A pause in the midst of researching coalition governments and the Knesset yielded an interesting tweet from Israeli's Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon (because, as you may recall, Foreign Minister is Avigdor Lieberman, leader of the Yisrael Beiteinu party, and he's less than ideal for making public statements... a West Bank settler, by the by). In any case, the news from Ayalon: "We have suspended our cooperation with UNESCO until their scandalous decision on Rachel's Tomb is rescinded."
Naturally, this required further research on my part (because I haven't been doing enough of that, clearly), yielding this article from Ha'aretz - "Israel clashes with UNESCO in row* over holy sites." In short, UNESCO (the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Org., that is) has classified what Israelis know as Rachel's Tomb, a holy site in the West Bank, as a mosque, known to Muslims as the al-Ibrahimi Mosque.
The kicker? "If the places where the fathers and mothers of the Jewish nation are buried, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Sarah, Leah and Rachel some 4,000 years ago are not part of the Jewish heritage, then what is?" As we discussed with the video in class, it often comes down to a matter of legitimacy and national history, the legacy of the people - which happens to be, in large part, a major source of identification for them, as well.... "them" being both Jews and Muslims, and Christians, if we're going to go that way. Abrahamic religions. Thus we see the importance of the West Bank and Jerusalem - a huge religious feature of the conflict that Sinai and the Golan Heights don't involve, making them less disputed. As we know, of course, the Israelis did ultimately return the Sinai territory, though Golan Heights remains more disputed; still, one can't help but guess that it's defining draw (location and altitude for the purpose of military strategy) is not so significant in the 21st century world of technology as it was in the past. The West Bank, however.... well, though we are getting progressively farther from the past (the nature of time, you know), it is still there, and still extremely important to all cultures and peoples involved.
To declare a site religious to all Abrahamic religions under the terms of one religion in particular is a loaded statement on the part of UNESCO, particularly considering the already loaded debate on the status and future of the West Bank. Admittedly, this is the first this is really coming to my attention. Upon delving through research on other matters and, ideally, after a bit of sleep, it's something I'd be interested to come back to. Really, how does one solve a conflict in which both sides have legitimate and rightful claims? Oy.
*For the record, I am now determined to use the term "row" in place of "argument" or "debate" sometime this week.
No comments:
Post a Comment