While Israel has stood strong against the reopening of a US diplomatic mission to the Palestinian Authority, the State Department has sneaked in a new position that promotes US-PA relations – and could undermine Israeli sovereignty in its own capital.

Hady Amr, leaving his post as deputy assistant secretary of state for Israeli-Palestinian affairs, will become the new special representative for Palestinian affairs – the first time the US has created such a position.

Abu Mazen (now in his 18^th year as PA president, though he was elected for a four-year term) originally objected to the new position. He demanded that the US reopen its consulate in Jerusalem, which would essentially serve as an embassy to the PA.

However, “as the President reiterated in Israel and the West Bank,” a State Department official said, “we remain committed to re-opening our Consulate General in Jerusalem and to the vision of a two-state solution.”

The correlation, then, that this position has with Jerusalem raises very critical questions: “Does the new post include purview over eastern Jerusalem? Are Arab residents of Israel in eastern Jerusalem supposed to engage with his office, or with the US Embassy to Israel?”

We referred precisely these questions to the US Office of Palestinian Affairs, which then referred us to its press office in Washington. No answer has yet been forthcoming, which is not surprising – because the issues are potentially explosive. For if in fact Arab citizens of Israel need not turn to the US Embassy in Israel but rather to a “stand-in” for a PA consulate/embassy, this would be nothing less than what Israel has called all along the undermining of Israeli sovereignty in its own capital.

Can it even be imagined that France, let’s say, would open an office in Washington for Native Indian affairs? This would be as if saying, “The Indians deserve their own identity, independent of the United States.” The only difference is that the Indians are no longer fighting for their independence and land, while the Arabs of the Palestinian Authority most definitely are.

Over a year ago, when the issue of reopening the American consulate for the PA first arose, former Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat said that it “means recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine … a red line that cannot be crossed.” Jerusalem Deputy Mayor Aryeh King called the initiative “a spiteful move that seeks to undermine Israel’s absolute sovereignty over Jerusalem” – sovereignty that continues to be under fire from those who wish to see Jerusalem become the capital of a new Arab state.

Furthermore, the very initiative of establishing a high-level position to upgrade the PA’s US relations and standing in Washington encourages it not to make concessions and thus perpetuates the state of non-peace – or worse.

KeepJerusalem calls upon the Israeli government to ensure that Hady Amr’s job remains only to encourage the PA to “undertake serious reforms” – one of the challenges that former U.S. Ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk reportedly said Amr would face in his new post.

Meanwhile, the Jerusalem Municipality published the zoning description for the future US Embassy to Israel earlier this month – and PA figures have begun to accuse Israel of stealing the land on which it is to be built.

PA prime minister Mohammad Shtayyeh demands that the US cancel its plans to build the new embassy complex. He told his cabinet ministers that the designated land – smack in the middle of western Jerusalem – was “illegally confiscated” by Israeli authorities in 1950.

The facts are, however, that the confiscation was not only legal, but in keeping with a just, moral, and duly-passed Knesset law: the 1950 Absentee Property Law, which transferred the property of absentee Arab land-owners into the possession of the State of Israel.

Who were these land-owners? On the whole, they were Arabs who had run away from the battlefront before and during the 1948 War of Independence, with encouragement and promises from the attacking Arab countries that they would soon be able to return in victory over the Jewish entity. *They were thus accomplices in the Arab war effort to destroy Israel.*

On June 8, 1951, for instance, the Secretary-General of the Arab League wrote that during the war, the League “assured the Arab peoples that [victory over the Jews] would be as simple as a military promenade…” This  underscored that which a Jordanian daily wrote on February 19, 1949: “The Arab states… encouraged the Palestinian Arabs to leave their homes temporarily in order to be out of the way of the Arab invasion armies.”

Thus, the homes and lands were abandoned specifically in order to facilitate Israel’s destruction. Just like it is well understood that Israel need not accept Arab Palestinian “refugees” into its population, the Absentee Property Law has the same justification: Israel need not allow people to return to their homes so that they might finish off, from within, that which they sought in 1948, namely, the destruction of Israel.

The new US Embassy is to be built just off Derech Hebron,  in an area known by its British Mandate-era name as “Camp Allenby.”

Despite what are expected to be increasing claims of illegality by left-wing organizations, the law in question has even been upheld by Israel’s Supreme Court, which takes international law into significant account.

These two dangerous developments – the upgrade of Washington’s relations with the PA, and the outrageous claims against Israeli law – present potentially great challenges to Israeli sovereignty in its united and historic capital. If and when we overcome them, the national rewards will be historic. 

The Ministry of Jerusalem and Heritage has launched the “Culture at Mt. of Olives Festival” with a gala performance by famed Jerusalem singer Yehoram Gaon. Over 1,000 people came to take part, followed a few days later by nearly the same amount at a concert by Hassidic-music singing star Avraham Fried. The visitors were also treated to unique tours of the mountain and a spectacular view of the Old City and the Temple Mount just across the Kidron Valley.

Dozens of events are scheduled at Mt. of Olives (Har HaZeitim, Israel’s 11^th-highest mountain) for this month of Elul preceding the High Holidays, from Sep. 15 to Oct. 3. The Ministry of Jerusalem and Heritage is investing millions of shekels in the project, carried out under the auspices of the East Jerusalem Development Company (Pami).

Visitors will pay a nominal fee to take part in tours and lectures, focusing on the people and events that have shaped Jerusalem over the past 3,000 years. A particular focus will be placed on some of the illustrious Jews buried in the Mt. of Olives cemetery, including Rav Kook, Menachem Begin, Rav Shlomo Goren, Nobel Prize winner Shai Agnon, the martyrs of the 1929 Hebron massacre, Pinchas Kehati, Henrietta Szold, and 100,000 more beginning at least during the First Temple period.

Under Jordanian rule, between 1948 and 1967, Jewish access to the mount was illegally and strong-handedly prohibited, despite Jordan’s commitment in the Israeli-Jordanian Armistice Agreement. In addition, the Jordanians smashed to pieces or otherwise desecrated some 38,000 tombstones and gravesites there. Since Jerusalem’s reunification in the Six Day War, burial ceremonies have been renewed at the site and large sections of the cemetery rehabilitated. A dozen burial societies are currently active there.

