Israel's plans to build new housing in the Har Homa area of municipal
Jerusalem have been widely misrepresented in the media and by
Palestinian spokespersons. The project has been cast as "right-wing",
a land-grab, a violation of the Oslo Accords, and the continuation of
an alleged Israeli policy of "Judaizing" Jerusalem by preventing Arab
growth and building in the city. The facts tell a different story.
* Ownership of the land at Har Homa
An area of 1850 dunams (about 460 acres) was expropriated by the government for the Har Homa project. Of this, 1400 dunams came from Jewish owners and 450 dunams from Arab owners. Among the parcels expropriated, the largest (almost 800 dunams, or about 43%) belonged to David Meeri, who is Jewish.
Much of the 1400 dunams owned by Jews was acquired prior to 1948.
Following the 1948 War of Independence, in which Jordan occupied the West Bank and half of Jerusalem, the *Jordanian* Custodian of Enemy Property planted a pine forest at Har Homa to prevent misuse of the land by local Jordanian residents. Since 1967 that forest has been maintained by the Jewish National Fund.
All of the land in question is vacant, most of it forested. No homeowners, Jewish or Arab, will be displaced by the project.
All owners were offered full compensation for the land taken. Nevertheless, both the Arab and Jewish owners contested the expropriation in court. The matter eventually reached the High Court, which denied the claims and ruled in favor of the government.
* Building at Har Homa consistent with Oslo Accords
Yasir Arafat, Palestinian spokespersons, and many media reports have falsely portrayed Israeli plans to build at Har Homa as a violation of the Oslo Accords. In fact:
Neither the Declaration of Principles nor the Interim Agreement place any restrictions on Israel concerning Jerusalem. All issues concerning the city were left to the Permanent Status negotiations, though it should be noted that the agreements do specifically bar PA authority over Jerusalem:
... the jurisdiction of the Council will cover West Bank and
Gaza Strip territory as a single territorial unit, except for:
issues that will be negotiated in the permanent status
negotiations: Jerusalem, settlements, ... (Interim Agreement,
Article XVII).
Since Jerusalem, and the final borders between the PA and Israel, were left to the Permanent Status negotiations, Israeli building in Jerusalem is no more a violation of the Accords than the extensive Palestinian building which is taking place throughout
PA-controlled areas.
* Palestinian threats of violence violate Oslo Accords
In clear violation of the Oslo Accords, which bar incitement and threats of violence, Palestinian leaders have repeatedly attempted to inflame the situation with provocative statements:
We are preparing for a confrontation. For us, Har Homa
is the end of the peace process.
(Ghassan Andoni, Financial Times, 26 February 1997)
If Israel decides to go ahead with building at Har Homa,
the Palestinian response will be hard and violent.
(Mohammed Jadallah, AFP, 21 February 1997)
... this decision gives the green light for riots, clashes,
starting a battle, a war.
(Faisal Husseini, Paris Radio Monte Carlo, 21 February 1997)
If Israel continues these unilateral actions (in) Jerusalem ...
they are undermining not just peace with the Palestinians but
peace in the entire region.
(Hanan Ashrawi, AP, 20 February 1997)
If Prime Minister Binyamin decides to build in Har Homa this
will be a declaration of war on the Palestinians.
(Faisal Husseini, Yediot Ahranot, 18 February 1997)
Such Palestinian threats of violence are clearly violations of the
Oslo Accords, which require that the two sides:
1. Foster mutual understanding and tolerance, and shall accordingly
abstain from incitement, including hostile propaganda, against each
other ...(Interim Agreement, Article XXII)
2. ... shall take all measures necessary in order to prevent acts of
terrorism, crime, and hostilities directed against each other,
against individuals falling under the other's authority ... (Interim
Agreement, Article XV)
* Most Israelis Support Har Homa Project
Many press reports have falsely portrayed the Har Homa project as
"right wing":
Under pressure from rightist members of his coalition to
proceed with the Har Homa plan ... Netanyahu ...
(Los Angeles Times, 24 February 1997)
Right-wing coalition partners and several members of the main
opposition Labor party have been pressing Netanyahu to give
the green light for the project ...
