JERUSALEM: A PRIMER JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 2

STATE 194: ABOUT THE FILM In 2009, Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad launched a plan to demonstrate that his people were deserving of statehood, inspiring them to change their destiny and seek UN membership. Since then, they’ve made remarkable progress, but the political quagmire--and Fayyad’s recent resignation from office--may destroy the most promising opportunity for peace in years.

Parents Circle members Yitzhak Frankenthal (left) and Nabeel Sweety (right)

Israeli Minister of Justice Tzipi Livni

Former Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction ...... 4

Background ...... 5

Jerusalem’s Significance ...... 7

Jewish-Israeli Narrative ...... 7

Palestinian-Arab Narrative ...... 7

Jerusalem’s Status 9

The Israeli Case that Jerusalem Must Remain Unified Under Israeli Sovereignty ...... 9

Confiscation, Displacement, Isolation: Israel’s East Jerusalem Policies through Palestinian Eyes 9

Perspectives on Negotiations ...... 15

Jewish-Israeli Perspective ...... 15

Palestinian-Arab Perspective ...... 15

Conclusion: International Positions and Proposed Solutions ...... 18

Maps ...... 20

Jerusalem in the News ...... 24

Partial Reference List ...... 25 JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 4

WRITTEN AND CONCEIVED BY MELISSA WEINTRAUB IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE TELOS GROUP, INC.

INTRODUCTION Of all issues at the heart of Palestinian-Israeli negotiations, Jerusalem may be the most fraught and decisive. Many observers claim it was the “radioactive” issue over which Camp David negotiations unraveled in 2000. Arguably, there remains a greater gulf between dominant Israeli and Palestinian narratives on Jerusalem than on any of the other core issues of the conflict.

This primer aims to provide not just historical background and context to shed light on current disputes regarding Jerusalem, but also to share dominant Israeli and Palestinian narratives to elucidate the city’s unique holiness and significance to each people. It is not intended to be a comprehensive account of Jerusalem, but rather an entry point to understanding why Jerusalem remains one of the most intractable issues of the conflict. JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 5

BACKGROUND Followers of the three Abrahamic faiths have called Jerusalem home since the advent of their respective religions. In the past century, the holiness of the city has increasingly been deemed an obstacle to finding a terrestrial solution, and practical options for Jerusalem’s sovereignty have stumped the international community.

Jerusalem’s place in the modern conflict can be divided into three main historical chapters:

1. 1917-1947 - British Mandate and international proposals: Before World War I, Jerusalem was under control of the Turkish Ottoman Empire for 400 years. After the Ottoman’s fall and the Allied Powers victory, the League of Nations—the predecessor to the United Nations—granted the British Mandate control over Palestine, including Jerusalem. They nonetheless stipulated that the rights and claims of all peoples to Jerusalem should be safeguarded by the international community. After World War II, in 1947, this drive to preserve Jerusalem’s globally-significant heritage was further reaffirmed by the United Nations in the Partition Plan, which called for the establishment of two states in the Holy Land, one Jewish and one Arab. The Partition Plan specifically called for a special international regime called the “corpus separatum,” including not only Jerusalem, but also Bethlehem and surrounding areas. Shortly after the announcement of the Partition Plan, however, war erupted and the “corpus separatum” was never implemented. 2. 1948-1967 - Division of Jerusalem between Israel and Jordan: At the end of the 1948 war, a ceasefire line running north to south cut through Jerusalem and divided it into “west” and “east” sections, the former controlled by Israel (about 38 sq km), the latter controlled by Jordan (approximately 6 sq km). The eastern part held the Old City, including many Jewish, Muslim, and Christian holy sites. Arguing against an internationalized Jerusalem, the Israeli delegation to the UN pointed to the inability of the international community to protect Jerusalem’s residents during the war. They claimed division of the city preferable to an international regime, though they did accept limited international control and protection of holy sites. The Arab delegation to the UN, meanwhile, stressed that prior Muslim sovereignty had protected the city’s holy sites in a way “satisfactory to all the world”, but accepted an international regime over Jerusalem in theory, given current “circumstances.”

Nonetheless, while the international community recognized Israel and Jordan’s de facto control over respective sections of Jerusalem during these nineteen years, they did not recognize their sovereignty – universally refusing to build embassies in Jerusalem or recognize Jerusalem’s residents as citizens of either Israel or Jordan. This international equivocation set a precedence of ambiguity and contestation over claims of legality, sovereignty, and citizenship that continue to hover over the city’s status to this day. 3. 1967-present – “Reunification and Liberation” vs. “Occupation”: In the 1967 war, Israel captured the eastern section of the city and extended the municipal boundaries of Jerusalem by 71 sq km (including the 6 km that had been considered “East Jerusalem” as well as 65 additional sq km), and placed these areas under Israeli civil law. Israel generally views this annexation as a reunification and liberation of the city, a restoration of Judaism’s geographical heart to the people who have held it most sacred. Palestinians generally view Israel’s annexation of Jerusalem as an unjust and illegal expropriation of areas both hallowed and essential to Palestinian culture and economy. The international community generally recognizes areas of Jerusalem beyond the 1949 Armistice line (aka 1967 border and “Green Line”) as “occupied” by Israel, and Israel’s measures to change Jerusalem’s status unilaterally as illegal under international law. The international consensus remains that questions of sovereignty over Jerusalem as a whole must be determined in permanent status negotiations; no other country de jure recognizes Israel’s 1967 annexation of East Jerusalem. One outcome of this checkered history: what is meant by “Jerusalem” is itself contested. Israel generally refers to “Municipal Jerusalem,” including significant neighborhoods such as Pisgat Ze’ev, Gilo and Har Homa that lie beyond the 1967 border. By Jerusalem (or “Al-Quds”), Palestinians generally refer to the JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 6

Old City and surrounding Arab neighborhoods that were under Jordanian control from 1948-1967 (such as Silwan and Sheikh Jarrah), as well as at times to the Arab neighborhoods that became part of West Jerusalem under Israeli control in 1948.

At the molten core of the struggle over Jerusalem lies the Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif – called by CNN “undeniably…the most contested piece of real estate on earth.” The site’s 35 acres contain the Foundation Stone – holy to Jews, Christians and Muslims alike – which lies at the base of Jerusalem’s iconic golden Dome of the Rock. Among its biblical associations, the rock purportedly marks Mount Moriah, where Abraham readied himself to sacrifice his son Isaac at God’s command and Jacob dreamed of angels. For Jews, the Temple Mount is the world’s epicenter: the “Holy of Holies” where two Temples stood that were Judaism’s original fulcrum, the place to which prayers have been directed for 2000 years, and the locus at which Heaven and Earth touch. Along the western side of the Temple Mount lies the Wailing Wall or “Kotel,” a site of Jewish pilgrimage, prayer and mourning for the destruction of the Temple for centuries. For Muslims, the Haram or “noble sanctuary” marks one of the world’s three holiest sites, the place to which the Prophet Muhammed made his famous nocturnal journey and from which he ascended to Heaven, as well as the initial direction toward which Muslims directed their prayers. While many scholars suggest that 4th century Christian rulers turned the Temple Mount into a garbage dump in order to signify Christian “replacement” of Judaism, Muslim rulers built glorious mosques there, including Al-Aqsa as well as Dome of the Rock, to commemorate a place holy to Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, and Jesus – all of whom Muhammed considered prophets. The site has been a seat of Muslim learning, prayer, and pilgrimage for centuries.

After capturing the Old City in 1967, Israel allowed the Palestinian-led Islamic waqf to retain independent authority over the Haram/Temple Mount, but Israeli security forces maintain a regular presence on the site in an effort to stem incitement and violence on the part of both Jews and Muslims. Within the already contentious issue of Jerusalem, there is perhaps no more contentious issue than who will exercise control over the Haram/Temple Mount as well as the “Holy Basin,” a term designating sites sacred to three religions that link the Old City via the City of David/Silwan with the Mount of Olives. The site is of such symbolic significance – and so flammable – that perceived and/or real provocations in connection to it have sparked some of the most intense waves of violence the area has known, from the 1929 riots to the Second (aka “Al- Aqsa”) Intifada beginning in 2000.