This is not to say that Arab attempts to damage the cemetery or attack victors have totally abated. The past two weeks alone saw at least four such attacks, after a relatively quiet period. Nevertheless, it is clear that Israeli security efforts have had a positive effect.

Jewish Presence Increasing

Most importantly, the Jewish presence in the area of the Mt. of Olives, and throughout eastern Jerusalem, has grown significantly in recent years. Among the new neighborhoods are Beit Orot (24 families), HaChoshen (two adjacent buildings atop Har HaZeitim), the City of David (nearly 90 families), Kidmat Tzion, the Yemenite Quarter in Silwan (35 families, with six more soon to move in), and more – but the largest of all is Maaleh HaZeitim, with close to 150 families.

It is important to remember the mountain’s critical importance in Judaism: The Red Heifer ceremony was performed there, King David earmarked it for prayer, and it was a Jewish pilgrimage site for long after the Second Temple was destroyed. Not only that, the oil from Mt. of Olives’ olive trees was used for the Menorah in the Holy Temple across the valley, and the torch-lightings signaling that a New Moon (new month) had been declared began there.

Perhaps most importantly, the last prophecy of Zecharia speaks of the day when G-d will fight on behalf of Jerusalem and the Mt. of Olives will split open from north to south.

The objective of the Mt. of Olives Festival is to enhance the area and solidify its standing as a preeminent and safe cultural and tourist center. A state-of-the-art Visitors’ Center will soon be built, and many security and environmental measures have been upgraded.

“Our goal is to solidify Mt. of Olives as a place of history, Judaism, and culture,” says Netanel Izak, Director of the Ministry of Jerusalem and Heritage, “and to thus strengthen Israeli sovereignty and authority throughout Jerusalem.”

“Har HaZeitim is among the most important Jewish sites in Yerushalayim,” says Jerusalem Minister Elkin, “and it also has significant strategic importance. We wish to instill this special site in the hearts of the entire population. I invite the general public to come to the tours and events at Har HaZeitim and enjoy a unique and safe experience.”

Its Role in Maintaining Sovereignty

In order to ensure continued future Israeli sovereignty over the entire city of Jerusalem, certain facts on the ground must be guaranteed. In the case of the all-important Mt. of Olives – and can we even conceive of a Jewish Jerusalem without the Mt. of Olives?! – Israel must make sure to guarantee and facilitate Jewish access and presence there. Jews must feel safe there, and must feel free to frequent the site, not only for funerals and to visit gravesites, but to visit friends, enjoy the view, stop off at the Visitors’ Center, remember its history, and more. The current Culture Festival should do much to attain this goal.

As our sad commemorations of the double-destruction of Jerusalem and the Holy Temples intensify with the approach of the fast of Tisha B’Av this Sunday, we have no choice but to find the parallels between then and now, enabling us to avoid our fateful mistakes of yore.

Indeed, it is critical for anyone who wishes to have a say or impact on what Jerusalem will look like in the coming years to know the basics of what happened nearly 2,000 and 2,500 years ago, respectively. Our Sages of the Talmud, who lived just before, during, and after the Roman destruction of the Second Temple and the gradual loss of Jewish near-sovereignty in the Holy Land, had a very clear take on the matter: Baseless hatred among the Jews, in its various manifestations, led to the sacking of Jerusalem, as did the committing of the cardinal sins of murder, incest, and idol worship specifically towards the end of the First Temple period.  

In addition, the Sages instituted fasts for the various milestones along the way. They decreed a fast for the siege placed upon Jerusalem by the Babylonians (10^th of Tevet), one for the breaching of the city walls (17^th of Tammuz), and one for the actual burning of the Temple (9^th of Av). Lastly, they instituted the Fast of Gedaliah (3^rd of Tishrei) for the assassination of the erstwhile leader of the surviving remnants of the Jewish community, and the dashing of all hopes for Jewish sovereignty for several decades to come.

Each of these has its parallels in our contemporary situation.

Over the past 30+ years, there has been a massive wave of illegal building in Arab neighborhoods of Jerusalem, for the express purpose of creating geographic contiguity from Ramallah in the north to Bethlehem in the south. The goal is not merely to facilitate Arab travel and strengthen the Arab presence, but even more, to divide Jerusalem de facto and create, on the ground, the capital of a Palestinian state. 

This creeping Arab expansion is definitely having an effect, strangling the city’s urban development – very much like the Babylonian siege forcefully imposed upon Jerusalem long ago. This stifling siege of illegal Arab construction, unhindered by the enforcement of zoning laws, combined with the double whammy of a lack of housing solutions and employment opportunities for Jews, has long been closing in on us. For years, it has cost Jerusalem an average net loss of some 8,000 Jews a year.

In some places, most unfortunately, the enemy has “breached” the walls – and right within our city limits, two huge Arab neighborhoods have sprouted and continue to grow wildly, unblocked by the security barrier. The two – Kafr Aqeb and Ras Hamis/Shuafat – have become Hamas strongholds that block Jewish growth, with high crime rates and almost no Israeli governance. 

The growing Arab population in Jerusalem now stands at 40% of the total population – and in eastern Jerusalem, where the Palestinian Authority wishes to establish its “capital,” it holds a commanding lead of nearly 60%. Will we wake up one day soon to a Hamas-backed mayor in Jerusalem!?

But possibly these problems are just the symptoms of deeper issues, as they were in the days of the Holy Temple. We must ask ourselves: Are we sufficiently attached to each other? To Jerusalem? To our nationhood and sovereignty? To our age-old teachings and values??

Though those who live here are perpetually witness to countless acts of kindness on the individual, communal and even national levels, the headlines read both here and abroad paint a different picture. How can it be that the personal rancor of certain party leaders can prevent us from electing a solid, unified government that holds the values of a Jewish State as its most precious asset?  What happened to our historic love of Jerusalem, that which we have vowed for millennia to verily pay for with our right arm? What happened to Zion – all of it – at the memory of which we simply sat and wept?

Is now, just before the Fast of the Ninth of Av, not the time to remember to come together in love and commitment to each other and to everything the Holy Temples stood for?

And from thoughts and intentions to practical acts: What can we do to secure our capital, keep it unified, and develop it with a large Jewish majority?

