Jerusalem launches debate on sharing holiest site By Ari Rabinovitch – Thu Jun 18, 11:05 am ET
JERUSALEM (Reuters) – Espousing a dream of harmony that may stretch credibility among even the most fervent believers in dialogue among the great religions, clerics in Jerusalem launched a project on Thursday aimed at finding a way to share the city's holiest, and most fought over, site.Even the Jewish religious scholar promoting it acknowledges it might need divine intervention before a peaceful remapping of the area where Muslims built the 7th century Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa Mosque on the site of the biblical Jewish Temple.We offer this vision for a long and deep discussion, and of course want to continue with a parallel research from other religions,said Yoav Frankel, director of the project promoting a vision of God's Holy Mountain (www.godsholymountain.org).Invitations to Thursday's launch conference depict a sunlit imagined future for the area Jews call Temple Mount. Happy Muslims and harp-playing Jews mingle between the Dome of the Rock and a new Temple, as Christians walk over from the nearby Sepulchre Church, traditional site of Jesus's resurrection.The project, headed by Jewish members of the Interfaith Encounter Association (www.interfaith-encounter.org) encourages all three faiths to re-examine the complex and perhaps foster a new theological outlook, making room for all to worship there.
DIVINE INTERVENTION?
But Frankel conceded it may take more than debate of Jewish law, or halacha, to alter centuries of tradition in favor of a compromise by which Jews would agree to build a temple nearby, not in the spot traditionally regarded as the correct site -- right where the Dome has stood since the 7th century.Regular halachic discussion will not be powerful enough,Frankel said, referring to the need for a holy revelation to make such a shift possible in Jewish tradition.Known to Arabs as the Haram al-Sharif, or Noble Sanctuary, and also respected by Christians and Jews who believe that the Dome covers a rock where Abraham prepared to sacrifice his son to God, the compound in Jerusalem's Old City has been the cause of bloodshed, from ancient times to today.It still lies at the heart of Israeli-Palestinian conflict and sovereignty over the holy sites remains a sticking point in international efforts to draft a final peace settlement.Not even all members of the interfaith group, which is dedicated to religious coexistence, favor the new project, which does not address political issues of whether Israel or Palestinians -- or both, or neither -- should control the city.
Muslim cleric Abdullah Darweesh, who was to speak at the official project launch on Thursday, said all holy Christian and Islamic sites should be under Arab sovereignty.
Islam teaches that Mohammad rose to heaven from the rock under the Dome. Muslim clerics who run the compound have been wary of Jewish encroachment into the site since Israel captured the Old City and the rest of Arab East Jerusalem in a 1967 war.
A visit there in 2000 by Ariel Sharon, a right-wing Israeli politician who later became prime minister, helped spark a Palestinian uprising that became known as the al-Aqsa Intifada.Since the Second Temple was destroyed under Roman rule in AD 70, Jews have prayed at the Western Wall, part of the ruins.Many Orthodox Jews believe they must not set foot on the Temple Mount itself for fear of treading on the now unknown site of the inner sanctum. Some groups, however, call for Israel to seize the site and rebuild the temple, a step some believe would then herald the return of the Messiah and a time of world peace.(Additional reporting by Mohammed Assadi; Editing by Alastair Macdonald)
Mideast peace deal could happen within year: Blair Thu Jun 18, 9:40 am ET
LONDON (AFP) – A Middle East peace deal is possible within the year, but only if all sides agree to peaceful negotiations, international envoy Tony Blair says in comments to be aired Friday.The former British premier said there was a great sense of hope and expectation in the region after US President Barack Obama's recent speech on relations between the West and the Islamic world.If President Obama gets the right partner, on the Israeli side but also on the Palestinian side, his determination to do this I have no doubt about at all,he told interviewer David Frost.He said Obama has made the Middle East a clear priority.I have no doubt at all of his sincerity or his determination,he said on Frost Over The World, on Al Jazeera's English-language channel.So if everyone would commit themselves to a peaceful political negotiation to a two-state solution, you could have this deal within the year. But people have got to be prepared to commit to it.Obama pledged a new beginning for Islam and America in a landmark speech to the world's Muslims made in Cairo earlier this month, fueling hopes of diplomatic progress after his predecessor George W. Bush's departure.That was followed by a major speech by Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu last weekend, in which he offered a conditional acceptance of a Palestinian state, in a break with his right-wing Likud party's ideology.I think the Obama speech was really a huge event... I think this was a very big moment, a vital moment, for the region and for the wider world,said Blair, adding: I think there is a great sense of hope and expectation.But he added: The important thing is to understand that President Obama doesn?t need cheerleaders, he needs partners. He needs people who are going to help him achieve what he wants.Blair said Netanyahu's speech was a step forward,but acknowledged there was criticism.From the outside they're going to be sceptical, some cynical, some worried: Well what does this really mean? and Are we going to be able to make progress on a basis that is acceptable to the Palestinian people?, he said.And that's obviously still to be decided.So my view is, yes in that sense it is a step forward and now we've got to wait and see what actually happens.
