I am raising this issue again. This story has the potential to be much more significant than the wedding of Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles. But you would never know it by watching your television.
I am still hoping that reasonable people will prevail and that we do not see an uptick in the cycle of violence.
Thousands of Israeli police have surrounded the Temple Mount in Jerusalem amid fears that Jewish extremists plan to storm the site.
The operation follows reports that extremists hope to thwart Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza by inflaming tensions with Palestinians.
Palestinian militants say they will end a truce if Jewish protesters enter the al-Aqsa mosque built on Temple Mount.
The Temple Mount is known as the Haram al-Sharif (Noble Sanctuary) to Muslims.
Last month, Israel’s Channel Two TV station showed a video that it said showed plotters, including rabbis and far-right extremists, discussing ways to occupy the site, which is holy in both Judaism and Islam.
The meeting of representatives from 30 different groups took place at a secret location in Jerusalem’s Old City, the TV station said.
Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei appealed to Israel to stop any action against the compound, saying it would cause the region to “explode”…
…Opponents of the Gaza withdrawal plan have been protesting in a number of ways, including blocking traffic on major roads causing massive jams.
Israel is due to withdraw all settlers and the troops that protect them from Gaza in July this year. Israel has occupied Gaza since 1967, and will retain control of the strip’s external borders, airspace and coastline.
The Temple Mount compound, in the old city in East Jerusalem, covers an area of 35 acres.
The site is holy to Jews because it is the site of the First and Second Temple in ancient times. It is known in Jewish tradition as the “abode of God’s presence”.
It is also of deep religious, political and national significance to Palestinians and to Muslims around the world.
BBC
Frontline has a big piece related to this. (thanks to one of my favorite sites, Disinfo)
With the traditional religious zealotry that persists and grows more self-riteous day by day, I don’t see anything coming but that explosion. Fueled by our own “religious” zealots.
I hope everyone here sees that Frontline. I brought it up in Booman’s superb analysis of Israel (it can also be found further down the page). It can be viewed online in its entirety. And, most PBS stations will reair it this weekend, so check your local PBS station.
In the past few days, stories after stories in the press about the building crisis in Israel have made me very worried. We can only pray that the Israeli government succeeds in keeping the extremist settlers at bay. Booman, thank you for staying on top of this.
some links from today and yesterday
Aqsa Khatib flays occupation for denying worshippers entry into the Aqsa
Israeli gunmen kill 2 Palestinian kids, 14 and 15
Israeli authorities to confiscate Palestinian farmlands east of Tulkarm
Israeli MPs urge police command to allow fanatics storm Aqsa Mosque
some backstory links
According to a group of 71 Jewish scholars who met this week in the Old City of Jerusalem in the form of a modern-day Sanhedrin – a duplicate of the religious tribunal which convened during the time of the Second Temple – a coronation day is growing closer.
As one member of the group put it, “We would have liked it to happen yesterday. But we are willing to wait until tomorrow.”
The only question now is how to establish the Jewish monarchy in spite of the presiding democratic government.
“There are two possibilities,” Dayan explained. “The first is that the nation or a majority from within will want the monarchy and will uproot the presiding democratic government.”
The second, more realistic option, he said, is “the one cited by Maimonides – and that is that no one will know how it will be until it happens.”
Some of the other ideas discussed at the Sanhedrin meeting included the construction of an altar on the Temple Mount to be used for the Passover Offering during the upcoming holiday.
One of the ideas, members said, is to climb the Mount and build the altar within minutes and sacrifice the lamb before security forces can stop them. Another, said leading Sanhedrin member Baruch Ben-Yosef, is to pray for a tsunami-like disaster on the Mount.
“In one second, God wiped out 150,000 people,” he said. “Who knows? Maybe he’ll help us if we show him we are ready.” link
Note that this last article is from 2002. How long does the state of heiferhood last? Won’t this one be a little old?
It’s all insane.
And talk about volatile. On the recent anniversary of Rachel Corrie’s death, I posted a diary commemorating her, and recounting my experience in going to her memorial service two years ago in Olympia, WA. I never dreamed I’d get so many vitriolic remarks condemning Rachel. I was hurt and completely puzzled.
To be sure, I can’t make any sense out of suicide bombers (aka “homicide bombers” by Fox) or the extremist settlers’ violence. Both sides justify those actions by saying they’re facing desperate times and are otherwise impotent against the might of Israel. Sorry. That doesn’t excuse the carnage.
But other nations, and other regions, have been overcome by such insanity and, in time and through great leadership, emerged relatively whole while the insanity faded away. I can only pray that happens there too.
