , that they don't want their part, unlike the Jews, who anyway had bought their part, with good money. Pals have no right to any of the land.documents or not
Looking for some kind of historical metaphor to use for the Occupation: I choose the example of US western expansion which repressed and occupied and destroyed Native American(s) culture, civilization, communities and homes in order to build settlements. They too held fast to a messianic ideology of privilege and entitlement to what is not theirs... The occupation may posses the manifestations of Apartheid but it's ideological base is in Manifest Destiny, or the right to destroy in order to settle...
So you belive that since the Jews of Arab countries left for a better opportunity to Israel (or where kicked out by the Arab countries they lived in), it is ok to do the same to the Palestinians, after all they are Arabs too, so they should get kicked out by force and it will be even? So do you also belive that since your people were victims of the holocaust, you can now do it to others, because it happened to you first. In the name of justice, Since when does the victim victimize?
The bottom line is stop talking about rights. It is for the best national interest of Israel that even land that was owned by Jews during the Ottoman period would remain today in Palestinian hands. This is a disputed land, and it is in the best interests of Israel that part of it will belong to the palestinians. It is about politics and coexistence ..... not about rights on land.
According to Shariah, Muslims cannot evict non-Muslims from their homes, and if it did happen, it would be an exception or due to implementation of secular laws: I think that the 800,000 Sephardic Jews who were supposedly evicted illegaly from their homes in Muslim countries should be given the option of either being compensated for or given back their homes plus some compensation too. We Muslims have no grudge against Jews or non-Muslims, we only want our homes back, we would oppose\resist even our own Muslim brothers if they took away our homes!
Until Arab countries compenstae Jewish families for their land and assets stolen and confiscaed when they were kicked out of various countries after 1948( and probably before during the second Wrold War)
when the 3M Palestinians expelled by Israel get theirs back.
Jordan. Jordan had a right to maintain law and order. Hundreds of thousands of peaceful refugees were not kicked out. Even now, when Jordan is revoking the temporary citizenship of Palestine refugees so that they can maintain RoR to the possible future Palestinian state or to Israel proper, it is not kicking them out.
hey zeev there is already a palastinian state its called Jordan!they can go there! i just love the left,why dont u go save the whales or seals in alaskaor something productive
think that it can't or wont happen in Jerusalem either. It all depends on the behavior of the Palestinians. To hell with World Opinion.
OK, so what's the bad news?
all i can say is thank you for publishing your well-reasoned opinion and encourage you to continue sharing your ideas.
How many more sane voices are there in Israel? And why do they let the crazies run the country?
I'm curious to see when 800,000 Sephardic Jews who posses deeds to their houses in Arab countries, get their houses back after they were kicked out????
say that very seldom here...its a point i have been trying to make in my own crude way...you said it better...hats off to you