Future of the Old City of Jerusalem

Prepared by: Shadia Touqan
Looking back at the Future

Over the years the definition of Jerusalem and the struggle over who can claim it "mine" has become increasingly vague and decidedly more complex. Territorial expansion, intensification of construction activities in newly confiscated land, creation of more neighborhoods (and/or settlements; residential areas; housing projects etc.) are only technical tools to justify political ends. Complicating the issue of Jerusalem by creating geographical insoluble puzzles on the ground has long been as Israeli exclusive talent.

It is evident that there are many alternatives to solve the political, administrative and institutional tangles of Jerusalem. There are available models to get inspiration from, similar-but not so similar-conflicts and ethnic complexities that has been resolved one way or another and could be considered for future solutions for the City. It is possible that one or more of these ready-to-use models could be suitable for resolving some of the issues we are facing in Jerusalem although it is doubtful that any model will closely fit that of the old city.

While considering the issue of Jerusalem future it will be difficult to define which Jerusalem are we talking about, what size and shape and who is entitled to claim residency right. The definition is not only difficult because of the complexity of existing conditions in the city but rather in the continued relentless efforts of the Israeli authorities to complicate it even more and to ensure that it cannot be easily resolved. In spite of the political, social, economic, legal and security risks such policy entails, the Israeli government is going ahead with its expansionist plans. Consequently, this continually deteriorating situation makes it difficult to focus on future solutions.

Attempting to disentangle the current mess therefore may be simplified if we can extract the original components of the problem and try to deal with each separately at one level and collectively at another in terms of their impact on each other and on the general political picture. These components can be summarized as:

1) Israeli non-compromising policy of territorial expansion over as much as possible of Palestinian land and insistence on giving back as little as possible, if at all.

2) Israeli determination to isolate the Old City of Jerusalem from all Palestinian areas and ensure its inaccessibility to Palestinians including its indigenous population.

We are all too familiar with the various quasi-legal tricks and tools which have been used to facilitate the implementation of the Israeli policies in and around Jerusalem as well as the rest of occupied Palestinian Territories since 1967.

As the International Law and various conventions and resolutions have a clear stand regarding the illegality of the occupation of Jerusalem, it may be possible for ease of reference to define it as three different cities; the Historic City (historic core within the walls), the Recognized City (pre-1967 municipal borders) and the Inflated City (the ever changing/expanding borders).

Regardless of the name given to the Inflated City (i.e. Jerusalem Metropolitan, Jerusalem Greater Council, etc.) and whatever are the final boundaries of Jerusalem we are dealing with, the question of size and shape, settlements and borders is similar to all other territorial battles between Palestinians and Israelis and should therefore be treated as such. To define the borders of this Jerusalem we have also to define the borders of Bethlehem and Ramallah as we cannot take it out of the context of the whole Palestinian West Bank unless we can agree in principle that the final borders of this Inflated City could theoretically reach River Jordan.

The core issue in the struggle over Jerusalem will always be that of sovereignty over the city inside the walls. Annexing East Jerusalem to the West was targeting the old city rather than Al Tour or Wadi El Jouz and Al Siwaneh. We have only to look at the state these Palestinian neighborhoods are in, the apparent intentional neglect and lack of development policy, to quickly conclude that the annexation of East Jerusalem aimed basically at absorbing the Historic City. The expansion of the city borders and other areas aimed, amongst other things, at wrapping the old city with more buffer layers and removing it more from the rest of the Palestinian body.

In conclusion, any proposed solutions may be simpler to discuss, modify and articulate while negotiating the future of either the Recognized City, the Inflated City or an In-between City. However, the stumbling block will always be the Historic City and the focus, therefore, should always be on discussing and agreeing the final status of that City to ensure the protection of its valuable World heritage as well as the protection of the basic human rights of its inhabitants.

Mine, Oh, Mine

For many centuries, various groups and civilizations have claimed Jerusalem as their own Today the struggle continues and the different claimants are digging in their history books and archaeological archives to prove who owned it first, while the basic question that we should be concerned with is who is entitled to live, work or visit Jerusalem.

The right to own regardless of the passing millenniums, (regardless of who pays the price and how) can neither be justified nor applied to Jerusalem or any other city in the World.

In spite of the exclusivity of Jerusalem, basic human rights for its present owners regardless of their religious affiliations (who also happen to have historic claim to it) must be protected. The right to access a religious monument in this day and age cannot be preferred to the right of the individual to live in his home, work and move freely in his city and enjoy full rights of all citizens in civilized societies in the 21 Century.

While politicians and professionals argue over the right of one people or another to control the City, the question of what type of society Jerusalem should be is often forgotten or relegated as unimportant. Observing the changing nature of the Israeli society in Jerusalem in the last few years and the increased negative migration of secular Israelis raises the question whether the Jerusalem any side will win may after all not be the place they would like to live in.

On the other hand, the obstacles to Palestinians right to live in the city, confiscation of ID's denying family reunions in addition to the deteriorating economic conditions in East Jerusalem is emptying the City from educated, and productive groups that can encourage investment, initiate development and contribute to the improvement of the economy.

Consequently there has been a parallel gentrification in the city to both communities. The remaining population may not be the easiest sector through whom peace and co-existence could be promoted.

It is therefore important that the two sides examine the recent demographic changes and social and economic characteristics, analyze that pull and push factors and draw conclusions before a strategy for the old city agreed.

Jerusalem Historic City; A Palestinian World City:

The Historic City has been the home of the three monolithic religions for centuries, the rich diverse architecture and variety of shrines and monuments are witness to such unequal cultural heritage. However, the undisputed fact remains that for generations the Arabic character of the City and its inhabitants survived waves of invasions and occupations. In spite of all the carefully planned and ruthlessly implemented Israeli policies to de-Arabize the City continues to retain its Arab Palestinian character. Its Palestinian population persevered for thirty years, resisted and continue to resist all attempts to uproot them from their homeland.

Many solhave been proposed for the Historic City since the Partition of Palestine including the UN resolutions. Various suggestions to internationalize or religionalize the city will only, in my view, will only succeed in postponing the solution and probably worsen the problems. While it is important to examine all these proposals, it is evident that the Historic City have been and will continue to be Arab and should be under Palestinian control although specific details for its institutional structures and operations should be examined to enable the operation of other interested parties within its area of jurisdiction.

While retaining the Arab character of the Historic City of Jerusalem and regaining Palestinian inhabitants rights and control over their city, Jewish community rights and control over the Jewish Quarter and their property will be ensured with special arrangements within the Historic City walls. Administration and management of various religious properties, shrines and monuments will also be ensured through special legislation and laws.

The final agreement should have a gradual incremental implementation program with clear short term and long term objectives. A transition period is proposed to allow both communities to learn and accept to live together. Special security arrangements should be made with international involvement in the initial phase.

A joint intensive public awareness and educational campaign should be launched to accompany any agreed solution. Building cultural, economic and educational links should be encouraged and activities with shared interests such as tourism should be facilitated. This will gradually engender a sense of security and confidence no weapons can provide.

Saving our Jerusalem, Protecting our Heritage

The following guidelines are proposed for the administration of the Historic City and the protection of its cultural and religious heritage:

Administrative and Institutional Guidelines:

1) Sovereignty with Palestinian Authority as an integral part of Arab East Jerusalem with special arrangements for certain areas, (i.e., Jewish Quarters, Wailing Wall, Jewish Cemetery/ies).

2) Jewish citizens already living in the Old City will continue to live within own boroughs under Israeli Jurisdiction (local/municipal laws) although the overall authority will remain with the Palestinians.

3) Each municipality will have jurisdiction over its neighborhoods corresponding to demographic make-up of the area it represents.

4) In certain areas where there in only a small Jewish presence (Pockets of few residence), Jewish citizens will have the choice of remaining under Palestinian jurisdiction or compensation if they move out.

5) Palestinian authority to decide the legal process, (within its area of jurisdiction) to resolve ownership disputes, status of tenure, returnees right of residency in the old city or compensation.

6) Land and property expropriated/confiscated by Israelis and not used to be returned to Palestinian authority. Compensation only considered in special circumstances and according to agreed rules fore compensation for the whole city (works both ways).

7) Special security arrangement under joint security arrangement under joint security body with international observers will be set up to ensure safety and security of residents, users and visitors,

8) Planning and management of each neighborhood will correspond to separate and joint planning arrangements agreed at the higher municipal co-ordination level.

9) Provision of utilities and services, transport, traffic management and environmental, controls will be generally the responsibility of the Palestinian Authority except in areas agreed at the higher municipal levels as shared/linked services.

Religious Places (sites & buildings)

1) An umbrella structure (International including representatives of various religions and denominations) will be formed to agree and co-ordinate the management of the holy places including procedural arrangements such as accessibility, worship, ceremonies on special religious days. This will be co-ordinated with Israeli & Palestinian representatives of the respective central & local authorities (inter-ministerial), inter-municipal bodies representing the two communities).

2) Right of worship should be based on equality and parity with identical rights of protection, access, unlimited use and access, protection of places and users with no supremacy of one religion, sec or race.

3) Religious/holy places and institutions will be under control and jurisdiction/protection of their relevant bodies.

Cultural Heritage:

1) The Old City is a declared World Heritage Site and should follow UNESCO's conservation laws and regulations for the protection of the cultural heritage. A special joint committee (Israeli Palestinian)will be formed to co-operate and co-ordinate with the WHC to ensure the protection of the historic, religious monuments and buildings as well as the preservation of the unique character of the city.

2) Protection and management of Religious buildings is automatically the responsibility of the relevant religious bodies. Although financially independent should draw on the technical and legislative expertise of the

3) An International Body (i.e. UNESCO WHC) will overlook the protection and management of archaeological sites. Responsibility for each site will be determined by such body in agreement with representatives of the two Ministers of Antiquities who will appoint/formulate their own archaeological site management committees. Both authorities will share the responsibility for the protection and development of archaeological sites according to International codes and standards without prejudice to other parties rights for exploration. Disputed sites remains will automatically be resolved by the International Body.

Strict planning regulations and urban design criteria should be followed to preserve the unique architectural character and scale of the city and that special building controls should be implemented for new development to ensure that it is in harmony and sympathy with the existing architectural styles and aesthetic character of the existing buildings.