Jerusalem is, in short, a microcosm and magnification of the broader conflict over who may exercise rights in and sovereignty over the same strip of land and holy sites. Reaching an agreement on Jerusalem might well be the most significant lever and biggest barrier to resolving the conflict as a whole. JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 7

JERUSALEM’S SIGNIFICANCE JEWISH-ISRAELI PERSPECTIVES PALESTINIAN-ARAB PERSPECTIVES

There is overwhelming support among Israelis The Palestinian narrative on Jerusalem begins with for Jerusalem remaining unified under Israeli the deep Palestinian historical connection to the sovereignty. Since Israel issued its Basic Law on Holy City and its holy sites, for which Palestinians Jerusalem in 1980, Israel has officially maintained served as the proud caretakers for centuries. that “Jerusalem, complete and united, is the Many of Jerusalem’s largest Palestinian families capital of Israel.” In a 2013 poll, 74% of Jewish- have family trees dating back unbroken many Israelis voiced support for a unified Jerusalem hundreds of years. Palestinians furthermore view and rejected a Palestinian capital in any part of Jerusalem as the cultural, religious, commercial, Jerusalem. Following the Camp David and Taba and medical hub of the West Bank, the linchpin of negotiations in 2000, in which dividing Jerusalem a metropolitan corridor running from Ramallah just between Israel and Palestinians was put on the north of Jerusalem to Bethlehem and Hebron just negotiating table, more than 100,000 Jews south, and a core symbol of Palestinian national marched in protest, purportedly the largest public and religious identities. demonstration in Israel’s history. For both Palestinian Muslims and Christians, In Israeli-Jewish narrative, Jerusalem has been the Jerusalem carries tremendous religious heart and soul of the Jewish people since King significance. Islam considers Jerusalem one of David made Jerusalem the ancient capital of Israel its holiest cities, along with Mecca and Medina; around 1000 BCE. For a thousand years thereafter, Palestinians note that the Quran mentions Jerusalem was the seat of Jewish sovereignty and Jerusalem many times by different names, just the locus of Judaism’s Temples, kings, councils and as it uses many different names for God and courts. For 2000 years in exile, from wherever they Muhammed. Muslims ruled over Jerusalem were in the world, Jews prayed in the direction of for thirteen centuries – from 638 AD to 1917 – Jerusalem three times daily, referenced “rebuilding excluding a 103 year interlude under Crusader Jerusalem” in everyday rituals, and on holidays bid rule. Many Palestinians argue that because Islam farewell to each other with a call for “next year in inherently sees Jews and Christians as “people of Jerusalem.” Jews leave a corner of their homes the book” and honors synagogues and churches unfinished and smash a glass at their weddings to as God’s shrines, Islamic rule granted the city the symbolize their yearning for Jerusalem, quoting most tolerant period of its history. For Palestinian the Psalmist: “If I forget you O Jerusalem, may my Christians -- who make up approximately 10% right hand wither.” The Anti-Defamation League of the global Palestinian population and 4% captures the Jewish connection to Jerusalem: of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza “No other city has played such a dominant role in -- Jerusalem is the focal point for Jesus’s life, the history, politics, culture, religion, national life ministry, crucifixion, and resurrection. Palestinian and consciousness of a people as has Jerusalem Christians see themselves as links in a chain rooted in the life of Jewry and Judaism…it has served as in Jerusalem and Bethlehem, stretching back to the the symbol and most profound expression of the time of Jesus. Jewish people’s identity as a nation.” Palestinian Muslims and Christians see their Many Israeli Jews emphasize the uniqueness of connection to Jerusalem as equally important, the Jewish people’s attachment to Jerusalem. if not more important, than Jewish claims to the This telling of history notes that Jews lived in city. They refute Jewish claims that Jews are Jerusalem for 1700 years before Arabs conquered more attached and therefore more entitled to Jerusalem; that Jewish independence before the Jerusalem than are Muslims and Christians. Some Roman destruction of 70 CE marks the longest more extreme Palestinians deny Jewish historical period of sovereignty over Jerusalem by any connection to the Temple Mount altogether, nation; that Jerusalem is mentioned over 800 disputing whether Jewish Temples in fact stood on times in the Bible, 0 times in the Koran; and that this site; some others argue that Zionism exploited Jerusalem has been the capital city of the Jewish religious longing for a spiritual and symbolic JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 8

JEWISH-ISREALI PERSPECTIVES (CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE) PALESTINIAN-ARAB PERSPECTIVES (CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE) people alone; while Muslim caliphates were based Jerusalem and transformed it into territorial, in Medina, Damascus, Baghdad and Cairo -- and physical terms. Regardless, most Palestinians the Ottoman ruler resided in Constantinople -- no resent and contest Israeli assertions that the Arab or Muslim ruler established a capital city Jewish bond with Jerusalem is exclusive, unique in Jerusalem. Israeli-Jewish narratives also note and superior to that of Palestinians, whether that throughout the centuries, there has been a Muslim, Christian or secular. Many Palestinians continuous presence of Jews in the Jerusalem, and fear Jewish designs on holy places. They cite for the past 150 years Jews have been the majority provocations on the part of both the Israeli population in Jerusalem. Some Israelis stress that government and Jewish extremist groups that seek Jerusalem has always been a unified city, and that to rebuild the Jewish Temple on the Temple Mount 1948-1967 was a brief interlude when the city was and flush Palestinians out of the Old City and artificially divided. As the Israeli Ministry of Foreign surrounding areas through shady and aggressive Affairs puts it: “Jerusalem is and has always been means, dishonoring the claims of Muslims and an undivided city, except for this 19 year period. Christians to places that are holy to them just as There is no justification for this short period to be they are to Jews. viewed as a factor in determining the future of the city, and to negate 3,000 years of unity.” JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 9

JERUSALEM’S STATUS THE ISRAELI CASE THAT CONFISCATION, DISPLACEMENT, JERUSALEM MUST REMAIN ISOLATION: ISRAEL’S EAST UNIFIED UNDER ISRAELI JERUSALEM POLICIES THROUGH SOVEREIGNTY PALESTINIAN EYES

Most Israelis find absurd the refusal of the Palestinians view Israeli policies as severing international community to recognize Israeli their historic connection to Jerusalem, driven sovereignty over Jerusalem. They argue that by a simple formula: maximize land under Israeli UN Resolution 181 (the Partition Plan) calling for sovereignty, while minimizing Palestinians on the the internationalization of Jerusalem in 1947 was land. Palestinians allege that Israel executes this a non-binding recommendation that was never strategy by: 1) physically cutting off East Jerusalem implemented; it is certainly not morally or legally from the rest of the West Bank, 2) enacting binding given the Arab states’ rejection of Partition policies making it difficult for Palestinian residents and the inaction of the international community of Jerusalem to remain in their homes, and 3) to protect Jerusalem’s residents when five Arab aggressively settling East Jerusalem with heavily- armies invaded the nascent State of Israel in 1948. subsidized Jewish settlements. In the words of Israel’s first Prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, upon moving Israel’s parliament and Within weeks of the 1967 war, Israel confiscated governmental offices to Jerusalem and declaring 65 km of land from 28 West Bank Palestinian Jerusalem Israel’s capital: “A nation that, for two villages on which it would build a ring of new thousand and five hundred years, has faithfully settlements severing Jerusalem from the West adhered to the vow made by the first exiles by Bank, in most cases annexing agricultural lands the waters of Babylon not to forget Jerusalem, but not Palestinian population in a classic case will never agree to be separated from Jerusalem. of ethnic gerrymandering. Notoriously, Israel’s Jewish Jerusalem will never accept alien rule after Gafni Committee in 1973 recommended that thousands of its youngsters liberated their historic Israel aim to preserve a demographic balance in homeland for the third time, redeeming Jerusalem Jerusalem of 76% Jewish to 24% Palestinian, and from destruction and vandalism. We do not judge this ratio has driven Israel’s urban planning and the U.N., which did nothing when nations, which municipal policies ever since. In the words of Amir were members of the U.N., declared war on its Cheshin, advisor on Arab affairs to Jerusalem’s resolution of 29 November 1947, trying to prevent Mayor from 1984-1993: “Since 1967, Israel’s leaders the establishment of Israel by force, to annihilate adopted two basic principles in their rule over East the Jewish population in the Holy Land and destroy Jerusalem. The first was to rapidly increase the Jerusalem, the holy city of the Jewish people… Jewish population in East Jerusalem. The second Thus, we are no longer morally bound by the U.N. was to hinder growth of the Arab population resolution of November 29, since the U.N. was and to force Arab residents to make their homes unable to implement it. In our opinion the decision elsewhere…Israel turned urban planning into a tool of 29 November regarding Jerusalem is null and of the government, to be used to help prevent the void.” expansion of the city’s non-Jewish population. It was a ruthless policy, if only for the fact that the The 1967 war intensified this belief that through needs (to say nothing of the rights) of Palestinian great sacrifice, Jerusalem was being restored residents were ignored.” This “demographic war” to the people who’d yearned for it for 2000 to ensure a Jewish majority in the city, bolster years and would not allow it to be torn away Jewish claims to Jerusalem, and thwart Palestinian again. In dominant Israeli-Jewish narrative, the claims is waged on multiple fronts. reunification of Jerusalem in 1967 – after an unwanted war imposed by aggressive Arab states, First, Palestinians argue that the Jerusalem in which Israel’s very existence was at stake – municipality exercises systematic discrimination was miraculous, if not a portent of redemption. in planning, building, and infrastructure, investing Israeli Jews speak of the ecstatic euphoria of heavily in building up Jewish areas of the city JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 10

