Daily Times

Israel is a country brimming with contradictions. It was founded by atheist Jews to save their people from religious and ideological persecution the world over. Yet today, hardline voices in government have turned Israel into a virtual theocracy allergic to the Arabs. It also claims to be the only democracy in the Middle East, yet zealously suppresses its Arab minority akin to an evil empire. Moreover, a constant source of Arab-Israeli friction — besides who owns Jerusalem — is the al-Aqsa Mosque. Also known as the Dome of the Rock or the Temple Mount, this compound located in the old quarters of East Jerusalem is sacred to the adherents of Islam, Christianity and Judaism — the world’s preeminent monotheistic religions.

Ironically, a holy site that should be an influential forum for interfaith dialogue has instead turned into a wellspring of recurrent, often deadly violence. Israel bases its historical right to the compound on legends the mosque was built atop the ruins of King Solomon’s Temple, although there is scant archeological evidence to back the claim. The international community, barring staunch ally America, broadly disagrees. On October 13, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) issued a communique calling Israel an “occupying power” for militarising Palestinian lands while restricting Muslim access to the mosque. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu immediately rubbished UNESCO’s statement, calling the agency a “theatre of the absurd.”

Denying Israel’s connection to the Temple Mount, Netanyahu fumed, is tantamount to claiming “China has no connection to the Great Wall of China, or that Egypt has no connection to the pyramids.” UNESCO’s statement was in response to a recent anti-Israel resolution sponsored by several Arab states that passed by a clear majority. The Palestinian Authority, naturally, was elated at the outcome. Spokesperson Nabil Abu Rdainah told reporters UNESCO’s position would add heft to the growing chorus of global voices that urge Israel to “end its occupation and recognise the Palestinian state and Jerusalem as its capital.”

This is a thorny, intractable dispute at best. The Temple Mount is the holiest site in Judaism. Jewish tradition holds that the Wailing Wall literally spawned humanity as God used the surrounding dust to create Adam and Eve. It is purportedly also where Prophet Abraham (pbuh) nearly sacrificed his son Isaac (pbuh) at God’s command. Solomon, the first king of the Jews, later built a temple to honour the Omniscient on this hilltop over 3000 years ago, yet the Jews were tested repeatedly. A procession of military juggernauts overran them through the course of history, enslaved or exiled the people and seized their promised land.

The Babylonian king, Nebuchadnezzar, eventually razed Solomon’s temple to the ground and banished many Jews from Palestine, a prescription repeated by the Greeks and Romans centuries later. The Jewish tragedy would culminate in Hitler’s holocaust during World War II, when Nazi concentration camps wrought six million casualties. Islam’s connection to both al-Aqsa and Jerusalem is no less sacred. The latter was the fledgling faith’s first qibla (direction of prayer) and remained so for close to two years. And legend also has the mosque of al-Aqsa was the departure point of the Holy Prophet’s (pbuh) journey to and from heaven astride the winged steed Buraq.

Jerusalem fell to the Muslims in the early days of Caliph Umar’s (RA) reign, and barring the 12th century when Christian Crusaders held sway, the city stayed in Muslim hands until Great Britain defeated the Ottoman Empire in World War I and divvied up its territories with the French. The creation of Israel in 1948 did not automatically change the status quo. Early Zionists were sensitive to the fact that tinkering with al-Aqsa would light a sectarian powder-keg explosive enough to consume everyone. And even today, hawks in the Likud party have not deviated from paying lip service to the notion of joint custody.

Indeed, as recently as October last year, Netanyahu reaffirmed Israel’s “commitment to upholding unchanged the status quo of the Temple Mount, in word and in practice.” Theoretically, as enshrined in two separate treaties with Israel and the Palestinian Authority, Jordan’s King Abdullah has “custodianship of Jerusalem holy sites.” Practically, though, there is little tangible power vested in him to intervene inside Israel’s borders, especially when the Jewish state rejects any dialogue on “united” Jerusalem’s status as its capital. Even when 200 Palestinians have died during a 12-month period following clashes with Israeli security forces that began with increased security measures at the al-Aqsa compound targeting Muslims worshippers.

Some Arab commentators believe the Wailing Wall is a lever for Zionists to eventually rid themselves of the Palestinians completely by triggering forced migration. Curiously, the wall was never revered as part of Solomon’s temple until the Balfour Declaration of 1917. Instead, when Israel annexed East Jerusalem in 1967, the Chief Rabbinate prohibited Jews from praying at the Al-Aqsa compound. He explained the soil on site was mixed with the remains of those killed during the destruction of the Second Temple by Romans, and therefore not a kosher place to pray. Furthermore, the Jews should await their messiah’s arrival before reclaiming the Temple Mount.

That did not stop Israeli politicians itching to legitimise their territorial gains of the Six-Day War from stoking a far-right religious movement to build a Third Temple in place of the al-Aqsa Mosque. This enterprise produced “Gush Emunim,” a group devoted to resettling the West Bank with Jews, and mainstreamed a slew of “temple movement” fanatics that extended to the Israeli Knesset. Tangible proof of this policy emerged in the year 2000, when the then Likud party leader (and later premier) Ariel Sharon visited the al-Aqsa compound flanked by a large security detail. The Palestinians were so livid at his insolence that random skirmishes soon escalated to a Second Intifada throughout the West Bank.

Israel’s military posture towards the Palestinians is contingent on its ability to weather frequent uprisings. That said, if hawks in the Knesset take a deep breath and mull it over, they would realise the ungodly amount Israel spends on defence every year could be diverted to social development programmes for the Arabs. Guns clearly don’t work, maybe it is time to try winning the Palestinians over with cash.

The writer is an Islamabad-based freelance journalist