Powered by WebAds

Tuesday, June 22, 2010

And here we go again

There was once an area that was zoned to be a national park. 88 groups of squatters came along and built homes in the area without permits. The city in which the national park was located sought to knock down the homes in order to carry out its original plan. But since the homes were occupied by Muslims and the city is a Jewish city, the world seethed. And the city canceled its plans.

Now the city has come up with another plan. Under the new plan, 66 of the homes will be allowed to stay and the other 22 squatters groups will be given (at city expense) new homes in the part of the park that has now been cut off to allow the other 66 squatters groups to stay. And the world is seething again.

Of course, the city is Jerusalem. My town. And the mayor, who loves Jerusalem despite having run on the Kadima party's ticket, is under attack from all sides.

After nearly a year of planning and almost four months of delay, and despite numerous legal and diplomatic concerns, two plans to radically redevelop sections of the Silwan neighborhood in east Jerusalem are expected to gain preliminary approval from the municipality’s Local Planning and Construction Committee on Monday morning, The Jerusalem Post has learned.

A spokesman for Mayor Nir Barkat told the Post on Sunday that the projects were designed to improve the quality of life of Silwan’s Arab residents and that they would not “surprise” the international community.

Yet the move had already sparked a backlash in Jerusalem on Sunday night, with members of the Meretz faction at City Hall threatening to resign over the matter, and the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD), labeling the move the “forced displacement” of the local residents and calling for a demonstration to be held outside the committee meeting on Monday morning.

The first plan, which deals with a section of the neighborhood known as El-Bustan or Gan Hamelech (the King’s Garden), includes the demolition of 22 structures that were built without the proper permits in an area beneath the Old City walls currently zoned as “green.” In fact, all 88 structures inside the El-Bustan section of Silwan were built in this green area and, as such, are considered illegal by the city and subject to demolition orders.

Pending Monday’s deliberations, however, the eastern section of the green area – which includes 66 structures – will be completely rezoned as residential, and residents will then have the ability to apply for the retroactive legalization of their homes.

Additionally, the plan stipulates that the 22 families displaced from the western section of El Bustan will be included in the zoning of the eastern side, where new homes will be built to accommodate them.
The city has even reached agreements with an undisclosed number of the to-be-displaced residents.
While residents of El-Bustan have in the past claimed that they refused to agree to a single demolition in the neighborhood, a municipality source involved with the management of the plan told the Post on Sunday that “what the residents say to the press and what they say to us are two different things.”

“There are different interests among different residents,” the source added. “Today, basically everyone understands that some houses will need to be demolished, and not for the goal of demolishing houses but for the goal of redeveloping and improving the standard of living in the neighborhood.”

The source also said that the municipality was continuing negotiations with the residents, but that since the mayor shelved the plan in March, one major, tangible step forward was that city negotiators had reached “specific, individual agreements” with a number of residents. He was unwilling to disclose how many such agreements had been reached.
And there was another carrot for the 'Palestinians.'
The second item concerning Silwan is a proposed change to the current zoning laws that would allow for the retroactive approval of structures in the “central” section of the neighborhood that have been built up to four stories.

Current zoning in that area of the neighborhood permits structures to be built up to two stories, rendering nearly half of the area’s 657 buildings illegal and vulnerable to demolition orders.

If approved, this new zoning would also give residents of central Silwan who are currently in violation of the height restriction the ability to apply for retroactive legalization of their homes as well.
Keep in mind that Silwan is literally a few meters outside the walls of Jerusalem's Old City.

Those plans passed the planning council on Monday. And the world is seething. Here's 'Palestinian' chief bottle washer Saeb Erekat.
Chairman Saeb Erekat of the Palestinian Authority's diplomatic negotiating team said Monday that the Jerusalem local planning commission's decision to destroy 22 illegally-built Arab homes as part of the King's Garden reclamation project "proves that Israel has decided to destroy the indirect talks with the Palestinians." Dr. Erekat also called on the international community "to stop these dangerous steps."

The authority issued an announcement condemning the decision in addition to construction plans for the capital's Ramat Shlomo neighborhood, stressing that "these arbitrary and dangerous steps demand American and international involvement to stop them."
And then there's State Department spokesman Phillip Crowley.
The US is "worried" about Jerusalem's Silwan building project, the US State Department said on Monday according to AFP.

"This is expressly the kind of step that we think undermines trust that is fundamental in making progress to the proximity talks and ultimately in direct negotiations," said State Department spokesman Philip Crowley.

"We're concerned about it. We've had a number of conversation with the government of Israel about it."
Jerusalem is not a 'settlement.' It's our capital city. It's time for Prime Minister Netanyahu to tell the Obumbler to butt out of Jerusalem. But don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen.

5 Comments:

At 3:13 PM, Blogger nomatter said...

"Jerusalem is not a 'settlement.' It's our capital city. It's time for Prime Minister Netanyahu to tell the Obumbler to butt out of Jerusalem. But don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen."

Seriously Carl. Netanyahu already made such statements to the press and to Obama.

Bottom line, if our good 'best' friend refused to sign the embassy act (in his 8 years of office) which would indeed legitimize Jerusalem as the undivided capital of Israel, what the hell do you expect from Obama?

The frosting on the cake was when Bush declined sending a representative of his administration to the anniversary of the reunification of Jerusalem. Please, what did that say?

But no, my party was too busy playing partisen politics to protest to the oval office, so now, cry me a river.

It is a dead deal Carl. The world does not want it and the leader of the strongest nation on earth blew his chance to prove real friendship.

Now you are pissed at an openly hostile prez?

Don't blame this sorry state of affairs on Netanyahu.

Never forget, the Arab world with their leader the House of Saud rejoiced each time Bush axed the embassy act.


Blame this all on the guy who proclaimed upon leaving Israel, "take good care of Olmert." If he did not do it, no one will and especially Obama.

 
At 4:55 PM, Blogger NormanF said...

Agreed. Obama is no better and no worse on Jerusalem than Bush. This is a normal municipal project, uncontroversial, that happens in cities all over the world every day without an uproar. Unless of course, its run by the Jews. But they are subject to a different set of rules, now aren't they?

What could go wrong indeed

 
At 5:23 PM, Blogger rickismom said...

Yes, the arabs will get new government-paid housing. My son, whose house encroachers on about 5 feet of UNUSED (and never-will-be-used) "public" land is being threatened with evacuation.Maybe he should (chasv'shalom" change his name to "Machmud".....

 
At 6:28 PM, Blogger Carl in Jerusalem said...

NormanF,

I disagree. Bush did plenty wrong and you know I criticized him a lot on this blog, especially over Annapolis.

And yes, as nomatter never tires of telling us he 'didn't sign the embassy act' (which is technically incorrect - what he did was exercise a national security waiver every six months to suspend the provision of the bill that requires the US to move its embassy to Jerusalem, as did Clinton before him and Obama after him).

But if you look at how Bush handled Har Choma (which I discussed in a post around the time that the Ramat Shlomo business came up), you cannot say that Bush was no better than Obama. He kept the peace talks such as they were going, and didn't make a fuss while Israel built. Because of that, we have a large, strategically placed suburb of Jerusalem at the southern end of the city which didn't exist when Bush took office.

In the Old City as well, Bush didn't pile on to the Mughrabi Gate fiasco, as you can bet Obama would have done.

So no, Bush wasn't perfect - far from it. But to see that he was no better than Obama is a distortion of reality.

 
At 10:45 PM, Blogger Juniper in the Desert said...

BULLDOZERS AT DAWN!

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

Google