This whole Temple Mount situation is a good example of why we went barking up the wrong tree when we invaded Iraq as a response to 9/11. We have fallen into what is widely perceived as a war between Christianity/Judaism and Islam, when the real “clash of civilizations” seems to me to be between fundamentalism and tolerance. And that is a struggle that is not just going on in the Arab or Muslim world – we (in the U.S.) seem to have our own creeping, intolerant theocracy much closer to home than that, and now Israel is tearing itself apart too over the same issue. Islamic fundamentalism has become the big bogeyman for us because of 9/11, but we seem to have latched on to the “Islamic” part of the equation, when it is the “fundamentalism” part that really threatens us.
Personally I know I have much more in common with secular, moderate people of any religious tradition than I do with a Temple Mount Looney who wants to ethnically cleanse his Palestinian neighbors because he thinks God says so, or a mad mullah who really believes that God is somehow offended by the sight of women driving cars or girls going to school, or a Hindu who wants to tear down the mosque at Ayodyha in honor of the lord Ram, or a Christian fundie who wants to decide when my feeding tube can be removed, teach my kids Intelligent Design in science class, and bring about Armageddon in the Middle East because that is supposed to inaugurate the Second Coming. And I’d like to think most Americans would say the same. But I don’t know how you overcome the fault lines as they are drawn up now, so that people realize they have more in common with many of the people on the other side than they do with some on their own side.
I am sure, however, that the course we have taken since 9/11 takes us in exactly the opposite direction from where we need to go. By combining its pre-existing desire for regime change in Iraq and control over Iraq’s oil reserves with the need to respond to 9/11, this Administration has simply alienated moderate people all round the world who share its opposition to al Qaeda, but want no part of our nationalist crusade. If you launch a war for oil and U.S. hegemony in the Middle East, then tell people “you’re either for us or against us”, then a lot of people in the region who do not normally identify with al Qaeda are going to say “Well, if that’s my only choice, I guess I’m against you”. The logical response would be to say, “Well actually I don’t accept that those are my only two choices”, but I think it’s too much to hope that people will necessarily come to that conclusion. It requires nuance and introspection, while fundamentalism offers much easier answers in the form of religious dogma and patriotic slogans. I don’t know how you counter that, especially in the U.S. where you have the added complication of a news media that seems to have completely lost the capacity for critical thought. It’s a lot easier to identify the problem than it is to know how to do anything about it.
with you more.
It appears the kids were playing soccer, and the gunmen killed 3 of them. (CNN domestic TV)
Since you’ve studied this so much, if there is significant violence, how will this possibly affect the entire region?
on Israel and Palestine. I’d say I’m fairly informed, no more.
But if there is a riot at the temple mount it could cause a third intifada, with corresponding brutality by the Israelis…
That would be a terrible shame. It is hard to hold out hope as long as Bush is in power here. But the death of Arafat has ushered in a new era in the dispute. So far, the new era has not been marked by widespread violence and mass carnage. There are still constant skirmishes, and the indignities of occupation continue unabated.
But I would hope to prevent a third intifada, especially one launched in response to deliberate provocation. People are not Pavlovian dogs…they do have the ability to turn the other cheek when it serves their purposes.
Let’s hope reason prevails.
but it’s never stopped me before :-).
I think some effects might be:
1. An end to the Palestinian factions’ truce and a resumption of the intifada.
I think this is virtually certain, but I think there is also the potential for much wider unrest. In 2000, Sharon’s visit to Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif was enough to spark off an intifada in the Occupied Territories, but the situation in the Middle East has gotten much worse since then. It’s a cliché to say that “9/11 changed everything”, but it did change some things, and not just for Americans. Bin Laden justified 9/11 by telling Muslims that it was an act of self defense, against a U.S. government that was propping up and arming repressive Arab regimes, enabling and conniving in Israel’s dispossession of the Palestinians, and whose troops were in Saudi Arabia, the home of Islam. His claim that Islam was literally under attack might have sounded a bit far-fetched to your average Muslim on the street in 2000, but I bet it doesn’t sound so far-fetched today, with U.S. troops invading one predominantly Muslim country for transparently bogus reasons, and now Jewish extremists threatening to storm one of the holiest sites in Islam. If you are a Muslim Arab watching Jewish militants threaten Haram al-Sharif, which do you find more realistic: George Bush’s assurances that he is bringing freedom to the Arab world and that Ariel Sharon is “a man of peace”, or bin Laden’s warning that Islam is under attack and every Muslim is obliged to fight in its defense?
