Jerusalem in the Arab World as it Ought to Be
This is a
pessimistic article that might not fall in line with what the angry
Arab reader might want to read at such a stage of our history. But
then again, I have become a pessimistic man and am viewing the
current crisis in historical retrospect. The misery and humiliation
we are experiencing today is the result of an accumulation of errors
on our part. Mistakes began when we did not lobby against the
Balfour Declaration in 1917 and carried on throughout the 20th
century, until we insisted that Ehud Barak be ousted from office and
replaced by Ariel Sharon – knowing perfectly well how bloodthirsty
Ariel Sharon was. The Arab leaders said that Sharon would be better
because he "showed the true face of Israel" and did not hide behind
peace masks. Arab history has been one big defeat
after another and anyone who disagrees with that should re-read his
or her history. The Arabs today are lamenting their luck and cursing
the skies for having abandoned them. We hear people lamenting
Jerusalem and
longing for its return.
I would like to remind my fellow Arabs that
Jerusalem, which was proudly under our jurisdiction 35 years ago,
was one of the most neglected and miserable cities in the years
1948-1967. If
Jerusalem were to
return to the Arabs today, it would be advisable that the Arabs
appreciate its worth and learn to administer it properly.
At times, knowing a lot of history can be
painful, especially in the Arab world. I have noticed a re-occurring
theme in our world that is "temporary politicization."
The Arabs take up a cause, drum up temporary
support from their masses, make themselves heard all over the world,
then reach one of two stages: either they get bored with the subject
and drop it. Or they lay it off until later where its mention might
prove useful in serving a specific and often personal political
objective. Sadly speaking, prior to
the intifadah in September 2000, nobody other than the
Palestinians was really speaking about
Jerusalem or
staging rallies in its favor. Its mention was there, nevertheless,
in official discourse, in posters, slogans, and state-run newspapers
but it was more of a nostalgic mention than a hands-on issue. Even in official Arab
discourse, the only leaders to repeat mention of
Jerusalem were
Yasser Arafat and the late Syrian President Hafez al-Asad. It was
nearly non-existent in the discourse of other leaders.
Most Arab audiences mistakenly took Al-Aqsa
Mosque for the Dome of the Rock and decided to leave
Palestine for the
Palestinians to deal with. After all, they had their government and
they had Yasser Arafat – why should the other Arabs worry about them
anymore.
Then, the intifadah breaks out and
hell breaks loose throughout the Arab world. All of a sudden, songs
are playing on national radio, pictures of Jerusalem are plastered
all over Arab capitals, leaders are racing to their microphones to
promise the liberation of Jerusalem, and some, like Ali Abdullah
Saleh and Saddam Hussain are ostensibly claiming that they are
preparing armies for the emancipation of the Holy City.
To the Arab heads of state, Jerusalem is a
selling topic that can be well digested and received by the Arab
masses. It serves their interest as depicting themselves as the
vanguards of Arab nationalism.
Reference to the Holy City has become a catchy phrase in Arab
discourse (and Jewish of course) and both peoples are found of
embracing one another on a festive occasion and hoping, "Next year
in Jerusalem!" However, as the
intifadah dragged on, people started to forget about the Israeli
onslaught and cater to their daily lives. News about Palestine
dropped in world broadcasts to third class topics and other issues:
the murder of the royal family in Nepal, the capture of a U.S. plane
in China, and the arrest of former Yugoslav President Slobodan
Milosevic all became more "interesting" news for the Arab public.
Then came September 11 and its aftershocks
and for a while the onslaught in Palestine was forgotten not only by
the world community but by the Arabs as well.
The reason for this lapse is that Arab
regimes want their people to remember Jerusalem only when necessary.
Jerusalem must be remembered from one time to another, so that the
Zionist threat is not forgotten, but also in a manner that does not
hold the Arab leaders accountable for failing to work for its
liberation. Arab leaders have managed
to keep Jerusalem in the Arab consciousness yet have conferred it
second-degree standing. It is always present for recall however,
whenever an Arab leader sees the need for it. This was the case
until the Palestinian intifadah broke out in September 2000, where
television channels, newspapers and books helped shed light on the
forgotten city and reminded the Arabs of its religious importance to
Islam and Christianity. Before that, on-and-off, the ordinary Arab
simply did not think about Jerusalem that often.
To better understand how the Arabs wronged
the Holy City one must remember that the last big achievements to
take place in Jerusalem were during the Omayyad Dynasty. The Dome of
the Rock was built in 691 and Al Aqsa Mosque was constructed in 715.
In 750, following the downfall of the Omayyad Caliphate, investment
increased in Baghdad, the new Muslim capital, and Jerusalem dropped
to near obscurity. Just as in
September 2000, Muslim sympathy towards Jerusalem was not
re-awakened until the Crusaders occupied it in 1099. Poets, leaders
and scholars began speaking of Jerusalem's virtues and praising its
significance to Islam. It became a
"selling topic" for official Muslim rhetoric and everyone started
calling out for the liberation of Jerusalem. Poems, similar to the
ones heard on television today were written overnight and so were
songs and make-believe liberation armies. In 1187 Salaadin
recaptured Jerusalem and once again, it slipped into darkness. Its
population dropped, construction projects ceased, illness increased,
and sanitary conditions worsened.
Jerusalem remained on a well-to-do status
during the years 1917-1948 where it was under control of the British
Mandate. Walls and gates, which had lain in ruins since Salaadin,
were rebuilt and money poured into the Holy City.
The British tried marketing Jerusalem as a
tourist attraction in the Near East. Ancient aqueducts were
reactivated, hotels built, and roads paved to facilitate travel to
and from the old city. In 1948 Jerusalem came under the Arab
authority of the late King Abdullah I. He insisted that importance
in Jordan be given to the capital Amman and not to Jerusalem.
First, this would prevent his Palestinian
subjects from assuming geographic precedence over their Jordanian
counterparts, since they already outflanked them in education,
wealth, and know-how. He also knew that if light was shed on
Jerusalem, Amman would never become more than a middle-size town
while it needed money and work to be transformed into a proper Arab
capital. Slowly, Jerusalem dropped to third-degree status in front
of its Jordanian counterparts. Jordanian radio transmitted the
Friday prayer not from Al Aqsa Mosque, as would be expected, but
from the King Abdullah Mosque in downtown Amman.
Following King Abdullah's assassination in
Jerusalem in 1951 not one Arab leader (except for his grandson
Hussein) visited the Holy City during the years 1948-1967. Even
Hussein was not a frequent visitor of the forgotten city.
The PLO founding charter, laid out under the
auspices of Gamal Abdul Nasser in 1964 did not even mention
Jerusalem and even Nasser himself, the vanguard of Arab nationalism,
barely referred to it in his 16 years as President of Egypt.
These facts, disturbing as they may seem,
are a realistic portrayal at how fake the Arab leaders have been in
their calls for "liberation of Jerusalem."
If Jerusalem were to return to the Arab fold
– how much Arab attention would it receive? Would Arab leaders set
aside their differences, and pray side-by-side at Al Aqsa Mosque?
They couldn't even assemble in times of urgency and war, how could
they be expected to meet in times of peace?
Politics, rather than religious attachment
or obligation, has driven the Arab leaders towards Jerusalem. And
politics, rather than nationalism, will drive them towards
Jerusalem, if ever returned, in upcoming years.
Beirut
Gulf News
April 17, 2002