You are here
jerusalemites (267)
Children categories
Posted on: 1999
By Khaled Nusseibeh
There are moments in the annals of human history when nations face, sometimes willfully– at others under compulsion– the bitter burdens of conflict. Each nation, in the ebb and flow of historical movement, has had a taste of both triumph as well as defeat. 
At each moment of such conflict individuals and states have grappled with the imperatives of an ethic of conduct, or have at other times been, to grave consequence, oblivious to the importance of a moral premise for behavior in times of war.
The modern world has, in this closing century of the second millenium, been profoundly shaken by the brutalities of modern warfare, the extent of which brutality and suffering has been unmatched in the preceding millennia of human civilization. The two world wars, the camps of incarceration of the Stalinist Soviet Union, Nazi Germany– and the multiple conflicts of this century have visited on both innocent and culpable life a heavy toll of suffering and death; likewise, the unfolding conflicts in Palestine, Iraq, Lebanon, and the Balkans have entailed a saga of oppression, the unethical targeting of innocents, the expropriation of legitimately acquired wealth and substantial abuses of human rights.
When children are targets of war, when the honor of women and men is a weapon in the arsenal of foes of dimmed moral vision, when the rights of civilian populations under military occupation are violated men and women of sense must pose the question: is there a code that can prevent human descent into the code of the jungle under conditions of conflict? Or have those participating in current conflicts forgotten the lessons of previous wars, or can’t they be awakened to a code of conduct, adherence to which, may be disaster preventive for future generations?
To speak in simple terms: there are ground rules for peaceful co-existence between states which may be enhanced when basic and politically tolerable restraint is shown by politicians and military personnel of all ranks in times of conflict. In other words, ethnic cleansing, attempting to starve a portion of a civilian population as a weapon of battle, rape of women, destruction of vital food crops, violence against children, plunder of the private property of a population under occupation, and degrading treatment of prisoners of war, all contribute to writing the following chapter of human conflict and suffering.
Islam has an ethic of conflict which is both humane, reasonable, and merciful to protagonists in a conflict: Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq, the first Caliph of Islam, captured an important part of this ethic in these words which he addressed to his troops in A.D. seventh century:
“O people, be alerted to ten matters, so learn them from me; do not betray.., do not cheat, do not defile dead corpses, do not kill a small child, or an aged man, nor a woman, do not cut or burn trees of palm, do not cut a fruit bearing tree, do not slaughter a sheep or a cow or a camel except for your nourishment; and you will encounter people who are dwellers of cloisters (i.e. monks and priests) so do not harm them…” (Quoted from: Mawsu’t Al-‘Alam Al-Islami/’Umar Al-Armuti, pp.205)
All of the preceding, in my view is relevant to the issue of Jerusalem which the One God of humanity has sanctified and blessed as the land of peace, holiness, and human surrender to Heaven. Such blessing is anchored in human striving to accept the races of earth, to build monuments of equity and tolerance, to defend what is inviolable in God’s Law, to water the plant of human glorification of God Almighty through deeds which do justice to an orphan, which support a righteous struggle to prevent the bulldozing of a home, which spread knowledge that is useful to people in their livelihoods– but which also helps people in their struggles for salvation in the hereafter.
It is very often a paradox that perpetrators of injustice and its victims are sometimes driven, through the blinding influence of power, or the sense of grievance at victimization– to unethical methods and views of struggle. In a word, any struggle that is injurious to Religion, property, inviolable life, the dignity of people, the integrity of the family is reprehensible– under circumstances of both military preponderance or under conditions of occupation; Muslims and people of goodwill will continue mourning the occupation of the Holy City of Jerusalem and will hopefully, continue to reform themselves and to strive that it is restored to righteous and tolerant sovereignty.
Posted on: 2000
By Khaled Nusseibeh
Palestinian Jerusalemites do indeed have a sense of the past. Arguably, any people do. How can we begin to define the Palestinians’ sense of history? And can we speak about the existence of a collectively shared sense of the past?
In a sense, it is an objective statement to say that Palestinians are a people with historical belonging to the land of Palestine. It is, moreover, objective to observe that Palestinians share the Arabic Language and an experience of history that dates to biblical and pre-biblical times.
