Home to Israelis and Palestinians: Jerusalem, a Shared City

Through his “slick” politics, Benjamin Netanyahu is doing more to ensure that Jerusalem will become the shared capital of Israel and Palestine than his “leftist” predecessors. I should make it clear that I made the transition to accepting the fate of Jerusalem years ago, while a student at Haifa University. Back then, in 1992, we, a group of Jews and Palestinians, declared this in unison. However, 18 years later there are still those who believe that it will remain in the sole hands of Israel--something no Palestinian in his right mind would accept.

During the last week or so, the issue of Jerusalem has been brought to the world’s attention due to the political maneuvering of the Israeli Prime Minister, who was “completely unaware” of the fact that just hours after his meeting with US Vice President Joe Biden, Shas party member Eli Yishai would publicly undermine his attempts to restart negotiations by announcing that Israel was planning the immediate construction of 1,600 housing units in East Jerusalem. What a blunder! What happened to the shock-and-awe politics of building settlements “quietly” and creating “facts on the ground,” before the US and others could get involved?

Well, Netanyahu has succeeded in creating a crisis between the US and Israel, and it looks like, for once, the US will draw the line: any expansion of settlements in the West Bank --including within the Jerusalem municipalities’ borders--is detrimental to the peace process and cannot be tolerated.

However, whether it is the Israeli government or the Jerusalem municipality, there are two other cases I would like to highlight that only exacerbate the problems of Palestinian-Israeli daily coexistence in Jerusalem. One is the ousting of 1948 Palestinians refugees from the neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah. These residents have lived in their homes since 1948. Recently, after Jews produced pre-1948 ownership records showing that the property actually belongs to them, eviction proceedings began against the Palestinian residents. Putting the legal issues aside, clearly the motivating factor behind the attempt to evict Palestinians is to strengthen the “Jewish” character of the city in the heart of Arab neighborhoods. Numerous other administrative and social initiatives are in place aimed at cleansing Jerusalem of its Palestinian population. Israeli pro-democratic movements should give priority to these issues and join forces with Palestinians.

The second case has to do with the controversy over the building of the Simon Wiesenthal Museum of Tolerance on the site of an ancient Muslim cemetery. This is a case where one finds oneself gasping at the shock of a museum that teaches tolerance and the history of the Holocaust setting out to erase the past of the “other.” While the Simon Wiesenthal Center denies that this is the case, the overwhelming evidence does not support their claims. Perhaps the Israeli government should start showing goodwill by intervening--first, to block the continued building of the museum, and second, to declare the cemetery a heritage site where Israeli and Palestinian children can learn about the history of those who graves date back perhaps even to the time of Saladin.

No one can deny Israel and the Jewish people’s connection to Jerusalem; however, the Palestinians also have a historical connection to the Holy City and are entitled to live in respect and dignity, and to self-rule in Jerusalem. Ironically, it is the Netanyahu government that is doing the most to help the world understand that Israel will one day have to relinquish parts of the city if there is ever to be peace. Without peace, Israel will face a continued uphill battle, not only to convince its children that this is the land in which they should remain, but also to convince the world that Israel is the state it portrays itself to be: one that longs for peace and promises a land where Jews can live in dignity and pride.

Lest We Speak: the AKP and Freedom of Expression

In October 2009, when Israel protested a Turkish television, Turkey’s foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoğlu, stated the following, “there is no censorship in Turkey.”; if this was only the case. Jumping up to late February 2010, Prime Minister Erdoğan criticized Turkey’s columnists as negatively influencing the Turkish economy and called on the editors of the Turkish press basically to censure their work, stating: “I want to call the bosses of these newspapers. You cannot say, ‘I cannot intervene in what the columnist writes.’ Nobody has a right to increase tension in this country. I cannot let such articles upset financial balances. You pay the salary of that columnist and tomorrow you will have no right to complain.” It seems that Erdoğan, who has criticized the media harshly in the past, needed a quick scapegoat as a result of the massive speculation voiced by the media outlets following the arrest over 50 military officers (retired and active), related to the “Balyoz/Sledge Hammer Affair (see previous blog entry). This massive raid on army officials obviously turned into a media frenzy, as it would in any country that has its top military echelon arrested for attempting to overthrow the state! Further, it would not be normal for an economy like Turkey’s, which is tied closely to political stability, if the arrests did not throw the financial markets into disarray to begin with.

