Search results

Intro -- Table of Contents -- Chapter 1 : What is the Wall? -- Chapter 2 : The Legal Status of the Wall -- Chapter 3 : The Wall and the Settlements -- Chapter 4 : The Suffering of Palestinians Caused by the Wall -- Chapter 5 : The Separation Wall in Jerusalem (Jerusalem Envelope) -- Chapter 6 : Facing the Wall…Bil'in Case -- Endnotes

AbstractJerusalem city witnessing last touches of constructing the Israeli wall that came as a part of a general strategy aim to separate the city from its periphery. The city, that includes about 400,000 Palestinians considered as the hub of fifty Palestinian communities. This structure is interlinked by complex cultural, social, and economic relationships. This aims to de facto annex vast areas to Israel using different means like land confiscations, colonial activities and finally constructing the wall in order to reach the city "Israelization". Israel claims that Jerusalem is an open city as was declared immediately after 1967. On the ground, since 1967, Israel created different kinds of walls to divide Jerusalem into Palestinian enclaves and Israeli contiguous urban scheme (Hasson, 1996).
This study investigates the impact of Israeli policies on Jerusalem area since 1948. Since then all planning practices were directed to isolate Jerusalem by cutting off all surrounding Arab communities. The aim of the study is to shed light on the hidden agenda of the Israeli planning strategies and its impact on the Palestinian urban structure.
In order to assess the urban settings for the study area, aerial photos were analyzed, field visits, literature and historical review were conducted. The outcome of the study shows that Israeli planning machine in the area was aiming to enlarge "Greater Jerusalem" area by annexing as much land as possible within the city boundary. Another aim was to weaken and segregate the surrounding Palestinian communities in away to make it impossible for these communities to form a center as a Palestinian hub competing the historical hub of Jerusalem.

AbstractThis paper studies the impact of multi‐layered transport exclusion on the mobility and accessibility of Palestinian women in Jerusalem. Ethnic segregation, hostile social climate, poor infrastructure and low levels of public transportation create multifaceted barriers to daily travel throughout the city. This research sheds light on the individual needs and decisions of women in making their travel choices in an exclusionary urban environment. This research is based on eight in‐depth interviews and 38 participants in focus‐group of Palestinian women living in East Jerusalem. It examines their public transport and private car use, in light of physical and psychological barriers. Interviews find that cultural and social pressures and the sense of exclusion and fear pose significant limitations to public transport use and destination choice, alongside poor infrastructure, low service levels and discriminatory planning policies. Many women internalize expectations of violence and exclusionary linguistic and visual cues, which serve as fear‐based barriers for public transport use. Women's responses fall into a number of categories: avoiding West Jerusalem and minimizing travel; adopting private cars as safer and more practical or, at times, accepting and barrelling through fears. Policy implications include both immediate changes to symbology and behaviour of transport personnel, and long term implications about consciously‐inclusive route and infrastructure planning.

This title is published in Open Access with the support of the University of Helsinki. ; This volume is a critical study of recent archaeology in the Western Wall Plaza area, Jerusalem. Considered one of the holiest places on Earth for Jews and Muslims, it is also a place of controversy, where the State marks 'our' remains for preservation and adoration and 'theirs' for silencing. Based on thousands of documents from the Israel Antiquities Authority and other sources, such as protocols of planning committees, readers can explore for the first time this archaeological 'heart of darkness' in East Jerusalem. The book follows a series of unique discoveries, reviewing the approval and execution of development plans and excavations, and the use of the areas once excavation has finished. Who decides what and how to excavate, what to preserve – or 'remove'? Who pays for the archaeology, for what aims? The professional, scientific archaeology of the past happens now: it modifies the present and is modified by it. This book 'excavates' the archaeology of East Jerusalem to reveal its social and political contexts, power structures and ethics. Readers interested in the history, archaeology and politics of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will find this book useful, as well as scholars and students of the history and ethics of Archaeology, Jerusalem, conservation, nationalism, and heritage.

This volume is a critical study of recent archaeology in the Western Wall Plaza area, Jerusalem. Considered one of the holiest places on Earth for Jews and Muslims, it is also a place of controversy, where the State marks 'our' remains for preservation and adoration and 'theirs' for silencing. Based on thousands of documents from the Israel Antiquities Authority and other sources, such as protocols of planning committees, readers can explore for the first time this archaeological 'heart of darkness' in East Jerusalem. The book follows a series of unique discoveries, reviewing the approval and execution of development plans and excavations, and the use of the sites once excavation has finished. Who decides what and how to excavate, what to preserve – or 'remove'? Who pays for the archaeology, for what aims? The professional, scientific archaeology of the past happens now: it modifies the present and is modified by it. This book 'excavates' the archaeology of East Jerusalem to reveal its social and political contexts, power structures and ethics. Readers interested in the history, archaeology and politics of the Israeli– Palestinian conflict will find this book useful, as well as scholars and students of the history and ethics of archaeology, Jerusalem, conservation, nationalism and heritage. ; Peer reviewed

Jerusalem's Temple Mount/al-Haram al-Sharif is the holiest place in the world for Jews, the third holiest place for Muslims and a constant feature in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Yet the gendered dimensions of inter-communal disputes over sacred space in Jerusalem, as well as in other holy places around the world, have been largely neglected, as have women's roles in these site-specific conflicts. An implicit association of women with peaceful politics and syncretic religious practices has obscured the fact that women are often key actors in inter-communal contestation of holy places. This study looks to three contemporary women's movements in and around Jerusalem's Sacred Esplanade: Women for the Temple - a Jewish Orthodox movement for access to Temple Mount; The Murabitat - Muslim women activists devoted to the protection of Al-Aqsa Mosque from Jewish claims; and Women of the Wall - a Jewish feminist mobilization against restrictive gender regulations at the Western Wall. Lihi Ben-Shitrit demonstrates how attention to gender and to women's engagement in conflict over sacred places is essential for understanding what makes contested sacred sites increasingly 'indivisible' for

Abstract
The significance of the Western Wall in Jerusalem has undergone numerous transformations over time. Originally a supporting wall for the Temple Mount, it became the focus of mourning after the Temple's destruction, and later a symbol for national rebirth; after the Six-Day War in 1967, Israel reclaimed it as part of its capital. Since then, two trends have been notable: strict religious authorities have taken charge of the site, and this transfer has been portrayed as part of an overall and purportedly inevitable shift in modern Israeli history. But the subsuming of national-historical significance of the Western Wall into a narrower religious one was not inevitable, and this article presents a number of viable policy alternatives that were available in 1967. Moreover, it suggests that the current status of the wall and policy towards it are outliers relative to mainstream public opinion, an example of political expediency conflicting with public interest.