Latest news with #WesternWall
The Guardian
3 days ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
Israel's move to take over Gaza looks likely to be open-ended occupation
One of Israel's most celebrated images is David Rubinger's photograph of a trio of paratroopers at the newly captured Western Wall in 1967, an event that would mark the beginning of the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip. You see it when arriving at Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion airport. It has been used to illustrate the Israel Defense Forces' 'values' page, and appears endlessly in the Hebrew media and on pro-Israel sites. It is ironic that at the end of his life the central figure in the picture, Yitzhak Yifat, rejected at least some of the photograph's meaning. Speaking to the Guardian in 2017, with the benefit of five decades of hindsight, he reflected on that conquest. 'I can say that the results of the war were bad. We realised that we had conquered another people. A whole people. And now it seems we cannot now get to a true peace, a real peace,' he said. What was true then remains true today, as Israel's security cabinet has authorised the full occupation once again of Gaza, beginning with Gaza City. While Benjamin Netanyahu has suggested it will be required until Hamas can be replaced, the international community should consider the strong likelihood that Israel will maintain an open-ended control of all of Gaza – a recipe, say critics, for perpetual war. And although the statement from Netanyahu's office describing the decision and its aims does not include the word 'occupation' – with all the international legal obligations that would entail – no one should be in any doubt that this is what is envisaged. Netanyahu's history in politics and diplomacy is one of endless excuses for why Israel should never meet the commitments it made in the Oslo peace process towards real self-determination and a Palestinian state, describing endlessly over the years the lack of a 'partner for peace' or claiming that any Palestinian state would be a threat to Israel. In practical terms, Israel's decision to seize full control of Gaza appears as reckless as it is delusional and inhuman, not least the notion that Israel will maintain control until the 'establishment of an alternative civil administration that is neither Hamas nor the Palestinian Authority'. As it currently stands, that alternative remains a fiction of Netanyahu's imagination. What will seem more plausible for many will be the far-right finance minister Bezalel Smotrich's unpalatable parsing of the decision on Friday. 'We are erasing the Palestinian state,' he declared, 'first in action and then officially'. In financial terms, as Israeli media have pointed out, the move is likely to place another huge financial burden on a country that has been haemorrhaging money during more than two years of conflict in theatres from Lebanon to Syria, Iran, Yemen and Gaza. Speaking to the rightwing Israel Hayom newspaper this week, Ram Aminach, an expert in Israel's military economics, suggested the cost of taking Gaza under full control could run to almost $6bn in the coming months, with 'incomprehensible costs' associated with sustaining a Palestinian population of 2 million people in a shattered territory. 'Look at the international pressure Israel faces today and multiply that by five, at the least,' he said. 'To ease that pressure, we'll need to take care of the population in Gaza. No international player is going to help pay for that, not while Israel is seen the way it is right now.' And there is an even bigger question: whether Israel has the resources to maintain an occupation that may be long-term. Envisaged, according to briefings to Israeli journalists, as involving five divisions in an operation lasting five to six months, it assumes that the IDF is capable of achieving more than it has in two and a half years of war in which it has been forced to launch multiple operations in areas where it has claimed Hamas was defeated only to see fighters return. Nor is the recent history of military occupations encouraging, not least the US and British experience of insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan. That appears, at least in part, to have been in the mind of the IDF's chief of staff, Eyal Zamir, when he made clear his opposition to the plan, suggesting it would lead to the death of the remaining Israeli hostages and greater risk to soldiers in an already exhausted Israeli military from improvised explosive devices. While Zamir has expressed his opposition in private to Netanyahu, others have made the same points publicly, among them the Israeli opposition leader, Yair Lapid, who described the decision as a 'disaster that will lead to many more disasters'. Charging that Netanyahu had been dragged into the decision by his far-right allies who have campaigned for Jewish settlement in Gaza, he described the plan as 'a move that will kill the hostages and many soldiers, will cost Israeli taxpayers tens of billions and will destroy Israel's diplomatic relations'. 'This is exactly what Hamas wanted: for Israel to end up stuck in Gaza without a goal, in a useless occupation, the point of which no one understands,' Lapid said. All of which leaves what will be regarded by many in the international community as the most glaringly problematic issue. While the IDF controls 75% of Gaza, the remaining 25% of territory where the new Netanyahu offensive will be focused is where 80% of Gaza's population has been displaced to. How Israel plans to achieve its full control without a massive increase in civilian deaths in an already starving and desperate Palestinian population is chillingly undescribed. Multiple mass fatality incidents around the Israeli- and US-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation's food distribution sites – where, according to the UN and other aid organisations, Israeli soldiers have killed hundreds of aid seekers – suggests that the IDF should not be counted on to behave humanely when confronted by those civilians. Keir Starmer, the UK prime minister, said on Friday: 'The Israeli government's decision to further escalate its offensive in Gaza is wrong and we urge it to reconsider immediately. This action will do nothing to bring an end to this conflict or to help secure the release of the hostages. It will only bring more bloodshed.'
