2010
DOI: 10.3167/isf.2010.250108
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Can the Conflict over the Temple Mount/Haram Be Solved?

Abstract: Th e issue of control over the Temple Mount/Haram al Sharif is perhaps the most diffi cult of all the issues in the Israeli-Palestinian confl ict to solve. Aft er presenting an analysis of the history of the confl ict over the site-holy to both Jews and Moslems-this article argues that only the internationalization of the Temple Mount/ Haram al Sharif, an idea fi rst suggested by David Ben-Gurion in 1937, will remove the issue as an element in the Israel-Palestinian and Arab-Israeli confl icts. Otherwise, "hol… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

1
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 10 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…From the Israeli side, there were complaints about continuing anti-Israeli incitement in the Palestinian media; Palestinian refusal to recognize that Jewish temples once stood in Jerusalem (itself a hotly contested issue, and one not specifically mentioned in Kerry’s negotiations framework (Freedman 2010); and constant Palestinian emphasis on the “Right of Return” of Palestinians exiled in 1948, which would inundate Israel with millions of Palestinian refugees and put into question the existence of Israel as a Jewish state. Whether Kerry can overcome all of these problems in the next two months, if only to get both sides to agree to a “framework” for continuing negotiations after the nine-month period of direct negotiation ends, is a very open question even though both Israelis and Palestinians would have the right to express their reservations about the framework.…”
Section: The Israeli–palestinian Peace Processmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From the Israeli side, there were complaints about continuing anti-Israeli incitement in the Palestinian media; Palestinian refusal to recognize that Jewish temples once stood in Jerusalem (itself a hotly contested issue, and one not specifically mentioned in Kerry’s negotiations framework (Freedman 2010); and constant Palestinian emphasis on the “Right of Return” of Palestinians exiled in 1948, which would inundate Israel with millions of Palestinian refugees and put into question the existence of Israel as a Jewish state. Whether Kerry can overcome all of these problems in the next two months, if only to get both sides to agree to a “framework” for continuing negotiations after the nine-month period of direct negotiation ends, is a very open question even though both Israelis and Palestinians would have the right to express their reservations about the framework.…”
Section: The Israeli–palestinian Peace Processmentioning
confidence: 99%