Israel Matzav: Israel not objecting to Jordanian plan to add minaret to Temple Mount

Thursday, October 12, 2006

Israel not objecting to Jordanian plan to add minaret to Temple Mount

Two days ago, I reported on separate plans to build a minaret and a synagogue on the Temple Mount. I told you right away that I thought that the minaret was far more likely to be built. This morning, both the Jerusalem Post and Arutz Sheva confirm my assessment.

The minaret, which will be constructed on the eastern wall of the Temple Mount near the Golden Gate, will at 42 meters be the highest of the minarets on the Mount and the first to be built in more than 600 years, Dr. Raief Najim, vice chairman of the committee running the project, told The Jerusalem Post in a telephone interview from Amman.

He said he spoke with Israeli authorities about the plan last year and did not hear any objections to the proposed construction. He revealed that he toured the intended site with a top Jerusalem police commander, a senior government official and the head of the Antiquities Authority and none of them voiced any opposition.

"Even though the political situation has changed, I do not think they will refuse to construct such a thing," he said.

The Olmert-Peretz-Livni government says that it has made no decision to approve the project, while the Antiquities Authority is declining comment. Construction is to begin in early 2007. But at least one archaeologist was willing to talk about the project:

A leading Israeli archeologist lambasted the plan. "I am against any change in the status quo on the Temple Mount," said Bar-Ilan University's Dr. Gabi Barkai, a member of the Committee Against the Destruction of Antiquities on the Temple Mount. "If the status quo is being changed, then it should not just be the addition of Muslim structures at the site."

In contravention of the law, Antiquities Authority archeologists have not been carrying out full-time supervision of the site for much of the last decade due to their concern about renewed Palestinian violence, despite the reopening of the compound to non-Muslims two years ago.

During this period, Israel has been keen to involve the Jordanians in the ongoing repair work on the Temple Mount, as they are considered more moderate than the Palestinian heads of the Wakf appointed by Yasser Arafat on his return to the West Bank 10 years ago.

The Jerusalem Post points out that administration of the Temple Mount is nominally shared by Israel with the Wakf:

According to a decades-old regulation in place at the Temple Mount, Israel maintains overall security control, while the Wakf, or Islamic trust, is charged with day-to-day administration.

But Arutz Sheva points out that the reality is quite different:

While Israel continues to claim Jerusalem controls the Temple Mount, in reality, the day-to-day running of the site is under Waqf control, with Israel complying with Waqf dictates regarding the goings-on on the site. When Waqf requests are not honored by the Israeli government, threats of violence have on many occasions accomplished the Waqf’s goals.

As to the possibility of building a synagogue on the Temple Mount, here's what one of the leaders of the 'peaceful ~~Palestinians'~~ Israeli Arab' fifth column had to say:

Any attempt to build a synagogue on Jerusalem's Temple Mount would immediate plunge Israel into horrible bloodbath, warned Tuesday MK Ibrahim Sarsur, head of the southern wing of the Islamic Movement.

"Muslims and Arabs will not stand idly by while representatives of Satan on earth such as MK Uri Ariel and his lunatic friends from the Yesha Rabbinic Council try to launch their insane plots," said Sarsur.

"We will resort to violence if need be, which I believe is legitimate under such circumstances."

...

But Sarsur said that the very building of the synagogue was a gross violation of the status quo and tantamount to a call to war.

"I want to believe that the government and the sane Israeli voice will not allow fundamentalists and self-haters to plunge the entire area into a horrible bloodbath," added Sarsur, who heads the more moderate southern branch of the Islamic Movement, which decided in 1996 to run for parliamentary representation.

Like I said before, they don't deserve a 'state' unless and until

they choose to live in peace with their neighbors, to stop using terrorism as a negotiating method, and to choose leaders who are honest and who will honestly attempt to advance their interests.

Mr. Sarsur is not such a leader.