Boulder Jewish News Arts, Culture, Events, Lifestyles, Holidays, Synagogues, Education
By Leonard Hammer
Lakin Chair on the Holocaust, Comparative Genocide, and Human Rights, Center for Judaic Studies. University of Arizona
President Trump has already declared a hardline approach towards dealing with various actors in the Middle East, particularly with recognized terror groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis. This is a welcome development for the road to peace in the region. Upon discussing the potential revival of the Abraham Accords, pundits are rife with talk of strong-arm tactics and a sturdy approach to be taken by the incoming President.
One aspect that oddly has not been discussed and yet can serve as a key factor for moving a peace deal forward is the matter of holy places. Holy places such as the Al-Aqsa mosque/Temple Mount are important seminal areas to all of the actors relevant to a peace deal. If President Trump desires to make a lasting impression and achieve some form of roadmap to peace, he should not only account for the significance of holy places, but also utilize them to his advantage in making a peace deal.
In a recent co-authored book (with Marshall Breger) regarding the contest and control of Jerusalem’s holy sites, we note the need for a focus-shift from a zero-sum approach adopted by parties to more functional considerations that account for what a particular group might seek at the site (such as capacity for prayer or security control). The approach emphasizes the needs of parties, rather than falling into the quagmire of entrenched positions to what they do not want the other side to “have”.
Holy places encapsulate the underlying interests of the actors at the peace negotiation table. A case in point over the relevance of holy places is the actions of the (now former) extreme right Israeli Minister of National Security, Itamar ben Gvir. He has carried out rather draconian policies that affect Palestinians in a myriad of ways. This includes ignoring at times the actions of settlers who run riot over Palestinian towns. Yet, it is only when he conducts Temple Mount visits, at times even daring to pray at this holy site to both Jews and Muslims, does the Arab world react to condemn his actions as dangerous to stability in the region. Even during the ongoing war with Hamas, it was only when ben Gvir prayed at the Temple Mount did Hamas attempt to rile up the public against Israel.
If utilized correctly holy places are an avenue by which to create a legitimacy pull of both Israelis and the Palestinians towards the negotiating table. As such, holy places also might serve as carrot and stick form of leverage between the variety of actors to any peace deal. This includes Israel whose current government certainly would demand a capacity for more activity at the site; Saudi Arabia who wrestled control of Mecca and Medina from the Hashemite Kingdom and would relish being involved in some way in the affairs of Al-Aqsa; and Jordan and the Palestinians who would do all they can to maintain a modicum of control over Al-Aqsa (indeed, oftentimes engaging in ongoing wrangling between themselves over the site) and other holy sites.
A true master of the ‘art of the deal’ would recognize that any peace and reconciliation negotiation would do well to carve out a potential role for the Saudis at Al-Aqsa, principally as a linchpin to keep Jordan and the Palestinians in the fray and maintain their interest in keeping peace with Israel. Indeed, the Saudis can be enticed to accept peace with Israel and become more involved in the affairs of Al-Aqsa under the guise of assisting a nascent Palestinian state (recognizing that the Palestinians actually rejected potential control of Al-Aqsa during the failed Clinton peace summit). Saudi Arabia does occasionally claim (when it suits their interests) that Palestinian peace is required prior to making a deal with Israel, but they can easily be influenced otherwise by affording them some form of involvement over the administration of a holy place like Al-Aqsa. That is a greater prize in their eyes.
President Trump knows quite well that the art of the deal demands quick, decisive, and adaptable action. Holy places offer these avenues for achieving peace. If he really wants to get to know his “market” and make use of the leverage that he presently maintains (largely thanks to the actions of the Israelis over the past one and a half years) he should effectively utilize holy places in a strategic manner.