JEWISH-ISREALI PERSPECTIVES (CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE) PALESTINIAN-ARAB PERSPECTIVES (CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE) returning to the Western Wall and Old City after while strangling development in Palestinian areas. 19 years in which they were inaccessible under The city has encouraged Jews to move to what Jordanian rule. Rabbi Emanuel Feldman captures Palestinians refer to as Occupied East Jerusalem the mood: “The Old City, Temple Mount and all in order to “create facts on the ground” to support of Jerusalem were once again in our hands. I still the claim that Israeli sovereignty is irreversible remember the trembling voice of the Israel Radio there. In a city that is at least one-third Palestinian, announcer as he declared: ‘Ani nogea bakotel – I the government has built more than 50,000 am touching the Wall.’ Special newspaper editions housing units in new Jewish settlements on 35% hit the streets. Ma’ariv shouted: ‘The Place For of the land annexed in 1967, while building only Which We Have Waited for 2,000 Years.’ Yediot 500 housing units in Palestinian areas. Israel Aharonot, hardly a religious-oriented newspaper, strategically placed these settlements on hilltops carried on its masthead a citation from Isaiah 52: in a perimeter surrounding Jerusalem to obstruct ‘The Lord Hath Comforted His People, He Hath contiguity between Jerusalem, Ramallah and Redeemed Jerusalem.’ That evening came a live Bethlehem. radio broadcast from the Western Wall: …the shofar was repeatedly sounded, and soldiers fell Of the remaining land, Palestinians argue, Israel into each others’ arms and wept. As did the radio has blocked Palestinians from new construction announcer. As did all Israel. A wave of relief and through several means, including confiscating a gratitude inundated the land. In an outpouring third of Palestinian-owned areas as “green zones” of religious awe, tens of thousands of Israelis on which residents are not permitted to build, of all kinds streamed to the Western Wall, to and then turning these areas over to construct Rachel’s Tomb, to the Cave of the Patriarchs. The new Jewish settlements. Palestinians explain with world’s media spoke unabashedly of a victory of bitterness, “When a Palestinian says he wants to biblical proportions. The more religiously-attuned build, they won’t tell you, you can’t because you’re were certain they were hearing the steps of the Muslim. They’ll say, in the master plan this area is Messiah.” On the day Israeli paratroopers captured green. And you think, there is nothing green here. the Old City, their Commanding General, Motta And then, as soon as the land passes into Jewish Gur, radioed a famous address: “For some two hands, it suddenly ceases to be green.” Israel has thousand years the Temple Mount was forbidden to further refrained from creating town plans for the Jews. Until you came — you, the paratroopers most Palestinian areas (declaring that building — and returned it to the bosom of the nation. The permits cannot be issued where there are no town Western Wall, for which every heart beats, is ours plans) and created an often-unattainable threshold once again. Many Jews have taken their lives into for Palestinians to demonstrate ownership of their hands throughout our long history, in order land. Palestinians as well as Israeli human rights to reach Jerusalem and live here. Endless words organizations reference Israeli municipal authorities of longing have expressed the deep yearning for explicitly acknowledging the discriminatory, Jerusalem that beats within the Jewish heart...You nationalist motivations for these policies, such as have been given the great privilege of completing a recent statement by the Israeli official in charge the circle, of returning to the nation its capital and of East Jerusalem: “We will not allow the residents its holy center...Jerusalem is yours forever. of East Jerusalem to build as much as they need… Though it is not politically correct to say this, we The idea that Israel recapturing the Temple will look at Jerusalem’s demographic situation to Mount may herald redemption drives much of make sure that in 20 years we do not wake up to the Israeli religious community and even many an Arab city.” secular Israelis Beyond these religious and cultural themes of return, redemption, and pride, security Palestinians stress that as a result of these considerations are a leading force in Israeli support deliberate policies of under-planning, direct, and for a unified Jerusalem under Israeli rule. creeping expropriation, they are plagued by an enormous housing shortage, housing density in Many Israelis believe that – whether in 1948 or Palestinian areas is more than twice that in Jewish 2013 -- only exclusive Israeli sovereignty over all areas, and many Palestinian homes are removed from sewage, electricity, water, and road systems. JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 11

JEWISH-ISREALI PERSPECTIVES (CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE) PALESTINIAN-ARAB PERSPECTIVES (CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE) of Jerusalem can protect the city’s residents and Many Palestinians see no choice but to build homes Jewish and Christian holy sites alike. The Israeli illegally, and despite international condemnation, Ministry of Foreign Affairs argues that “at no Israel has responded by bulldozing hundreds of other time in history have worshippers of all faiths those Palestinian homes. enjoyed such a degree of religious freedom.” Many Israelis believe nowhere else in the world would Palestinians point to other means of confiscating a State provide so many rights and freedoms to Palestinian property, Judaising Jerusalem, and its enemies. They emphasize that Israel secures cleansing the city of Palestinians, such as an arcane religious freedom and access even for populations “Absentee Property Law” that Israel issued in 1950 that are overtly hostile to the State, and who do to administer the transfer of Palestinian refugees’ not protect Jewish religious rights in kind. Israelis property to the State of Israel. Since 1967, this law put forward much historical and contemporary has been used to expropriate the properties of evidence to support this claim. In the period of Palestinians who live in neighboring Bethlehem Jordanian rule from 1948-1967, at least 55 Jewish or other villages but own land in the Old City and holy sites in the Old City were desecrated and surrounding neighborhoods; after Israel annexed destroyed by the occupying Jordanians, and Jerusalem, Israel claimed that Palestinian property- Jews had no access to the Western Wall and owners in the West Bank are “absent” since they Temple Mount, Judaism’s holiest sites. During this are not citizens of Israel. Meanwhile, in an act that period, with Jerusalem divided, the border was Palestinians decry as clear, overt discrimination, meters away from Jewish neighborhoods, and Israel simultaneously determined that properties Jewish residents of Jerusalem were subjected to in East Jerusalem belonging to Jews prior to 1948 regular sniper fire; 25% of the Jewish residents of would be transferred to Jewish ownership even if Jerusalem fled the city in 1949 alone. Palestinian refugees had been living in them for decades since. More recently, in 2000 when the holy site of Joseph’s tomb in Nablus was evacuated and turned Jewish extremist groups like Ateret Cohanim – over to the Palestinian Authority, the Tomb was whose surreptitious, yet express aim is to drive pillaged and torched, its synagogue burned to out Palestinian inhabitants of the Old City and the ground and books incinerated. Most holy sites surrounding Arab neighborhoods and replace administered by the Palestinian Authority are seen them with Jews – use these laws and other, more as too dangerous for Jews to visit. Israelis will say disreputable means to gain control of Palestinian things like, ‘Look at how Muslims and Arabs treat property and create enclaves of Jewish residents what is holy to us, and yet look by contrast at how in Palestinian areas. Palestinians stress that these we treat what is holy to them – and yet the world Jewish settler groups are supported by the state; criticizes us and ignores their blatant violations of the Israeli government and Jerusalem Municipality our human and religious rights.’ send security forces to accompany the takeover of Palestinian homes, allocate private security Moreover, when Beit Jala was under full Palestinian guards to Jewish enclaves in the middle of control in 2000, Palestinian snipers took over Palestinian neighborhoods, promote building and the homes of Palestinian Christians and fired development projects in the enclaves, and admit on the 27,000 Jewish residents of Gilo. Many openly to their assistance to these settlement Israelis believe such attacks would be par for projects. Palestinian children in central Palestinian the course without Israeli security control and neighborhoods like the Muslim Quarter, Silwan, with close proximity between Palestinian and Sheikh Jarah, Ras al-Amud, and a-Tur are afraid to Jewish neighborhoods. If Shuafat – to cite but play near their own homes, out of intimidation from one example – were turned over to the Palestinian the armed Jewish settlers and security guards, who Authority, it would be 300 meters from the Jewish not only harass them in the streets but invade their neighborhood of French Hill and 100 meters from privacy by using security cameras to film inside Pisgat Ze’ev, home to 42,000 Israelis. Many Israelis their apartments. The settlers regularly attack believe experience suggests that Palestinian armed Palestinians and vandalize Palestinian property groups would exploit such points of vulnerability with near-total legal impunity; there is a less than to attack residents of Jerusalem with automatic 9% indictment rate for charges of settler violence JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 12

