Amman is furious over Israeli minister’s call for changing the status quo on Temple Mount
BY MOHAMMAD AL-KASSIM/THE MEDIA LINE
Palestinians pray on the first Friday of the holy fasting month of Ramadan, on the compound known to Muslims as Noble Sanctuary and to Jews as Temple Mount, in Jerusalem’s Old City May 10, 2019. . (photo credit: AMMAR AWAD / REUTERS)
The Jordanian government is furious over remarks made by Israel’s Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan calling for a change to the status quo in Jerusalem, so that Jews can pray at the Temple Mount, known to Muslims as the Haram al-Sharif.
The Jordanian Foreign Ministry stressed on Tuesday that “the kingdom’s absolute rejection” of Erdan’s comments, and denounced “any attempt to prejudice the historical and legal status quo and the serious consequences thereof.”
Palestinian journalist Daoud Kuttab told The Media Line that Jordan, the official custodian of Jerusalem’s Muslim and Christian holy sites, takes that responsibility extremely seriously.
“Jordan has been responsible for managing the Al-Aqsa Mosque for decades, and this is carried out by the Islamic Waqf Endowment, which is a Jordanian department of the government that employs more than 1,000 individuals,” he said. “[These people] work for Jordan in helping manage the third holiest mosque in Islam. Any attempts to change the status quo is something rejected by the Palestinians, Jordanians, and Muslims.”
The compound was the site of clashes between Muslim worshipers and Israeli police on Sunday over the entry of Jews during the Islamic holiday of Eid al-Adha, which this year coincided with the Jewish fast day of Tisha B’Av, which marks the destruction of the First and Second Jewish temples.
Kuttab criticized the way Israeli police dealt with the situation.
“I think the bad handling by the Israeli government of what happened, and the defense of the Al-Aqsa mosque by 100,000 Palestinians showed… that the people of Jerusalem defended their mosque from attempts by extremists to change the status quo. Now the politicians are trying to do what the extremists weren’t able to do,” Kuttab said.
As part of an arrangement established after the 1967 Six Day War, when Israel captured the Old City and East Jerusalem from Jordan, non-Muslims are barred from praying at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount.
“I don’t think the Jordanian position is new,” Kuttab said, adding that “[Amman] is also armed with the Jordanian-Palestinian agreement of 2014 in which the Palestinian leadership ceded the responsibility of protecting holy places, both Christian and Muslim, to the Jordanian Kingdom. Jordan is protecting the properties legally, religiously, and politically.”
Dr. Abdullah Swalha, the founder and director of Center for Israel Atudies in Amman told The Media Line that despite the “rising number of extremist Jews who are calling for a change to the status quo,” it is unlikely Israel will take any steps to force a change in that direction for two reasons.
“First, its legal commitment to Jordan, and the second reason is that Israel cannot change the status quo by force or unilateral action,” he said.
Swalha believes that Jordan’s main concern is whether Israel will officially seek a change in the kingdom’s role over holy sites.
“I think the danger to Jordan is that Israel demands that things change in Jerusalem diplomatically and be adopted by the US administration,” as part of the Trump Administration’s broader regional aspirations. “Is this part of the US peace plan? Will this be through pressure on Jordan? I think this is the dangerous thing that Jordan should prepare for in the future,” Swalha asserted.
But Swalha downplayed the recent tension and accused Erdan’s of using the violence to his own political advantage.
“Erdan’s statements are just wishes and part of the election season and an attempt to win some votes and popularity,” he said in reference to Israel’s upcoming September 17 national vote. “Also, I don’t expect Israel to change the situation unilaterally because this will transform the conflict [with the Palestinians] from a national one [into a religious one].
“This is what Israel does not want… especially in light of the wave of normalization with some Gulf countries and at a time when Israel is experiencing a rapprochement with the Arab world,” concluded Swalha.
Under the 1994 peace treaty between the countries, Israel recognized Jordan as the custodian of Christian and Muslim holy sites in Jerusalem. In November 2014, a meeting in Amman confirmed the understanding.
“Jordan is upset that the Israelis have broken the understanding of 2014 between [Jordanian] King Abdullah, [then-US Secretary of State] John Kerry and [Israeli Prime Minister] Binyamin Netanyahu,” according to Swalha. “That agreement stated clearly that the Al-Aqsa Mosque is for Muslims to pray at and for all others to visit. Any attempt to change this agreement so that Jews can carry out religious or political activity in the mosque area is a violation.”
Kuttab said tension over the issue has strained relations between Israel and Jordan, and that the Trump Administration isn’t helping to defuse the situation.