The mistake is sometimes made whereby Palestinian history is viewed as having a beginning in the Arab-Islamic conquest of the lands of Syria and Palestine in the 7th century. Perhaps the processes of conversion to Islam and cultural Arabisation began then- yet Palestinian history by no means started then.
Palestinians are an Arab, predominantly Muslim people with varied ethnic and cultural genealogies and who have inhabited Palestine for countless centuries (1). The various ethnic and cultural genealogies are attested to by the names of its hamlets and towns and through the archeological ruins that communicate a dazzlingly rich history of awesome and modest happenings alike.
The Palestinian, irrespective of his/her level of education, has a sense- intensified by the assaults on his/her land and identity- of belonging to a national community. But this national community accommodates other affiliations and identities such as the Jordanian national identity, the Lebanese national identity, the American national identity, etc.
This writer belongs to a segment of Palestinians who are aware of their being Arab and Palestinian, but who equally underpin this national belonging to a belonging to the community of Islam or the Ummah of Mohammed (Peace be Upon Him).
What does belonging to the Ummah of Islam mean? It means respecting, cherishing, and honoring one’s homeland and the near and distant kinship ties. However, it also means feeling a sense of brotherhood with all who profess the faith of Islam and who bear witness that there is no God but Allah, and that Muhammad is His messenger.
This sense of brotherhood/sisterhood transcends the boundaries of politics, ethnicity, geography, language, social standing, etc. Because it is a communal belonging that is based on the sense of our divine origin, the God who created mankind, the universe, the homeland, and history.
The Palestinians are a people with a land, with a history, with a faith, with a struggle, and with a future (God Willing).
Bibliography
(1) Nakhleh, Issa; Encyclopedia of The Palestinian Problem; Intercontinental Books, NY, V. 1; 1991; p. 1
Mr. Khaled Nusseibeh is a translator and writer. He currently manages the Ubada Center for Writing and Translation Services in Amman. Born in Amman in 1961, he obtained his BA and MA from Columbia and Princeton Universities, respectively. Mr. Nusseibeh, who originates from Jerusalem, specialized in Near Eastern Studies with a focus on Islamic thought and studies.
Posted on: 2002
By Sami Rami
The Zionist movement
The Zionist movement faced rejection in the regions of the Ottoman state, but Jews enjoyed the same equal rights with others since the reign of Sultan Muhammad the 2nd(1808-1839) in the wake of his large-scale political and social reforms.
The equal rights decree was declared in 1839 by Sultan Abdul Majeed (1839-1861). Further details regarding the decree were made in 1856. A year earlier, in1855, the state cancelled the tax of tribute exacted from Jews.
The reforms’ movement culminated in 1876 when the empire adopted its first constitution. Meanwhile, Oriental Jews paid high attention to Palestine, for example started in the 17th century turning to the book of prayers stipulated by Rabbi Ha’ari and his followers in Jerusalem and Safad instead of the classical book of prayers. Rabbi Youse Haiem, then leader of Iraqi Jews prepared a book of prayers in harmony of books of prayers approved by followers of the Cabbala’s sect in Palestine (Rabbis Ha’ari, Haiem Vetal and Shalom Shara’abi) who lived in Palestine between 16-18 centuries. The teachings of the Cabbala of Palestinian Jews have spread also into north Africa, Balkan’s states and Turkey. When Safad lost its religious significance in the 17th century, other religious Jewish centers appeared in Jerusalem and Aleppo–many religious schools were founded in Jerusalem and the leader of this faction in Jerusalem, dubbed as Hereshon Lesion, enjoyed a prominent place among Jewish circles.
The Jewish community of Jerusalem has played a major role through its emissaries to the Orient in publicizing Rabbi Ha’ari’s thoughts of Safad School. The centrality of Palestine in the conscience of Oriental Jews surfaced since the 19th century or more specifically the year 1840 and thereafter. Undoubtedly, various Political and geopolitical factors contributed since then in strengthening Oriental Jews’ bridges with Palestine, and activated the immigration’s movement between all Oriental countries. As a matter of fact, the stamina of Jewish colonization in Palestine increased during the reign of Abraham Pasha (1832 – 1840). Moreover, the official Turkish recognition in1840 of Herishon Lesion as religious leader of the Jewish community in Palestine, and granting him the title of Rabbi Pashi have contributed to the growth of Jewish power there. Consequently, the power of Rabbis in Palestine has appreciated not only as Jewish clerics, but also as clergymen enjoying wide-ranging authorities among the Jewish community. Attesting to the influence of Jerusalem’s Rabbis, Yemeni Rabbis, despite their commitment to Rabbi Moses Ben Meimoon’s teachings more than any other Oriental Jews, used to send them theological questions on Judaism.