The Guardian
3 days ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
Israel's move to take over Gaza looks likely to be open-ended occupation
One of Israel's most celebrated images is David Rubinger's photograph of a trio of paratroopers at the newly captured Western Wall in 1967, an event that would mark the beginning of the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip. You see it arriving at Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion airport. It has been used to illustrate the Israel Defense Forces' 'values' page, and appears endlessly in the Hebrew media and on pro-Israel sites. It is ironic that at the end of his life the central figure in the picture, Yitzhak Yifat, rejected at least some of the photograph's meaning. Speaking to the Guardian in 2017, with the benefit of five decades of hindsight, he reflected on that conquest. 'I can say that the results of the war were bad. We realised that we had conquered another people. A whole people. And now it seems we cannot now get to a true peace, a real peace,' he said. What was true then remains true today, as Israel's security cabinet has authorised the full occupation once again of Gaza, beginning with Gaza City. While Benjamin Netanyahu has suggested it will be required until Hamas can be replaced, the international community should consider the strong likelihood that Israel will maintain an open-ended control of all of Gaza – a recipe, say critics, for perpetual war. And although the statement from Netanyahu's office describing the decision and its aims is absent the word 'occupation' – with all the international legal obligations that would entail – no one should be in any doubt that this is what is envisaged Netanyahu's history in politics and diplomacy is one of endless excuses for why Israel should never meet the commitments it made in the Oslo peace process towards real self-determination and a Palestinian state, describing endlessly over the years the lack of a 'partner for peace' or claiming that any Palestinian state would be a threat to Israel. In practical terms, Israel's decision to seize full control of Gaza appears as reckless as it is delusional and inhuman, not least the notion that Israel will maintain control until the 'establishment of an alternative civil administration that is neither Hamas nor the Palestinian Authority'. As it currently stands, that alternative remains a fiction of Netanyahu's imagination. What will seem more plausible for many will be the far-right finance minister Bezalel Smotrich's unpalatable parsing of the decision on Friday. 'We are erasing the Palestinian state,' he declared, 'first in action and then officially.' In financial terms, as Israeli media have pointed out, the move is likely to place another huge financial burden on a country that has been haemorrhaging money during more than two years of conflict in theatres from Lebanon to Syria, Iran, Yemen and Gaza. Speaking to the rightwing Israel Hayom newspaper this week, Ram Aminach, an expert in Israel's military economics, suggested that the cost of taking Gaza under full control could run to almost $6bn in the coming months, with 'incomprehensible costs' associated with sustaining a Palestinian population of 2 million people in a shattered territory. 'Look at the international pressure Israel faces today and multiply that by five, at the least,' he said. 'To ease that pressure, we'll need to take care of the population in Gaza. No international player is going to help pay for that, not while Israel is seen the way it is right now.' And there is an even bigger question: whether Israel has the resources to maintain an occupation that may be long-term. Envisaged, according to briefings to Israeli journalists, as involving five divisions in an operation lasting five to six months, it assumes that the IDF is capable of achieving more than it has in two and a half years of war in which it has been forced to launch multiple operations in areas where it has claimed Hamas was defeated only to see fighters return. Nor is the recent history of military occupations encouraging, not least the US and British experience of insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan. That appears, at least in part, to have been in the mind of the IDF's chief of staff, Eyal Zamir, when he made clear his opposition to the plan, suggesting it would lead to the death of the remaining Israeli hostages and greater risk to soldiers in an already exhausted Israeli military from IEDs. While Zamir has expressed his opposition in private to Netanyahu, others have made the same points publicly, among them the Israeli opposition leader, Yair Lapid, who described the decision as a 'disaster that will lead to many more disasters'. Charging that Netanyahu had been dragged into the decision by his far-right allies who have campaigned for Jewish settlement in Gaza, he described the plan as 'a move that will kill the hostages and many soldiers, will cost Israeli taxpayers tens of billions and will destroy Israel's diplomatic relations'. 'This is exactly what Hamas wanted: for Israel to end up stuck in Gaza without a goal, in a useless occupation, the point of which no one understands,' Lapid said. All of which leaves what will be regarded by many in the international community as the most glaringly problematic issue. While the IDF controls 75% of Gaza, the remaining 25% of territory where the new Netanyahu offensive will be focused is where 80% of Gaza's population has been displaced to. How Israel plans to achieve its full control without a massive increase in civilian deaths in an already starving and desperate Palestinian population is chillingly undescribed. Multiple mass fatality incidents around the Israeli- and US-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation's food distribution sites – where, according to the UN and other aid organisations, Israeli soldiers have killed hundreds of aid seekers – suggests that the IDF should not be counted on to behave humanely when confronted by those civilians. Keir Starmer, the UK prime minister, said on Friday: 'The Israeli government's decision to further escalate its offensive in Gaza is wrong and we urge it to reconsider immediately. This action will do nothing to bring an end to this conflict or to help secure the release of the hostages. It will only bring more bloodshed.'
ABC News
31-07-2025
- Politics
- ABC News
Jewish activists accused of eroding centuries of tradition at Jerusalem's holiest sites
It was just after 7:30am, before the hot summer sun started beating down on Jerusalem, when Yehuda Glick arrived in the Old City. The right-wing rabbi and former politician brimmed with excitement and enthusiasm. He walked through security checkpoints and climbed the wooden and metal ramp leading to one of Jerusalem's holiest sites, shaking hands with Israeli police as he went on his way. "Watch this," he told the ABC, before leaning over the edge of the bridge and yelling at Jews praying at the Western Wall below. "Stop worshipping the Golden Calf," he bellowed, invoking the biblical story of the Israelites idolising a false god, suggesting they should not pray there. "Come and pray on Zion." Yehuda Glick wanted them to join him as he walked into the Temple Mount, which is referred to by Muslims as the Al-Aqsa Mosque. Jews over the centuries have avoided visiting the area on the south-eastern corner of Jerusalem's Old City, because of the ruling of rabbis that has forbidden approaching what is considered the site of the Holy of Holies. Not Mr Glick. He has spent decades pushing to overturn rules about entering the site. "You see how big this place is — it's the size of 20 football stadiums," Mr Glick said. "It's extremely big and there's enough room for everybody." And he is getting his way. "I feel like 2,000 years of Jews on my shoulders who were longing for the privilege, for the honour of standing here," Mr Glick said. With nationalist fervour in Israel growing in the wake of the war in Gaza, and right-wing politicians within the Netanyahu government aggressively pushing a Messianic agenda, people like Yehuda Glick are gaining freedoms on the Temple Mount/Al-Aqsa compound in ways never seen before. It is an extremely provocative move for the Muslim population, and has fuelled accusations that decades-old agreements have been undermined. Palestinian authorities say more than 33,000 Jewish extremists have "invaded" the site since the beginning of 2025. Called the Temple Mount by Jews and Christians and referred to by Muslims as the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound, it is an important holy site for the world's three Abrahamic religions. Jews believe it is the location of two temples — the second of which was destroyed almost 2,000 years ago by the Romans. The temple's Western Wall is considered to be all that remains, and is one of the most significant places of prayer for Jewish people. Christians believe it is the site where Jesus Christ regularly visited and taught. For Muslims, this is where the Prophet Mohammed ascended to heaven, after his night journey from Mecca. At the centre of the Al-Aqsa compound, on the spot where Muslims believe the Prophet Mohammed ascended to heaven, sits the Dome of the Rock. The restrictions on worship at the Temple Mount/Al-Aqsa compound were enshrined in the 1994 peace treaty between Israel and Jordan. In the bilateral agreement that ended the war between the two countries, it said that even though non-Muslims were entitled to visit the site, the right to pray was reserved for Muslims only. The precinct is administered by the Jerusalem Waqf — an organisation appointed and funded by the Jordanian government and King, which managed the site before and after Israel captured the Old City and East Jerusalem in the 1967 war. Since the occupation of East Jerusalem, security of the site has been controlled by Israeli authorities, with police posted at each entrance to the precinct and restricting access to the venue. But the Muslim authorities are concerned about an encroachment that will lead to the division of the site ahead of a full Jewish takeover. "It's a mosque for Muslim prayers only … and not for sharing," a spokesman for the Jerusalem Waqf, Muhammad Al-Ashab, told the ABC. He said the situation had been deteriorating over the past two decades, but there had been a marked change in recent months. Much of that has been driven by Israel's controversial far-right national security minister, Itamar Ben Gvir, who has oversight of the police. Under his watch, restrictions on Jewish worship at the Temple Mount/Al-Aqsa Mosque compound have been relaxed. "This is, of course, against the normal situation or the status quo since 1967, that the Israeli government itself accepted when Jerusalem city and the Al-Aqsa Mosque was occupied," Mr Al-Ashab said. Until 2000, non-Muslims, including Jews, could only visit the holy site by purchasing a ticket from the Waqf. All that changed following the provocative visit of then-Israeli