Hyde Presses U.S. on Israeli Wall

Chicago Sun-Times ^ | J+M+J April 1, 2004 | Robert Novak

[Siobhan]

There is hardly a more resolute supporter of Israel in Congress than Rep. Henry Hyde, the venerable chairman of the House International Relations Committee. That is why his March 25 letter to Secretary of State Colin Powell is so important. It is a plea to deflect Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's wall around the Holy Land from its planned position blocking the Scriptural pathway of Jesus Christ.

''I fear that important religious sites will become museums for commercial purposes and will no longer be maintained as places of spiritual worship shared by billions across the world,'' Hyde, a prominent Roman Catholic layman, told Powell. As Holy Week approaches, he asked the secretary's help to ''ensure that the Stations of the Cross are not cut off from each other, preventing the normal celebrations of Easter and the commemoration of the last days of Christ.''

That raises the question of whether the Bush administration will confront Israel on this issue. Sharon's government last year abruptly cut off negotiations with the Vatican. U.S. Catholic clergy and laity, inspecting the deplorable conditions for Christians in the Holy Land, have found the attitude of the Israeli military and bureaucracy ranges from uncooperative to hostile.

When worried Catholics first visited Hyde last year to tell him of the havoc wrought by Sharon's wall, he told them to come back with proof. A delegation headed by the Rev. Donald Rooney of Fredericksburg, Va., and the Rev. John J. Podsiadlo of Baltimore did just that in March.

''If we do not turn the tide of events,'' Reverends Rooney and Podsiadlo wrote after they returned, ''Christian charity, sacred sites and the living Christian community in the Holy Land will be destroyed.'' The wall, the priests said, ''could forever change the Holy Land and the people who live in and visit this cherished historic land.''

With corroborating evidence supplied by his own staffer sent to investigate, Hyde was convinced. In his letter to Powell, he laid out the problems created by the Sharon wall. An 8-meter-high concrete wall will completely enclose the last passage from Bethany to the Mount of Olives, restricting the Palm Sunday procession from Bethpage into Jerusalem. Access will be blocked to the Sisters of Emmanuel Monastery north of Bethlehem. A proposed route of the wall will separate the convent and school of the Rosary Sisters. The process also is certain to accelerate the continuing Israeli expropriation of West Bank land still held by the dwindling Christian community there.

Henry Hyde is no Israeli-basher. ''I would never criticize Israel for building that fence,'' he told me. He said he is just trying to set in motion ''some negotiations'' to protect the Christian holy places.

The problem is that the Sharon government won't negotiate. The Vatican charges that Israel has violated the 1993 agreement between Rome and Israel guaranteeing West Bank land owned by the Catholic Church. Sharon has refused to enforce the concordat. The Rev. David Jaeger, representing the Holy See, is a native-born Israeli citizen who has been working on this problem for 27 years but has run into the Sharon wall. The Israeli government pulled out of negotiations with Jaeger Aug. 28. The response to me from an Israeli embassy spokesman in Washington was ''no comment.''

This state of affairs did not appear on screens of Bush administration policymakers until it was called to Hyde's attention and the congressman wrote his letter. Colin Powell, who clearly has not been enthusiastic about the wall, can be counted on to carefully study the problem in the Holy Land.

But a dilemma faces Powell, Hyde and all official U.S. supporters of Israel. The wall manifests Sharon's policy of blood and iron, with collateral damage. While soldiers from the Israeli Defense Force overrun church properties, the U.S. taxpayer is paying for much of the $8 billion wall. The Christian pilgrim, stopped at IDF checkpoints, sees this graffiti at many places on the barrier: ''The USA is paying for this wall.'' That underscores U.S. responsibility for what is happening in the Holy Land.

[rmlew]

The vast majorities of Arabs who left Israel in 1948 did so at the behest of Arab armies to facilitate the proposed extermination of Jews. The Arabs hoped to then steal the property of the Jews.
Those Arabs who stayed in israel have full rights. In fact, they own more private property than Jews, despite being just 20% of the population.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

One is left wondering whether the de-Christianisation of Palestine is an explicit policy of Israel.

Of course it is, and they've been very successful at doing so for 50 years now if you simply look at the population figures. Fr. Feeney pointed out their trouncing upon the rights of Christians back in the 1950's. Their meddling in the West Bank and Lebanon has only accelerated the final de-Christianization of the Middle East, something that will be cemented by the coming attack on Syria, a country very tolerant of Christians. Unlike our "pals" in Saudi Arabia.

The Israelis have done more in 50 years to de-Christianize the Middle East than the Muslims have done in 500 years. That is a fact.

[rmlew]

Israel supported that Pahalangists in Lebanon. They tried to protect the Christian state. That is more than the US did.

[Romulus]

If it were as simple as that, Israel would be standing on its head to encourage the Christian Palestinians to stay. They are not.

Nor am I convinced that the Jews' systematic bid for exclusive control of the land amounts to no more than "rejecting their role as dhimmi."

I stand by what I said earlier: neither side is in good faith. Over the long run neither the muslim Palestinians nor the Jewish state has any interest in peaceful compromise.

[rmlew]

If it were as simple as that, Israel would be standing on its head to encourage the Christian Palestinians to stay. They are not.
In 1948 they did. Since then, Palestinians have been out to destroy Israel. Why should Israel try to help any segment of its enemies?

