Europe’s illegal move in Jerusalem
Silwan was once a small innocuous village, located just south of the Old City of Jerusalem. At the beginning of the previous century, it was home to poor Muslim traders and ultra-orthodox Sephardi Jews. Today, it is a microcosm of all the hypocrisies of Middle East conflicts.
Silwan is no longer a place for the poor, but a mainly middle class Arab area in Jerusalem. In the past 2 decades, Jews have started to return to the area. This has not met with the approval of much of the international diplomatic community. Who is right?
If any other people or religion wouls ask to move to the neighbourhood, nobody would blink an eyelid. Yet, these Israelis are simply living where the ancient City of David was concentrated. They are next to the also holy Mount of Olives. How can it be a crime to want to live next to the heart of your own religion?
On the other hand, the American State Department, supported by Brussels, argues that the new residents are creating facts on the ground, which could prejudice the peace that everyone craves for. Bottom line: The diplomats want the religious Jews kicked out for living there illegally, especially the new residents of “Jonathan’s House”.
And now comes the “oops”. You see, it turns out that right in the middle of Silwan is a large building, housing offices of the European Union. Much of the building has been constructed illegally, and is facing a very real threat of being torn down. Oh la la!
(To be precise, the Jerusalem Municipality has identified this site along with several other homes in the Arab part of Silwan as illegal). Of course, there is a solution. The Jerusalem Municipality is thinking of approving all the construction retroactively in a one-time, one-off move.
Fine for the Europeans of course……..so long as they realise that the law would also approve the Jewish homes as well.
Now, if only all problems could be solved so simply, n’est ce pas?
2 comments
Reply
We also must remember that no one complained of the Arabs creating “facts on the ground” when they rioted, causing the Jews who lived there to flee. But returning to a prior date’s status quo is now seen as revisionist.
Trans-Jordan, created in 1921 as a state for Palestine’s Arabs, dropped the “Trans” from its name and crossed the Jordan river in an all-out assault on new-born Israel in 1948. In that war Jordan took by force all of the Old City of Jerusalem (now misnamed “East Jerusalem”) and illegally occupying it along with the West Bank. This occupation was illegal in every sense of the word. Compounding that illegality, the occupied land was used in 1967 to launch yet another all-out war against the remnant of Israel. Unlike their 1948 assault, the 1967 one failed, and Jordan’s illegal possession of Jerusalem and the West Bank was reversed, and Jordan withdrew to “Trans”-Jordan – west of the river, its original border.
To many in the world, but most essentially in Europe, Jordan’s occupation was no prolem, even though Jerusalem was utterly desecrated and off-bounds to Jews, and the West Bank was undeveloped. Above all the land was stolen. As long as it was free of Jews, it didn’t matter that it was conquered, stolen land.
By contrast, Israel’s so-called occupation was the only thing Israel could possibly have done to survive the Jordanian invasion.
This Jewish survival is what really bothers those who oppose the occupation. Even Jordan itself has fully renounced its claim to the entire area, and is infact revoking the Jordanian passports of citizens who lived under Jordanian rule during its European-approved occupation of the West Bank.
To be absolutely clear, Jordan has declared illegal its own occupation of Jerusalem and the West Bank which were largely accepted by the world for nineteen years – though only legally recognised by one country, Great Britain.