(Reuters, 20 February 1997)
Netanyahu has been under growing pressure from members of his
conservative coalition to build in Har Homa ...
(AP, 20 February 1997)
Contrary to such reports, there is actually broad support in Israel
for the project. In a Gallup poll 46% of respondents favored building
at Har Homa, with only 29% opposed (Ma'ariv, 21 February 1997).
A Dahaf poll placed overall support for building Har Homa at 69%, with 38% for building "immediately," and 31% for doing so "at the right moment," and only 24% opposed (Yediot Ahranot, 21 February 1997).
* Labor Party's Teddy Kollek, former Mayor of Jerusalem, supports Har
Homa project
Reflecting the Israeli consensus on the Har Homa project, prominent
Labor Party member Teddy Kollek, who was Mayor of Jerusalem for 28
years, stated:
I am in favor of building now. One cannot give in every time
an Arab leader makes a threat.
(Ma'ariv, 27 February 1997).
* Rabin and Netanyahu on building at Har Homa
The late Prime Minister Rabin supported plans to build at Har Homa in
words remarkably similar to those of Prime Minister Netanyahu:
... the land expropriations in Jerusalem were not designed to
usurp anyone's property, but rather to turn uncultivated areas
into construction projects for both Arabs and Jews.
(Prime Minster Rabin, Ma'ariv, 12 May 1995)
I want to make clear that we will build in all of Jerusalem,
and we will build also in Har Homa... First of all because there
is a big housing deficit in Jerusalem, there will be construction
for both Jews and Arabs.
(Prime Minister Netanyahu, AP, 25 February 1997)
In accord with these statements, municipal plans for Jerusalem include
20,000 housing units for Jews and 8500 for Arabs, reflecting the
demographic balance in the city (Jerusalem is 71% Jewish).
* In Jerusalem Arab growth rate surpasses that of the Jews
Since 1967 Jerusalem's Jewish population has increased by only
105%, while its Arab population has increased by 156%. In other words, despite Arab charges that Israel is "Judaizing" the city, Jerusalem is less Jewish today than it was in 1967. (This and the next 2 points are based on 1993 data from the Statistical Yearbook of Jerusalem.)
Excluding the Old City (where little building takes place), the average size of Jewish homes in Jerusalem is 67.2 square meters, while the average size of Arab homes is 75.1 square meters.
While the Arab population of Jerusalem has increased greatly, crowding has actually decreased. Since 1967 the number of rooms-per-person in Arab households has increased by 11%.
Much of the new Arab building in Jerusalem has taken place in the neighborhoods of Ras al-Amud and Arab a-Suwachra in the south-east, and in Shuafat and Beit Hanina in the north. Arab villages within the city, such as Isawiya, A-Tur, Sur Bacher and Beit Safafa, have also grown significantly.
Meron Benvenisti, the former Deputy Mayor of Jerusalem, now much quoted by Israel's critics, in the past criticized propagandists who distorted Arab and Jewish population growth in Jerusalem:
These complaints were taken up and accepted in wide circles
all over the world. However, demographic data did not justify
such complaints. The massive Israeli efforts only ensured that
the growth of the Jewish population of the city did not lag
behind that of the Arab community. As in many other areas, the
complaints rested not so much on real facts as on the declarations
of politicians. The efforts made for the rapid construction and
development of the city brought about a relatively swift growth
of the Jewish population, but they also brought about a relatively
faster growth of the Arab community. Like Siamese twins, the two
communities nourished each other and were obliged to advance at
the same pace. The true beneficiary of the efforts directed towards
development was not the Jewish community, nor the Arab one, it was
the city as a whole.
(Jerusalem, The Torn City, 1976)
Since Benvenisti wrote these words in 1976, Jewish building in Jerusalem has continued to lag behind the Arab efforts, as noted above.
Prepared by:
Alexander Safian, Ph.D.
Associate Director CAMERA (Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America)
PO Box 428
Boston, MA 02258
Tel 617-789-3672
Fax 617-787-7853 EMAIL
WWW
Brought to you by Virtual Jerusalem, the SuperSite with
over 10 million monthly hits and 100+ email lists with 100,000+ subscribers.