2. Pro-Western Arab leaders distancing themselves from the U.S.
The Arab regimes that support the U.S. are not democratic regimes whose friendship for us reflects the will of the populace, but autocracies that go along with U.S. policies in spite of public opinion, basically because we give them stuff in return – lots of cash for countries like Egypt and Jordan, advanced weapons systems and training for the “internal security” apparatus in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States, and CIA intelligence training and cooperation for Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia to keep the lid on their internal Islamist opponents. Their part of the bargain is to recognize Israel (or at least to ensure that popular anger towards Israel never translates into active support for the Palestinians), and to stamp down on the Islamist movements. But there is a limit to what Hosni Mubarak and King Abdullah can justify to their people, and an assault on Temple Mount by Israeli extremists – and whether we like it or not, the U.S. is closely identified with Israeli actions in the Middle East – is beyond that limit. This isn’t “just” killing Palestinians and annexing the Occupied Territories, it’s an attack on Islam. There is no amount of U.S. aid that is going to make Hosni Mubarak et al be seen to side with Israel and the U.S. if the issue is the storming of Temple Mount; not if they expect to stay in power, anyway.
3. Big gains for Hamas in the Palestinian elections.
Palestinian parliamentary elections take place in July, and Hamas is standing for the first time (and is already expected to do very well). Even if this Temple Mount incident passes off smoothly, the heightened religious fervor has got to be a big vote-getter for Hamas. If you are a Palestinian voter watching Jewish extremists threatening to take over the Temple Mount Compound, who are you going to trust to safeguard your holy sites: the secular Fatah that has been telling you for 10 years that negotiation will end the Occupation (during which time the number of settlers has doubled, East Jerusalem has been effectively cut off from the rest of the Occupied Territories, and not a single settlement has been dismantled), or the religious Hamas, that has maintained all along that Israelis only understand force and can now point to the fact that four years of gruesome intifada have forced Israel to do what seven years of negotiation could not, i.e. to dismantle settlements in part of the Occupied Territories? Any incident which, like this threat to Temple Mount, makes the I/P conflict a religious conflict that can only be solved by jihad, rather than a political dispute over territory and self-determination that can be resolved by negotiation and compromise is really unhelpful if you are a moderate, secular candidate in the Palestinian election.
P.S. I’m not saying that bin Laden or Hamas are correct in how they read events in the Middle East: I am saying that the way they read events is probably going to enjoy greater credibility in the light of what is happening at Temple Mount.
The current intifada started when Ariel Sharon visited the Temple Mount in 2000. BBC timeline
And the parallels are even stronger: Sharon did so to get a political advantage in the (then) upcoming elections, knowing full well the reaction he might trigger.
Broken record here: I can see why, after watching that Frontline, why Sharon and other Israeli politicians are so very worried about the settlers and, at times, currying their favor. (Sharon’s visit was a grossly cynical move to get votes, knowing the ensuing cost in lives would be worth it, for him.)
Last May, The New Yorker had a lengthy article by Jeffrey Goldberg, “Among the Settlers” that painted a rather dispiriting picture of the prospects for a completely peaceful resolution of any removal process. Sharon and many other members of Likud are in a position similar to that of older, more mainstream GOP politicians and consultants in the US, who are now seeing much of their party held hostage by its most extreme elements. It’s very much a matter of “reap what you sow”.
Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount in 2000 was a deliberately provocative move that he knew would instigate a round of violent resistance that would box Ehud Barak’s government into a corner — either it would crackdown on the uprising, upsetting the Peace Now wing of the coalition as well as the many Israeli Arabs who had quietly supported Barak’s gov’t, or it would take a hands-off approach, which Likud would portray as “they’re not able to protect our own citizens.” By implicitly acceding to the settlers’ position, Sharon has set himself up for the upcoming showdown. As politicians should have learned from history, a mob riled up is not easy to control and often ends up destroying those same politicians.
For many years, it was militant groups on the Palestinian side who effectively placed roadblocks along the path to peace, by either bullying/threatening any moderates amongst the Palestinian leadership, or, more overtly, blowing up a cafe/bus/disco in order to provoke a violent Israeli military response. While it’s safe to say that groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah or the Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades haven’t completely laid down their weapons, they seem somewhat more content right now to allow the radical Jewish fundamentalists to take the lead in disrupting any steps toward peaceful coexistence.
It’s also important to keep in mind the ultimate aim of those plotting to enter the Al-Aqsa mosque: although that act alone would inflame tensions, it is just a prelude to the goal of rebuilding the (Third) Temple. In this, the Christian fundies in the US are helping the process along, as they view the reconstruction of the Temple as a necessary step toward the Second Coming and the End of Days (or “eschaton”, as Atrios would have it). It’s almost too messy to contemplate.
If Sharon really wants to demonstrate that he’s more than a military demagogue, he needs to crack down hard on the radical settlers and fundamentalists and break their back once and for all. If he fails to do so, he exposes himself as a hypocrite on the grandest scale, since it was the failure of Arafat to reign in radicals on the Palestinian side that enabled Sharon to refuse to engage in any bilateral talks.