Clearly, dividing the city and handing over the Arab neighborhoods to Palestinian Authority control will only aggravate the problems. Geographically and demographically speaking, an Israeli withdrawal will strangle the city, leading not only to increased Jewish emigration [as happened when the city was divided in 1949] but also to heightened immigration by Arabs to the Israeli side where they can continue to enjoy the full political rights that Israel grants them. Security-wise, the void formed by an Israeli withdrawal would quickly be filled by Islamic terror forces, deployed just across streets or valleys from Jewish neighborhoods – while Israel’s ability to respond would be limited. Dividing the city would also place the holy sites at the mercy of Islamic extremists, who have proven that freedom of access and worship is not on their to-do list.

The Jewish People and State must do everything today to prevent the modern destruction of our eternal capital. As Tisha B’Av approaches, KeepJerusalem’s Jerusalem Shield Program appears to be the only practical, democratic and safe answer for the urgent challenges we face. It involves a massive increase in Jewish housing, especially where it can create wedges in the Arab corridor between Ramallah and Bethlehem. In addition, employment opportunities must be enhanced – as will possibly soon be taking place at the rapidly-developing western entrance to Jerusalem.

But perhaps most important of all is the Jerusalem Shield proposal to expand Jerusalem’s municipal borders in order to increase the city’s Jewish population. Satellite communities outside the current city borders, such Givat Ze’ev, Mevaseret Zion, Beitar Illit, Gush Etzion and Maaleh Adumim will become part of a greater Jerusalem municipality, according to the plan. At the same time, Kafr Aqeb and the Shuafat refugee camp would be detracted from Jerusalem – not to become part of the Palestinian Authority, but rather as separate, new Israeli municipalities. This would change the 60-40 Jewish/Arab demographic ratio to 85-15. The impact will be for generations!

When we mourn today for the destruction of Jerusalem, it’s not for the brick-and-stone structures that were destroyed, but rather for the loss of our Temples, our capital, and what they stood for. Today, when we are on the fast track in rebuilding Jerusalem and sensing the footsteps of the Mashiach, it is incumbent upon us to make sure we preserve our gains – and to continue to work together with brotherly, causeless love for even greater progress towards a united, secure and Jewish Jerusalem. With this, Tisha B’Av will truly turn from a day of mourning to one of joy and celebration.

With unity and togetherness, it will come sooner than we think. 

For more information on how to win the PR battle for Jewish Jerusalem, or to participate in geopolitical strategic tours of Jerusalem, send email to info@keepjerusalem.org, and visit <www.KeepJerusalem.org>.

In a statement that seems to not have been reviewed before being issued, the EU declared without qualification that Israeli evictions of illegal Arab squatters on Jewish-owned property and demolitions of illegal structures on public land are “illegal under international law.” It could be that the EU is unduly distracted by the possibility of a Russian invasion into Ukraine, placing it on the borders of major European nations. But this is no excuse for making unfounded declarations regarding one of the most incendiary hot spots in the world: the holy city of Jerusalem.

The subject of the EU announcement was the execution of a five-year-old court-approved confiscation order of land, widely and violently protested by local Arabs. The land has been designated for the construction of six child-care centers and a special-needs school for the local Arab population. Could it be that Israel cares more for its Arab residents than they themselves do?

In condemning the eviction, the European Union issued a statement similar to one it issued a year ago when Israel evicted a long-squatting Arab family from Jewish-owned property. The previous statement claimed that Israel is an “occupying power” in Jerusalem, and termed Israel’s settlement policy “illegal under international law.”

In what is possibly the only truism in the statement, the EU said that the continuation of Israel’s settlement policy “undermines the viability of the two-state solution… and seriously jeopardizes the possibility of Jerusalem serving as the future capital of both States.” This evaluation, seemingly meant as a warning, is welcomed by the majority of Israelis and even, according to polls, many Arabs in Jerusalem.

The Jewish People’s inalienable right to the Land of Israel is not only Biblical, but is rooted in internationally recognized legal treaties and documents beginning a century ago. In July 1922, the League of Nations, predecessor of today’s United Nations, voted unanimously to approve for a Jewish state the territory outlined for this purpose at the San Remo Conference of 1920. The document begins: “Whereas recognition has been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country…”

It laid down the Jewish legal right under international law to settle anywhere in western Palestine, i.e., the area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. This includes what some today call the West Bank (of the Jordan River), but is widely known as Judea and Samaria.

Article 6 actually encouraged “close settlement by Jews on the land, including state lands and waste lands not required for public use.” This clearly indicates, as author and expert Eli E. Hertz has written, that not only is Israeli control over these areas not illegal, but that international pressure on Israel to withdraw from them is illegal!

The United Nations, after taking over the authorities of the League of Nations upon its formation, then reaffirmed these terms.

International law expert Dr. Jacques P. Gauthier of Canada wrote his doctoral thesis on the legal status of Jerusalem. His conclusion, after 1,300 pages and 3,200 footnotes is that the world community of nations granted the Jewish People irrevocable legal rights to Jerusalem, and to the entire area west of the Jordan River, in a non-broken series of treaties and resolutions beginning with the Balfour Declaration and the San Remo Conference, as well as affirmations by the League of Nations and the UN.

As such, all claims that the Arabs deserve a state in Judea, Samaria and Gaza are groundless. For, as Dr. Gauthier often repeats, the legal principle of “la chose jugée” (judged issue) means that once the issue was decided, as it was in the above councils, it becomes irreversible and forever binding in a “sacred trust.”

After the UN was formed, seven Arab armies invaded the land, seeking not only to wipe out the Jewish presence there, but also to prevent the establishment of a Jewish state, in opposition to the UN’s stated intention. “Israel’s War of Independence in 1948 was considered lawful and in self-defense,” writes Hertz, “as may be reflected in UN resolutions naming Israel a ‘peace-loving State’ when it applied for membership at the United Nations,” by both the UN Security Council and General Assembly.

No changes in the legal status of the land were made by the time, less than 20 years later, that Arab armies tried again to destroy Israel. This became the Six Day War, which finally left Israel in control of, inter alia, Judea and Samaria – and able to implement its aforementioned rights to settle it.

Even if San Remo and the UN are ignored, Prof. Hon. Stephen M. Schwebel, former President of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), makes very clear that Israel’s military activity during this war was purely defensive, and that “a state acting in lawful exercise of its right of self-defense may seize and occupy foreign territory, as long as such seizure and occupation are necessary to its self-defense.”