JEWISH-ISREALI PERSPECTIVES (CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE) PALESTINIAN-ARAB PERSPECTIVES (CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE) rifles, mortars and rockets, and Palestinian security toward Palestinians in East Jerusalem. Meanwhile, forces either would not or could not stop them. Palestinians watch the growing Temple Mount movement with mounting anxiety, presenting In sum, many Israelis believe dividing Jerusalem extensive evidence that Jewish extremists – under would endanger hundreds of thousands of lives the guise of seeking the right to pray on the Mount by placing a likely-unstable Arab state on the -- are actively plotting to blow up the Al-Aqsa doorstep of its residents and holy sites; they mosque and build the Third Temple. argue that only under Israeli sovereignty can Jerusalem be a free and tolerant city where all Palestinians present a third mechanism of pushing faiths can practice and maintain access to holy Palestinians out of Jerusalem: revocation of sites. Many believe that without the protection Palestinian residency rights, which Palestinian of the State of Israel, Jerusalem would descend and Israeli human rights organizations have into violence and chaos; Palestinian Authority rule called “the quiet deportation.” This mechanism over eastern Jerusalem would be a magnet for exploits the tenuous status granted Palestinian terror organizations from the Muslim Brotherhood, Jerusalemites, regardless of whether they were Islamic Jihad and Al Qaeda to Iranian-funded born in Jerusalem, their families have lived in organizations like Hezbollah and Hamas, just as in Jerusalem for generations, and they have no other Lebanon, Gaza, and Egypt. home. Most Palestinian Jerusalemites are not Israeli citizens, but rather hold the status of “permanent Furthermore, some Israelis argue that it is no residents.” To obtain Israeli citizenship, Palestinians longer physically feasible to divide Jerusalem, in Jerusalem must swear allegiance to Israel and certainly not according to the 1967 borders, renounce all other citizenships; most Palestinian given that the city has changed dramatically Jerusalemites reject this coercive requirement on since 1967. Most Israelis do not consider Jewish political grounds, viewing Israel’s rule over East neighborhoods built in Jerusalem since 1967 Jerusalem as legally and morally illegitimate. As as settlements, and would not support these residents, Palestinian Jerusalem residents can neighborhoods being dismantled or their residents vote in municipal elections, are obligated to pay being uprooted. Once a housing project or road taxes, and since 1988 have been entitled to social system is built, most Israelis regard it as an integral security and health care benefits. They cannot, and non-negotiable part of Jerusalem. 200,000 however, vote in national elections, and their status Jews live in what was once “East Jerusalem” and is treated as conditional and subject to revocation. infrastructure has fused between east and west, including a new light rail, water systems, pipe lines, As “residents,” Palestinians must prove that East electricity networks and roads. Tens of thousands Jerusalem is their “center of life” to retain their of Palestinians work in Jewish neighborhoods. right to reside there, a standard that has been Many contend that it is no longer possible at a used to revoke their residency rights on several practical level to “unscramble the egg,” given the grounds. Residents who leave Jerusalem for seven intermingling of neighborhoods, infrastructure, and years – including those who do graduate degrees populations. abroad – can lose their right to return to the city of their birth. Many Palestinians moved to Jerusalem Some Israelis make the case that Palestinians along suburbs – sometimes meters away from the with Jewish-Israelis would object to Jerusalem municipal boundaries – in direct response to Israeli- being divided according to ethnic lines, citing policy driven housing shortages in Palestinian recent polls indicating that a majority of Palestinian Jerusalem neighborhoods and inability to obtain residents of East Jerusalem would prefer living building permits; many of these Jerusalemites under Israeli Jewish sovereignty than Palestinian have had their residency revoked with no warning sovereignty, due in part to the social security and that they would jeopardize their right to return health insurance benefits they enjoy and in part to or visit the city. In 2000, Interior Minister Natan their belief that they have greater freedom under Sharansky announced that these policies would Israeli rule than they would under the Palestinian be discontinued: “As someone who believes that Authority. Many Israelis believe these polls give lie Jerusalem must remain under Israeli sovereignty, to criticism of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and we must look after the human rights of all citizens, JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 13

JEWISH-ISREALI PERSPECTIVES (CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE) PALESTINIAN-ARAB PERSPECTIVES (CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE) demonstrate the double standards to which Israel including those who live in East Jerusalem.” is held; why would Palestinians prefer to live under Nonetheless, from 2005-2011, thousands more Israeli sovereignty if Israel were an evil oppressor Palestinian Jerusalemites – treated as immigrants rather than a humane, tolerant, and democratic on their own soil – lost their rights to live in or visit society, especially in comparison to its neighbors? their only home.

While many Israelis believe that Palestinians have Israel’s family reunification policies have stripped greater democratic rights under Israel than they hundreds more East Jerusalem Palestinians of would under the Palestinian Authority, Israel residency rights and left thousands more in limbo, nonetheless has a small but vocal human rights with no idea whether they can carry on a normal community that carefully tracks and condemns life in Jerusalem. Marriages between Palestinians what it sees as the Municipality’s glaring in Jerusalem and West Bank cities are historically discrimination in planning, infrastructure, and quite common, and continued post-1967 with little building permits, as well as human rights violations regard for the border imposed by Israel between such as revocation of residency rights and home “Municipal Jerusalem” and the West Bank, a border demolitions. As Israeli human rights organization Palestinians view as arbitrary and illegitimate. West Btselem puts it, “Israel’s policy gravely infringes Bank Palestinians who marry East Jerusalemite the rights of residents of East Jerusalem and Palestinians are generally not granted permits flagrantly breaches international law.” Jerusalem’s allowing them to visit, reside, work or receive mayor Nir Barkat, however, challenges the health care in Jerusalem. Particularly since security allegations of discrimination, maintaining that the policies tightened in 2002, many couples now live Municipality supports “natural expansion” of both separately, with one spouse in Jerusalem and the Jewish and Arab residential areas and “honest other in the West Bank so as not to forfeit the right and fair” planning that will enhance the quality of the Jerusalemite to visit her family and home of life for all the different sectors of Jerusalem. city; moreover, because Jerusalem residency rights Barkat speaks for many Israelis in maintaining don’t automatically transfer to children, many that if anything, in a clearly discriminatory “triple children of Jerusalemites have been deprived of standard,” the international community asks Israel the right to reside in Jerusalem with one of their to tolerate criminal, politically-motivated, illegal parents. These policies are blatantly discriminatory; Palestinian building while denying natural growth Israelis do not lose their right to return to Israel to Jewish residents living in “disputed” areas no matter how many years they live abroad or in of Jerusalem. Many other Israelis acknowledge settlements in the West Bank or whom they choose some discrimination toward Palestinians occurs to marry. in Jerusalem, but believe it is episodic rather than systematic or inherent to Jerusalem remaining Since 1993, Israel has furthermore isolated unified under Israeli sovereignty. Jerusalem from the West Bank and Gaza through “closures” obstructing West Bank and There are some dents in Israeli tenaciousness on Gazan Palestinians from access to the holy city. Jerusalem. 55-72% percent of Israeli Jews believe Palestinians – some of whom live literally on the city is functionally divided between Jews the doorsteps of Jerusalem, many with deep and Arabs, according to recent polls, and some historical connections to the city -- have been believe that Israeli rule over close to 300,000 cut off from the goods and services, livelihood, Palestinians in East Jerusalem is a burden and medical care, transportation, universities, and not sustainable. As an Americans for Peace Now holy sites on which they relied. Palestinians are statement puts it: “contemporary Jerusalem is an deeply distrustful of Israeli claims to protect ‘undivided’ city only in slogans. On the ground, the rights of all faiths to freedom of worship, it is a visibly divided city…It is a city where…two given that hundreds of thousands of Muslim and distinct populations – Israelis and Palestinians – Christian Palestinians are regularly denied access live separate and rarely overlapping existences.” to holy sites in Jerusalem, even during Ramadan, Jerusalem expert and human rights activist Daniel Christmas, and other religious holidays. “It became Seidemann has compared Israel’s hold over easier for a Palestinian living in Nablus, Ramallah JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 14

JEWISH-ISREALI PERSPECTIVES (CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE) PALESTINIAN-ARAB PERSPECTIVES (CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE)

Jerusalem to a wolf held by the ears: “you don’t or Bethlehem to go to Istanbul, Paris, London, dare hold on, and you are scared to let go.” He or Boston, than to visit Jerusalem…The net result asserts that Israelis would embrace an avenue that was the ghettoization of Jerusalem” (Salim Tamiri, enabled them to “’let go’ of occupation in East Palestinian sociologist). Jerusalem, not as a retreat, but as a bold move made in the service of the two-state solution, and The construction of the wall/separation barrier justifying a division of the city.” If some Israelis along a route that effectively envelops and seals use empirical arguments – “facts on the ground” off East Jerusalem – concretizing the Municipality’s -- to argue prescriptively that Jerusalem cannot annexation of 65 km of occupied West Bank again be divided, others use empirical terms to territory -- has made even more consequential contend that Jerusalem is already divided between Israel’s other policies severing Jerusalem from Palestinian and Jewish areas and has never been the West Bank. The notorious E-1 plan – through unified, and thus would be easy to re-partition. which Israel proposes to connect Jerusalem to the settlement of Maale Adumim – would finalize Nonetheless, by and large Israeli public opinion the total separation of the northern and southern stands resolved on Jerusalem. According to halves of the West Bank, detaching Jerusalem recent polls, a majority of Israeli Jews (61-74%) from Ramallah and Bethlehem, and ignoring if voice opposition (and 48% “strong opposition”) to not destroying a fabric of life that evolved over passing eastern portions of the city to Palestinian centuries. sovereignty even if reaching a peace agreement with Palestinians hinged only on the question of Palestinians see all of these human rights violations Jerusalem. 83% oppose the Palestinian Authority and discriminatory policies as driven by Israel’s ruling over the Old City. Only 15-35% of Jewish- objective to strengthen its demographic hold and Israelis suggest that they would support a divided sovereign claim over Jerusalem, drive Palestinians plan for the city in which Israel relinquished from the city, and sever Jerusalem from the rest of sovereignty over parts of East Jerusalem. the West Bank. JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 15

