The battle for Jerusalem

Jerusalem is one of the oldest cities in the world, and one of the holiest, containing sites sacred to Christians, Jews, and Muslims. This historic and religious significance to all three Abrahamic religions has made the status of Jerusalem a particular sticking point in the Arab-Israeli conflict. Although Israel claims the city as its capital, it is not internationally recognised as such, with all foreign countries keeping their embassies in Tel Aviv. Palestine wants East Jerusalem as the capital of any future Palestinian state.

Understanding the current situation in Jerusalem requires a look at recent history. During the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, the city was split, with West Jerusalem captured and annexed by Israel and East Jerusalem (including the Old City), captured by Jordan. Israel recaptured and annexed it in the 1967 Six Day War. Israel’s “Jerusalem Law” currently refers to the city as the country’s “undivided capital”, but the international community views the 1967 annexation as illegal, treating East Jerusalem as occupied Palestinian territory.

As elsewhere in the conflict, there has been little meaningful progress in recent decades on who owns what in Jerusalem. But the struggle for the city continues. While Jerusalem is currently not host to any foreign embassies, a public law in the US, passed in 1995, stated that the American embassy should be transferred from Tel-Aviv no later than May 1999, and expressed support for Jerusalem remaining an undivided city and the capital of Israel. Successive presidents have used the presidential waiver in the interests of national security to delay the transfer. This week, President Obama again used this executive power to create a delay, meaning that the US embassy will stay put in Tel Aviv for now.

But that is not to say that the city’s status does not remain a hot topic. Next week, lawmakers from pro-Israel groups in America and the European Union will hold an event to declare their support for Jerusalem remaining Israel’s undivided capital. The event is timed to coincide with the 46th anniversary of the city’s “reunification” in 1967. As outlined above, this anniversary is controversial. After the Jerusalem Law was passed in Israel in 1980, the UN Security Council passed a resolution that declared it “a violation of international law”. The Jerusalem Post reports that the forthcoming event is being organised by “the Israel Allies Foundation and its branches of pro-Israel caucuses in Congress and the EU Parliament and the Knesset Christian Allies Caucus”.

Meanwhile, Palestinians and their Muslim supporters have planned a day of protests, termed the Global March to Jerusalem. They are protesting against the Israeli government’s programme of settlement building in occupied areas, and the mistreatment of Palestinians in Jerusalem.

One of the reasons that the future of Jerusalem is such a hot topic of late is Israel’s latest round of settlement building. After Palestine’s status at the United Nations was upgraded last year, the Israeli government authorised building on two plots in East Jerusalem, in what looked like retaliation. Tenders and contracts have now been issued for around one thousand new homes in the areas of Gilo and Ramat. Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat attacked the move last week, telling AFP that Israel has “a systematic plan for destroying [US Secretary of State, John] Kerry’s efforts which involves an escalation of settlement building, a displacement of the population of the Jordan Valley, an increase of settler attacks against our people, and confiscation of our land.” In response, the Israeli government alleged that Palestinians are simply finding reasons to avoid negotiations.

The aim of ramped up settlement building in East Jerusalem is clear: as with all settlements on Palestinian land, it changes the “facts on the ground” (in the words of settler politician Naftali Bennett), and makes the prospect of any clear division or Palestinian ownership very difficult to envisage.

Not without reason, many analysts have said that the future of Jerusalem may be the single issue that prevents a meaningful peace deal. As the flurry of recent activity – mass protests on one side and international conferences and avowals of solidarity on the other – neither Israel or Palestine is willing to give Jerusalem up.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.