Arabs largely silent on Iran election and unrest By HADEEL AL-SHALCHI, Associated Press Writer – Wed Jun 17, 4:23 pm ET
CAIRO – Key Arab nations have kept silent about Iran's political upheaval, possibly reluctant to antagonize the powerful nation that sponsors such militant groups as Hezbollah and Hamas.But there are signs the young and reform-minded have been inspired by the mass protests that followed the disputed election.It makes me feel so jealous,said Abdelmonem Ibrahim, a young pro-reform Brotherhood activist in Egypt.The scenes of hundreds of thousands in the streets of Tehran provide a stark contrast to Arab countries such as U.S. ally Egypt, where widespread allegations of election fraud to ensure victory by ruling parties are greeted with complaints but little action.Small protests in Egypt by democracy advocates after parliament and presidential elections in 2005 were quickly silenced by security forces and never caught on with the broader populace. The Egyptian reform movement — which combines secular activists with the fundamentalist Muslim Brotherhood — has largely been silent since.We are amazed at the organization and the speed with which the (Iranian) movement has been functioning. In Egypt, you can count the number of activists on your hand,Ibrahim told the Associated Press.One Egyptian blogger, who writes anonymously under the user name Louza, posted a picture of a demonstration in Tehran, adding, Sigh, will the Arab world follow?
Iran elections are controlled by the country's ruling clerics, who can throw out candidates they don't approve of. Still, the voting has historically been among the most free in the Middle East, where authoritarian regimes prevail. U.S.-ally Saudi Arabia holds no elections at all, while some like Syria hold tightly controlled votes in which the outcome is never in doubt. Lebanon and Kuwait — which both held parliament elections that saw unexpected results recently — are among the few exceptions.Even though they are run by an authoritarian regime, (Iran) still allows for a good amount of liberalism and freedom,said Gamal Fahmy, a prominent Egyptian secular reform activist.In contrast, he said, activism in Egypt has been put in a freezer because the regime doesn't allow for the space to express any sort of opposition.I think the new generation of activists will definitely be inspired by what they see on the Iranian street. What's happening in Iran isn't happening on Mars,he told AP.So Egyptian activists will feel they can replicate it in their own country.Still, there has not been as much wall-to-wall coverage of the Iranian uproar in Arab media or Arab activists' blogs as there has been in the West — for a number of reasons.Some are not convinced by claims of fraud in the election results showing a victory for hard-line incumbent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who is popular among some in the Arab world for his tough stance against the United States and Israel. Even among Arab critics of Ahmadinejad, some don't believe his rival, Mir Hossein Mousavi, is a true reformer and they note that Iran's unelected supreme leader holds the real power.
Meanwhile, Arab governments — even ones that are fiercely critical of Iranian influence in the region — have remained silent, apparently afraid of angering the powerful Persian nation.The Arabs don't want to go out on a limb against the Iranian government. They don't want to be upfront,said Paul Salem, director of the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut.It's part of this pattern of being nice to Iran and encouraging the U.S. or somebody else to be not nice.They are afraid of Iran and don't want to antagonize it themselves,he added.The easiest target for Iran are the Gulf Arabs.Tehran is a key player in the Middle East and has played a major role in the divisions splitting the Arab world. It is the main backer of Hezbollah, Hamas and — according to the U.S. — Shiite extremists in Iraq. It's also a close ally of Syria.Its foes — mainly Sunni countries, such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt — are deeply worried that Iran is seeking to fuel Islamic radicalism, empower Shiite minorities in the Arab world and establish itself as a regional superpower by getting involved in crises they believe are none of its business, such as the Israeli-Palestinian crisis and inter-Palestinian fighting. But at the same time, those countries have been careful not to annoy Iran and have, at least in public, voiced opposition to any military strike against it. Their silence today is part of the pattern they have followed for the past few years, according to analysts. Jordanian political analyst Labib Kamhawi said Arabs want somebody else to fight their battles on their behalf.
