Printer Friendly

Email to A Friend

Friday March 28, 2008

Dividing Jerusalem — when, not whether

by douglas bloomfield

Jerusalem will be divided. The question isn’t whether, but when and how. The city’s borders have been shifting for 3,000 years.

Today’s borders will not be tomorrow’s. Already the security barrier cuts off some parts of the city, and the Palestinian Authority, with American funding, is building a road linking East Jerusalem to Ramallah.

The Jewish majority is shrinking as many secular Jews move away, complaining, at times, that the city is too poor, too Orthodox and too Arab. If the present borders remain unchanged, David’s City could be come Daud’s City and have a Palestinian mayor.

Ariel Sharon understood the inevitability of dividing the city; his initial plans for the security barrier included putting some Arab neighborhoods of Jerusalem on the far side. American Jews who are increasingly demanding a voice in deciding the fate of Jerusalem understand the same reality; many oppose any change in the city’s borders, including jettisoning Arab neighborhoods that were added after 1967, because they oppose any and all land for peace deals with the Palestinians.

Without Jerusalem, no deal is possible. There will be no end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, nor will there be international recognition of the city as Israel’s capital, even by the United States.

Most of the Arab neighborhoods in East Jerusalem have no Jews living there, noted former top U.S. peace negotiator Dennis Ross, questioning why Israel would want to absorb nearly a quarter of a million Arabs who live in parts of the city where Jews don’t visit.

A bigger question may actually be whether Jerusalem’s Arabs want to have their homes and property transferred to the Palestinian state and to lose their Israeli permanent residency status and its accompanying social, educational and economic benefits. Polls indicate they would welcome the establishment of a Palestinian state but have little desire to move there; not unlike many American Jews’ attitude toward Israel.

Jerusalem has been on the negotiating table at least since 1979, and may or may not still be there, depending on whom you believe. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert mollifies his critics by assuring them he is not discussing Jerusalem with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, who says just the opposite for the same reason — their own political survival.

Each leader has a domestic constituency and diaspora to worry about, and each faces death threats if it appears he’s giving away too much. Abbas also has a plethora of Muslim and Arab states whose approval he needs for any agreement.

Olmert’s lack of public support for changing Jerusalem’s boundaries makes little difference because the discussions with the bifurcated Palestinian Authority aren’t going anywhere near where that would be necessary.

When Israel annexed East Jerusalem in 1967 following the Six-Day War, lines were drawn to reflect security considerations and to include as few Arabs as possible. Nonetheless, the Shuafat Palestinian refugee camp and 28 Palestinian villages not previously considered part of the city wound up within Jerusalem’s municipal boundaries.

All too often, talk of an undivided Jerusalem is less about preserving Jewish patrimony than blocking a peace settlement with the Palestinians. There is a two-state consensus among Israelis today, but there is also a vocal rejectionist camp. One of its leaders, Likud chairman Benjamin Netanyahu, has said that if he becomes prime minister again he will shut down the U.S.-initiated peace talks begun at Annapolis, Md., in November 2007.

Meanwhile, the future of Jerusalem is becoming a source of growing tension between the Olmert government and diaspora leaders, many of who are demanding at least a voice, if not a vote, in any decision.

Israeli leaders privately resent what they consider the paternalism of American Jewish machers who, they note, don’t live in Israel, don’t vote, don’t pay taxes and don’t serve in the army.

Jerusalem is an emotionally charged issue and while Olmert is correct in saying it is a political decision for Israelis ultimately to make, ignoring the voices of the diaspora would seriously fray the ties that bind them together. It will be up to Israeli leaders to educate Jewish and Christian supporters that redrawing municipal boundaries is not splitting the city asunder but making it a stronger capital of a stronger Jewish state.

Douglas Bloomfield is a Washington, D.C.-based political consultant who was formerly chief legislative lobbyist for AIPAC.

Did you find this article interesting? Subscribe to our FREE newsletter and you'll be notified each week when "J." goes online. We'll tell you about the most important stories of the week and give you a link to each one.

This page contains a BETA version of Amazon contextual links. They are marked by the dashed underline.  Your purchases support our site. At times they point to items which are not related to the actual link. Please alert us by email if you discover objectionable links.