Judea and Samaria was administered by Jordan (recognized as sovereign there only by Great Britain and possibly Pakistan) between 1948 and 1967, during which period it was populated by Arabs with no recognized national entity [nor could there have been, as their national rights to the area were purposely left unrecognized]. In light of all the above, Schwebel and other experts agree: Israel has the best legal title and claim to Judea and Samaria.

Perhaps the European Union would like to consider no longer repeating the canard that Jewish settlement of the Land of Israel is illegal under international law. One hundred years of history say the EU is wrong.

As some Christian leaders in Israel and around the world blame Jews for diminishing Christian numbers in the Holy Land, the true culprit – hostile Muslims – goes unnamed.

Fact: The 2016 killing of a gorilla in Cincinnati received six times more media coverage than the beheading by ISIS of 21 Coptic Egyptian Christians who refused to recant their faith. This is just one example of the woeful paucity of reporting on rampant Muslim persecution of Christians around the world.

Let us here be part of the solution, and note important examples of how Christians are faring in Muslim-controlled areas. In Nigeria, no fewer than 32,000 Christians were butchered to death by the country’s main Jihadists over the course of the decade just ended. Another more than 3,000 Christians were murdered there during the first seven months of this year, and three months ago, Muslims attacked a Christian community, murdering 49 Christians and kidnapping another 27.

The situation in other Muslim countries is better, but that’s little comfort. Raymond Ibrahim, author of a ten-year-old monthly Gatestone Institute series entitled Muslim Persecution of Christians, says, “the phenomenon of Muslim persecution of Christians is real: it’s unwavering, constant, and systemic, and it conforms to sharia-approved patterns — meaning its root source is Islam.”

Ibrahim emphasizes that in addition to the “pure genocide” of Christians in Nigeria, this same jihadist spirit is well entrenched or increasing in other African nations, such as Somalia, Mauritania, Kenya, Mozambique, and many more. In Christian-majority Uganda, it is common to see Muslims attacking or killing family members for converting to Christianity. In Pakistan, Ibrahim writes, “blatant and systemic discrimination against Christians is downright disgusting. Not a week seems to go by without a young, underage Christian girl being abducted, raped, and then forced to convert and marry her abductor – with the police and courts siding with the abductors and rapists.” In Egypt, numerous churches have been bombed by Muslims over the years, killing many worshipers, other churches have been banned outright, and kidnappings and forced marriages of Christian women and girls to their Muslim abductors have reached record levels.

PA Christians

What about in the Palestinian Authority-controlled areas? A 2019 report by Edy Cohen of the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies cited three horrifying incidents that received very little attention because they are “not connected to Israel.” The three stories “encapsulate the persecution of Palestinian Christians,” in the words of an HonestReporting.com report. One of them occurred on April 25, 2019, when Muslims stormed a village near Ramallah in response to a Christian resident who complained to police that the son of a Fatah leader had attacked her family. Rather than protecting the innocent civilian, police ignored the armed Fatah-affiliated rioters as they lobbed petrol bombs at homes and fired live rounds into the air. The men even demanded that the Christians pay a “jizya,” a yearly tax historically levied, by authority of the Quran, on permanent non-Muslim subjects (dhimmi) of Islamic states.

In the two other incidents in Cohen’s report, vandals broke into, desecrated, and stole equipment from churches in Bethlehem and Ramallah. In 2013 in Gaza, the Christian Holy Family School was set on fire, while the five Christian schools in the district were closed by Hamas government order.

“The only thing that interests the PA is that events of this kind not be leaked to the media,” Cohen wrote, because Fatah exerts heavy pressure on Christians not to report the attacks so as not to damage the PA’s image. “[Many] Christians in the PA … fear – with good reason – that Muslim aggression against them will only escalate. Such fears are all the stronger in light of the thunderous silence of the Western (and Israeli) media in the face of the Christian minority’s ongoing disappearance from the PA and Islamic lands in general – in striking contrast to the growth, prosperity and increasing integration of the Christian community in Israel proper.”

Church Leaders Blame Israel

With all this, a recent declaration by church leaders in Jerusalem puzzlingly lays all blame for Christian woes in the Holy Land at the feet of Jewish and Israeli elements. They warned that Christians have become targets of “frequent and supported attacks by radical fringe groups” – Jewish ones, that is. Nowhere do they mention attacks, both physical and otherwise, initiated against Christians by Muslims. The religious leaders warned of a “systematic [Jewish] attempt to drive the Christian community out of Jerusalem and other parts of the Holy Land.”

Several days later, two leading Christian clerics, one in England – no less than the head of the Church of England, Justin Welby – and one in Jerusalem, wrote an article supporting the claims and clearly suggesting that Israel is at fault for the decline in the Christian population in the Holy Land. This, even though the Christian population in Hamas-run Gaza has plummeted by 80% (!) over the past 15 years, to around 1,000.

The article states: “The growth of settler communities and travel restrictions brought about by the West Bank separation wall have deepened the isolation of Christian villages and curtailed economic and social possibilities.” Again, these vague and undocumented accusations totally obfuscate the true picture of ongoing Palestinian Arab persecution of Christians. The article does not even mention the PA or Muslims.

Regarding the insinuations that Israel is responsible for a drop in its Christian population, the facts tell a different story. Though the percentage of Christians in Israel has dropped drastically over the decades, largely because of the massive Jewish immigration to the Jewish State, in absolute numbers the Christian population in Israel proper has actually grown – and Israel is the only Middle Eastern country in which this is the case.

It is notable that the Christian charity organization “Open Doors” attributes to “Islamic oppression” the steep decline of Christian numbers in the Palestinian Authority-controlled areas. The organization stated that “Islamic extremist militants” were causing Christians to fear violent attacks. Keep in mind that Christian numbers are dwindling in Muslim lands around the world. In 2019, Christians comprised 5% of Middle Eastern populations, compared with 20% a century ago.

Despite all, it might be of some consolation to know that even the Welby article notes that “Christians in Israel enjoy democratic and religious freedoms that are a beacon in the region.” Israel officially recognizes no fewer than 10 Christian denominations that regulate personal status issues such as marriage and divorce: Greek Orthodox, Greek Catholic and Roman Catholic – to which most Israeli Christians belong – as well as Armenian Orthodox, Armenian Catholic, Maronite, Syrian Orthodox, Syrian Catholic, Chaldean Catholic and (Anglican) Episcopal. Israel is the only country in the region where freedom of Christian worship is not only permitted, but also protected.