So nobody expressed any position on the Iranian elections because they think that the Americans and the Europeans will do it for them,he said.This is a very negative approach, especially with regional political issues.Since Ahmadinejad was declared the landslide winner on Saturday, several Arab countries have sent congratulatory telegrams. Others, however, like Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt, have remained silent. Saudi officials have said the kingdom does not comment on the internal affairs of other countries. Gulf nations — always worried about the biggest military power in the vital area — may be happy to see Iran tied up in its domestic affairs. This is not bad because it weakens the rigid Iranian approach to the countries around the region,Saudi analyst Dawood al-Shirian said. Still, Gulf states do not want to see a violent power struggle in Iran for fear of the unrest spilling over,said Mustafa Alani, a security analyst at the Dubai-based Gulf Research Center.AP writers Shafika Mattar in Amman, Jordan and Donna Abu-Nasr in Riyadh contributed to this report.
Hamas rejects Carter plea to recognize Israel By BEN HUBBARD, Associated Press Writer – Wed Jun 17, 3:08 pm ET
GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip – A senior Hamas official praised former President Jimmy Carter on Wednesday, a day after he met with the group, but said he failed to persuade the Islamic rulers of Gaza to accept international demands, including recognizing Israel.
Carter visited Gaza on Tuesday and urged Hamas leaders to accept the demands to end an international boycott, which was imposed when the militant group overran Gaza two years ago.Carter's meeting was itself unusual because of the boycott. The United States, European Union and Israel consider Hamas a terror group and refuse to deal with it directly.Ahmed Youssef, the deputy Hamas foreign minister, said Gaza's Palestinians were pleased to receive Carter.The people think this is a historic visit,Youssef told The Associated Press on Wednesday, describing Carter as somebody very knowledgeable about the conflict and very sincere in the way he understands the conflict.But Youssef said Hamas turned down Carter's policy requests.The visit has not led to a significant change. Hamas finds the conditions unacceptable, he said.Recognizing Israel is completely unacceptable.According to Hamas ideology, there is no room for a Jewish state in an Islamic Middle East. The militant group has sent dozens of suicide bombers into Israel, killing hundreds.Even so, some Hamas officials have indicated they could support creation of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, implying a form of tacit acceptance of Israel.
Youssef said the other two international conditions — renouncing violence and accepting past agreements between Israel and the Palestinians — are irrelevant. He said Israel broke a cease-fire, killing many Palestinians, and the state outlined in the partial peace accords would have no substance, no borders and nothing that a real state is.Carter has said that despite the world boycott, Mideast peacemaking efforts must include Hamas, which took control of the Gaza Strip in 2007, expelling forces loyal to Western-backed Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, whose government now effectively rules only the West Bank.Though as president Carter brokered the 1979 peace treaty between Israel and Egypt, the first between Israel and an Arab country, he is perceived by many Israelis as anti-Israel, siding with the Palestinians in their conflict.He antagonized many Israelis with his 2007 book, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid,in which he argued that Israel must choose between ceding the West Bank to the Palestinians or maintaining a system of ethnic inequality similar to that of the apartheid regime in South Africa. Most Israelis strongly reject the comparison.
During Carter's visit to Gaza on Tuesday, Hamas security found what appeared to be explosives buried in a sand dune next to his route. No one was hurt, and it was unclear if the former U.S. president was being targeted.We were aware of some reports" of a threat to his safety, U.S. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley told reporters in Washington on Wednesday.I'm sure we took appropriate security steps, but obviously President Carter was there for a few hours and returned safely.Associated Press Writer Robert Burns contributed to this report from Washington.