opposition leader Ariel Sharon, surrounded by hundreds of Israeli security personnel — a move that sparked an outburst of violence known as the Al-Aqsa Intifada. Since then, the Muslim authorities have lost, to their dismay, control over the entrance of non-Muslims. They describe the unwanted and uncoordinated visits of Jewish activists as "break-ins" and "raids" accompanied by Israeli police. "We consider incursion into the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque to be a change to the historical and legal situation, the status quo that has existed for a long time," Mr Al-Ashab said. Israeli authorities have also banned some Waqf staff from entering the compound for months at a time, taking issue with their actions within the site. Just last week, the grand mufti of Jerusalem and Palestine, Muhammad Hussein, was detained by Israeli forces and banned from accessing the compound. "[The order] says that my presence in the Al-Aqsa Mosque poses a security threat to the public in the Al-Aqsa Mosque," he said. "This, of course, I reject categorically. "It is illegal for the occupying force to expel the local population … from where they pray or live. This is contrary to humanitarian and international law." The Temple Mount/Al-Aqsa Mosque compound has long been a flashpoint in the relationship between Palestinians and Israelis. Just one example is the fortnight of fighting in 2021 after Israeli police stormed the compound. Tear gas, stun grenades and rubber-coated bullets were fired after Israeli authorities accused Palestinians of throwing rocks. In response, Hamas in Gaza fired rockets into Israel, prompting retaliatory strikes in the occupied territory. In the end, 13 Israelis and 260 Palestinians were killed. Mr Glick survived an assassination attempt in 2014, which he said was prompted by his campaigning. "A gentleman came over to me, said to me: 'You're an enemy of Al-Aqsa'," Mr Glick said. "And he point-blank shot four bullets to the centre of my heart." Israeli police accused Mutaz Hijazi, a Palestinian man who had been a former prisoner and an alleged member of Islamic Jihad, of the attack. Hijazi was shot dead by police, who claimed he opened fire on them when they tried to arrest him at his Jerusalem home — something his family reportedly denied. In the past, hard-line Jews have been arrested for harassing and attacking Muslim worshippers near the compound, while Palestinians have also been arrested in clashes with Jews in the area. When the "status quo" was being enforced, Jews could be detained for mouthing the words of prayers inside the precinct, and prayer cloaks and texts were banned. Religious items remain prohibited, although the ABC saw one man draped in a shawl in the precinct. When the ABC followed Mr Glick to the site, it was clear to see that the situation had changed dramatically — all under the watchful gaze of police officers. "I would say, in the presence of the present minister of National Security, Mr Itamar Ben-Gvir, it's become already official that people pray here, that people dance here, people sing here," Mr Glick said. "There's an effort, a major effort by the Israeli police and by the Israeli authorities to, on the one hand, allow freedom of worship for everybody and at the same time make sure there's no friction." It was clear, however, that "friction" was in the eye of the beholder. The ABC saw police moving on a group of young Palestinians as the Jewish worshippers approached the steps of the Dome of the Rock — not only telling them to get out of the way, but kicking them out of the complex altogether. And for all Mr Glick's rhetoric about peaceful coexistence, Al-Aqsa's Muslim custodians are furious about the changes and argue prayer is being used as a proxy for a takeover of the compound. It is no coincidence that the shift in policy has happened as Itamar Ben-Gvir has gained power and influence within the Netanyahu government. He regularly visits the Temple Mount/Al-Aqsa compound and has publicised his trips on his social media channels. It has inspired others to follow in his footsteps. While police have allowed them to enter the precinct, they have stopped some from taking animals such as goats, used for ritual sacrifice, into the area. Extremists have boasted about their plans for the restoration of a Jewish temple on the site, even going so far as to post AI-generated videos showing the destruction of Al-Aqsa. The Netanyahu government insists the "status quo" remains, but onlookers say the behaviour of police and the conduct of Jewish worshippers has raised questions about that claim. Traditional Jewish leaders believe the Temple Mount is intrinsic