In light of the Welby accusations, it behooves honest and freedom-loving citizens, especially in the Christian world, to protest yet another blatant antisemitic attempt to delegitimize Israel. These transparently false attacks serve only to delegitimize their own credibility. Shame.

In light of relentless international opposition, the Jerusalem District Planning Committee found a way to postpone construction of a new Jewish neighborhood in what used to be the Atarot Airport in northern Jerusalem.

The excuse utilized for this purpose was a purported need to conduct an environmental survey. The survey will take at least a year.

The United States, the European Union and several ministers from Israel’s current left-leaning government were pushing strongly for the postponement. This, even though the city council itself had just days before approved the neighborhood.

American pressure came not only in the form of a direct message from the State Department, but also the presence of a U.S. embassy official at the very meeting at which the postponement was decided upon. Jerusalem City Council member Ofer Berkovitz says that there is no reason why the new neighborhood could not be approved and advanced simultaneously with the conducting of the environmental survey.

The 9,000 housing units that were set to be constructed in Atarot would have significantly alleviated the housing crisis in Jerusalem, and would have helped guarantee full Israeli sovereignty over the entire city, for a number of reasons. As we have explained in previous articles, northern Jerusalem is a critical front in the Arab drive to take over parts of the city and then form yet another Arab country in the land of Israel.

Atarot—site of a Jewish village in both Biblical times and the early decades of the 20th century, a currently closed airport and a huge industrial zone that has dwindled to less than half its size as a result of the Oslo war—is the main Jewish presence in northern Jerusalem. The current threat to it is very real, with the nearby Arab neighborhood of Kafr Akeb about to engage in massive illegal and unsafe Arab construction that will overflow into it.

If Atarot does not remain Jewish, a contiguous north-south route of Arab neighborhoods—Qalandia, Bir Naballa, Beit Hanina, Shuafat and, further south, to Abu Dis and Bethlehem—will essentially divide Israel’s capital. On the other hand, the large Jewish neighborhoods of Pisgat Ze’ev and Neve Yaakov cannot continue to be connected to the rest of the city merely by a highway.

“It is construction projects like this [in Atarot] that will save Jerusalem [from being divided],” said Jerusalem lands activist Aryeh King. The only way to prevent the strangling of existing Jewish neighborhoods, in addition to buffering them up, is to build new ones alongside them.

This is clearly a national priority. Nearly a year ago, plans were finalized in southern Jerusalem for the construction of a new, mostly Jewish, neighborhood in Givat HaMatos.

There, too, heavy international pressure impeded the approval of the neighborhood, located adjacent to Beit Tzafafa (Arab) and Kibbutz Ramat Rachel, along the route leading to Gush Etzion. In fact, the Israeli government, after issuing and awarding the construction tenders in Givat HaMatos, made sure to finalize and close them just hours before U.S. President Joe Biden was inaugurated. Work on the more than 1,200 housing units there is now underway.

Atarot is planned to be a mostly haredi neighborhood. Although the future disposition of a neighborhood is not generally stated outright, several hints reveal the secret: The buildings will not be higher than nine stories, so that the highest floors can be accessed on the Sabbath by those who do not use Shabbat elevators; special sukkah porches with no ceiling above them are planned for each apartment on the higher floors; and lots have been designated for synagogues and mikvaot (ritual baths).

Haaretz commentator Nir Hasson wrote last week, “The [postponement] hearing well summed up the planning failure of united Jerusalem ever since 1967. The decision-makers and planners don’t see the city as a place that must be planned and built for its residents, but rather as a geopolitical chess board that must be built up in order to separate between two [Arab] neighborhoods, to preserve the [Jewish] majority or to thwart a diplomatic plan to divide the city.”

What Hasson sees as a “failure” and a contradiction between civilian needs and demographic/diplomatic considerations, we at Keep Jerusalem see as validation and a natural outgrowth of the Jewish return to its homeland. For what could be more important to the historic national and religious capital of the Jewish people for more than 3,000 years than ensuring that it remain Jewish?

Israel must certainly do all it can to ensure that Arab neighborhoods in its capital not become so large that they can no longer be policed (though this already the case in some areas), and that Jews are afraid to enter. We must also proudly do everything possible to ensure as large a Jewish majority in Jerusalem as possible, and certainly to thwart any and all diplomatic plans to divide our holy city.

This is why building up Atarot, Givat HaMatos and everywhere in the Jerusalem areas liberated more than 50 years ago in the miraculous Six-Day War is the charge of the hour.

Chaim Silberstein is president of Keep Jerusalem-Im Eshkachech and the Jerusalem Capital Development Fund. He was formerly a senior adviser to Israel’s minister of tourism. 

Hillel Fendel, past senior editor at Israel National News/Arutz 7, is a veteran writer on Jerusalem affairs.

JTA — I watched the news of the terrible Jersey City shooting last week with both horror and a sense of deja vu. Sadly, violent attacks against Jews, wherever we live, have become all too common. We can no longer assume our communal spaces and houses of worship are safe.

Each terror attack is different, and no one knows exactly what it is like to be the victims of the most recent attack except the Jersey City community. But as a fellow survivor of terror that ripped at the seams of my family, I want to lend my support and share my story, which I believe shows that even during the worst of times, human kindness finds a way to shine.

The scourge of terrorism entered my own life almost exactly one year ago. On Dec. 9, 2018, my life was shattered when two Hamas terrorists committed a drive-by shooting on my daughter Shira, her husband Amichai and five others. Shira then was seven months pregnant with her first child and my first grandchild. The Hamas terrorist savagely used a Kalashnikov rifle to do the most damage possible. Shira nearly died after the bullet tore a path from her thigh to her abdomen, leaving a six-inch wide exit wound.

That day was one of extremes and colossal evil, but also unimaginable goodness. When Shira and her fellow victims were shot, two first responders from Magen David Adom, stationed only 1,000 feet away, heard the attack unfold. The paramedics, Betzalel and Benzi, initially believed the sounds had come from firecrackers. But after hearing blood-curdling screams, the two sped toward the danger in their ambulance. They reached Shira in just over 60 seconds.

