For Palestinians, Judenrein Areas Is A Given
03/29/2010 - 11:05
Gary Rosenblatt

 At our seders this week we will recite at the outset, "let all who are hungry come and eat."

It's a reminder of the universal as well as particular aspect of the seder in general, and of Judaism in general, a timely reminder at a point of deep tension between Washington and Jerusalem over Israel's treatment of its Arab minority and neighbors. The Obama administration wants Israel to stop building in east Jerusalem, even though the neighborhood in question is Jewish and surrounded by the Jewish neighborhoods of French Hill and Ramot.

The irony is that when east Jerusalem was under Jordanian control, from 1948 until the Six Day War of 1967, the Western Wall and its environs were banned to Jews. And there is no discussion of a future Palestinian State allowing Jews to live within its borders. By contrast, Israel has allowed access to its holy places to all since 1967, ceding control of the Al-Aksa Mosque to the Arabs, even though it includes the Temple Mount, the holiest site in Judaism.

Why is it acceptable to the U.S. that Palestinian areas be Judenrein while Israel is condemned for allowing Jews to build in Jewish neighborhoods of a city that is open to all? 

view counter

Comment Guidelines

The Jewish Week feels comments create a valuable conversation and wants to feature your thoughts on our website. To make everyone feel welcome, we won't publish comments that are profane, irrelevant, promotional or make personal attacks.


The word Judenrein as holocaust connotations, and it is inappropriate to use it in this context.
The problem started over 30 years ago when Israel gave the Sinai peninsula back to Egypt and removed all the Jews. More recently, Israel gave the Gaza strip to Hamas and removed all the Jews. Now when there is any discussion of giving parts of the West Bank to the Palestinian Authority, it is assumed that all the Jews will be removed from those areas. Nobody is proposing removing Arabs from any part of Israel in exchange for territorial concessions by Israel. If there is to be any realistic two-state solution, each state will have to permit both Jews and Arabs to live as residents, if not citizens. Unfortunately, the Sinai precedent makes it that much more difficult.
The ME "peace process" has always comprised two tracks. One for Israel and the other for everyone else. Virtually every entity that's had a say in the alleged efforts to resolve the conflict--meaning the U.S., the U.N., the Palestinians, the entire Arab and Muslim world, Great Britain, France and Russia--has weighed in with opinions, demands, solutions, and proposals anchored in lies and distortions, revisions of history and omissions of fact, that always hurt Israel. Establishing Judenrein areas for the Palestinians is among the most blatant double-standards applied to Israel. And yet our President seems completely unaware of the racism inherent in the policy. As for the situation in Jerusalem: Jordan took possession of East Jerusalem by invading Israel in 1948. Consistent with its anti-Israel double-standards, the world now deems it a fait accomplis that Israel will "return" East Jerusalem to Jordan or the Palestinians. But if Israel is "negotiating" for peace, then she has the right to say no sometimes. If she can't say no, then the process should be identified for what it is: Israel being terrorized and forced to reward Arab aggression.
Excellent points!! ~ MME
So many excellent points!

Add comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.