.
Commentary;
In reading Natan Sharansky’s words excerpted below, particularly where he cites Yassir Arafat at Camp David in 2000 as declaring “that since Jerusalem belonged to all Arabs and Muslims, he had no right to make the decision about the relinquishment alone – and therefore needed to consult the Arab and Muslim League,” this author reflected back on a citation in the sefer “Torah Gems”, by Aharon Yaakov Greenberg (Vol. 2, page 103).
On Shemos, chapter 14, verse 10; “Behold the Egyptians travelled after them…” and the B’nai Yisrael saw the immense Egyptian force moving toward them — as one, R’Menachem Mendl of Kotzk comments;
“With one heart as one man (Rashi). How is it that the Egyptians were so unified? The answer is that the greatest trouble which befalls the Jews is when non-Jews adopt Jewish values and customs.”
In other words, only in rare times in Jewish history have we displayed national unity. But unity is the state of how the Jewish people is supposed to be. And in the case of Jerusalem, every Jewish voice and heart must be heard, every Jew must rise up to show a regime that Jerusalem is not about expeditient division in order that an evil, corrupt coalition and regime remain in power and in order that an evil leader be spared judgement for his malgeasance and nonfeasance in office and spared trial for corruptions and wrong-doing.
How is it that Islamics, with little if any real connection to Jerusalem and with references in their Koran which are obscure at best, seek a national concensus whereas the Jews, for which Jerusalem is our heart, the very essence of our being, the place we face to pray for thousands of years and more let a bunch of corrupt power-mongers divide OUR CITY in order to cover their posteriors? MB
Israel Must Not Decide Alone, by Natan Sharansky (Jerusalem Post)
Excerpts;
Among the decisions that could affect the future of our entire people, for good or bad, the future of Jerusalem is perhaps the most prominent. Jerusalem is not just the capital of a sovereign state. It is an integral part of the identity of the entire Jewish people.
Thousands of years of prayers, tears and hope; of yearning for Jerusalem – as embodied in the timeless pledge, “If I forget thee O Jerusalem may my right hand wither” – all these reflect the unique place of Jerusalem in the Jewish heart.
We Jews of Russia felt this special place, the heart of our identity, when Motta Gur’s cry, “The Temple Mount is in our hands!” pierced the Iron Curtain and stirred us from our slumber.
THERE IS no doubt that the State of Israel has the right to make decisions about the future of Jerusalem. But neither is there any doubt that a possible decision of the State of Israel – for the first time in Jewish history – to give up on the very core of the Holy City will influence the history of generations of Jews, their relationship with the Jewish people and their sense of common destiny.
To those who doubt that, indeed, the very core of the city is at stake, I would recommend recalling what happened at Camp David, when the representatives of the State of Israel revealed their willingness to relinquish the Temple Mount and the controversy was primarily about who would guard the Western Wall – the IDF or multi-national forces, with Jews having access by organized transportation.
It is easy to be cynical about the lack of recognized leadership among Diaspora Jewry. But just as in the case of the Ne’eman Commission, the Jews of the Diaspora have the right to participate in such a way that decision makers are required to take their opinion into account. No more – but also no less – because, otherwise, the only decisive voice that will be heard in discussions of the fate of the Jewish people will be the argument for the survival of the coalition.
The last time the fate of Jerusalem was on the negotiating table was seven years ago at Camp David. When Arafat heard the proposal for dividing the city, he declared that since Jerusalem belonged to all Arabs and Muslims, he had no right to make the decision about the relinquishment alone – and therefore needed to consult the Arab and Muslim League.
A short while afterwards, when I received a phone call from Ehud Barak (I was not the only politician he was calling from Camp David), I asked him: “Why is it that Arafat feels that Jerusalem belongs to all the Arabs? Why does he feel obliged to consult the entire Arab nation, while the government of Israel recognizes no such sense of obligation toward its people, and does not feel the need even to consult Diaspora Jewry about such a fatal decision?
Unfortunately, I am still waiting for an answer.
To read the entire piece, click here.