"I feel my heart rising," Kifah said to me as we parked the car near the mountain.
The last time all three of us were together going somewhere with the purpose of documenting it was during the September clashes. The severity of the violence during that period - sparked by the Israeli opening of a tunnel running very near to the Muslim Dome of the Rock - was a very hard one to forget and Abu Ghnaim seemed to be another symbol that Palestinians across the West Bank and Gaza could easily take hold of as they did the tunnel. Since last September, there is always a feeling when Israel announced moves such as this one that trouble is in the air. Actually, before Kifah had spoken, as the car was coming to a halt, I had been feeling a little strange myself. I chuckled.
"It's in my stomach," I said, "It's like I can feel my life moving around it." Kifah laughed that we were both a little freaked out. "You should write that down, man," he says.
I gave Saleem 20 shekels for half the petrol, which he pushes away, saying "later". "There may not be a 'later'," I say, "I don't want to die owing people money!" It wasn't funny but we all laughed anyway and I stopped to take a photo of them both as we made our way towards the site (right).
The mountain gradually came into view in front of us, and it quickly became obvious both why the residents of Beit Sahour and Um Tuba village (who historically own the land) were so angry, and why the media have focused on this particular settlement construction when there are several similar project underway in other areas of the West Bank.
Thickly forested, Jebal Abu Ghnaim is circled by softly rolling Palestinian valleys rising up into the smaller hills surrounding it. Clearly visible from East Jerusalem, Beit Sahour, Beit Jala, and Bethlehem, it is a central and natural landmark and a thankfully unavoidable view for all these surrounding towns. In short, Jebal Abu Ghnaim is beautiful.
One does not have to look far to see a projection of the future. At least five ugly settlements are visible in the area, each one a mass of closely-packed box apartments, ugly-ass water towers and barbed fences, interconnected by wide commuter and bypass roads. As the day was to progress, it would increasingly hit me how outrageous this latest Israeli move was. It would have the effect of a huge industrial plant in the middle of a beach, a daily reminder to the Palestinians surrounding it of the contempt that Israel feels for their rights.
The settlement, on land once declared a "green belt area" by Israel (to prevent Palestinian building), will initially house 35,000 Israeli Jews. Local Palestinian residents lost the last battle to nullify the expropriation of their land in the Israeli High Court of Justice in 4 December 1994. Naturally, things are always done 'legally' here.
You can't just blame the "anti-Oslo" Likud either. You may remember that Rabin was Prime Minister of the post-Oslo Labor government in December 1994 when all of this was in process. Netanyahu - of course - claims some Arabs will be provided with homes here but it seems unlikely. Demolishing Palestinian homes seems to be a far more popular sport for Israeli governments.
Claiming to have Arab interests in mind in Jerusalem is a relatively new tactic in Israeli circles, successfully employed to remove from the international media one of the correct Palestinian accusations of discrimination in the city.
It is obviously a final status talks tactic, as no Israeli government - Labour or Likud - has given a fig for this in the past. Thanks to a Labour-Likud final agreement paper proposed by Labour MK Yossi Beilin and Likud MK Michael Eitan, this was recently admitted in the Israeli press:
Within the framework of the municipal government, the Palestinian residents of Arab neighborhoods in Jerusalem will receive a status that will allow them to share in the responsibility of the administration of their lives in the city."
Jerusalem Post, "Highlights of Beilin-Eitan final agreement position paper", p12, 27 January 1997.
There have been other direct admissions to Israeli de-development of East Jerusalem, but this one was interesting as it related specifically to the final status and an Israeli vision of Palestinians being given a minor role in the city as long as it permits administration of their lives only.
The Abu Ghnaim land, occupied in 1967, also contains some sites of significance to local Christians, including St. Theodore's Well, Byzantine and Georgian monasteries, and strong associations with St. Lucas and St. Marinus. It's also near Bethlehem.
These are very significant points. Why? Let's not reinvent the wheel. Let's look at some of the material from ARIJ's website, listed in the related website links below:
The closeness of Abu Ghnaim mountain to the Christian traditional site of the Shepherd's Fields necessitates that the forested mountain be left in tact [sic] so as to preserve the landscape of this biblical setting. The removal of the trees and replacing them with modern western-style houses and industrial parks will undoubtedly alter the character of the area adjacent to the Shepherd's Fields.
The Har Homa settlement will ensure that Israel deprives the Palestinians of Bethlehem of their main source of income: tourism. The Har Homa project includes the building of a tourist village, Bethlehem Israel, to attract the Christian tourists who come to visit the Church of Nativity in Bethlehem. These pilgrims coming on Israeli tours, who are mostly guided by Israeli tour guides, will be taken to the Har Homa tourist village without being given the opportunity to shop in Bethlehem or pray with the local Palestinian Christians. For this purpose, Israel is working hard to complete the Har Homa settlement before the year 2000. In 2000, it is expected that far over 5 million Christians from all over the world will visit Bethlehem to celebrate with the local Palestinian Christians in Bethlehem, the 2000th anniversary of Christianity and the Christ.
The Byzantine monastery on the top of Abu Ghnaim mountains would remain on site. This monastery would become a showpiece, exploited for tourist revenue in the same fashion as the Byzantine Church which is located in the middle of Ma'ale Adumim settlement. Thus, Israel, rather than the local Christian community, would benefit from the tourist development of these sites.
Now this makes sense.