by Hillel Fendel and Chaim Silberstein of Keep Jerusalem
And so, once again in the news is President Trump’s “Deal of the Century” – the latest in about a century’s worth of proposals for peace to the Middle East.
This particular proposal, contrary to most others, has an inherent advantage for many Land of Israel lovers: For the first time in 2,000 years, it grants Israel full sovereignty over significant parts of Judea and Samaria.
However, many in Israel still cannot accept it with open arms, because the remainder of Judea and Samaria (70%!) is being left open for a Palestinan state – an existential danger, according to many experts, for the State of Israel. This is especially true given that much of the Israeli areas enclaves of various sizes surrounded by Arab territory, thus choking off the Jewish section’s viability
What about Jerusalem? What does the Trump Plan say about Israel’s capital city?
As with many other critical issues addressed in the plan, the key word is “vagueness.” In principle, Jerusalem fares relatively well in the plan. For instance, it states, “We believe that returning to a divided Jerusalem… would be a grave mistake.” The plan then notes that “a security barrier currently exists … that already separates Arab neighborhoods in Jerusalem (i.e., Kafr Aqab, and the eastern part of Shuafat) from the rest of the neighborhoods in the city. This physical barrier should remain in place.”
But the next words are problematic: “[This barrier] should serve as a border between the capitals of the two parties… The sovereign capital of the State of Palestine should be in the section of East Jerusalem located in all areas east and north of the existing security barrier…”
The removal of the neighborhoods outside the security barrier from Jerusalem could be acceptable, if they would become separate Israeli municipalities. But to detract them from Israel altogether is clearly not something we can sign on to.
True, this plan does not seek to divide Jerusalem “down the middle,” as some other plans did. And certainly it is heartening that most of the Holy Sites will remain under Israeli control. But we must look at the plan in its entirety, including the previously mentioned points. We must also continue to demand the measures we have long been calling for that will ensure effective Israeli sovereignty in our capital city: more construction in neighborhoods such as Gilo, Har Homa, Pisgat Ze’ev and of course the Old City; promotion of the Greater Jerusalem plan that will bring Mevaseret Zion, Maaleh Adumim, Gush Etzion, and the areas north of Jerusalem under the Greater Jerusalem “umbrella;” and making the city more attractive for large and small employers.
Atarot
Rumors abound regarding another area of Jerusalem which, if correct, would make the Trump plan problematic for Jerusalem. The reference is to Atarot, in the northern part of the capital. The plan is not totally clear as of yet, but there are indications that the Trump Deal’s “conceptual map” designates this area for joint Israeli-PA control.
Jerusalem Deputy Mayor Aryeh King has explained that the Housing Ministry is in the early stages of planning a new Jewish neighborhood of 8,000 units there. However, if the above indications are correct, “the chances of a Jewish neighborhood being built there are … zero,” King concludes.
Atarot and northern Jerusalem are essentially a “weak link” in Israel’s critical grasp on the capital. After 1967, when the area was liberated during the Six Day War and became part of municipal Jerusalem, Israel began massive housing construction in nearby N’vei Yaakov – but showed no interest in renewing settlement in Atarot just to the north. Instead, the Atarot Industrial Zone, Israel’s largest, was built nearby. But even the industrial zone began to deteriorate when the Oslo War began in late 2000.
New solutions for Atarot began to be pursued – and rejected. A plan to build a sizable hareidi-religious neighborhood was floated in 2007, but U.S. pressure scuttled it. The reason was clear: It would have destroyed chances for a viable contiguous Arab presence in Jerusalem. As King said at the time, “it is projects like these that will save Jerusalem [from being divided].”
The same was understood by left-wing proponents of dividing Jerusalem. They warned that it would disrupt a zone of Arab contiguity extending from Ramallah southwards and “would make a final status agreement on Jerusalem impossible.”
All parties agree, then, that building up Jewish Atarot could prevent the division of Jerusalem and impede plans for a Palestinian state. Can the importance of such a project for united Jerusalem be made any clearer?
Jerusalem lovers who are now considering the Trump Plan had best look closely at this aspect of the plan – while making sure to bring about all the actions that contribute to securing Jerusalem’s future with a large Jewish majority in a greater Jerusalem.
To help advocate for keeping Jerusalem united under Israeli sovereignty, visit our Keep Jerusalem-Im Eshkachech website at <www.keepjerusalem.org>. Send e-mail to <info@keepjerusalem.org> for information on our bus tours in news-making areas of the capital.