According to regular protocol, the first ambulance on the scene must wait for a second ambulance to leave in the case of a mass shooting situation. The next ambulance was five minutes away, and Betzalel decided to break protocol and evacuate Shira immediately, likely saving my daughter’s life.

As Benzi drove the vehicle, Betzalel administered lifesaving care to Shira, pumping liquids into her body to stanch the bleeding and earn her some time. He needed both of his hands for this procedure, and Shira bravely inserted her own fist into her wound to slow the bleeding so that Betzalel could finish the job.

Benzi also took heroic measures to save Shira’s life. Road construction was bound to slow down their passage to Jerusalem, so Benzi called the army and pressured it to open a special security road that would make the trip much quicker. The road passes through a dangerous Arab village, and the army requires that vehicles be bulletproof in order to take this route. Benzi was luckily driving one of MDA’s few bulletproof vehicles, and access was granted. This allowed a trip that usually takes 45 minutes to be completed in only 19 minutes.

Shira was rushed into the operating room at the hospital and underwent radical and invasive surgery. Benzi and Betzalel were correct that Shira had no time to lose: The head of surgery told us that if Shira had arrived three minutes later, she would have suffered irreversible brain damage. Five minutes later and she would have been dead.

Shira’s unborn child, the surgeon told us, had saved her life. Pregnant women produce extra blood to nourish their babies, especially as the pregnancy advances. Shira’s baby was delivered prematurely, at seven months, through an emergency C-section as the doctors operated simultaneously on Shira. But her newborn son – my grandson — would live only briefly, as the lack of oxygen and blood robbed him of any chance of survival.

Shira and Amichai spent a few short moments with their child before he succumbed. Named Amiad Yisrael, which in Hebrew means “the nation of Israel is eternal,” he was interred in a heartrending ceremony that his mother and father could not attend due to their own injuries. He was Israel’s youngest-ever terror victim.

A couple of months ago, during the festival of Sukkot, there was a ceremony dedicating a new mobile intensive care unit ambulance in memory of Amiad Yisrael. During the ceremony, Amichai pronounced words that will forever remain with me: “Our heroes are the ones who protect life and those who save lives … We hope, please God, the ambulance will be used only for happy occasions. We bless the dear MDA teams with the verse from the book of Psalms: ‘for He (God) will order His angels to guard you wherever you go.’”

For me, terror became personal with the attack on Shira and Amichai and the murder of my grandchild. Israel faces merciless, shameless enemies who will strike us anywhere and anytime the opportunity presents itself.

Nonetheless, the forces of good remain just as strong, if not stronger. There are countless men and women who run in the direction of danger and rush to the aid of others in the most dire circumstances. Such was the case with Benzi and Betzalel, and so many paramedics and emergency personnel who work with organizations like MDA. We are grateful to the well-trained paramedics for saving our children’s lives. And the ambulance, too: It was Shira’s chariot of mercy.

The human capacity for goodness was also on display in Jersey City, where the heroic Douglas Miguel Rodriguez held open the back door of the kosher grocery store so that Chaim Deutsch could escape, costing him his life. Police officers valiantly engaged in an hours-long shootout, likely saving the lives of dozens of Jews in the yeshiva next door, according to the Jersey City mayor. Concerned Americans sent thousands of pounds of kosher food to the Jersey City community in the days that followed.

The human kindness and courage found when confronted with evil in the attacks on the Jews of Jersey City and around the world remind us what we all are capable of. As we approach Hanukkah, the season of light and hope, let us hope for — and create — more light in the face of such darkness.

With Prime Minister Bennett set to meet with US President Biden this Thursday, it is critical to discuss the American intention to reopen a consulate in Jerusalem that will serve only Arabs – and undermine Israel’s sovereignty in its capital city.

Three months ago, when US Secretary of State Antony Blinken visited Israel and the PA, he declared that the Biden administration would reopen its consulate in Jerusalem. Until it was closed in 2019 by the Trump administration, following the opening of the US Embassy in Jerusalem, the consulate had served as a de facto embassy for Arabs of the Palestinian Authority.

Prime Minister Bennett must make it clear that Israel will absolutely oppose the consulate’s reopening. Here are ten reasons why.

1. It undermines already-beleaguered Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem.

Based on past experience, we know that a new consulate will serve as a de-facto embassy for Arabs of the Palestinian Authority and even of Jerusalem – and this essentially undermines Israeli sovereignty in its capital city.

“The act of establishing a Palestinian consulate in Jerusalem means recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine. [This is] a dangerous decision… a red line that cannot be crossed.” So said former Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat, and they are the sentiments as well of most of the Israeli Knesset, both opposition and coalition members.

Jerusalem Deputy Mayor Aryeh King called the initiative “a spiteful move that seeks to undermine Israel’s absolute sovereignty over Jerusalem” – sovereignty that continues to be under fire from those who wish to see Jerusalem become the capital of a new Arab state.

2. It distances peace.

Opening a consulate in Jerusalem for the Palestinian Authority will raise the PA’s standing in Washington, thus encouraging it not to make concessions and perpetuating the state of non-peace or worse.

3. The current embassy obviates the need for a consulate.

There is no need to reopen the consulate, as all consular services are already provided by the US Embassy in Jerusalem.

As The Hill explained, “There is no case in the entire world where a [U.S.] consulate general exists in the same city as a U.S. embassy.” In 2019, some months after the embassy was opened in Jerusalem, all American diplomatic activity was logically and efficiently consolidated into a single mission – and no other one is needed.

4. It violates international law.

Such a move is likely in violation of international law.

The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961 – which defines a framework for diplomatic relations between independent countries – stipulates that the “guest state may not, without the prior express consent of the receiving state, establish offices forming part of the mission in localities other than those in which the mission itself is established.”

5. It violates Israeli law.

A consulate for the Palestinians is similarly likely in violation of Israeli law. Israel’s Basic Law: Jerusalem, the Capital of Israel (1980) stipulates that “Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel.”

Opening a diplomatic mission in the city on behalf of a foreign entity is thus apparently illegal in establishing Jerusalem as the capital of a country other than Israel.

6. It violates American law.

It similarly is likely in violation of U.S. law. The Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995, passed overwhelmingly by the U.S. House and Senate, recognized united Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and states that “Jerusalem should remain an undivided city.”

7. A perpetual cause of friction.

America’s Jerusalem consulate has for decades been “a perpetual cause of friction with the U.S. Embassy to Israel and … a hotbed for some anti-Israel ideologues.” So explained former U.S. Ambassador to Israel David Friedman to journalist Michael Ireland – to which can be added that the consulate has in the past worked closely with “Arabists” in the State Department, who are openly hostile to Israel.

8. Ramallah, not Jerusalem.

Even if the U.S. decides it needs a consulate for Palestinian Arabs, it should be in Ramallah, where the PA is entirely based. As Jeff Ballabon of the American Center for Law and Justice has written, “The PA has no presence in Jerusalem and has never been located there.”

9. A beachhead for a hostile terrorist government.

Ballabon also wrote: “It is troubling enough that Biden would re-engage with the terror-supporting PA and send it money (also likely a violation of U.S. law); but to establish a beachhead for a hostile terrorist pseudo-government in the center of a sovereign state’s capital? To promote the PA while it continues publicly to pay terrorists and promote the eradication of all Israel?”

10. It sends a discriminatory U.S. signal.

For the U.S. to open a consulate in Jerusalem just for Arabs “delivers a dangerous and ambiguous signal that this administration may well support a divided Jerusalem,” writes former Deputy National Security Advisor Eliot Abrams.

“The fact that the United States is even considering such a move is another unfortunate example of Israel being held to a different and discriminatory standard by the international community,” he adds. “Other nations, including the United States, would not allow a foreign country to divide their capitals or open consulates therein serving a third party or foreign entity…

“The United States should respect Israel’s choice of Jerusalem as its capital and not make it the only place on earth where the United States places both its embassy and a permanent mission to a foreign entity in the capital of a sovereign state. That is precisely the kind of damaging and discriminatory treatment of Israel that Democrats and Republicans in Congress have long pledged to avoid and indeed to condemn.”

Sheikh Jarrah has been very much the talk of the town of late, but is replete with sketchy details and vagueness. Many do not know if this Jerusalem neighborhood is actually Jewish or Arab, why it is in dispute, and – the main point of this article – why Israeli law there appears to favor one side over the other.

Let us start with one critical event that occurred 73 years ago and that colors everything that has happened there ever since.

On the morning of April 13, 1948, Arabs in Sheikh Jarrah ambushed a convoy of Jewish vehicles on their way to the besieged Hadassah Hospital. The “battle” lasted for close to six hours, while a British army force stood passively by, despite repeated pleas that it intervene to save lives. Only well after the buses and other vehicles were set ablaze with their passengers inside did the British take action and rescue those Jews who had not yet been murdered. Seventy-eight Jews, mostly doctors and nurses, were killed, and dozens were wounded.

In retrospect, one of the ironies of this terrible tragedy in Sheikh Jarrah was that it took place adjacent to the Jewish neighborhoods of Shimon HaTzaddik and Nachlat Shimon, home to properties owned and inhabited by dozens of Jewish families. It is these properties that are now the subject of Arab Palestinian violence and international criticism of Israel.

It is critical to emphasize this point: The controversial houses were built in the Jewish neighborhood of Shimon HaTzaddik, and not, as most news reports would have you believe, in Sheikh Jarrah. Yes, scream it from the rooftops: The houses are Jewish-owned, not Arab; this is not an issue of an attempted Jewish takeover of a peaceful Arab neighborhood. On the contrary, the Arabs who refuse to cease unlawfully squatting have time and again initiated violence against the Jews.

In fact, it was this violent Arab refusal to accept that those they had banished decades earlier had in fact returned to their homes that led to the Hamas-initiated war of several weeks ago.

How exactly did the Jews “lose” their properties in 1948? It happened a month after the Hadassah Hospital convoy massacre, when the State of Israel was formed – with Shimon HaTzaddik, Sheikh Jarrah and the rest of “eastern Jerusalem” outside its borders. Arabs moved into the Jewish homes, while the real owners, who had moved to within Israel’s borders, waited patiently to actualize their legal claims to their homes.

The Two Laws

In 1950 and in 1970, the Israeli Knesset passed two laws, which some see as mutually contradictory and discriminatory – a view based on a superficial, misguided, and unjust outlook of the history of the Land and State of Israel.

The 1950 Absentee Property Law transferred the property of absentee Arab land-owners into the possession of the State of Israel. Who were these land-owners? On the whole, they were Arabs who had run away from the battlefront before and during the War of Independence, with encouragement and promises from the attacking Arab countries that they would soon be able to return in victory over the Jewish entity. They were thus accomplices in the Arab war effort to destroy Israel.

On June 8, 1951, for instance, the Secretary-General of the Arab League wrote in a New York Lebanese daily that in 1948, then-League Secretary Azzam Pasha had “assured the Arab peoples that [victory over the Jews] would be as simple as a military promenade …” – underscoring that which the Jordanian daily Falastin wrote on February 19, 1949: “The Arab states… encouraged the Palestinian Arabs to leave their homes temporarily in order to be out of the way of the Arab invasion armies.”

Thus, the homes abandoned in order to facilitate Israel’s destruction were legally rendered the property of the State of Israel. This jibes with Israel’s refusal, with the world’s understanding, to accept Arab Palestinian “refugees:” Israel need not allow people to return to their homes so that they might finish off, from within, the destruction of Israel that they sought to accomplish in 1948.

On the other hand, a second law, the Legal and Administrative Matters Law of 1970, negated a similar transfer of absentee Jewish-owned properties to their present Arab occupiers. Rather, such properties left behind in Arab-populated areas in Israel may be reclaimed by the Jewish owners.

As intimated above, the fairness of this seeming discrimination is made patently clear when viewed from a historical vantage point of war and peace. The Jewish owners were truly thrown out of their homes, the war made it impossible for them to remain, and the Arabs who took over their property did so with warlike intentions of conquest.

On the other hand, the Arabs who left their homes had no reason to leave. In many cases the Jewish leaders even encouraged them to remain. For instance, the Jewish Haifa Workers’ Council appealed to the Arabs of Haifa, “… do not bring upon yourself tragedy by unnecessary evacuations and self-imposed burdens…” The Arab-sponsored Institute for Palestine Studies in Beirut found that 68% of the Arab refugees in 1948 left without seeing an Israeli soldier. Rather, “the removal of the Arab inhabitants … was voluntary and was carried out at our request,” stated the Arab National Committee of Haifa – as part of the pan-Arab master plan to destroy Israel.