Mideast peace possible only if imposed: author Wed Jun 17, 3:53 am ET
JERUSALEM (AFP) – A Middle East peace deal is possible only if it is forced on Israelis and Palestinians by US-led efforts, one of Israel's best-known authors has written as he hit out at a speech by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.Netanyahu's speech on Sunday tells us between its contorted lines that there will be no peace here if it is not forced upon us,David Grossman wrote remarks published on Wednesday in the liberal Haaretz daily.It is not easy to admit it, but it seems increasingly that this is the choice Israelis and Palestinians face.A just and secure peace -- forced on the parties through firm international involvement, led by the United States -- or war, possibly more difficult and bitter than those that came before it.
Grossman virulently criticised Netanyahu's address, in which the premier for the first time accepted the creation of a Palestinian state, but set a slew of conditions rejected by the Palestinians.What the speech exposed ... is the standstill we have come to, we Israelis, in the face of a reality that requires flexibility, daring and vision.I saw my prime minister in his tight-lipped juggling act, a sophisticated performance of close-eyed rejection.Other than acceptance of the two-state principle, which was wrung out of Netanyahu under heavy pressure and sourly expressed, this speech contained no tangible step toward a real change of consciousness.Grossman decried Netanyahu for not saying that most Jewish settlers in the occupied West Bank would have to leave their homes as part of a final peace deal and for listing conditions for Palestinians to accept without listing the risks that Israel had to take for a deal.He also hit out at the Palestinian leadership for rejecting the speech out of hand.I also observed the Palestinians who responded to the speech, and I thought that they are the most faithful partners to standstill and missed opportunities,he wrote.Their response could have been much wiser and more prescient than the speech itself if they grasped the drooping branch Netanyahu was offering and challenged the premier to an immediate restart of negotiations, he wrote.Grossman is the author of such acclaimed works as The Yellow Wind and Sleeping on a Wire.
Europe, US call Netanyahu speech step towards peace Mon Jun 15, 6:48 am ET
PARIS (AFP) – Europe and the United States said Monday that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had taken a step forward to ending the Middle East conflict by giving conditional backing to a Palestinian state.But while the key powers gave cautious approval, Palestinians reacted with fury. The Hamas movement which has controlled the Gaza Strip for two years said Netanyahu's address on Sunday reflected a racist and extremist ideology.Under pressure from the United States, Netanyahu endorsed for the first time the creation of a Palestinian state, provided it was demilitarised and that Palestinians recognise the Jewish character of Israel. He ruled out a halt to all Jewish settlement activity as demanded by the United States.In my view it is a step in the right direction, said Czech Foreign Minister Jan Kohout, speaking on behalf of the European Union presidency as he arrived at a meeting of EU ministers in Luxembourg which discussed the speech.Of course, there are a number of other elements which need to be analysed, but the acceptance of the Palestinian state is there,he added.Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt echoed Kohout's caution.The fact that he uttered the word state is a small step forward, Bildt, whose country takes over the EU presidency on July 1, told reporters.Whether what he mentioned can be defined as a state is a subject of some debate.
The White House meanwhile issued an upbeat initial assessment.
President Barack Obama welcomes the important step forward in Netanyahu's speech,his spokesman Robert Gibbs said in a statement.Obama believes this solution can and must ensure both Israel's security and the fulfillment of the Palestinians' legitimate aspirations for a viable state, and he welcomes Prime Minister Netanyahu's endorsement of that goal,it said.Obama has called for a freeze on all settlement building in Palestinian territories and Netanyahu's rejection is likely to arouse international criticism.While also acknowledging the step forward, French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said that Europe and the United States wanted an immediate freeze to settlement activity and a reopening of the Gaza Strip.During a visit to the Middle East, former US president Jimmy Carter warned that the US and Israeli governments would be on a collision course if Israeli settlement activity continues in the Palestinian West Bank.
Analysts agreed such a confrontation is still possible.
For Aaron David Miller, a former adviser in both past Democratic and Republican US administrations, Netanyahu tried to strike a balance between responding to political pressures in Israel and in Washington.He said he succeeded, at least in part, by calling for a Palestinian state.Palestinians reacted with undisguised anger to Netanyahu's conditions for peace.This speech torpedoes all peace initiatives in the region,Nabil Abu Rudeina, spokesman for Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas, told AFP.