Nor am I convinced that the Jews' systematic bid for exclusive control of the land amounts to no more than "rejecting their role as dhimmi."
Of course it is more. However, the Christians will be slaves so long as they accept the Arab identitiy of their Muslim masters instead of the freedom Israel would give them.

I stand by what I said earlier: neither side is in good faith. Over the long run neither the muslim Palestinians nor the Jewish state has any interest in peaceful compromise.
1. The Arab Christians, having gone throuh a 1000 year Stockholm syndrome, side with their Muslim masters.
2. How many times has Israel tried to negotiate? 1923, 1927, 1947, 1948, 1950... They were always rejected by the Arabs.

[Alouette]

The Israelis have done more in 50 years to de-Christianize the Middle East than the Muslims have done in 500 years. That is a fact.

That must be the reason the Christian population of Bethlehem has gone from over 60% to 10% since the Palestinian Authority took over. Blame it on the eeeeeevil Joooooooz.

[Romulus]

You will get the bloodbath you want. We'll all get the bill for it.

[Romulus]

You will get the bloodbath you want. We'll all get the bill for it.

[Romulus]

Here's what I don't understand. Life in a majority muslim country must have been no picnic for the Christian Palestinians. So how did they manage to survive all those years, preserving their faith and handing it on? Why did they not either give in and convert to islam, or else emmigrate a long time ago?

Why are they exiting only now?

[Bella_Bru]

That must be the reason the Christian population of Bethlehem has gone from over 60% to 10% since the Palestinian Authority took over. Blame it on the eeeeeevil Joooooooz.

Of course it is our fault Alouette. We should just do the right thing and turn Israel over to the Vatican. < /sarcasm>

You finished cleaning your kitchen? I thought about taking a blowtorch to mine. ;-)

Shabbat Shalom, Alouette.

[Alouette]

Life in a majority muslim country must have been no picnic for the Christian Palestinians. So how did they manage to survive all those years, preserving their faith and handing it on?

There were also ancient Jewish communities in Muslim lands. How is it that they also managed to survive for so many centuries?

Why are they exiting only now?

You mean, since the Palestinians took over Bethlehem?

[eddiespaghetti]

One is left wondering whether the de-Christianisation of Palestine is an explicit policy of Israel. There's nothing Israel could do more likely to radicalise those remaining and provoke a final terrorist offensive so savage that it will be able to claim self-defense in clearing the land altogether. Perhaps this is their endgame in the consolidation of this utopian project.

Rubbish.

[Romulus]

How is it that they also managed to survive for so many centuries?

Exactly! Makes you think, doesn't it?

You mean, since the Palestinians took over Bethlehem?

Took over from whom? They were there all along.

[Alouette]

After the Israelis surrendered control of Bethlehem to the Palestinian Authority (according to the Oslo Agreements) the Christian population went from over 60% to 10%. If life under the Muslims is so much more wonderful for Christians than life as Israelis, how do you explain this?

[eddiespaghetti]

The Israelis have done more in 50 years to de-Christianize the Middle East than the Muslims have done in 500 years. That is a fact.


Pure horse-pucky!

The Christians in Lebanon, for example, had been emigrating long before Israel invaded in 1982. Israel had also been helping the Christians in Lebanon (both militias and civilians) since Lebanon's civil war started in 1975.

Do you blame Israel for the fate of the Armenian populations in Syria/Turkey/Iran? Or that of the Chaldean Christians in Iraq? (I think someone named Saddam had something to do with the depletion their population.)

[eddiespaghetti]

The Arab Christians, having gone throuh a 1000 year Stockholm syndrome, side with their Muslim masters.

I don't think they've had much choice, as their survival required them to.

[eddiespaghetti]

You mean, since the Palestinians took over Bethlehem?

Took over from whom? They were there all along.

Yes, "they" meaning the population was there. However,
she is talking about when Israel ceded control over Bethlehem (and most of the West Bank, for that matter) to the Palestinian authority in 1994.

[Romulus]

Well, you said it yourself -- the Christian population had been at 60%. You reckon the Israeli government planted them there? Me neither.

[Alouette]

Well, you said it yourself -- the Christian population had been at 60%.

So why did they not leave in droves until after Arafat took over?

[agrace]

You're missing the point. Which is, the Palestinian Christians were doing just fine under Israeli control, but when the PA took over, they started leaving. Seems hard to believe it's just a coincidence in timing.

After all, who took over the Church of the Nativity a while back? Who held its inhabitants hostage and destroyed the interior while firing on Israeli troops? Who built a mosque next to the Church of the Annunciation? Who destroyed Joseph's Tomb and built a mosque in its place?

Do a google search for "Palestinian Christian persecution" - it's quite interesting the number of articles that pop up detailing incidents at the hands of Palestinian Arabs. Rioting mobs destroying churches in the West Bank, Muslims claiming Christian-owned land for themselves, Palestinian Christians being granted asylum in America for religious persecution in PA-controlled areas.

And let's be honest - the Vatican has been in constant support of the Palestinians for quite some time now, signing solidarity agreements with them etc. The pope has had an audience with Arafat at least nine times! And with Palestinian "Christians" like Hanan Ashwari and Edward Said in full support of the PA, I don't think Israel should trust them either.

It isn't too hard to figure out who is the greater threat. All we have to do is look at how Christians are treated in other Islamic countries. In my opinion, Israel's probably been a restraining force.