“The relationship between Jordan and Israel isn’t good, the leaders haven’t spoken to each other for years and unfortunately the Americans, who are usually the mediators, are totally not involved in trying to bring both sides together, and bring order to the relationship,” Kuttab said.
@ Philippe:
Phlippe, with all due respect…please do not lump former PM Sharon with Barak. It cheapens your contribution to Israpundit.
General Sharon had the guts to disobey his commanders, who were totally responsible for placing Israel into the position of defeat in 1973.
Everyone knows this, but…what the purg…Sharon surrounded The Egyptian, was it the 3rd Army in Sinai in violation of his orders. He saved the country and the lives of all Israelis hung in the balance. This is not debatable. Now Sharon’s performance as PM is controversial and hence, “debatable”. I was totally opposed to Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza. I engaged Minister Uzi Landau immediately after the Knesset supported the Gaza evacuation. I expressed my concern that the PA in Gaza would be taken over by Hamas, and he agreed and stated my ….”points were in place…” Nevertheless he stated that he knew of no mechanism to revisit the issue, now that it appeared The PA would fold, like a $2 suitcase.
Now we have the advantage of 20/20 hindsight. Israel could have done as it pleased.If Sharon would have wanted to cancel the withdrawal he could have done it, but he did not, Why?
I believe Sharon knew long before that Hamas would wrestle Gaza from The PA and the Arab residents of Judea, Samaria and The Gaza District would be under divided leadership, indefinately. If so, he was totally correct. There was tremendous pressure for Sharon to create a Palestinian State, so he offered them an opportunity. He probably knew the opportunity would be squandered and there would be as result, no “Palestinian State”. That is exactly what happened.
My guess is Sharon will end up as one of the greatest leaders of Israel.
@ Buzz of the Orient:
That was the problem..He was NOT a great soldier, He very imperfectly understood-if at all-military strategy…but all the adulation (his picture on a Time cover) made him think so. He was very careless, not attending to important details. He gained his reputation basically as a guerrilla fighter, having learnt a few things from Orde Wingate in pre-state days.. His active soldiering days were beginning to end in the few years after after Israel’s establishment. He was a personal pal of Ben Gurion which got him places.
He was appointed Min. of Defence only on the day of the 6 day war and had nothing to do with planning it, or the bravery of the wonderful IDF. The main cause of the lack of preparation for the Yom Kipur War was laid, rightly so, at his doorstep, and he had to resifgn after the War.
His main asset was his black eyepatch, which looked not only romantic, but also dashing and very martial,…..of which he was the exact opposite. Thts patch made him ..the darling of the always foolish public opinion and the news photographers, the picture of the staunch, fighting brilliantly improvising, always victorious, Israel
And THAT sort of brain bursting drek nearly caused a disaster in 1973.
Dayan was a great soldier, Chief of Staff, Defence Minister and politician….according to the book he wrote about himself….
@ Raphael:
He did it because 1) He was totally irreligious, and it meant nothing to him except as a protuberance from the ground. 2) He was colossally egotistical and and fancied himself s being a benefactor to beaten enemies….The BIG Gesture……He lapped up personal fame.
His personal arrogance and lack of foresight were his main attributes.
@ Buzz of the Orient:
Same observation apply to other IDF generals ( Ehud Barak – Ariel Sharon)
Once in power they are puppets of the left, either willingly or through coercition .
Dayan, the PM, the Cabinet… How about the rabbis who forbade religious Jews for years, to even set foot on the Temple Mount? Assigning blame accomplishes nothing. What matters is today, the day which is in the hands of every Jew. What will they do now?
@ David melech:
Then how can the P.M. and Cabinet ever be surprised or upset if the Diaspora turns its back on Israel, the Diaspora Jews who from every place on the planet had faced that holiest of all sites when praying, since the Israeli Government never considered how important it may have been to them?
No point in blaming m dayan. The p.m and cabinet accepted and passed his error into law.
Moshe Dayan may have been a good soldier, but he was a damned fool for giving control of the Temple Mount to Jordan.
@ Raphael:
the bloody Mosque should have been blown to bits and the blame put on Jordan and then refused to let them rebuild
@ Nannette:
Fifty two years after the fact, we still ask ourselves that question. Why did Dyan do it? Putting the Temple Mount back into Muslim hands has only brought conflict and suffering. Was he pressured into doing it? Possibly. Or did he do it out of some other mis-guided rationale? Either way, there is a valuable lesson to be learned about ceding any part of Eretz Israel to others. It must not be done. No good can come of it.
If only Moshe Dayan hadn’t given control of the Temple Mount to Jordan after the ’67 war!!!
There would have been peace by now!