to their faith, but they insist people should not pray there. "In each community, in each people, in each group, there are the margins of the society that make very extreme statements," rabbi of the Western Wall Shmuel Rabinovich told the ABC. "I tell them the vast majority of the rabbis of Israel have forbidden the ascension on the Temple Mount; I convey to them this message. "Some of them have other rabbis that have another opinion — it causes me pain." Rabbi Rabinovich said it was against Jewish law, or Halacha, to enter the site — in particular, to approach the Dome of the Rock. But he argued Muslim anger at Jews entering the precinct was not appropriate. "When we came back here [Jerusalem's Old City] in 1967, we opened this place to everyone," he said. "The Western Wall is ours — Muslims can come here, Christians can come here, anyone can come here, if you feel that this place is yours, you don't prevent others from visiting. The fact that the Muslims don't let the Jews pray there does not give them a badge of honour. "Therefore, I believe that it is not the Muslims that should prevent Jews from ascending the Temple Mount. The fact that Jews should not enter the Temple Mount, I think they are forbidden from entering because of religion and because of the Halacha." Despite that assertion, it is rare to see Muslims in the Western Wall plaza. The Palestinian Authority was furious that Mr Glick entered the site, particularly how close he got to the Dome of the Rock, issuing a fiery statement in response. "Glick is considered to be one of the most prominent symbols of religious extremism," the authority's Jerusalem governorate said in a statement. "This raid coincides with a clear escalation witnessed at the Al-Aqsa Mosque," it added, alleging that Jewish weddings had taken place inside the mosque with Israeli police protection. It blamed Mr Ben-Gvir for the situation, saying he had given the "green light" to the escalation. "The number of settlers who have broken into the Al-Aqsa Mosque since the beginning of 2025 has reached about 33,634, in a serious increase in terms of numbers and patterns," the governorate said. It issued a warning that the situation could deteriorate even further in early August, around the Jewish holiday of Tish'a B'Av, which marks the destruction of the Jewish temples.
Al Arabiya
13-06-2025
- Politics
- Al Arabiya
Israel takes name of Iran operation from Bible verse
Israel has called its military operation against Iran 'Rising Lion', taking the name from a biblical verse that promises a victorious future for a powerful Israel. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was photographed on Thursday putting a handwritten note into a crack of Jerusalem's Western Wall, Judaism's holiest prayer site, which in retrospect pointed to the looming strikes on Iran. His office on Friday released a photo of the note, which said 'the people shall rise up as a lion.' The expression comes from verse 23:24 of the Book of Numbers in the Bible: 'Behold, the people shall rise up as a great lion, and lift up himself as a young lion: he shall not lie down until he eat of the prey, and drink the blood of the slain.' This verse is part of the first oracle of Balaam, a non-Israelite prophet and diviner, where he foretells the strength and power of Israel, comparing it to a lion that will not rest until it has satisfied its hunger. Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei called Israel's strikes 'satanic.'
Yahoo
13-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Israel takes name of Iran operation from Bible verse
JERUSALEM (Reuters) -Israel has called its military operation against Iran "Rising Lion", taking the name from a biblical verse that promises a victorious future for a powerful Israel. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was photographed on Thursday putting a handwritten note into a crack of Jerusalem's Western Wall, Judaism's holiest prayer site, which in retrospect pointed to the looming strikes on Iran. His office on Friday released a photo of the note, which said "the people shall rise up as a lion". The expression comes from verse 23:24 of the Book of Numbers in the Bible: "Behold, the people shall rise up as a great lion, and lift up himself as a young lion: he shall not lie down until he eat of the prey, and drink the blood of the slain." This verse is part of the first oracle of Balaam, a non-Israelite prophet and diviner, where he foretells the strength and power of Israel, comparing it to a lion that will not rest until it has satisfied its hunger. Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei called Israel's strikes "satanic".
