Jerusalem in the Arab world as it ought to be

This is a pessimistic article that might not fall in line with what the angry Arab reader might want to read at such a stage of our history. But then again, I have become a pessimistic man and am viewing the current crisis in historical retrospect.

The misery and humiliation we are experiencing today is the result of an accumulation of errors on our part. Mistakes began when we did not lobby against the Balfour Declaration in 1917 and carried on throughout the 20th century, until we insisted that Ehud Barak be ousted from office and replaced by Ariel Sharon – knowing perfectly well how bloodthirsty Ariel Sharon was.

The Arab leaders said that Sharon would be better because he "showed the true face of Israel" and did not hide behind peace masks.

Arab history has been one big defeat after another and anyone who disagrees with that should re-read his or her history. The Arabs today are lamenting their luck and cursing the skies for having abandoned them. We hear people lamenting Jerusalem and longing for its return.

I would like to remind my fellow Arabs that Jerusalem, which was proudly under our jurisdiction 35 years ago, was one of the most neglected and miserable cities in the years 1948-1967. If Jerusalem were to return to the Arabs today, it would be advisable that the Arabs appreciate its worth and learn to administer it properly.

At times, knowing a lot of history can be painful, especially in the Arab world. I have noticed a re-occurring theme in our world that is "temporary politicisation."

The Arabs take up a cause, drum up temporary support from their masses, make themselves heard all over the world, then reach one of two stages: either they get bored with the subject and drop it. Or they lay it off until later where its mention might prove useful in serving a specific and often personal political objective.

Sadly speaking, prior to the intifada in September 2000, nobody other than the Palestinians was really speaking about Jerusalem or staging rallies in its favour. Its mention was there, nevertheless, in official discourse, in posters, slogans, and state-run newspapers but it was more of a nostalgic mention than a hands-on issue.

Even in official Arab discourse, the only leaders to repeat mention of Jerusalem were Yasser Arafat and the late Syrian President Hafez Al Assad. It was nearly non-existent in the discourse of other leaders.

Most Arab audiences mistakenly took Al-Aqsa Mosque for the Dome of the Rock and decided to leave Palestine for the Palestinians to deal with. After all, they had their government and they had Yasser Arafat – why should the other Arabs worry about them anymore.

Then, the intifada breaks out and hell breaks loose throughout the Arab world. All of a sudden, songs are playing on national radio, pictures of Jerusalem are plastered all over Arab capitals, leaders are racing to their microphones to promise the liberation of Jerusalem, and some, like Ali Abdullah Saleh and Saddam Hussain are ostensibly claiming that they are preparing armies for the emancipation of the Holy City.

Selling place

To the Arab heads of state, Jerusalem is a selling topic that can be well digested and received by the Arab masses. It serves their interest as depicting themselves as the vanguards of Arab nationalism.

Reference to the Holy City has become a catchy phrase in Arab discourse (and Jewish of course) and both peoples are found of embracing one another on a festive occasion and hoping, "Next year in Jerusalem!"

However, as the intifada dragged on, people started to forget about the Israeli onslaught and cater to their daily lives. News about Palestine dropped in world broadcasts to third class topics and other issues: the murder of the royal family in Nepal, the capture of a U.S. plane in China, and the arrest of former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic all became more "interesting" news for the Arab public.

Then came September 11 and its aftershocks and for a while the onslaught in Palestine was forgotten not only by the world community but by the Arabs as well.

The reason for this lapse is that Arab regimes want their people to remember Jerusalem only when necessary. Jerusalem must be remembered from one time to another, so that the Zionist threat is not forgotten, but also in a manner that does not hold the Arab leaders accountable for failing to work for its liberation.

Arab leaders have managed to keep Jerusalem in the Arab consciousness yet have conferred it second-degree standing. It is always present for recall however, whenever an Arab leader sees the need for it.

Wronging the city

This was the case until the Palestinian intifada broke out in September 2000, where television channels, newspapers and books helped shed light on the forgotten city and reminded the Arabs of its religious importance to Islam and Christianity. Before that, on-and-off, the ordinary Arab simply did not think about Jerusalem that often.

To better understand how the Arabs wronged the Holy City one must remember that the last big achievements to take place in Jerusalem were during the Omayyad Dynasty. The Dome of the Rock was built in 691 and Al Aqsa Mosque was constructed in 715. In 750, following the downfall of the Omayyad Caliphate, investment increased in Baghdad, the new Muslim capital, and Jerusalem dropped to near obscurity.

Just as in September 2000, Muslim sympathy towards Jerusalem was not re-awakened until the Crusaders occupied it in 1099. Poets, leaders and scholars began speaking of Jerusalem's virtues and praising its significance to Islam.

It became a "selling topic" for official Muslim rhetoric and everyone started calling out for the liberation of Jerusalem. Poems, similar to the ones heard on television today were written overnight and so were songs and make-believe liberation armies. In 1187 Salaadin recaptured Jerusalem and once again, it slipped into darkness. Its population dropped, construction projects ceased, illness increased, and sanitary conditions worsened.

Jerusalem remained on a well-to-do status during the years 1917-1948 where it was under control of the British Mandate. Walls and gates, which had lain in ruins since Salaadin, were rebuilt and money poured into the Holy City.

The British tried marketing Jerusalem as a tourist attraction in the Near East. Ancient aqueducts were reactivated, hotels built, and roads paved to facilitate travel to and from the old city. In 1948 Jerusalem came under the Arab authority of the late King Abdullah I. He insisted that importance in Jordan be given to the capital Amman and not to Jerusalem.

First, this would prevent his Palestinian subjects from assuming geographic precedence over their Jordanian counterparts, since they already outflanked them in education, wealth, and know-how. He also knew that if light was shed on Jerusalem, Amman would never become more than a middle-size town while it needed money and work to be transformed into a proper Arab capital.

Slowly, Jerusalem dropped to third-degree status in front of its Jordanian counterparts. Jordanian radio transmitted the Friday prayer not from Al Aqsa Mosque, as would be expected, but from the King Abdullah Mosque in downtown Amma