PERSPECTIVES ON NEGOTIATIONS JEWISH-ISRAELI PERSPECTIVES PALESTINIAN-ARAB PERSPECTIVES

The point of departure for Israeli political leaders For most Palestinians, it is non-negotiable that and negotiators remains for Jerusalem to be Jerusalem will serve as the capital of a future united under Israeli sovereignty. In 1995, then Palestinian state, and there can be no two-state Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin said that he would solution without East Jerusalem (Al-Quds) as never divide the city: “if they told us peace is its capital. Those Palestinians who support a the price of giving up a united Jerusalem under two-state solution (ranging from 53-70% in Israeli sovereignty, my reply would be ‘let’s do 2013 polls) understand that West Jerusalem is without peace’”. Israelis almost across-the-board not up for grabs. Many believe pre-1948 Arab view former Prime Minister Ehud Barak’s offer neighborhoods should nonetheless be on the at Camp David as exceedingly, if not excessively table in permanent status negotiations, given the generous and conciliatory, as the first Prime significant percentage of West Jerusalem that Minister to put division of Jerusalem on the table. was Palestinian-owned prior to 1948, if only to In doing so, he broke enormous taboos, went acknowledge the concessions Palestinians have further than any Israeli Prime Minister had gone already made. Many Palestinians who support a before and further than he had a public mandate two-state solution accept the general principle to do, despite coming into office on a pledge for East Jerusalem proposed by President Bill to preserve Jerusalem as Israel’s “eternal and Clinton in 2000: Jewish neighborhoods to Israel, undivided capital.” Many attribute the collapse of Arab neighborhoods to a future Palestinian state. parliamentary support for his government and his Nonetheless, Palestinians view the ring of Jewish landslide loss in national elections to Ariel Sharon neighborhoods with which Israel has encircled in 2001 to his concessions on Jerusalem. Jerusalem since 1967 as noxious settlements that have cut off Ramallah, Jerusalem, and Bethlehem Israelis have mixed reactions to the Clinton from one another and confiscated private and Parameters formula of Jewish neighborhoods to municipal Palestinian property. In Palestinian public Israel, Palestinian neighborhoods to a Palestinian opinion, accepting Israeli sovereignty over most state. According to the Parameters, East of these settlements is contentious. According to Jerusalem and the Old City would be divided leaked documents, in 2008 Palestinian negotiators along ethnic lines; Israel would gain sovereignty controversially went so far as to concede most of over the Western Wall, and Palestinians would these settlements (Gilo, Pisgat Ze’ev, etc.), barring gain sovereignty over the Temple Mount. In Har Homa (see “Jerusalem in the News” section on 2000, Israel’s cabinet approved support for the page 24). Parameters, but added the condition that Israel would retain sovereignty over the Temple Mount. In The starting point for the official Palestinian the extensive reservations Barak wrote to Clinton position is UN Security Council Resolution on the plan, he insisted that he “would not sign any 242, which claims the ’67 border as the basis document that transfers sovereignty on the Temple for division of Jerusalem between Israeli and Mount to the Palestinians,” and also demanded Palestinian sovereignty and identifies East Israel retain sovereignty over the “Holy Basin” area Jerusalem -- including the Old City and Haram outside the Old City, including the City of David. -- as illegally occupied territory carrying the same status as the West Bank. Palestinian negotiators Many Israelis argue that Clinton’s formula on have minimally sought sovereignty over Arab Jerusalem, while it sounds fair to outsiders, neighborhoods in core areas of East Jerusalem, would be a disaster from a security perspective. including the Old City, Sheikh Jarrah, a-Tur, and Says Dore Gold, Israeli diplomat and former Salah a-din Street outside Damascus Gate. At the Ambassador to the United Nations: “You cannot Camp David Summit in 2000, Israeli negotiators take a city that looks like an ethnic chessboard offered Palestinians sovereignty over only outlying and grant the red squares one sovereignty and areas like Abu Dis, while proposing functional the black squares another sovereignty.” Former “autonomy” with formal Israeli sovereignty over Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defense Forces, Shaul more central areas. Palestinian negotiators rejected JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 16

JEWISH-ISREALI PERSPECTIVES (CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE) PALESTINIAN-ARAB PERSPECTIVES (CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE)

Mofaz reportedly stated that the Clinton Plan, if limited “administration” in lieu of sovereignty; implemented, would “threaten the security of the they believed ambiguous formulations would be state.” In consistent polling over the last decade, exploited by Israel to its advantage, having seen a majority of the Israeli public has said they similar arrangements render Palestinian leadership would oppose the Clinton plan for the division of purely symbolic with Israel maintaining real control. Jerusalem even as part of a comprehensive peace At Camp David, Palestinian negotiators instead agreement. proposed that all of East Jerusalem over the Green Line fall under Palestinian sovereignty, with Israel Israelis also hold mixed opinions about what should retaining autonomy over the Western Wall and happen with the Temple Mount, though a clear Jewish Quarter. majority opposes ceding Israeli sovereignty to Palestinian rule, joint management, or international Palestinians especially rejected fuzzy agreements supervision of the holy site. Israelis often view around the Haram/Temple Mount. At Camp David, Palestinian rejection of the Jewish historical Arafat refused to relinquish Islamic control over connection to the Temple Mount as a litmus test the Haram because – according to many observers for Palestinian denial of Jewish claims to Israel -- he didn’t feel he had the authority to make this as a whole. Many saw Arafat’s refusal at Camp decision on behalf of the Muslim world; some argue David to allow Jews even a prayer corner on that trying to force a final resolution at Camp David the Mount as a glaring symbol of such denial, was premature precisely because Arafat hadn’t unwillingness to compromise for the sake of peace, yet received imprimatur on the Haram from global and untrustworthiness as a custodian of holy sites. Muslim leadership. Some argue that the Saudi- In 2008, 60% of Israeli Jews said they would not driven Arab Peace Initiative (API) in 2002 intended accept joint Palestinian and Israeli management of in part to give cover to Palestinian negotiators to the Temple Mount as part of a peace agreement, give up the Haram to international control. Others while only 34% said they would be prepared to do argue, however: “Any attempt to construe the API so. Many also question whether an international in a manner that falls short of ‘full-stop’ Palestinian administration over the Old City could provide or Arab sovereignty on the Haram/Mount would be proper security mechanisms accommodating an exercise in self-delusion” (Danny Seidemann). several million tourists. Alongside supporting Israeli The formal Palestinian position on the Old City sovereignty remaining over the site, a majority of remains a claim for Palestinian sovereignty, with Israelis, according to a 2013 poll, wish for a change guarantee of freedom of worship and access to all from the status quo; 59% support Jews being as well as protection and preservation of holy sites, allowed to pray at the site despite its ongoing including Jewish ones. sensitivity, and a third of respondents suggest support for rebuilding a Third Jewish Temple on In 2008, according to some accounts, Palestinian the site. negotiators expressed willingness to accept an international committee taking over the In short, most Israelis believe that the division Haram, with the Old City being divided between of Jerusalem would be exceedingly dangerous, Palestinian (Christian and Muslim Quarters) and technically impossible, and not in the interests of Israeli sovereignty (Jewish and Armenian Quarters). the city’s residents, neither Jewish nor Arab. Nir These proposals went further than any Palestinian Barkat, Jerusalem’s Mayor, spoke for many Israelis negotiating team had yet gone, and Palestinian when he said in 2013, “In [the peace negotiations] negotiator Saeb Erekat was quoted as offering there are a lot of pink lines, but I have one red Israelis “the biggest Yerushalayim [Jerusalem] line: It’s called Jerusalem, don’t negotiate with in history” -- but even these concessions were Jerusalem…There is no good example of a split rejected by the Israeli side. Palestinian protests city that works.” Splitting Jerusalem, goes another ensued from revelation of these concessions, and colloquial metaphor, is like trying to split the Erekat was quoted in news media denying that the chambers of a heart; it simply doesn’t work. Palestinian team would concede the Old City and ring of settlements surrounding Jerusalem to Israel, Most Israelis believe the international community’s or the Haram to international management. recommendations for Jerusalem are foolish JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 17

