On Yom Kippur 1973, I sat singing with friends in my Jerusalem apartment, marveling at the dramatic silence that permeated the city that day. Suddenly, without warning, the air-raid sirens began to wail and the Yom Kippur War had begun. This year, the High Holy Days have again been marred by violence — a street war rather than a declared war. The scale is different, but an unsettled feeling persists during this period of reflection.
It is hard to sit more than 5,000 miles away from the center of a volcano and understand all the forces at work each time it erupts. What seems clear, however, is that the most recent eruption of the Mount Moriah volcano — which hopefully will have ebbed by the time this article appears — would not have taken place without the provocative visit to the Temple Mount by Ariel Sharon, head of the Likud Party.
Questions will no doubt loom in Israel about who authorized the use of state police forces to accompany Sharon, universally despised in the Arab world as the man they hold responsible for the massacre of hundreds of Palestinians at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in 1982. (Israel’s Kahan Commission recommended that then-Defense Minister Sharon be removed from office as a result of his failure to prevent the massacres by the Phalange extremists.) At best, permitting Sharon to visit the site revered by Jews as the Temple Mount and by Muslims as the place from which Muhammad ascended to heaven appears to be a major lapse in judgment.
Sharon may have the right, along with others, to walk the grounds of a sacred site at times that do not conflict with Muslim prayers. But, as a walking invitation to incitement — which Sharon has proven to be — the exercise of that right requires too high a price to be paid by the rest of Israeli society. Israel should have put its state interests ahead of his — and not permitted the visit.
Yet, the ease with which the Palestinian people resort to full-scale violence is deeply disturbing. The latest eruption raises very difficult questions about the will of the Palestinian leadership to end the conflict. Had Sharon not visited the Temple Mount on that particular day, there could have been countless other encounters that could have been labeled provocations by the Palestinians and sparked riots.
An incident at a checkpoint; a fight between a Jewish settler and a Palestinian; a traffic accident. While this turn toward violence may genuinely be tied to the level of pent-up frustration in the Palestinian world, the Palestinian leadership deserves much of the blame for failing to prepare its people for peace.
Just a few weeks ago, the possibility of peace and an internationally recognized Palestinian state was in the grasp of the Palestinians. Under Prime Minister Ehud Barak’s leadership, Israel displayed greater courage and flexibility on the key issues than ever before, and still Chairman Yasser Arafat and his advisers could not find a way to say yes. The Palestinians vetoed pragmatism at Camp David. The consistent unwillingness of Arafat to redefine the Palestinian vision in a way that comes to terms with and accepts the reality of coexistence with the state of Israel is what maintains the constant “ready to be provoked” state among the Palestinian people.
Even if Arafat accepts the reality of Israel, he appears unwilling — more than unable — to come to terms with the responsibility that comes with such acceptance. It is his responsibility to prepare the Palestinian people for peace. One can be an unequivocal supporter of the peace process and still recognize how little Arafat has done to create a constructive climate among the Palestinians regarding Israel.
Much has been made of Palestinian textbooks’ treatment (or non-treatment of Israel) and Arafat’s shocking denial of any historical Jewish attachment to the Temple Mount, which he evidently tried to suggest at Camp David. But, these are just indications of how little has been done to prepare the Palestinians for an end to the conflict. This absence of will may stem from Arafat’s ambivalence toward abandoning the use of violence as a tool to achieve greater concessions.
It is this fatal flaw in Palestinian leadership that should be the primary focus of the world’s attention, not the cynical visit on the Temple Mount of an Israeli demagogue who unfortunately knows all too well how to ignite a riot that he believes might serve his ends. For peace to be possible, provocations have to become opportunities for a society’s leaders to assert true leadership.
The Palestinian people have a right to protest when they believe they have been wronged by Israel, as they surely must with Sharon’s defilement of a setting sacred to both Jews and Muslims. But the Palestinian leadership must be held accountable for determining the boundaries of acceptable and civil protest.
Otherwise, the prospects for peace will indeed fade.
On Yom Kippur, Jews throughout the world will re-enact the dramatic service of the Kohen Gadol, the high priest, who entered the Holy of Holies in Jerusalem’s ancient Temple to offer the confessional prayers on behalf of the community. The splendor of the moment is described as follows: “How glorious the Kohen Gadol emerging from the Holy of Holies! He was like the morning star appearing through the clouds, or like the moon when it is full, like the sun reflecting on God’s Temple…”
A dark cloud now hangs over the site of the ancient Temple. It requires human will to lift it.