THE MEANING OF HEBRON
A Modest Proposal

By Janet M. Powers

 

Belatedly, the US public has learned that the twelve Israelis killed and fourteen injured in the recent ambush in Hebron were all soldiers, police, or security guards. In other words, they were combat casualties. Remarkably, the 200 settlers who went to pray at a site sacred to both Jews and Arabs were not assaulted. The ambush occurred after the settlers had passed by on their way home from worship. The gunmen (who were later killed) were careful not to target civilians.

Overlooking Hebron, a town of 130,000 Arabs, is a Jewish settlement of 450 people. Israelis and Palestinians both joke that the number of armed men required to guard these setters is greater than the number of people living in the settlement. Nowhere is the absurdity of the Israeli government's seizure of land, and construction of settlements high above Arab towns and villages, more obvious. The cost to Israel in shekels and human lives is insanely high.

Hebron is also the site of ancient caves where Palestinians have lived since 1830 following a pastoral life of sheep-herding and agriculture. During the last three years, the Israeli government has systematically tried to expel 750 people from their homes, destroying the dwellings built onto the caves, plugging up wells, and tearing up crops. In 1994, Hebron was the scene of a true massacre when a Brooklyn-born Jewish doctor killed sixty Muslims at prayer and wounded 150 others.

Just now in Hebron it is Ramadan, a time when many ordinarily go to the mosque to pray. But the Ibrahimi mosque, the burial place of Abraham, is closed to Muslims. No other mosque in Hebron is permitted to issue the call to prayer. However, that portion of the mosque, seized some years ago by the Israelis, the Ma'arat Ha-Machpela, is open daily to Jews. Ironically, the site is where Isaac and Ishmael came together to mourn their common father. It should be a site of reconciliation rather than conflict.

The situation at Hebron cries out for principled negotiation. Abraham's burial site is sacred to all three Abrahamic religions, although Christians have not claimed rights. Cooperative jurisdiction over the site would guarantee safe passage for all who wish to pray there. Perhaps the keys should be given to Christians, just as keys to the Church of the Nativity were put into the hands of Muslims to end squabbling between Christian sects many centuries ago. This sacred trust has been maintained for more than a thousand years.

If free access were allowed to all religious groups and the safety of worshippers guaranteed, there would be no need for an Israeli settlement so close to Hebron.

Dismantling that housing project, costly in so many ways, would go a long way to easing tension in the area. Instead, Sharon has said he will seize more Palestinian land in order to link four settlements in the area. Never mind that such land seizure is illegal and represents flouting of UN resolutions!

What we see in Hebron is like the Ayodhya mosque conflict in India which continues to generate communal violence. For a number of years, Hindus maintained a small shrine in one corner of the mosque. When the BJP party came to power, they locked out Muslims and encouraged Hindu extremists to dismantle the mosque and build a temple in its place.

Admittedly, sharing a religious site can be difficult, particularly where different styles of worship are involved. Yet assertive peace efforts on the part of religious leaders, with the help of outside mediators, could make a huge difference in both locations. Instead, both the BJP and the Sharon government are using their respective conflicts to fuel further violence.

What do Vajpayee and Sharon have to gain from inciting their people to hatred? In both cases, leaders are building a rationale for increased militancy against their adversaries. Yet inevitably the entire population will suffer if conflict escalates. Unscrupulous leaders who provoke their followers into unjustified violence are the worst sorts of evildoers. Manipulation of information to support that evil is equally unconscionable.

Americans need to question why the word "massacre" was used to describe the deaths of soldiers and border police. American and European church leaders need to do more than deplore the violence between Israelis and Palestinians as they have been doing for the past two years. Real peacemaking is called for at this moment. Plenty of people on both sides would support such an effort.

The possibility is great that cooperative care of holy places could lead to other larger steps toward peace. But if we continue to wring our hands and act as if nothing can be done, the violence will persist and grow, in Hebron, in Ayodhya, and elsewhere. It is time for civilian peacemakers to step forward and assume responsibility for the work that governments have bungled.

An effort uniting clerics from many religious traditions could have a mighty impact on the world's violence, especially that generated by conflict over sacred spaces. Every religion in the world teaches ideals of tolerance and respect for others. Yet the gap between belief and practice, though comforting to deny, grows larger every day. If we are to save each other from hatred, we must find the courage to act on behalf of peace.

 

Janet M. Powers teaches at Gettysburg College and researches the peacebuilding efforts of Palestinian and Israeli women.

Janet M. Powers

Associate Professor of Interdisciplinary Studies
Women's StudiesGlobal Studies Program Coordinator

Gettysburg College
300 N. Washington St.
Gettysburg, PA 17325

 Return to Read List

Return to Cactus48 Home Page