JEWISH-ISREALI PERSPECTIVES (CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE) PALESTINIAN-ARAB PERSPECTIVES (CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE) and unworkable, another demonstration of how Many Palestinians voice despair over the future outsiders simply don’t understand the nature of of Jerusalem, given their perceptions of Israel’s this conflict: “What they’re seeking is the simple, relentless “land grabs” in and around the wrong answer for this region, for Jerusalem, for the Municipality, “ethnic cleansing” and dispossession Middle East and for the relationship between us of Palestinian residents, rhetoric about exclusive and our neighbors” (Jerusalem Mayor, Nir Barkat). Jewish sovereignty over the city, and refusal to That said, a significant minority would be willing share the area with its native inhabitants. They to transfer Arab neighborhoods in Jerusalem to believe Israel justifies its policies in the name Palestinian sovereignty in exchange for peace, of security considerations, while depriving and this number rises slightly when the security Palestinian Jerusalemites of basic security and situation is stable. Few Israelis, including those rights. In the words of Palestinian politician and on the left, envision a Jerusalem according to journalist, Ghassan Khatib: “It is debatable whether the 1967 borders, but some also believe there Israel ‘realizes’ that a Palestinian state without is nothing sacred about the expanded borders East Jerusalem as its capital is no solution for of “Municipal Jerusalem,” and some Palestinian Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims. Either its right- areas could be let go for the sake of peace. wing power structure knows this and is intent on Some believe that demographic considerations, sabotaging the two-state solution, or it is arrogant Israel’s international standing, and a just and and thinks that Palestinians will be forced to peaceful settlement require an Al-Quds that will accept whatever they get in the long run… Israel’s rise alongside Yerushalayim in at least some of objectives of ‘Judaising’ the city, changing its the neighborhoods of East Jerusalem. But the character and severing it from the rest of the West vast majority of Israeli Jews stand firm that, for Bank, will spell the death knell of the two-state the security and freedom of all of its residents, solution.” Jerusalem must remain undivided and exclusively under Israeli control. The PLO’s Negotiations Affairs Department summarizes what is at stake for Palestinians in Jerusalem: “The Palestinian position is based not only on the legal, religious, and historical rights of the Palestinian people, but also on their concrete needs and interests…One-third of the West Bank’s population resides within Jerusalem’s daily commuting orbits. If a just and lasting peace is to be realized, Jerusalem, the vital center and future capital of Palestine, must be reconnected to Palestine and its residents - politically, geographically, and spiritually.” JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 18

CONCLUSION: INTERNATIONAL POSITIONS AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS Most Western governments, including the United States, have not formally relinquished the 1947 UN Partition Plan’s recommendation to “internationalize” Jerusalem and its holy sites, given Jerusalem’s significance to all three Abrahamic faiths and peoples all over the world. The international community de jure does not recognize Israel’s sovereignty over West Jerusalem – or Jerusalem’s status as Israel’s capital – and many UN member states do not believe that Jerusalem should belong to Israel. For this reason, no country in the world currently maintains an embassy in Jerusalem, operating from the principle that Jerusalem’s final status must be determined through negotiations and not unilaterally by Israel. Nonetheless, America seemingly de facto recognizes Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. In 2012, the Democratic Party, at the behest of President Barak Obama himself, reinstated a line into its platform declaring that “Jerusalem is and will remain Israel’s capital.” The US Congress adopted a non-binding resolution in 1995 recognizing a united Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and calling for the US embassy to be relocated to Jerusalem. The Justice Department, however, concluded that this bill invades presidential authority and is unconstitutional, since the Constitution stipulates that the President has exclusive authority to recognize foreign sovereignty over territory. In 2002, the US Congress also passed legislation suggesting that US citizens born in Jerusalem may list “Israel” as their country of birth. Both Presidents George W. Bush and Barak Obama used their executive authority to override the legislation, citing its international sensitivity. While this primer was being written, in July 2013, a federal appeals court declared the 2002 Congressional law invalid.

Israel’s annexation of East Jerusalem and 1980 Basic Law declaring Jerusalem the “complete and united” capital of Israel are all the more contested. There is near international unanimity among inter- governmental institutions that East Jerusalem is part of the Occupied West Bank and the Jewish neighborhoods/settlements built by Israel over the Green Line since 1967 are illegal. In 1999 and 2001, the High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention – binding on 189 signatory states including Israel -- reaffirmed the applicability of the Convention to East Jerusalem and illegality of Jewish settlements in East Jerusalem. International bodies – from the UN organs to the International Court of Justice -- have ruled that they will not recognize changes to the 1967 borders with regard to Jerusalem unless agreed upon between the parties. As Serge Schemann, editor at the International Herald Tribune, has put it: “The battle for Jerusalem has always been a battle that Israel has waged alone.”

Though more than 65 solutions have been proposed for Jerusalem over the past four decades, five possible arrangements recur among Jerusalem experts: 1) Israel’s default position, namely full control and sovereignty of the State of Israel over a “united Jerusalem,” with some autonomy to Palestinians, and Muslim and Christian leaders to administer their own holy sites; 2) The PLO’s default position, namely sovereignty and full control of Palestinians over East Jerusalem, including the Old City and Holy Basin, with Jewish autonomy over the Western Wall and Jewish Quarter; 3) Territorial division, with most Jewish settlement neighborhoods incorporated into Israel, Palestinian neighborhoods (including the Muslim and Christian Quarters of the Old City and Haram/Temple Mount) to a Palestinian state; 4) Similar territorial division of the larger city, but with Israeli and Palestinian joint management of the Haram/Temple Mount, Old City, and Holy Basin; 5) Similar territorial partition of the larger city, but with a multi-national body and special regime managing the Haram/Temple Mount, Old City and Holy Basin and guaranteeing both integrity of holy sites and universal freedom of worship.

Most observers agree there will not be a peace agreement according to the first two alternatives. Of the latter three, the greatest sticking point remains what will happen with the Haram/Temple Mount. JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 19

King Hussein of Jordan was serious when he proposed that only God be recognized as ultimate sovereign over the Haram—and some have argued that this unconventional proposal may be the only possible resolution to two peoples’ who will not otherwise relinquish their exclusive claims over this sacred site.

On Jerusalem, the chasm between the two sides and the clash of their narratives remains immense, if not unbridgeable. Yet many suggest that to solve Jerusalem would be to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a whole. JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 20

MAPS

UN Proposed Boundaries for Jerusalem – Nov. 1947

Jerusalem city limits unilaterally expanded by Israel, June 28, 1967; annexed by Knesset, July 30, 1980.

Sho’fat Lifta Al Aisawiya Metsa Deir Yasin Jerusalem Al-Tour al-Azzaria

Ein Kerem Silwan Al Mafiha Abu Dis Jerusalem Beit Safafa city limits, 1947 Sharafat Sur Bahir Ramat Rahel

Umm Tuba

Beit Jalla

Bethlehem Beit Sahour

02 4 kilometers

0 1 2 3 miles

SOURCE: The Status of Jerusalem, United Nations, New York, 1979. http://www.fmep.org/maps/jerusalem/un-proposed-boundaries-for-jerusalem-nov-1947-jan-2000) JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 21

MAP OF THE OLD CITY OF JERUSALEM

http://www.fmep.org/maps/jerusalem/old%20city%20enyc%20brittanica.png/view JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 22

Jerusalem Before and After 1967

West Bank (Israeli occupied – JORDAN status to be determined) Ramallah KENDALL TOWN SCHEME Ramallah 1966 Jerusalem city limits unilaterally expanded ATAROT NEVE by Israel June 28, 1967, YA'ACOV annexed PISGAT by Knesset July 30, 1980. ZE'EV RAMOT EASTERN Mt.Scopus FR. HILL GATE

WEST East Jerusalem WEST East Jerusalem EAST TALPIOT GIVAT HAMATOS GILO GIVAT HA'ARBA HAR HOMA Bethlehem Bethlehem

Israeli Built Up Area Current / Projected Palestinian Built Up Area

Palestinian Urbanization

projected in Kendall Scheme Map: © Jan de Jong

http://www.fmep.org/maps/jerusalem/jerusalem-before-and-after-1967-jan-2000 JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 23

http://www.fmep.org/maps/jerusalem/metropolitan-jerusalem-august-2006/metropolitan_jerusalem_ august_2006.pdf/view JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 24

JERUSALEM IN THE NEWS

E1

E1 refers to a contentious area east of Jerusalem. The term generally references an Israeli plan to link Jerusalem to Maale Adumim, a large settlement many Israelis view as a suburb of Jerusalem. Palestinians see the project as destroying a potential Palestinian state by effectively bisecting the West Bank from north to south. Washington and the international community have condemned E1 as dooming a two-state solution. Israel has frozen construction since 2009, due to international controversy.

EXCAVATIONS

In Jerusalem, archaeology is infused with politics through-and-through. Palestinians see many Israeli archaeological projects as driven by efforts to spotlight Jewish Jerusalem at the expense of both prior and subsequent layers of non-Judaic Jerusalem culture, including 1300 years of Arab and Muslim civilization. Many see Israeli excavations as encroachments, particularly tunneling under the Haram/Temple Mount— which some go so far as to view as under-handed ways to structurally compromise Al-Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock in order to make way for a Third Jewish Temple. Palestinians furthermore decry archaeological projects being used to threaten displacement of local populations, such as the current residents of Silwan. Israelis in turn argue that the Islamic Waqf controlling the Temple Mount has shown total contempt for pre- Islamic Jewish heritage, treating precious remains from the First and Second Temple periods as “waste” in an effort to render invisible extensive Jewish rule and history in Jerusalem. Some go so far as to compare the behavior of the Waqf to that of the Taliban in Afghanistan repugnantly destroying pre-Islamic Buddhist sites. Many Israelis cite Palestinian desecration of Jewish holy sites as evidence that the cultural and religious heritage of the Holy City can only be preserved under Israeli sovereignty and oversight.