It hobbles all efforts to save the peace process, in a clear defiance of the US administration,he said. This speech reflects the racist and extremist ideology of Netanyahu and denies all the rights of the Palestinian people,Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhum told AFP.This speech is the reiteration of the policy of his government, which aims at transforming the Palestinian people into a tool to protect the occupation.
Russia, which along with the United States, European Union and United Nations makes up the international diplomatic Quartet on the Middle East conflict, made no immediate public comment on the speech. Australia called for new Middle East peace talks after Netanyahu endorsed the creation of a Palestinian state. I think what Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech reflects today is there is now a basis for a peace process for negotiations to commence and start,Foreign Minister Stephen Smith told Australian television.
Israel left, right both deride PM's speech by Ron Bousso – Mon Jun 15, 5:22 am ET
JERUSALEM (AFP) – Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's conditional acceptance of a Palestinian state drew criticism on Monday with many in his hawkish coalition saying it went too far, and from the left who felt it didn't go far enough.The premier's vision for ending the decades-old Middle East conflict, as presented in his long-anticipated speech on Sunday, marked a stark break from his Likud party's ideology, which claims a historic right to the occupied West Bank.Several key Likud MPs responded furiously to his unprecedented endorsement of a Palestinian state, albeit demilitarised and stripped of Jerusalem as a capital.The prime minister caved in to American pressure. He will have to explain to his coalition why he was ready to go so far,Likud MP Danny Danon told AFP.We oppose a Palestinian state and do not believe it will happen. If he moves from words to actions, he will encounter a wall of resistance.Netanyahu's speech followed massive pressure by US President Barack Obama's administration to renew negotiations with the Palestinians in order to reach a peace agreement.The premier, however, rejected in his speech a key US demand to freeze settlement construction in the occupied West Bank.Likud MP Ayoob Kara said that Netanyahu's concessions were a pain killer to stop international pressure, but at this stage there will be no movement on the ground. It is wrong to go that way because there is no (Palestinian) partner.National Infrastructure Minister Uzi Landau of the ultra-nationalist Yisrael Beitenu party, a key partner in Netanyahu's coalition government, said that accepting the principle of a Palestinian state was a grave mistake.Yet even the most vocal critics on the right did not suggest seeking to topple Netanyahu's right-leaning coalition at this stage.A senior political analyst in Israel's Maariv daily said that Netanyahu gave one of the most hardline speeches made by an Israeli premier in recent years to compensate for his ideological concession.
The speech was thirty minutes of pure right-wing rhetoric to cover up one leftist phrase,Ben Caspit said.Both the United States and the European Union welcomed Netanyahu's speech as a positive step towards the renewal of peace talks, but the Palestinian Authority slammed it as sabotaging the teetering process.The 59-year-old premier won strong backing from Defence Minister Ehud Barak who faces a mutiny within the ranks of his center-left Labour party for joining the Likud-led coalition.This is an important step in the right direction and I have to say that Prime Minister Netanyahu showed seriousness, responsibility and courage,Barak said in a statement.
Trade and Industry Minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer, also of Labour, told AFP that Netanyahu crossed the Rubicon and a psychological threshold... he turned his back on an ideology he backed for years and started seeing things in their true colours.But opposition left-wing MPs slammed Netanyahu's cautious peace overtures as not nearly enough.So much preparation for nothing. The prime minister proved again that he is the number one peace refusenik. Bibi chose to serve the needs of the settlers and the extreme--right rather than those of Israel,Meretz MP Ilan Gil-On said. MP Ahmad Tibi of the United Arab List said that the speech showed a mental fixation that wants a non-sovereign Palestinian state with ongoing settlement construction. I hope the White House will expose his public relations stunt.
Obama welcomes Netanyahu's two-state speech Sun Jun 14, 3:47 pm ET
WASHINGTON – The White House is welcoming Israeli Prime Minster Benjamin Netanyahu's call for the creation of a Palestinian state.Netanyahu said in Jerusalem that he would support a Palestinian state as long it is demilitarized and guarantees Israel's security.White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Sunday that President Barack Obama welcomes the speech and is committed to two states: a Jewish state of Israel and an independent Palestinian state.Gibbs says Obama will work with all parties to see that they fulfill their obligations and head toward regional peace.Netanyahu had resisted endorsing the creation of a Palestinian state as part of a Mideast peace settlement, drawing intense pressure from the United States.