[Note that in many cases Israel bent over backwards towards the Arabs, such as in not demanding the return of the Jewish-owned area of the Dehaishe refugee camp near Bethlehem, paying out 10 million NIS in compensation to previous Arab owners, allowing the Arabs of Lod and Ramle to return, and more.]

Thus, to return the story back down to the nitty-gritty of current events, it is perfectly logical, historically justified, and legal according to several Israeli court rulings, for the Jewish owners of these properties to demand either the payment of rent or the evacuation of the property. Though in many cases the Jews allowed the Arab tenants the first option, they are also well within their civil and national rights to demand the second.

 The radical left-wing Ir Amim organization self-righteously blames Israeli law for both “legaliz[ing] expropriation of Palestinian property in East Jerusalem” and also “allow[ing] Jews to claim their property from before 1948, in clear discrimination due to nationality-ethnicity.” As explained, the discrimination is actually based only on the motives of those who left: The party that left in order to destroy the other need not morally be allowed to return, while the party that was forced to leave is certainly entitled to reclaim its property.

“The consequences of that discrimination,” Ir Amim continues, “are evident in neighborhoods such as Silwan and Sheikh Jarrah, where Palestinian families, some of which are refugees from 1948, are being evicted from their homes…” Behind these words lie the assumption that these are unwilling “refugees, when in fact, as we have seen, this is not the case in many if not most cases. Remember this the next time the words “evicted from their homes… Silwan and Sheikh Jarrah” appear in your news feeds.

To keep up with Jerusalem news, or to participate in bus tours of critical parts of the city, e-mail info@keepjerusalem.org, or visit Keep Jerusalem-Im Eshkachech’s website www.keepjerusalem.org

The obvious question at this time for supporters of Israel, of course, is: Where does Joe Biden stand regarding Israel and Jerusalem? And less obviously, but even more critically: Where do the people he surrounds himself with stand on these issues?

Regarding Israel in general, Biden is considered a good friend, as his Senate voting record shows. He once said, “My father pointed out to me that I did not need to be a Jew to be a Zionist, for I am. Israel is essential for security of Jews worldwide.” (He then immediately added, however, “and a state of Palestine, each enjoying security, self-determination, and mutual recognition.”)

Back in 2008, Biden said, “My support for Israel begins in my stomach, goes to my heart and ends up in my head.”

More practical, however, is this: What about Jerusalem? For instance, now that President Trump has moved the US Embassy to Jerusalem, will Biden move it back? As a US Senator, Biden himself voted in favor of the 1995 resolution authorizing the President to move the embassy – and allowing the President to postpone the move if he felt like it. Since then, every US leader except for Trump – Clinton, Bush, and Obama – in fact “chickened out” and did not move the embassy.

In April of this year, Biden said, “The embassy should not have been moved. [Rather, it should have happened] in the context of a larger deal to help us achieve important concessions for peace in the process.”

That is, according to President-elect Biden, the US should have kept the Jerusalem carrot hanging just out of Israel’s reach for as long as possible, until America could squeeze out every possible Israeli concession.

However, “now that it [the embassy’s relocation] is done,” Biden said, “I would not move it back to Tel Aviv.”

“But he would re-open our consulate in East Jerusalem to engage the Palestinians,” a Biden campaign spokesman said. “He would also return the U.S. to the effort of encouraging a two-state solution.”

The word “return” in this context is key. It is important to recall that when Biden was Vice President under Barack Obama, their Administration promoted the creation of a Palestinian state in the heartland of Biblical Israel – and the division of Jerusalem into Israeli and Palestinian capitals. We must thus be wary that Biden will return to the same old failed advisors who will regurgitate the same old failed solutions that promote splitting Jerusalem in two.

Here are some of those who currently advise him, along with some of their credentials. Let the reader decide:

Tony Blinken served as Deputy National Security Advisor under Obama… Carlyn Reichel is a former speechwriter for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton… Colin Kahl, expected to be responsible for Iran policy, served as Deputy Assistant to President Obama… Daniel Shapiro was the U.S. ambassador to Israel during the Obama administration, overseen by Secretary of State John Kerry…

Keep in mind that the division of Jerusalem would be catastrophic for Israel on many levels: Jerusalem has been the capital of the Jewish People for over 3,000 years – and never of any Arab or other entity. Conceding any portion thereof, especially its holiest sites, and dividing it would be a major moral and political blow for the Jewish State and Jewish People.

Furthermore, any concession in Jerusalem will invite pressure to concede on issues such as refugees and Judea/Samaria. And of course, placing parts of the holy city under Arab sovereignty would likely mean a return to the very difficult security situation the city experienced before 1967, which would lead, in turn, to large numbers of Jews leaving Jerusalem.

When then-VP Biden visited Israel in 2010, he and Obama were deeply “offended” when the Israeli government announced then the planned construction of 1,600 units in the neighborhood of Ramat Shlomo. Biden abruptly cut short his trip, and Obama demanded that Israel freeze all Jewish construction in eastern Jerusalem (in addition to the ten-month freeze that Israel had already agreed to in Judea/Samaria). And in fact, these areas of Jerusalem saw no construction for nearly seven years, until President Trump took office. Ramat Shlomo is now blossoming with new homes, roads, and residents.

Our work at KeepJerusalem towards ensuring that Jerusalem remains united, secure and with a large Jewish majority, is always critical, regardless of who the US President is. But our strategy must now adapt to the unfortunate likelihood that a new Biden administration will continue the Obama policy of seeking to divide Jerusalem.

Now, during the ten-week transition period before Biden is set to take office, is the time to create irrevocable facts on the ground. As former Jerusalem City Council member Yair Gabbai wrote this week, two major construction projects practically ready for implementation must be carried out immediately. Between the two of them – Givat HaMatos, near Talpiyot, and Atarot, close to Jerusalem’s northern tip – they will add over 12,000 new housing units. Their construction would drop housing prices in the city and impede the emigration of young couples to other cities. “It would also bring about historic justice,” Gabbai continued, “in that the Palestinian dream of dividing Jerusalem would evaporate.”

Thus, when we consider what Joe Biden means for the future of Jerusalem, we must be prepared for all eventualities, and again adapt our vital work in educating, advocating and lobbying for united and Jewish Jerusalem to the circumstances. Let us explore how to do so in our next column.