Historical sites are important, but not at the cost of fresh peace talks

Follow j. on

and

One would be hard pressed to find Jews who do not value the Torah and the Holy Land. Every square inch of biblical Israel is significant to the Jewish people.

But many of those same biblical sites are just as important to Palestinians. And there’s the rub.

We understand why Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently declared the Cave of the Patriarchs and Rachel’s Tomb as Jewish historical sites warranting new funding for upkeep.

However, we question his timing. Because both sites are in the West Bank, the declaration deepened Palestinian suspicions that Israel is insincere about a peace deal that would transfer parts of the West Bank to a new Palestinian state.

Israel should be doing everything reasonable to bring the Palestinians to the table. This just gives them an easy excuse to say “no.”

As our story on page 12 notes, of all the current bad news on the Middle East diplomatic front, this declaration may prove the most inflammatory. Netanyahu says politics played no role in his decision. Even if true, there can be no avoiding the subsequent political fallout.

Netanyahu says he wants Jewish youth to be able to visit the sites and connect with their heritage. In a perfect world, he would be absolutely correct. But this is not a perfect world.

Israel has long understood that the bumpy road to peace has required painful sacrifices. Giving up the Sinai and the Gaza Strip, not to mention the release of hundreds of jailed Palestinian terrorists over the years, attest to that.

Thus it makes little sense to make this declaration now. Not because we dispute the historical significance of the Cave of the Patriarchs and Rachel’s Tomb. That is beyond measure.

But such a declaration has real consequences on the ground. Israel would certainly renovate the sites, spurring tourism and perhaps prompting more Jewish settlement.

Despite a government spokesman saying the declaration does not change the status quo, in fact it does.

Palestinian protests quickly erupted in Hebron, and they may spread. In the near term, this could cause Israel security headaches. Or worse.

When it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, some issues are black and white, the moral clarity apparent. Whether stopping suicide bombers, or combating efforts to undermine Israel’s legitimacy as the Jewish homeland, we know what’s right and what’s wrong.

But in this case, we would urge the Israeli government to at least postpone the declaration, turn down the political heat and get back to the business of peace talks.

Comments

Posted by BillB
03/04/2010 at 06:48 PM

Preserving Jewish Holy Sites

First, you miss labeled these as “historic” sites when they are “holy” sites; second, your argument is based on the assumption that there will be a better time to deal with this issue. Now is the time - ‘if not now, when?’ - As commentaries on this week’s parsha state, wisdom is attained through Torah study - perhaps you may wish to study Torah.

Login to reply to this comment or post your own

Posted by Jack Kessler
03/04/2010 at 09:49 PM

Who Speaks for the Palestinians?

The J editorial that Israel should sacrifice parts of its heritage to mollify the Palestinians into negotiating peace, ignores history.

The Palestinian leadership, judging by their actions, has never been willing to permanently live in peace with Israel. At Oslo in 1993, Israel traded lands and cities for promises. In return she got the Second Intifada, two years of low-level warfare. But kept the lands and cities.

As much as there was no one on the Palestinian side with whom to negotiate a lasting peace before, now that the Palestinians are split between a PA government in the West Bank and a Hamas government in Gaza, there is even less. With whom would one negotiate? Who speaks for the Palestinians?

The J editorial says that Israel should not list the sites as Jewish historical sites because it would make the Palestinians doubt Israeli good faith. The people whose peaceful intentions are in doubt are not the Israelis, but the Palestinian leaderships.

Israel has scrupulously abided by both the letter and the spirit of every treaty and agreement she has signed. The Palestinians have abided by none. If gestures of good faith and good will are called for they must come from the Palestinians.

Login to reply to this comment or post your own

Posted by artcohn
03/04/2010 at 10:23 PM

Jewish Heritage sites

The argument that Jewish heritage sites should not be announced now because of interference with peace negotiations is nonsensical. Peace negotiations have been going on for about 20 years, with Israel making too many concessions adverse to the safety of its citizens. Yet Fatah still calls for the total dissolution of Israel. They teach their children and draw their maps with no Israel. Hamas also calls for the total destruction of Israel. The only diferrence is that Hamas wants to do so in one fell swoop, while Fatah is willing to do so in stages. There are no imminent negotiations that will lead to real peace. Israel, the Jewish State, should take beter care of the graves of our Patriarchs and Matriarchs.

Login to reply to this comment or post your own

Posted by Steven
03/12/2010 at 04:54 PM

Pathetic

The author of this article demonstrates an astounding lack of knowledge regarding our history, and the conflict with our Arab neighbors. What a shame that any Jewish organisation would see fit to publish such nonsense.

But all is not lost, there are some people out there who are still in touch with the real world.

Login to reply to this comment or post your own

In order to post a comment, you must first log in.
Are you looking for user registration? Or have you forgotten your password?

Historical sites are important, but not at the cost of fresh peace talks

Comments

Leave a Comment

Subscribe to: