How to apply the lessons from protecting Hebron to Jerusalem
The Temporary International Presence in Hebron has failed to make a major change in relations between Israelis and Palestinians, as many argue that a similar force in Jerusalem will not work unless it is given clear mandate and power to hold any violators accountable.
As the violence in the occupied territories that began with clashes on the Jewish New Year, Sept. 13, is escalating, Palestinian officials say that 70 Palestinians were killed in the month of October alone. Meanwhile, Palestinian calls for international protection have been gaining traction.
The United States attempted on Oct. 19 to finesse the issue by saying that even Jordan doesn’t accept international observers on the Haram al-Sharif. On the same day, a fatwa was issued by the head of the Supreme Islamic Council in Jerusalem, Ekrima Sabri, also echoing the Jordanian rejection.
But Palestinians continue to call for protection in Jerusalem and all other points of friction with Israeli settlers. France, as a permanent member of the UN Security Council, also supports the need for an international presence in Jerusalem until a solution is found.
While Israel’s UN representative rejected the idea, Palestine’s UN representative reminded the world of the 1994 resolution calling for disarming settlers and employing international observers. He also said that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had agreed — during his first term as prime minister — to the idea of international observers in Hebron back in 1997.