Jerusalem Rabbi Jacob Shaol Alissar who occupied the position of Grand Rabbi in Palestine (1893-1906) was a prominent Oriental Rabbi. prior to his rabbinical job. He occupied many important positions among Jewish settlers; as a senior judge for Sephardim Jews in Jerusalem or as Jerusalem’s Grand Rabbi Deputy. Alissar was also close to Oriental Jews, who migrated to Jerusalem, occupying thus a prominent place among them.
Generally speaking, we can say that Jerusalem’s Rabbis, starting the sixteenth century, especially from the second half of the nineteenth century, constituted the highest spiritual authority to all Oriental Jews. This factor was not among important factors that encouraged Oriental Jews to immigrate to Palestine, but it contributed to the preservation of what they considered their nationalistic religious link to it, and to their wish to migrate to, depending on appropriate political and economic conditions. Oriental Jews viewed ,erroneously, Palestine as a land that they can live in, according to their traditions without problems. Therefore, no wonder that some oriental communities immigrated to Palestine en masse
Posted on: 2002
By Sami Rami
Jerusalem, with its abundant Muslim relics and monuments, has occupied a Paramount place in Arab and Muslim glorious history since times immemorial. Arab tribes have flooded Palestine during successive waves of Semitic migration out of the Arabian Peninsula many Arab kingdoms flourished in the region before Christ. After the advent of Islam, Muslims were ordered to turn to 
in prayers before turning to Mecca.
Prophet Muhammad conducted, prior to the Islamic liberation of Palestine in 638, a miraculous spiritual nocturnal journey to al-Aqsa Mosque and his great vision of ascensión to heaven from the third shrine in Islam (al-Aqsa). Recognizing Jerusalem significance in Islam, all Arab and Muslim rulers gave the city a prominence and every attention it deserved as the first Qibla (where Muslims turned in prayers before Mecca).
Consequently, the crusaders were attacked and defeated by Saladin in 1187 and the city retained its Muslim façade. In December 12, 1516, the Ottomans entered Jerusalem, and two weeks later (Jan. 1, 1517) Sultan Salim I received the keys of Jerusalem.
Palestine remained under the Muslim Ottoman rule up to the end of WWI and the beginning of the British occupation of Jerusalem in Dec. 1918. A new chapter of colonialism and Zionism started with the British occupation to Jerusalem and the rest of the region. Many Palestinian revolts and mass rebellions erupted against the new colonial and Zionist invaders.
Posted on: 2002
By Sami Rami
Before the advent of Islam, Palestine and the rest of Bilad al-Sham (Syria, Jordan, Palestine) was populated by the Arab tribes of Ghassans, Kalb, Lakham, Jutham and others. 
Ahead the of the Prophet’s Mission, Mohammad was in touch with those tribes twice during his two trips to Bilad al-Sham. He has foreseen them as backing up their Arab brothers in the Arabian Peninsula. Three forays, Zat Assalasil, Mu’ta and Tabuk, were launched in the Prophet’s time, enabled early Arab Muslims to stretch their sway to Bilad al Sham’s frontiers. The Prophet, himself, participated in the last foray.
No sooner had he ordered the preparation of a strong expedition, that his Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, were ordered to participate in it. The expedition was under the leadership of Usama Ben Zaid.
While everyone was readying himself to the coming mission, the Prophet died in 632. But the sudden death of the Prophet created the problem of the renegades and turncoats. His successor, Caliph Abu Bakr, adopted a decisive policy in dealing with those who turned—after the Prophet’s death– their back to Islam. He ordered the army of Usama to move the Sham in fulfillment of the Prophet’s testament. Thus the Arab Muslim’s liberation of that land from the Roman invaders has begun and deepened in later years. But Abu Bakr died before the Arab liberation of Palestine was materialized. The sacred mission of Palestine’s liberation occurred during his Successor, Caliph Omar Ben Al-Khattab. During his reign, the fate of Egypt and Palestine was decided.
The Muslim, under the leadership of Abu Obeidah al-Jarrah, mover toward Jerusalem in It was winter, and the occupying Romans had the wrong impression that the Muslims couldn’t fight in severe cold weather. But the Muslim siege of Jerusalem continued four months alongside daily fierce fighting between the two sides.
The Muslim historian, al Tabary, has described the then prevailing situation around Jerusalem, saying: “ When the Romans realized that Abu Obeidah was unswayable…they proposed to surrender to the Prince of the Faithful, Omar Ben Al-Khattab…Abu Obeidah agreed.” He wrote to the Caliph Omar: “ In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful, to Abdullah Omar, the Prince of the Faithful, from Abu Obeidah Ben Al Jarrah…we put up to the people of Eliya, they thought that in facing us they would be relieved, but God troubled them; they grew more bottlenecked, emaciated and humiliated. Realizing their predicament, they asked for the Prince of the Faithful to be the trusted and the writer [of their surrender’s terms]…. knowing that they accepted to pay tribute and have the same non-Muslims’ guarantees applicable to them…. if you see coming here do so as it is recompensed [by God]…God bless you.”
Posted on: 2002
By Sami Rami
The late Faisal Abd al-Qader Husseini, as the head of the Orient House in East Jerusalem–occupied by Israel in June 1967–and PLO Executive Member in charge of Jerusalem File, used to tell foreign dignitaries who visited him at his office in
the Orient House– which Israel reoccupied on orders from Sharon in the summer of 2001– that Israel should ultimately accept the fact that undivided Jerusalem is the capital of two states: East Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine, and West Jerusalem—occupied by Israel in 1948 outside the UN partition plan of November 29, 1947—as Israel’s capital.
Husseini, more often reminded his visitors, including Israeli peace groups, that Arabs accounted for 70 percent of West Jerusalem’s property. The Arab residential quarters of Qatamon, Talbieh, Baqa’a, and the villages of Ein Karem, El Malha, and DeirYassin. Arabs remember the later village as the ground of a horrible and premeditated Zionist massacre against civilian population. While Abd al-Qader Husseini was battling successfully the Haganah at the Castel, eighty Zionist terrorists from Irgun and Stern Gang, on orders from Menachem Begin, attacked in April 9,48 the village of Deir Yassin killing in cold blood at least 100 Arabs (reports at the time said as many as 250), including children and pregnant women. The gruesome massacre of Deir Yassin was widely publicized intentionally by the Zionists, causing a wave of unprecedented panic and demoralization to spread through Arab Palestine. About 60,000 Palestinians fled the western section of the City of Jerusalem.
But four days later Arabs retaliated. Palestinian irregulars ambushed Haganah escorted convoy to the Hadassah Hospital; 39 Jews and 6 Palestinians were killed.
Accordingly, the British authority in Palestine, and Jerusalem in particular, had totally collapsed. And on May 14 Sir Alan Cunningham, the British High Commissioner, left Jerusalem for the last time, and the mandate was terminated.
On May 16,1948 King Abdullah, overriding Brigadier Glubb (Pasha), the British commander of the Arab Legion, ordered the Arab Legion back to Jerusalem. The next day, he telegraphed to the UN Secretary General:
We were compelled to enter Palestine to protect unarmed Arabs against massacres similar to those of Deir Yassin. We are aware of our national duty towards Palestine in general and Jerusalem in particular and also Nazareth and Bethlehem. Be sure that we shall be very considerate in connection with Jews in Palestine while maintaining at the same time the full right of the Arabs in Palestine. Zionism did not react to our offers made before the entry of our armed forces.
At 11:30 a.m. on May 17, Glubb was ordered by King Abdullah to “ advance towards Jerusalem from the direction of Ramallah”. As a matter of fact, Jerusalem was the area in which the King turned down all British and Zionist attempts for reaching a compromise on its Arab identity.
A cease-fire agreement came into effect on November 30, 1948 giving the first acknowledgement of the de facto division of Jerusalem. An Armistice Agreement was formalized on April 3, 1949, but considered at the international level to have had no legal effect on the UN partition plan of November 29, 1947 under which Jerusalem and its surrounding villages were envisioned as acorpus separatum.
According to the final report of the UN Conciliation Commission (UNCCP) Land Expert, the total area of Jerusalem Sub district (excluding Hebron and Ramallah) was estimated at 296,943 dunums of which 222,482 (74.59%) dunums owned by Arabs. The remaining was considered to be Government, public, and Jewish properties. The figures of UNCCP were not specific on Arab and Jewish properties of West Jerusalem, which came under Israeli control in 1948. The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) “ Village Statistics 1945” estimated the total area of Jerusalem, prior to 1948, at 20,790 metric dunums, of which 16,261 dunums (80.5 %) fell in 1948 under Israeli occupation.
Posted on: Jul 2004
By Khalid Amayreh
Israel’s Public Security Minister Tzahi Hanegbi has said hardline Jewish groups may be planning to carry out attacks on the two most sacred Islamic shrines in occupied East Jerusalem.
Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock are collectively known as al-Haram al-Sharif (Noble Sanctuary). Originally built in CE711 (AD711), al-Aqsa Mosque is Islam’s third holiest place, after the two Holy Mosques in Saudi Arabia.
Hanegbi said in a TV interview at the weekend that the goal of the potential attackers would be to thwart the Israeli plan for unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip.
But a former leader of an armed Jewish group that sought to bomb al-Aqsa Mosque in the late 1970s, told Israeli state-run radio on Sunday the purpose of any “new action” would not have anything to do with the “disengagement plan”.
The Israeli daily Haaretz on Sunday quoted officials in the domestic intelligence service, Shin Beth, as saying there was a possibility of Jewish hardliners trying to destroy al-Aqsa Mosque by crashing a radio-controlled plane into it.
There are numerous Millenarian Jewish groups in Israel dedicated to the destruction of the mosque to facilitate the “rebuilding” of the “Third Temple” on the site.
Messianic Jews believe the destruction of the mosque and construction of the temple would expedite the appearance of a Jewish messiah, or redeemer, who would rule the world from Jerusalem and bring about the salvation of the Jewish people.
Ultimate red line
Muslim leaders in Palestine have warned of “unforeseeable consequences” and “horrible repercussions” all over the world in case “anything happened to al-Aqsa Mosque”.
“This is the ultimate red line. If Jewish terrorists embarked on such an act of sheer madness, they would trigger huge fires all over the world … . Only God knows how the fires would be extinguished,” said Kamal al-Khatib, deputy head of Israel’s powerful Islamic Movement.
Speaking to Aljazeera.net he said an attack on al-Aqsa Mosque would be viewed as an appalling provocation by the world’s Muslim population.
“If such a thing happened, God forbid, it would galvanise the world’s 1.2 billion Muslims, and there would be a backlash and anger all over the world.”
Al-Khatib said the Islamic Movement in Israel remained vigilant against the risk of an attack on the Islamic holy places in Jerusalem.
“We send thousands of people to the Haram al-Sharif every day to make up for the barring by Israel of our people from the West Bank and Gaza Strip from accessing the mosque … and we see to it that there are no loopholes in security arrangements,” he said.
Security pretext?
The highest-ranking Muslim cleric in East Jerusalem, Shaikh Ikrama Sabri, says Jewish extremists are capable of doing the unthinkable.
“We know quite well that they are conniving and coordinating their plans with the Israeli security establishment,” he claimed.
“We also know that the Israeli state uses the extremists as a supplemental tool to achieve its thinly disguised goals, including the destruction of Islam’s holy places in Jerusalem.”
But in the present contest, Sabri cautioned, Israel may be trying to gain a “foothold” inside al-Haram al-Sharif compound under the pretext of “ensuring the security of the place”.
He said after the 1994 Hebron massacre in which 29 Arab worshippers were killed by a messianic Jewish immigrant from Brooklyn, the Israeli army took over the town’s historic Ibrahimi Mosque and assigned the bulk of the holy site to Jewish settlers.
The “arrangement” then was justified by the Israelis on security grounds – to prevent a repetition of the massacre, Sabri said.
He claimed the Israeli authorities knew the Jewish hardliners individually, but did not take action against them for political reasons.
“Look, the police know them one by one, but the extremists have strong allies and supporters within the government, the Knesset and the security establishment, so much so that it seems as if they are the real rulers of Israel,” Sabri said.
Inspection tours?
The Israeli police currently permit religious Jews to enter al-Aqsa Mosque compound despite strong objection from the Supreme Muslim Council, which is in charge of the administration of the holy place.
Israeli officials, including security chiefs, say Jews have a right to visit the holy place they call Temple Mount just like anybody else.
However, Waqf officials, who are entrusted with the upkeep of the holy sanctuary, say trips by Jews are not simple visits, but in fact “inspection tours” aimed at drawing up destructive designs on al-Haram al-Sharif.
On Sunday, a Jewish rabbi allied with the messianic Gush Emunim movement which advocates the expulsion and extermination of non-Jews in Israel – told the Israeli army radio, Gali Tsahal, he fully supported the destruction of al-Aqsa Mosque.
“This is more than a positive thing – this is a desirable thing, and I am looking forward to seeing these mosques reduced to ruins,” said Yehuda Tzion, who in 1980 headed the underground Jewish group that had planned to bomb al-Aqsa.
Tzion has urged the Israeli government to “send army bulldozers to the site and destroy these buildings once and for all … and if the state is not willing to do so, let other Jews do it”.
One of the messianic Jewish groups that openly calls for the destruction of al-Aqsa is the Temple Mount Faithful, headed by Girshon Solomon.
A few years ago, he told Israeli television, with the golden Dome of the Rock in the background – that: “it is time this pagan edifice ceased to exist”.
Source:
AlJazeera
From The Encyclopedia of the Palestine Problem
By Issa Nakhleh
In 1516 the conquered Palestine, and the country was incorporated in the dominions of the Ottoman Empire. Local governors were appointed from Constantinople, to which annual revenues were sent.
Various public works were undertaken in Palestine, such as the rebuilding of the walls of Jerusalem by Suleiman the Magnificent in 1537. Palestine remained under Turkish rule until World War II.
In the early sixteenth century, northern Palestine, as far south as Acre, was temporarily included in the Druse state established by Fakhr ud-Din and set up in defiance of Ottoman authority, but the new state did not last long.
Toward the close of the 18th century Napoleon undertook a campaign in Palestine, capturing Jaffa, Ramle, Lydda, Nazareth and Tiberias in 1798, but his siege of Acre was unsuccessful. In 1831 Mehemet Ali of Egypt intervened in Palestine. Under his son Ibrahim Pasha, Egyptian troops captured Acre, but in 1834 the Palestinians revolted against the Egypticians. By 1840 the Ottoman authority was fully reestablish in Palestine, and the Palestinian played an active role in encouraging the political reforms in the Ottoman Empire of 1876 and 1908.
The territory of Palestine under Ottoman rule was composed of two areas. The Independent Sanjak (district) of Jerusalem was subject to the High Porte in Constantinople. Rhe Sanjak extended from Jaffa to the River Jordan in the East and from the Jordan south to the borders of Egypt. The other area was part of the Willayat (province) of Beirut.
This part was composed of the Sanjak of Balka (Nablus) from Jaffa to Jenin, and the Sanjak of Acre, which extended from Jenin to Naqura.
His Eminence the late Haj Amin Effendi El Husseini, on behalf of the Arab Higher Committee for Palestine, testified on the 12th of January 1937, before the Palestine Royal Commission sent by the British mandatory Power. He explained the position of the Arabs under the Ottoman rule as follows:
Under the Ottoman Regime the Arabs formed an important part of the structure of the Ottoman Empire. It is wrong to say that the Arabs were under the yoke of the Turks and that their uprising and the assistance, which was rendered to them during the Great War, were merely intended to relieve them from such yoke. The fact is that under the Ottoman Constitution provided for one from of government of all Ottoman territories and elements.
The Arabs had a complete share with the Turks in all organs of the State, civil as well as military. There were Arabs who held the high office of Prime Minister and Ministers, Commanders of Divisions and Ambassadors…. There were Arab ambassadors, provincial and district governors. There were two Parliaments, two Constitutions. One was made in the early days of the reign of Sultan Abdul Hamid, in 1876, and the other was made after the grant of the Constitution in 1908…but even in the Parliament under the first Constitution there were Arab representatives. In the first Parliament, you find the President of the Council of the House of Representatives was a Deputy from Jerusalem, Yusif Dia Pasha Al Khalidi. Moreover, the administration of Arab territories was entrusted to elected Administrative Councils. Those Councils were elected and existed in the provinces, districts, and sub-districts.