HAR HOMA

Har Homa is a Jewish neighborhood/settlement just south of Jerusalem, with 12,000 residents. For Palestinians, Har Homa is an especial affront since it breaks contiguity between Jerusalem and Bethlehem, and – as a settlement initiated in 1997 in the midst of the Oslo period – became, for Palestinians, a symbol of Israeli duplicity. Israel argues that the project is part of a broader initiative to address housing shortages among both Jews and Arabs in Jerusalem; Oslo agreements do not prohibit Israel from building in Jerusalem; and significant contiguity between Arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem and the West Bank remains. JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 25

PARTIAL REFERENCE LIST

“1967: The Reunification of Jerusalem,” CAMERA, n.d. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.sixdaywar.org/content/ReunificationJerusalem.asp

Abdullah, Daud, “’Shocking Revelations’ on Jerusalem,” Al Jazeera, 23 Jan. 2011. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.aljazeera.com/palestinepapers/2011/01/2011123134738643818.html

“Absentees Against Their Will – Property Expropriation in East Jerusalem under the Absentee Property Law,” Ir Amim, 7 Jan. 2010. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.ir-amim.org.il/en/report/absentees-against-their-will-%E2%80%93-property-expropriation-east- jerusalem-under-absentee-property

Abu-Amr, Ziad, “The Significance of Jerusalem: A Muslim Perspective,” Palestine-Israel Journal 2:2 1995. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.pij.org/details.php?id=646

Adwan, Sami, Dan Bar-On, and Eyal Naveh Side-by-Side: Parallel Histories of Israel-Palestine, New York: New Press, 2012. Print.

Alpher, Yossi, “Only by Prioritizing the Issues,” Can Jerusalem Still Be the Capital of Two States? Bitterlemons.org, 22: 1 Aug. 2011. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.bitterlemons.org/previous_ins.php?opt=1&id=25#118

Alyan, Nisreen and Mahmoud Qarae’en, Keren Tzafrir, Miri Gross and Tali Nir, “Unsafe Space The Israeli Authorities’ Failure to Protect Human Rights amid Settlements in East Jerusalem,” The Association for Civil Rights in Israel, Sept. 2010. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.acri.org.il/pdf/unsafe-space-en.pdf

Amirav, Mosheh, Jerusalem Syndrome: The Palestinian-Israeli Battle for the Holy City, Portland: Sussex Academic Press, 2009.

Anderson, John Ward, “Israelis Act to Encircle East Jerusalem,” Washington Post, 7 Feb. 2005. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3263-2005Feb6.html

“Arafat names Jerusalem as capital,” BBC News, 6 Oct. 2002. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2302961.stm

Associated Press, “Jerusalem Mayor Rejects Clinton’s Criticism of House Demolitions,” Haaretz, 5 March 2009. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.haaretz.com/news/jerusalem-mayor-rejects-clinton-s-criticism-of-house-demolitions-1.271531

“Background on East Jerusalem,” Btselem, 1 Jan. 2011. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.btselem.org/jerusalem

“Basic Law: Jerusalem – Capital of Israel,” Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 30 July 1980. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/mfa-archive/1980-1989/pages/basic%20law-%20jerusalem-%20capital%20 of%20israel.aspx

Baskin, Gershon, “The Jerusalem Problem: The Search for Solutions,” Palestine-Israel Journal 8:1: 2001. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.pij.org/details.php?id=165

Benari, Elad, “83% of Israelis: ‘67 Borders’ Won’t Bring Peace,” Arutz Sheva, 1 Jan. 2013. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/163754#.UpATYuLjXxs JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 26

---, “Barkat on BBC: From Whom, Exactly, Did We Conquer Jerusalem?” Arutz Sheva, 15 July 2011. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/145761#.UpAdduLjXxt

Benhorin, Yitzhak, “Jerusalem Arabs Prefer Israel,” YNet News, 13 Jan. 2011. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4013000,00.html

Benn, Aluf, “U.S. Warns Israel: Don’t build up West Bank corridor,” Haaretz, 24 July 2009. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/u-s-warns-israel-don-t-build-up-west-bank-corridor-1.280654

“Biblical Claims to the Land: How Can Israel Give Up Even an Inch of Jerusalem?” American for Peace Now, 1 Feb. 2010. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://peacenow.org/entries/tsws_israel_give_up#.UpAd4eLjXxt

Black, Eric, Parallel Realities: A Jewish/Arab history of Israel/Palestine, Minneapolis: Star Tribune, 1992. Print.

Bloch, Ilan, “Jerusalem as the Eternal Capital,” Jerusalem Post, 20 May 2012. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-Ed-Contributors/Jerusalem-as-the-eternal-capital

Carlstromm, Gregg, “’The Biggest Yerushalayim: PA Offered to Concede Almost all of East Jerusalem,’” Al Jazeera, 23 Jan. 2011. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.aljazeera.com/palestinepapers/2011/01/2011122112512844113.html

“Conference of High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention: Declaration,” Settlement Report, Foundation for Middle East Peace 12:1 Jan.-Feb. 2002. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.fmep.org/reports/archive/vol.-12/no.-1/conference-of-high-contracting-parties-to-the-fourth- geneva-convention-declaration

Eldar, Akiva, “Jerusalem is Already Divided,” Haaretz, 31 May 2011. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/features/jerusalem-is-already-divided-1.365067

“EU: Jerusalem Should Be Capital for Two States,” BBC, 8 Dec. 2009. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8401913.stm

“Europe Affirms Support for a Corpus Separatum for Greater Jerusalem,” Settlement Report, Foundation for Middle East Peace 9:7 May 1999. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.fmep.org/reports/special-reports/israels-uncertain-victory-in-jerusalem/europe-affirms- support-for-a-corpus-separatum-for-greater-jerusalem

Feldman, Emanuel, “The Road from Euphoria,” Jerusalem Post, 15 May 2007. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-Ed-Contributors/The-road-from-euphoria

Felner, Eitan, “A Policy of Discrimination: Land Expropriation, Planning and Building in East Jerusalem,” Btselem, 1995. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.btselem.org/download/199505_policy_of_discrimination_eng.doc

Gold, Dore, “The Dangerous Implications of Dividing Jerusalem,” www.Dore-Gold.com, 7 April 2010. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.dore-gold.com/2010/04/the-dangerous-implications-of-dividing-jerusalem.php

---, The Fight for Jerusalem: Radical Islam, the West, and the Future of the Holy City, Washington D.C.: Regnery Publishing. Print.

---, “Jerusalem in International Diplomacy,” Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, n.d. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.jcpa.org/jcprg10.htm JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 27

---, “Media: Indecent Proposal,” Jerusalem Post, 7 Jan. 2011. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.jpost.com/Features/Front-Lines/Media-Indecent-proposal

Greenberg, Joel, “A Gain for Arabs in East Jerusalem,” New York Times, 18 Oct. 1999. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.nytimes.com/1999/10/18/world/a-gain-for-arabs-in-east-jerusalem.html

Hasson, Nir, “One Third of Israeli Jews Want Temple Rebuilt, Poll Finds,” Haaretz, 12 July 2013. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/.premium-1.535336

Hirsch, Moshe, Deborah Housen-Couriel, Ruth Lapidoth, Whither Jerusalem?: Proposals and Positions Concerning the Future of Jerusalem, The Hague, Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 1995, Print.

Horowitz, David, “Barkat: Let the Palestinians Rename Ramallah as ‘Jerusalem’” The Times of Israel, 7 May 2013. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.timesofisrael.com/barkat-let-the-palestinians-rename-ramallah-as-jerusalem/

---, “One Jerusalem. Undivided. Open to all. Controlled by Israel,” The Times of Israel, 8 May 2012. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.timesofisrael.com/one-jerusalem-undivided-open-to-all-controlled-by-israel/

“How to Resolve the Conflict? Jerusalem,” Palestinian Negotiation Affairs Department, n.d. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.robat.scl.net/content/NAD/resolve_conflict/jerusalem/index.php

“Indivisible Jerusalem,” Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, 13 Dec. 2012. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://jcpa.org/video/indivisible-jerusalem/

“Jerusalem,” Israel: A Guide for Activists, Anti-Defamation League, n.d. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://archive.adl.org/israel/advocacy/glossary/jerusalem.asp

“Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995” 104th Congress Public Law, U.S. Government Printing Office, n.d. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-104publ45/html/PLAW-104publ45.htm

“Jerusalem in International Diplomacy: The 2000 Camp David Summit, the Clinton Plan, and Their Aftermath,” The Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, n.d. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.jcpa.org/art/jid-campdavid.htm

JuleeK, “Temple Mount, Israel,” CNN, 2 June 2013. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-981631

Kampeas, Ron, “ADL to Jerusalem-born Yanks: We Want You,” Jewish Journal, 28 July 2011. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.jewishjournal.com/nation/article/adl_to_jerusalem-born_yanks_we_want_you_20110728/

Khatib, Ghassan, “Sabotage or Arrogance?” Can Jerusalem Still Be the Capital of Two States? Bitterlemons.org, 22: 1 Aug. 2011. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.bitterlemons.org/previous_ins.php?opt=1&id=25#119

Khatib, Khaled A., The Conservation of Jerusalem, Palestinian Academic Society for the Study of International Affairs, 1993. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.passia.org/jerusalem/publications/khaled_khatib_Conservation_Jerusalem/chapter1.htm

Lapidoth, Ruth and Moshe Hirsch, The Jerusalem Question and Its Resolution: Selected Documents, The Hague, Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1994. Print.