The Prime Minster’s words are worrying since he is the leading the campaign of constitutional reform, and for the very fact that censorship in Turkey has been able to prevail and has remained unscathed as the result of a general lack of interest by a great part of the population. Numerous websites are banned in Turkey, including Youtube, which are easily accessed via third party sites (and with PM Erdoğan ironically stating that he visits the site). Sites are banned for promoting terror, criticizing the founder of the Turkish Republic, and pornography, among on long list of other reasons. However, the line dividing issues of morality are blurred with 3 gay dating and social sites being temporarily suspended in October 2009, for example. Furthermore, during my last visit to Turkey, I can attest to the fact that the “free internet service” on Istiklal Caddesi, supplied as a courtesy of the Istanbul municipality, conveniently blocked an article which appeared on Bianet that covered a news story about a book in Turkey, which was being investigated by Istanbul’s prosecutors due to its containing stories alluding to same-sex love between women (not to mention the banning of a book for youth under 18-years of age, based on its subject matter: the life of a transsexual).

Most recently, the European Human Rights Court has fined Turkey (43,000 Euros) for the past closing/suspensions of newspapers due to their coverage of the Kurdish issue. As we will see with the case of Berivan, which I previously wrote about, the harshness of punishment is greater when dealing with Turkish citizens living in the Southeast. An editor of a local Kurdish language daily in Diyarbakir, Azadiya Welat, has recently been charged with crimes which call for a 525-year prison sentence.

While clearly, the judiciary is responsible for many of these cases, the government has also actively pursued some cases of censorship, making clear that freedom of expression does not top their agenda. An example of this is the fact was that in place of abolishing the controversial law 301, they opted to “reform” it. Lastly, since PM Erdoğan has set out to solve the “Kurdish question,” it seems that there has been an escalation in excessive punishments being handed down.

In this article, I have only touched upon a few cases of censorship, while many more exists; both in print and the internet.* The Turkish government seems suited on one hand to bring forth the democratization of Turkey; especially when it comes to settling accounts with the Ergenekon affair. However, without upholding the most basic right of democracy –freedom of expression- how can one take this conservative party truly as a democratizing force? And, as long as the groups being targeted remain on the fringes of the society, their struggle to freely express their aspirations and concerns will continue to be met with uphill battles.


*A detailed list of articles relating to issues of Freedom of Expression can be found on Bianet at the following site: http://bianet.org/english/freedom-of-expression

One Year Later after the Israeli Elections: Yes, it is that Bad.

One year has passed since the Israeli elections, when Benjamin Netanyahu so swiftly took the Knesset from the hands of Tzipi Livni, and it is safe to say that the present government has failed radically on a few fronts: Gilad Shalit, the peace process, and perhaps most of all, allowing Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon to continue to serve.

Until now, I have not written much about the Israeli soldier who has been held hostage in Gaza since June 2006. Yet, I think of him constantly and I am thankful for all those who have worked to keep his memory alive. No war has been able to get him released and Hamas refuses to allow international organizations access to visit him. Last year, on September 30th, Hamas released a video clip in exchange for 20 Palestinian women prisoners. This tape set off a wave of excitement and it seemed that in no time he would be returned home; but to no avail. A deal, proposing an exchange of 1000 Palestinian prisoners for him, fail through, despite the hard work of the German negotiator. I for one will not forget Gilad and will continue to demand that both sides adhere to international laws concerning the holding of enemy combatants and civilians.

As for the peace process, one can only ask what peace process. The current government has its eye on Iran, while diverting the attention of the real challenge: a comprehensive peace agreement with the Palestinians which would lead them to an independent state. For me to call out FREE PALESTINE now would simply fall on deaf ears (simply since this has turned into somewhat of a cliché and it seems farther away than ever). However, I have to say it. The occupation has gone on for 42 years, and Israel has no time to waste. For years, we, in the leftist camp, would declare the need for a state out of some humanistic reasoning; now Israel does not have that option. Simply, demographics are at work and if Israel is not careful a Jewish state will seem like something of the past. On this topic, I promise to write more during the upcoming months. What is clear to me more than ever is that to continue to place blame on the “right wing” and “settlers” will get us nowhere since real change has not taken place due to the fickleness of the political center, and not as a result of the political maneuvering of the right.

Lastly, on the diplomatic front, the Foreign Minister has been quite a surprise. Avigdor Lieberman, the one who almost all love to hate, has met an enormous number of foreign ministers and seems to be working much more than the average Israeli politician. However, as long as Danny Ayalon remains his deputy he really need not worry; Ayalon has stolen the show and takes the prize as the most incompetent and damaging figure Israel has encountered in years. Whether it was the public humiliating of the Turkish Ambassador, the snubbing of US congressmen due to their trip-affiliation with the American Jewish pro-peace camp organization J Street, or the almost bragging about the alleged Mossad assassination of the Hamas member in Dubai, Ayalon has proven time and time again that he is unfit for the job –or any public position for that matter. The damage he has caused is immeasurable and it is about time that he goes home.