Those Councils were vested with extensive powers in all matters relating to administration, finance, education, and development, but, irrespective of all this, the Arabs were aspiring to he attainment of complete national independence and the regaining of the distinguished position which the Arab peoples had held in the past centuries, when the Arab peoples made the greatest contribution to civilization and to every phase of human activity.
Posted on: 1999
By Dr. Hala Fattah
Dr. Theodore Herzl, the founder of Political Zionism
There is a certain school of thought among Zionist historians that detects anti-Semitic overtones in every action or utterance of Muslim rulers of the Middle East. Sultan Abdul-Hamid II’s famous refusal to allow Dr. Theodore Herzl, the founder of Political Zionism, to settle Palestine with Jewish colonists is a case in point. Herzl probably thought that he was offering the Sultan a bargain, knowing that the Sultan’s dearest wish was to rescue the empire from the indebtedness it had fallen into as a result of easy European loans.
Herzl offered to buy up and then turn over the Ottoman Debt to the Sultan’s government in return for an Imperial Charter for the Colonization of Palestine by the Jewish people. For having refused, the Sultan is painted in the lurid colors of the Muslim bigot and presented as the first of a long series of Jewish-hating rulers particularly characteristic of the Muslim Middle East.
And yet, this is far from the truth. The fact that Jews native to the Ottoman empire had long coexisted and made contributions to Ottoman culture is totally ignored, although it was a reality recorded in many of the archives of the provinces of the Ottoman empire. Ottoman Jerusalem, for instance, was, and is still famous for the coexistence of many different ethnic, religious and confessional groups often living together cheek by jowl.
The reasons for Abdul-Hamid II’s decision not to initiate the beginnings of Jewish political settlement in Palestine had to do with the internal or foreign affairs of the empire, and were not based on racial or ethnic bias. At a time when the multinational Ottoman empire was being torn apart by secessionist movements in the Balkans and East Anatolia, the Turkish government feared the creation of yet another nationality problem . The Sultan’s government also recognized that the venture would sow the seeds for Jewish expansionism that might affect negatively other Ottoman provinces. Finally, the Great Powers posed as the protectors of religious minorities in the empire and the Sultan did not want to provide them with further advantage. As a result , the Ottomans devised a series of entry restrictions that prohibited all foreign Jews, with the exception of pilgrims, from visiting Palestine. Through active European involvement, however, European Jews were granted official protection as bona-fide minorities, thereby increasing the number of “native” Jews in Palestine, and thereby flouting Ottoman laws.
In Jerusalem, the governor, Ali Ekrem Bey was hard put to stem the tide of Jewish immigration and often laid the blame for the phenomenal rise of Jewish migrants at the door of foreign Consuls who offered protection to all minorities . The governor realized that laws were not enough to prevent the sale of land to foreign Jewish settlers because many lands had been acquired by private agreements and the connivance of corrupt officials. Moreover, the local Sephardi community was becoming susceptible to “the winds of change” and falling under the influence of Zionist ideas. Although he actively fought against these tendencies , in the end Ali Ekrem Bey was forced to conclude that the foreign Consuls had usurped a large role in the conduct of minority relations with the Ottoman state. Suffice it to say that largely as a result of that foreign interference, by 1908 when Sultan Abdul-Hamid II’s rule collapsed, it was estimated that the Jewish population of Palestine had risen to 80,000, three times its number in 1882, when the first entry restrictions were imposed. And Jews had acquired some 156 square miles of land, setting up 26 colonies.
Of Iraqi origin, Dr. Hala Fattah is a historian of the Arab provinces of the Ottoman empire, especially Iraq. She is the author of The Politics of Regional Trade of Iraq, Arabia and the Gulf, 1745-1900 (S.U.N.Y Press, 1996). Presently, she is an Independent Scholar.
References
Oke, Mim Kemal, “The Ottoman Empire, Zionism and the Question of Palestine” in International Journal of Middle East Studies, vol.14, 1982.
Posted on: 1999
By Dr. Hala Fattah
Although the opening up of the Ottoman archives to scholars has resulted in the revision of many flawed arguments on Ottoman history, the remarkable thing is that many biases remain in the literature. 
Among the most persistent have been the periodic attempts to portray the empire as inherently anti-Christian and, of course, anti-Jewish. The presumption is that because the Ottomans upheld Islam as the state religion, and fought against Christian states to expand their territories, they automatically discriminated against other faiths in the empire.
