"The status of Jerusalem is among the most explosive issues in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, defying resolution throughout two decades of on-again, off-again peace talks. Today, the Arab and Jewish sections of the city are worlds apart.
Job discrimination against Arab Jerusalemites is common and investments in infrastructure and education in east Jerusalem are far below the levels plowed into the western sector. The discrimination has stifled economic development, fueled chronic joblessness and stoked poverty.
"We often use slogans in regard to Jerusalem and refrain from looking at the reality of Jerusalem. The result is that the discrepancy is something that many people have trouble adjusting to and accepting," Olmert told Israel TV." Foxnews/AP
-------------------------------
Ehud Olmert was Deputy Mayor of occupied Jerusalem under that great and good man, Teddy Kollek. At the time he looked like a genuine hard a-s on this subject and would glower at Kollek in meetings when the subject of the rights of the Arab citizens of the city came up.
When he became PM, he evidently had his "road to Damascus" moment (irony alert), and began to make offers to the Palestinians of some sort of shared sovereignty as a road to peace. The Palestinians, never wishing to miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity grandly rebuffed him with the "not enough" slogan.
The old, walled city of Jerusalem lies at the heart of any chance of a settlement not built on Arab and Israeili skulls. The Christian and Muslim quarters of the Old City plus other parts of East Jerusalem, like Shiekh Jarrah, the Mount of Olives south of Mount Scopus and Abu Dis are indispensible parts of any partition that the Palestinians might accept.
A shared administration of such necessities as electricity, water, trash disposal, sewage and policing is possible. There have been existing plans for schemes of government based on such ideas for many years.
!n 1973 I heard Admiral Moorer, then CJCS lecture on peace for the Holy Land. When he finished, I asked him how he would deal with Jerusalem in a settlement. He fell silent and then said that this could be settled "at a later time." Is this the time? pl
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/05/20/former-israeli-pm-jerusalem-must-be-partitioned/#ixzz1vQgkL56M
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem
To me, the Israelis seem incredibly restrained not to give the Arabs a month to disassemble the mosque on the Temple Mount and then rebuild the Temple.
I guess I'm a bad guy, b/c I would totally do that if I were them.
Posted by: AverageJoe | 20 May 2012 at 04:44 PM
Average Joe
Do you have a dog in that fight? You remind of the banker in Texaz who suggested at a business meeting with a group of Arabs that the whole Old City should be bulldozed so that there could be peace in the Holy Land. He did not get their business. You live in Charlottesville? Remarkable. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 20 May 2012 at 04:59 PM
When I'm feeling cynical and a bit depressed, I sometimes think that the best way forward in the Israel/Palestine dispute would be for the US to take control of the education system of both Israel and Palestine for a generation. The result would be a generation of kids on both sides who no longer knew whether they were Israeli or Palestinian, nor what any of the critical differences between the two sides were.
Of course, the undoubted result would be that they would instead be addicted to US television, and find some new set of relatively trivial tribal differences to base a conflict on, and nothing fundamental would change...
Posted by: PeterHug | 20 May 2012 at 05:07 PM
Col. Lang,
No, I don't have a dog in that fight. I was just remarking that the *terms* of debate seem rather constrained. Certainly the Spanish did not preserve the Alhambra as a mosque, they (re)converted it back to its original use as a Church. That's the sort of cultural reference point that I am drawing on, and that I would apply if I were the Israelis.
P.S. Charlottesville is a very "diverse" community. ;-)
Posted by: AverageJoe | 20 May 2012 at 08:05 PM
Average Joe
The Alhambra was built originally as a Noorish building. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Alhambra
pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 20 May 2012 at 09:04 PM
Colonel,
Speaking of 'bullies', it appears that the bully Israel wants to deploy some 20,000 'Commandos' to Cyprus. Turk jets have already run Israeli jets away from Cyprus, now the Israelis want to deploy commandos there. What next, will we be seeing Turk blue berets being deployed to counter the Israeli nitwits?
Imagine the Israeli bullies facing a 'real' military adversary like the Turk military instead of children with sticks and stones like with the Israelis and their normally bullying Palestinians and Lebanese, then we could see the Israelis really getting their arrogant noses bloodied for a change. The Turks would wipe the floor with the Israeli 'Commandos'.
Israel seeks to deploy 20,000 commandos in Greek Cyprus
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/israel-seeks-to-deploy-20000-commandos-in-greek-cyprus-.aspx?pageID=238&nid=21160
Posted by: J | 20 May 2012 at 09:10 PM
It is all one country, no need to slice the city.
One person, one vote.
Posted by: Ael | 20 May 2012 at 11:05 PM
20k commandos seems a bit too much for me, esp. when looking at an israeli population of some 6 million.
Posted by: Ursa Maior | 21 May 2012 at 02:38 AM
I am going out on a limb here in saying that probably Israel doesn't have 20.000 commandos.
But still, the confrontational Israeli posture vis a vis Turkey is as interesting as it is troubling.
Obviously, the Israelis are trying to play the Greeks against the Turks, and the financial crisis has opened them an opportunity to do so - they are offering the cash strapped Greeks military military hardware at relatively low prices and the like.
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2011/0705/Israel-s-new-friend-Why-Greece-is-thwarting-Gaza-flotilla
Sidenote: Considering the extent to which Israel is dependent on US military aid, it is probably so that they recycle US financed equipment and sell it to the Greeks for profit. Just a hunch.
Posted by: confusedponderer | 21 May 2012 at 06:05 AM
All:
The disposition of the Temple Mont is not in the purview of Palestinians; you need the approval of the Organization of Islamic Conference of any deal there.
There are two mosques there.
One is believed by Muslims to have been built on the site from which the Prophet of Islam ascended to Heaven in his Night Journey.
The other, is built on the site where during the same Night Journey, God is believed to have gathered all prohpets from Adam to Jesus in prayer led by the prophet of Islam.
Plaestinians cannot agree to a deal even if they wanted to.
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 21 May 2012 at 09:39 AM
He will have a dog in that fight once the Temple Mont is destroyed by Israelis.
He will find the United States in a religious war with the World of Islam for decades if not centuries.
May be he will enjoy having a cross on his shirt, dying in a far off place...
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 21 May 2012 at 09:42 AM
Its amazing - the forbearance of the owner of this website - when someone posts something that demonstrates the attitude that has resulted in Two recent wars and the destruction of the American economy.
Posted by: Walrus | 21 May 2012 at 02:44 PM