“A Layman’s Guide to Home Demolitions,” Ir-Amim, March 2009. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.ir-amim.org.il/en/report/layman%E2%80%99s-guide-home-demolitions JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 28

Lazaroff, Tovah, “Poll: 72% of Jewish Israelis view J’lem as Divided,” Jerusalem Post, 5 June 2013. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.jpost.com/Diplomacy-and-Politics/Post-poll-72-percent-of-Jewish-Israelis-view-Jlem-as- divided-315490

Lekas Miller, Anna, “Israel’s Land Grab in East Jerusalem,” The Nation, 17 April 2013. Web. 22 Nov. 2013 http://www.thenation.com/article/173884/israels-land-grab-east-jerusalem#

“Letter Dated 18 May 1948 from the Assistant Secretary-General for Security Council Affairs Addressed to the Jewish Agency for Palestine, and Reply Dated 22 May 1948 Addressed to the Secretary-General Concerning the Questions Submitted by the Security Council,” United Nations Security Council, 18 May 1948. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/B4085A930E0529C98025649D00410973

Lidman, Melanie, “Jerusalem Will Never Be Divided, says Barkat,” Jerusalem Post. 13 March 2013. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.jpost.com/Video-Articles/Video/Jerusalem-will-never-be-divided-says-Barkat

---, “Support Growing for Two-State Solution,” Jerusalem Post, 28 Dec. 2011. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.jpost.com/Diplomacy-and-Politics/Support-growing-for-two-state-solution

Malley, Robert and Hussein Agha, “Camp David: The Tragedy of Errors,” New York Review of Books, 9 Aug. 2001. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2001/aug/09/camp-david-the-tragedy-of-errors/

Morris, Benny, “Camp David and After: An Exchange (An Interview with Ehud Barak),” The New York Review of Books, 13 June 2002. Web. 21 Nov. 2013. http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2002/jun/13/ camp-david-and-after-an-exchange-1-an- interview-wi/

Mozgovaya, Natasha and Barak Ravid, “U.S.: Only Israel, Palestinians Should Decide Jerusalem’s Future,” Haaretz 8 Dec. 2009. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.haaretz.com/news/u-s-only-israel-palestinians-should-decide-jerusalem-s-future-1.2548

“Netanyahu to Bush: Jerusalem is Ours Forever,” Israel Today, 11 Jan. 2008. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.israeltoday.co.il/default.aspx?tabid=178&nid=15004

“The Palestine Mandate,” The Council of the League of Nations, 24 July 1922. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/palmanda.asp#art28

“The Palestinian Official Position,” Palestinian Ministry of Information, n.d. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://web.archive.org/web/20060212195415/http://www.minfo.gov.ps/permenant/English/Jerusalem/ Pal_Official.htm

“Palestinians in East Jerusalem Seek Safety in Israeli Citizenship,” Irin News, UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, 30 May 2013. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.irinnews.org/report/98132/palestinians-from-east-jerusalem-seek-safety-in-israeli-citizenship

“Palestinians Attack Al-Jazeera ‘Distorted’ Talks Leaks,” BBC News, 24 Jan. 2011. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12263671

Parker, Zack, “Why Jews Should Be Allowed to Pray on the Temple Mount,” The Daily Beast, 25 June 2013. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/06/25/why-jews-should-be-allowed-to-pray-on-the-temple- mount.html JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 29

Pressman, Jeremy, “Visions in Collision: What Happened at Camp David and Taba?,” International Security 28:2, Fall 2003: 5-43.

“Prime Minister’s Statement Concerning Jerusalem and the Holy Places,” Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, 5 Dec. 1949. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.jcpa.org/art/knesset4.htm

“Residency Rights of Palestinians in East Jerusalem,” UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, 23 March 2011. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.ochaopt.org/jday/ocha_opt_jerusalem_report_2011_03_23_web_english_Chapter_1.pdf

“Resolution 181 (II). Future Government of Palestine,” United Nations General Assembly, 29 Nov. 1947. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/0/7F0AF2BD897689B785256C330061D253

“Resolution Adopted by the General Assembly 63:30: Jerusalem,” United Nations General Assembly, 23 Jan. 2009. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/unga63_30.pdf?OpenElement

Reuters and JTA, “U.S. Court Rules: Americans Born in Jerusalem Cannot List ‘Israel’ as Place of Birth,” Haaretz, 23 July 2013. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.537530

Ross, Dennis and Gidi Grinstein, “Camp David: An Exchange,” New York Review of Books, 20 Sept. 2001. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2001/sep/20/camp-david-an-exchange/

Rudoren, Jodi, and Mark Landler, “Housing Move in Israel Seen as Setback for a Two-State Plan,” New York Times, 30 Nov. 2012. Web. 22 Nov. 2013.

Schmemann, Serge, “A New Struggle for Jerusalem,” New York Times, 2 March 1997. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.nytimes.com/1997/03/02/weekinreview/a-new-struggle-for-jerusalem. html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

Segal, Jerome, “Sovereignty Over Jerusalem, Religious Sites Belongs to God,” Haaretz, 27 July 2000. Web. 22 Nov. 2013.

Seidemann, Daniel, “Holding on By Our Fingernails,” Can Jerusalem Still Be the Capital of Two States? Bitterlemons.org, 22: 1 Aug. 2011. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.bitterlemons.org/previous_ins.php?opt=1&id=25#120

---, “Jerusalem Challenges the API,” Bitterlemons-api.com, 12 Jan. 2011. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.bitterlemons-api.org/inside.php?id=22

Shavit, Ari, “Continuation of Eyes Wide Shut: An Interview with Ehud Barak,” Haaretz, 4 Sept. 2002. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.haaretz.com/continuation-of-eyes-wide-shut-1.35091

Shehori, Dahlia, “Modeling Jerusalem’s Holy Basin on West Berlin,” Haaretz, 19 Jan. 2004. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/features/modeling-jerusalem-s-holy-basin-on-west-berlin-1.111383

“Statements of the Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion Regarding Moving the Capital of Israel to Jerusalem,” Knesset, 5 Dec. 1949. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.knesset.gov.il/docs/eng/bengurion-jer.htm JERUSALEM: A PRIMER 30

“The Status of Jerusalem,” Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 14 March 1999. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/mfa-archive/1999/pages/the%20status%20of%20jerusalem.aspx

Tamari, Salim, “The Future of Jerusalem: Sacred Space or Open City?” Al Shabaka Palestinian Policy Brief, 11 July 2011. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://al-shabaka.org/policy-brief/negotiations/future-jerusalem-sacred-space-or-open-city?page=3

---, “The ‘Palestine Paper Leaks’ and the Sacralization of Jerusalem City Space?” Jerusalem Quarterly Institute of Palestine Studies, 47 Autumn 2011, Web. 22 Nov. 2013.

“United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine Committee on Jerusalem: Letter dated 31 May 1949, addressed by Mr. Walter Eytan, Head of the Delegation of Israel to the Chairman of the Committee on Jerusalem in response to the Questionnaire dated 3 May 1949 concerning an International Regime for the Jerusalem Area,” 1 June 1949. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/2C25E1B7AADB7CC685256AF5005F6D18

“United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine Committee on Jerusalem: Summary Record of the Thirty-Third Meeting Between the Committee of Jerusalem and the Delegations of the Arab States,” United Nations, 20 June 1949. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/39DCEB7D1499881685256AF50068F3BA

“U.K. Position on Jerusalem,” the National Archives, n.d. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20080205132101/www.fco.gov.uk/servlet/ Front%3fpagename=OpenMarket/Xcelerate/ShowPage&c=Page&cid=1057335917798

“U.S. Policy: Jerusalem’s Final Status must Be Negotiated,” Settlement Report, Foundation for Middle East Peace 4:7 Feb. 1994. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.fmep.org/reports/special-reports/special-report-on-israeli-settlement-in-the-occupied- territories-1/u.s.-policy-jerusalems-final-status-must-be-negotiated

Weiner, Justus Reid, “Illegal Construction in Jerusalem,” Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, n.d. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.jcpa.org/jlmbldg.htm

Wilson, Scott, “Democrats Restore to Party Platform Language on Jerusalem,” Washington Post, 5 Sept. 2012. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-09-05/politics/35497382_1_obama-and-jewish-voters-platform- language-jerusalem

Zellman, Ariel, “Polls: Division of Jerusalem and Israelis,” www.arielzellman.wordpress.com, 15 Jan. 2011. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://arielzellman.wordpress.com/2011/01/15/polls-division-of-jerusalem-and-israelis/

Zonszein, Mairav and Aziz Abu Sarah, “The ‘Religiousization’ of the Conflict in Jerusalem,” 972Mag, 20 Jan. 2011. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://972mag.com/the-religiousization-of-the-conflict-in-jerusalem/8952/

Zohar, Gil, “The Land is Whose Land?” Jerusalem Post, 26 July 2007. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://www.jpost.com/Local-Israel/In-Jerusalem/The-land-is-whose-land