And yet, archival history tells a different story. Amnon Cohen’s article on Muslim policies with regard to the Christian community of 16th century Jerusalem explores the complexity of relations between state and religion without resort to simplistic arguments.
Although Christians were not considered as equal to Muslims in many instances, the state never “prevented any of the Christian communities from exercising their historically acknowledged rights of free passage into Jerusalem” nor interfered in any way with their religious conduct.
Moreover, even though several incidents throughout this period gravely affected this relationship, Cohen puts them into perspective. He concludes that, overall, the expulsion of the Franciscan monks from Mt. Zion in 1551, Muslim attempts to legally seize parts of the Monastery of the Cross and threats to the Coptic monastery in Jerusalem were not so much the work of official policy as they were the actions of Muslim “zealots”.
In any case, Istanbul reimbursed the monks’ loss by providing them with other properties on which to build monasteries. The important thing is that these episodes never formed part of Ottoman ideology. Quite to the contrary, the state continued to treat all its citizens with justice and to uphold their rights throughout the Ottoman period, even though the empire itself was constantly prey to anti-Muslim prejudice (and potential dismemberment) from Christian Europe.
Further evidence that the Ottoman empire kept to its contract with ahl al-kitab (people of the Book) is provided in Ottoman church documents. They reveal the systematic building, renovation and upkeep of churches and monasteries in Jerusalem and beyond. This is apparent even in times of inter-communal friction.
For instance, an interesting phenomenon is the permission granted to the Armenian Catholic community in Jerusalem in 1887 to build a church on property close to a Muslim mystic fellowship, even though the Armenian Catholics in Jerusalem numbered but four houses comprising 22 men and women. What is extraordinary about the incident is that this permission was given to the Armenians of Jerusalem at about the same time as state elements were massacring Armenians in Anatolia.
In another instance, when the Greek Orthodox community asked the Porte for allowance to renovate their church in 1881, they were automatically allowed to do so. Even on the rare occasions when Istanbul initially refused permission, as it did in 1894 when the 30-odd Greek Catholic rite wanted to erect a second church in Jerusalem (on property already inhabited by Muslims), eventually official consent was given for a second church to be built.
Significantly, all permission was granted based on the same formula: that the governor of Jerusalem ascertain that the property on which the churches would be built belonged to the community in question, that it did not infringe on Muslim property, and most important of all, that no force would be used to extract contributions from community members to build the churches.
Of Iraqi origin, Dr. Hala Fattah is a historian of the Arab provinces of the Ottoman empire, especially Iraq. She is the author of The Politics of Regional Trade of Iraq, Arabia and the Gulf, 1745-1900 (S.U.N.Y Press, 1996). Presently, she is an Independent Scholar.
References:
Abu-Husayn, Abdul-Rahim and Saadawi, Salih eds., Al-kana’is al-arabiyya fi al-sijjil al-kanasi al-uthmani, 1868-1922 (Arab Churches in Ottoman Church Documents, 1868-1922), Amman : Royal Institute for Interfaith Studies, 1998.
Cohen, Amnon, “The Ottoman Approach to Christians and Christianity in Sixteenth Century Jerusalem”, Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations, vol.7, no.2, June 1996.
More...
risus enim amet nibh faucibus ante purus mollis quam, lobortis tempus donec urna ornare duis nisi curae ante sit vitae, nisl vivamus cubilia fringilla ligula faucibus nam vestibulum diam. mattis sollicitudin nam phasellus in magna metus, mollis est porta venenatis phasellus curabitur gravida, curae non congue in nisi.
Suscipit sapien vivamus eu neque egestas nulla aliquam risus ad mattis elementum, tincidunt sociosqu nunc nisi dictumst volutpat feugiat euismod lobortis curabitur. consectetur aenean lacinia auctor habitant enim sem ligula lacinia himenaeos, velit ullamcorper suspendisse ante leo magna ad conubia egestas donec, facilisis taciti placerat inceptos arcu id imperdiet curabitur.
Cursus lacinia fusce ut mi pretium convallis nulla turpis, taciti facilisis conubia consequat est aliquam eu fermentum convallis, at fermentum at tortor integer nisl vestibulum. ante aenean scelerisque tellus faucibus facilisis sagittis augue donec, sapien morbi quis cursus dui platea etiam enim nisl, curae elementum posuere eget habitasse lobortis nostra.