Unholy tactics in the holy city
Next year in Jerusalem! The ancient Jewish toast that has rung down the centuries was redeemed when independent Israel established its capital in the holy city. To demand more would not only trample on the rights, legal as well as moral, of Israel's Arab neighbors -- Jerusalem being as sacred to them as it is to Jews -- but it would also violate Israel's own solemn commitments.
The dispute goes right to the heart of the Middle East conflict. The proposed Har Homa settlement, on the hill that the Arabs call Jabal Abu Ghneim, will seal off the last corridor through which occupied east Jerusalem, claimed by the Palestinians as the independent state which they hope the Oslo process will deliver, can be linked up to the rest of the West Bank.
United States President Bill Clinton is not alone in denouncing the decision because it "builds distrust". No one outside the Likud coalition's extreme right wing can view with equanimity a course that threatens to throw the Middle East back into the grip of strife and unrest. If Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu refuses to acknowledge this, it is probably because he is a prisoner of this country's internal politics.
Regrettably, Israel's tactics seem to be to present the world with one fait accompli after another while appearing to pay lip service to the peace process. The additional settlements in Hebron, suspension of the corridor from Gaza to the West Bank, the tunnel under Jerusalem's Muslim quarter, and now the peremptory closure of four institutions in east Jerusalem that are dependent on the Palestine Authority and are directly financed by it and all seem calculated to flaunt superior might. Even the tone and language that Netanyahu used when announcing the latest closure seemed to be a studied insult to a quasi- sovereign entity with which Israel hopes to live in amity.
None of this bodes well for the peace process. It also suggests that the Israelis have forgotten that former Prime Minister Shimon Peres initiated the Oslo talks only after the Intifada, as the spontaneous uprising in the West Bank was called, convinced him that Israel's security would remain in jeopardy until the rights of the Palestinians had been recognized.
-- The Straits Times, Singapore