Ugly, ugly, ugly. We can only hope that reason and pragmatism prevail.
If Sharon really wants to demonstrate that he’s more than a military demagogue, he needs to crack down hard on the radical settlers and fundamentalists and break their back once and for all. If he fails to do so, he exposes himself as a hypocrite on the grandest scale, since it was the failure of Arafat to reign in radicals on the Palestinian side that enabled Sharon to refuse to engage in any bilateral talks.
So very true. Alas, the evacuation of Gaza seems more like a “you get Gaza and we keep the West Bank” move.
.
By Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, April 9, 2005
Israeli Prime Minister
Ariel Sharon arrives Monday at President Bush’s ranch in Crawford, Tex., for his 11th meeting with the president in four years, a coveted invitation that is intended to reward Sharon for taking the politically difficult step of ousting Israeli settlers from the Gaza Strip.
[…]
In his talks with U.S. officials this week, Peres said he promoted the idea of a U.S.-appointed economic coordinator to bring together funds donated by companies and countries to assist the economic rebirth of Gaza. U.S. officials have been considering naming such a coordinator, similar to a U.S. general who is assisting the Palestinians on streamlining of security.
But Bush administration officials largely have remained distant from the bickering between the two sides, preferring to let them haggle on the details. On Wednesday, on the sidelines of a conference in Washington sponsored by the Aspen Institute, Palestinian Civil Affairs Minister Mohammed Dahlan and Sharon’s national security adviser, Giora Eiland, met for two hours and agreed to set up five committees that would examine aspects of the Gaza withdrawal. The process was sealed when Abbas agreed to it in a phone call with Dahlan during the meeting.
But it was Aspen Institute President Walter Isaacson, not any U.S. official, who pressed the two sides to meet in the first place.
Oui – Liberté – Egalité – Fraternité
Insurgents kill 15 Iraqi soldiers
Insurgents have killed 15 Iraqi soldiers travelling in a convoy south of Baghdad, police and officials say.
The attack happened near the town of Latifiya, in a lawless area known as the “triangle of death”.
The violence came on the second anniversary of the fall of Baghdad to the US-led coalition.
Tens of thousands of Iraqis joined an anti-US protest in Firdus Square, where Saddam Hussein’s statue was toppled on 9 April 2003 as millions watched on TV.
Chanting “No to America” and “No to the occupiers”, they pulled down and burned effigies of Saddam Hussein, US President George W Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair.
Details of the attack near Latifiya are still sketchy, with conflicting accounts of how the soldiers died.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4427151.stm
Hmmm.
(1st comment since I joined, but never fear, I HAVE been reading! BTW, comps on the kewl new bellz & wissels vis a vis that so yesterday kos site! 😉
.
GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip – Israeli troops fired at a group of Palestinians in a southern Gaza Strip refugee camp Saturday, killing three teenagers in the deadliest incident in Gaza since Israel and the Palestinians declared a cease-fire two months ago.
The incident in the Rafah camp, located along the border with Egypt, shattered weeks of calm and added to tensions surrounding plans by Jewish extremists to march on a disputed holy site in Jerusalem.
Ali Abu Zeid, a 22-year-old Rafah resident, said a group of boys were playing soccer in an open area when the ball was kicked toward the border fence. “The kids ran after it, and that’s when we heard gunfire,” he said.
Palestinian hospital officials said the two of the dead youths were 15 years old and the third was 14.
Israeli army said a group of youths had entered an unauthorized area near the border and ignored warning shots to stop. The shots were fired by forces patroling the area in an armed vehicle.
Oui – Liberté – Egalité – Fraternité
I remember seeing a picture of an Israeli soldier with his gun ready guarding over Palestinian schools with the kids walking by single file and their heads down. That picture said it all.
Does anyone have a grasp on the H20 situation in the Middle East?
An article I read, somewhere, sparked my concern that the Middle East conflict may get another boost of conflict from declining water resources.
The Palestinians have been denied more than a trip to the well, per day, while their water is being pumped into Israeli neighborhoods. This of course is one of the big issues with the Israelis. If they return the land then they would have to buy the water.
Not to mention the situation in the rest of the region…
And never covered but important, Yemen.
Ah yes, but we’re strategically positioned.
.
Does anyone know source of this “first” American War picture?
IMO must have been in George’s fraternity house at Harvard.
Oui – Liberté – Egalité – Fraternité
.
Just found this site, may be worthwhile —
Jewish Virtual Library
I really was looking for Peace Movement led by Yossi Beilin and the Geneva Accords. Does anyone have this available?
Oui – Liberté – Egalité – Fraternité