Home

Christian interests have been protected and preserved in the construction of the Israeli security fence, retired IDF Col. Danny Tirza writes in "The Influence of Christian Interests in Setting the Route of the Security Fence in Jerusalem," published by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.

The decision to put up a physical barrier to keep terrorists out of Israel came after failed negotiations between Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat at Camp David, Md. After an agreement could not be reached at the 2000 meeting, the Palestinian leadership "elected to initiate a terror campaign against the Israeli civilian population with a view toward pressuring the Israeli government," Tirza writes.

According to Tirza, for two years, suicide bombings continued with little solution to stop them. Diplomacy did not work; a peace deal was clearly unattainable at the time. However, after a school bus was targeted by a suicide bomber in September 2002, the Israeli government put its foot down. Under heavy public pressure, "the government of Israel decided to take control over the area of the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank," where 73 major attacks had been launched from in three years, "and assume security responsibility for the entire area," Tirza writes.

Building a security fence to physically block terrorists from entering Israeli populated areas was included in this takeover. This temporary fence would enable Israel to build checkpoints for people traveling to and from Jerusalem and the West Bank. In contrast to the 73 major attacks launched before the fence, only five successful attacks were launched to date - proving, Tirza writes, that the fence was an effective deterrent.

However, there was more than one party involved. In the media attention given to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Christian interests are not frequently discussed. Many questions arose in the building of a security fence in an area saturated with Christian churches, holy sites, educational institutions, hospitals, and headquarters for charity work. It was in Christian interests to maintain as strong a relationship with Israel as possible, for "extreme Muslim forces have gathered strength and violence towards Christian communities" and "harassment of Christians has also taken the form of land and property seizures and even damage to churches and holy sites," Tirza said. In addition to threats from the Muslim population, the Vatican and the state of Israel have an agreement to "preserve freedom of religious observance and the property of churches affiliated with the Vatican," an agreement that could not be held as more important than Muslim religious interests in the region.

The main concerns facing the Christian community were: access to Jerusalem and other holy sites, protection of property and clergymen, and preserving ties between the state and Christian communities.

One of the challenges to meeting these concerns was the daily contact that the Christian communities in Bethlehem, Beit Jalla, and Beit Sahur - all under Palestinian control - had with Jerusalem. With the outbreak of the 2000 intifada, it was crucial that these towns were blocked from entering Jerusalem freely. "Despite the severe security situation," permits were issued for the Christian residents wishing to enter Jerusalem, including entire communities around the time of religious holidays. There would be no way to include solely the Christian communities on the Israeli side of the security fence, for that would have included "tens of thousands of Muslim Palestinians living in these towns and adjacent areas, some of whom were hostile to Israel," Tirza writes. To solve this primary Christian issue, Israel established a passenger terminal in Bethlehem with high security to respond to civilian needs. The passage between Jerusalem and Bethlehem is "free, while maintaining suitable security checks," according to the document. The passage is only closed for brief periods when the threat of a terrorist attack is imminent or one had just occurred.

Freedom of religious observance in each Christian holy site was guaranteed "without disturbance and without exception," Tirza writes. "The planning team for the security fence viewed religious observance and freedom of access to the holy places as an overriding principle, and made an effort to preserve ties with clergymen and provide a rapid response to any problem."

Access to such sites was granted for those in Israel wishing to worship at sites left on the Palestinian Authority's side of the fence, as well was the other way around. Near the tomb of Lazarus, which is east of Jerusalem and a heavily populated Muslim area, a special gate was built for clergymen and pilgrims visiting any religious sites that were left on the Palestinian side of the security fence. Special gates were also built so that traditional parades held at Christmas and Easter times would not be disturbed. A special access route was also built to the Monastery of the Emmanuel Sisters, north of Bethlehem, which is Palestinian territory.

The Christian community was also concerned with any damage to Christian property that may occur during the construction of the security fence. "Extensive areas in Jerusalem and the surrounding area… are owned by the large churches," Tirza writes. "The establishment of the security fence obligated the security bodies to seize strips of land of varying widths for limited periods. In exchange for use of the land, the state offered the landowners compensation for damage as well as annual usage fees," Tirza writes. This made the Christian community nervous that the land would be expropriated and that lands on the Palestinian side of the fence would be left abandoned and taken over by Palestinians.

In order to limit damage, as well as help secure the trust of the Christians that their land would not be expropriated, "the territorial interests of each and every church were mapped out and a joint effort was made to have the fence go along the margins of the plot" in an extremely complex effort on legal, security, and engineering accounts. In some places, a very thin fence was constructed on top of existing ancient stone walls to accommodate for Christian, Muslim, and Israeli interests. Some disputes remained between church representatives and Israeli security officials in some areas, and these cases were brought settled in court.

Many clergymen, who were unarmed, feared for their personal safety in addition to the safety of their property.

"Israel works assiduously to preserve the neutrality of the churches and their independence, and to prevent injury to the clergymen, their property, and their dignity," Tirza writes.

On the other hand, some terrorists have been known to exploit this sensitivity and use church property to bypass security and enter Israel. While passing through, it is not unheard of for property to be purposely damaged or destroyed. The Christian community tries to remain as politically neutral as possible, but taking no stand leaves them vulnerable to repeated injury and property damage. Any attempts that monks or other religious clergy have taken to speak with the Palestinian Authority have led to threats, subjecting them to physical violence. Clergy, therefore, frequently turn to Israeli authorities when such threats arise. In order to protect religious figures, Israeli forces initially reinforced and raised ancient stone walls that surround the churches. When these tactics failed, special police units "were stationed to prevent the infiltrations and preserve the security of the priests."

A vast majority of Christian institutions in Israel serve both the Jewish and Muslim populations. The establishment of the security fence "created a conflict of interest among some of the mission institutions that wanted to preserve the security of the staff and church property while continuing to serve the Muslim community in the West Bank," Tirza writes. Many of the Christian-run institutions that served the Palestinian refugee population, such as Lutheran Hospital or Augusta Victoria Hospital, are in the heart of Jerusalem, now making free access to these places almost impossible. The solution for Palestinians to access centers in the heart of Jerusalem was to obtain passage permits from Israel and provide aid and assistance to strengthen the medical facilities in the West Bank to help limit travel into Jerusalem.

For institutions located on the security fence's border, "decisions were necessary regarding the exact line of the fence and suitable passage arrangements," the document said. To respond to Christian requests to stay on the Israeli side of the fence, 19 out of 22 Christian sites were included on the Israeli side of the fence, many of which requested to remain on the Israeli side. Some could physically not be included because that would have encroached on Muslim property rights as the fence moved further into the West Bank.

"Despite the constraints of time and the pressing security needs, many efforts were invested and solutions were provided to meet the unique needs of the Christian churches in the region to guarantee the fundamental values of Western democracy," the document stated. This publication from the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs serves as a testament to the efforts that Israel made to preserve those rights for its Christian population. "The planning team spared no effort to reach this objective in a suitable legal and humanitarian manner to the maximum extent possible, under the difficult circumstances of a terror war," Tirza concludes.