(Israeli) Cabinet mulls leaving capital's (Jerusalem's) Arab districts outside barrier

Ma'ariv ^ | 2 August 2004 | Amir Rapaport

[anotherview]

Cabinet mulls leaving capital's Arab districts outside barrier
Considered a possible security risk, Arab residents of north and east Jerusalem may find themselves living on opposite side of security fence.
Amir Rapaport

In recent unpublicized meetings, Israeli security officials have been discussing the possibility of leaving the Arab neighborhoods of north and east Jerusalem outside the boundaries of the security fence.

These plans are consistent with comments made in June by Deputy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, who told Maariv NRG that the neighborhoods in question would be under Palestinian jurisdiction: "In the future, in an effort to improve the demographic balance, the line will be drawn so that Isawiya, Kfar Aqab, Tsur Baher, Um Tuba, the Shuafat refugee camp, and the neighborhood of Anata will all be on the east or north sides of the fence, and not under Israeli jurisdiction".

As originally planned by the government nine months ago, the fence's route was to follow the municipal boundaries set by Israel after the Six-Day War. On paper, the plan included at least 190,000 Palestinians on the Israeli side, and it split Arab neighborhoods that had spread to both sides of the border.

Although construction of the fence surrounding Jerusalem is already underway, its route was slated for re-consideration following the High Court ruling early last month. Israel, it said, was obliged to strike a balance between security considerations and the "life fabric" and livelihood of Palestinians. Security officials, according to one source, see the possibility of "using the court's ruling as an good excuse for changing the route – first and foremost according to our security interests".

If a large mass of east Jerusalem Arabs remain on the Israeli side of the fence, say the sources, they are likely to collaborate with terrorists from Judea and Samaria. "At security meetings, the Israel Security Agency only wanted to give its professional view about the consequences of the recommended route. The ISA does not make decisions or official recommendations on the subject of the fence", the source added.

(2004-08-02 10:24:47.0)

[anotherview]

Unilateral division of Jerusalem?

[DoctorZIn]

This article has been posted to DoctorZin’s New News Blog!

[AmericanChef]

Here's an idea - kick 'em all out, and keep all of Jerusalem.

What have they got to lose? They have little support, anyway, and aren't likely to turn into the world's favorites any time soon. Might as well make themselves safer.

[anotherview]

ping

[SJackson]

If you'd like to be on this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.

And a ping for those on Alouette's list, she's away from her computor.

[SJackson]

How well this will be received by the East Jerusalem arab population remains to be seen.

[dennisw]

How well this will be received by the East Jerusalem arab population remains to be seen......

I think they objected strenuously a few months ago for honest reasons. They prefer Israeli rule over Arafat or Hamas.

[SJackson]

Clearly Israel can't make them all happy.

These Arabs fear being branded traitors — because they find the security fence beneficial

Israeli Arabs credit fence for newfound prosperity

Worried about new Jerusalem fence, local Arabs make contingency plans [move to Israel]

Arab bomb victim [now] backs security fence

[dennisw]

Thanks for the links. I read them all. Here are some blog comments on the fence---->

That may be so, but in plotting the route for the barrier Israel had to take into account not only where its citizens are, but where the Palestinians are attacking from.

Quoting Laurence Rothenberg and Abraham Bell:
"[N]o less-intrusive construction, such as building the fence along the 1949 armistice line, can achieve Israel's legitimate military goals. A barrier along the armistice line would expose motorists along the main Jerusalem-Tel Aviv highway to Palestinian sniper fire near the Latrun salient and would recreate the division of Jerusalem that existed from 1949 to 1967, when Israeli civilians were repeatedly attacked by snipers from the Jordanian-controlled side of the line. Additionally, this would expose Israeli civilian aircraft landing and taking off from Israel's international airport in Lod to shoulder-launched missile attacks from Palestinian terrorists in the Benjamin region of the West Bank."

Posted by: at July 13, 2004 06:47 AM

The notion that a barrier built along the green line would be preferable, requires serious consideration. Would any of those who profess to care about the humanitarian damage be comfortable with a wall that splits Jerusalem in two (that is, after all, where the green line runs)? How many people would be cut off from jobs, family and friends then?

Posted by: Elisha Stein at July 14, 2004 08:25 PM

[FreeReporting]

The actual fact is that the wall (fence, barrier) is there to separate the killers from their victims. The line runs any place where you can keep "them" away from "us"