July 29, 2009, posted by Noam Shelef
The following is a statement on the Obama Administration’s policy on Jerusalem issued today by APN, Ameinu, Brit Tzedek v’Shalom, Meretz USA, and J Street:
We are Jewish American organizations who have a deep and abiding connection to Jerusalem and believe that Jerusalem is and always will be the capital of the state of Israel.
Along with 76 percent of Jewish Americans, we support a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, believing it is an essential interest of Israel’s as well as of the United States.
Jerusalem is perhaps the most sensitive final status issue that will have to be resolved. We believe that issues of borders and sovereignty related to Jerusalem should be determined through negotiations in the context of a regional, comprehensive resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict.
Unilateral actions that inflame tensions, impair negotiations and make the ultimate resolution of issues surrounding Jerusalem more difficult, are unhelpful and should be avoided at this particularly sensitive moment.
We support the Obama administration’s effort to move quickly toward a comprehensive, regional resolution to the conflict, its call on all sides to take steps that move in the direction of peace, and its opposition to unilateral actions that make resolution more difficult.
Finally, we urge those who choose to enter the debate on Jerusalem do so carefully and with arguments based on facts and law – not ideology. For instance, it is a matter of law and of fact that Arab residents of East Jerusalem do not have the right to purchase state-owned property in West Jerusalem – and the overwhelming majority of all land in Israel is state-owned. Claims that somehow Jerusalem’s Arab residents currently have the same rights to live where they choose as Jewish residents are simply untrue, and provide an inaccurate picture of a city that remains divided based on ethnicity, religion and geography.
For those of you who think Jerusalem can be “shared under divided sovereignity”, I suggest you read this piece by Seth Freedman which appears in his blog in the Guardian’s “Comment Is Free” section. Seth is a real “progressive” but here he talks about a visit to Nazareth. This town is one of most important for the Christian world and a major church is located there, which is a important destination for Christian pilgrims. Note well what Freedman says regarding a large, green banner facing the church denouncing Christianity, put up by local Muslims. What does this say about the fate of Jewish and Christian holy sites in Jerusalem if Israeli foolishly does like the “progressives” say and turn east Jerusalem over to the Arabs?
Muslims ruled Jerusalem for many centuries, preceding the allied conquest of 1917. Jews and Christians lived as tolerated minorities under Turkish rule, which was not ideal or comfortable but it worked for 500 years without major problems. It is time to move beyond the demonization of Muslims and Arabs and start thinking in productive, lawful, and mutually respectful terms.
Michael-
Then how do you explain the banner in Nazareth if Islam is a tolerant religion? How do you explain that 100 years 20% of the population of the Middle East was Christian, now it is 2%. The number of Muslims in Jewish Israel and Christian Europe and North America is expanding rapidly, yet Jews and Christians have basically vanished from the Muslim countries of the Middle East. Who is tolerant and who is intolerant.
Also your comment that there were “no major problems” in Muslim controlled Jerusalem is really stretching things.
Both sides need to calm down and have a peaceful talk. There is no truth in this kind of argument. I think the Jews actually are too mean to the Muslims.