"Greater" Jerusalem Absorbs West Bank Area
Settlement Report | Vol. 4 No. 7 | February 1994- Jerusalem at a Glance
- Israel Builds Greater Jerusalem at the Site of the Eternal City
- To Our Readers
- "Greater" Jerusalem Absorbs West Bank Area
- U.S. Policy: Jerusalem's Final Status must Be Negotiated
- Rabin Builds on the Vision of a Permanent Jewish City
- Jerusalem's Borders Vanish
- Christian Views on Jerusalem
The term "Greater Jerusalem" has entered the lexicon of the
Arab-Israeli conflict. The United States acknowledged this when, for
the first time, the State Department, in an April 1993 report to
Congress, noted that "the [Rabin] Government also has affirmed its
intention to continue settlement construction in a 100-square mile
surrounding area termed 'Greater Jerusalem.'"
The increasing use of this expression by Israelis, who originated it more than a decade ago, is a testament to the nation's continuing effort to expand Israel's permanent borders well into the West Bank.
As Israel's appetite for territory has grown, so too has the definition of Greater Jerusalem, which now is the address for 70 percent of the total settler population and includes approximately 10 percent of the land area of the West Bank. In the 1970s, the term was used to describe the boundaries of the city, including newly constructed suburbs--French Hill, Gilo, and Neve Ya'acov, for example--which were built in annexed territory. Today the term encompasses a far greater expanse of the West Bank.
"The area from Ramallah in the north to Bethlehem in the south, Ma'ale Adumim in the east, and Mevasseret [an Israeli suburb of Jerusalem] in the west is one metropolitan area," explained Moshe Amirav, a former member of the Jerusalem city council.
Plans for Greater Jerusalem
The Rabin government has not formally defined the territorial reach of greater Jerusalem. Unlike the government's concept of sovereignty over the entire West Bank held by the Likud Party when it was in power, Rabin's Labor-led coalition is establishing settlement priorities that reflect a more limited, but equally determined, vision of Israel's sovereign borders. This narrower concept, together with the countdown to final status negotiations with the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), has added a sense of urgency to an ambitious and expansive program of de facto annexation in the region between Ramallah, Hebron, and Jericho.
Long-range planning reports completed during the previous Shamir government had already targeted Greater Jerusalem as an area where demographic facts were to be created to protect and secure Israel's permanent hold on Jerusalem.
A Jerusalem Post summary of the 1991 "Ordnance Plan for Population Dispersal in Israel," which projected a settler population of 250,000 in the West Bank and Gaza Strip by 2010, noted that "a large percentage of Jewish West Bank residents would be living in the 'non-ideological' suburbs of Jerusalem like Ma'ale Adumim [current population 17,000, planned population of 60,000], Pisgat Ze'ev [current population 29,000, planned population 70,000], and Betar [population 1,800]," where, the paper reports, a population of 60,000 by the year 2000 is forecast.
"In two or three years it might be too late to set up a Palestinian state because of the policy of continued settlement building around Jerusalem," warned Haidar Abdel Shafi, former head of the Palestinian delegation to the Washington peace talks.
Greater Jerusalem's West Bank region fits the Labor Party's criteria for continuing vibrant settlement activity: successful and growing towns supported politically by the vast majority of Israelis as a natural part of Israel. Communities like Ma'ale Adumim, Givat Ze'ev (population 7,100), four miles from Ramallah, and the Etzion Bloc of ten settlements closer to Hebron than to Jerusalem are not viewed by Israelis as "settlements" in the conventional meaning of the term. Rather they are accepted as "normal" communities no different than similar communities within Israel's borders.
The settlement priorities of the Rabin government, which are allocating a greater percentage of development resources to this area than did Likud, will result in enlarging the importance of Greater Jerusalem relative to other West Bank settlement areas.
"No one worries especially about the peace process," noted a newspaper portrait of the Efrat settlement, southwest of Bethlehem. "No one--in the Etzion Bloc and even more in the government--believes that this area will be returned."
"I don't believe that we will return the [Etzion] Bloc. The fact is that this [Rabin] government encourages settlement here," observed Rabbi Riskin, one of the founders of the greater Jerusalem settlement of Efrat.
The increasing use of this expression by Israelis, who originated it more than a decade ago, is a testament to the nation's continuing effort to expand Israel's permanent borders well into the West Bank.
As Israel's appetite for territory has grown, so too has the definition of Greater Jerusalem, which now is the address for 70 percent of the total settler population and includes approximately 10 percent of the land area of the West Bank. In the 1970s, the term was used to describe the boundaries of the city, including newly constructed suburbs--French Hill, Gilo, and Neve Ya'acov, for example--which were built in annexed territory. Today the term encompasses a far greater expanse of the West Bank.
"The area from Ramallah in the north to Bethlehem in the south, Ma'ale Adumim in the east, and Mevasseret [an Israeli suburb of Jerusalem] in the west is one metropolitan area," explained Moshe Amirav, a former member of the Jerusalem city council.
Plans for Greater Jerusalem
The Rabin government has not formally defined the territorial reach of greater Jerusalem. Unlike the government's concept of sovereignty over the entire West Bank held by the Likud Party when it was in power, Rabin's Labor-led coalition is establishing settlement priorities that reflect a more limited, but equally determined, vision of Israel's sovereign borders. This narrower concept, together with the countdown to final status negotiations with the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), has added a sense of urgency to an ambitious and expansive program of de facto annexation in the region between Ramallah, Hebron, and Jericho.
Long-range planning reports completed during the previous Shamir government had already targeted Greater Jerusalem as an area where demographic facts were to be created to protect and secure Israel's permanent hold on Jerusalem.
A Jerusalem Post summary of the 1991 "Ordnance Plan for Population Dispersal in Israel," which projected a settler population of 250,000 in the West Bank and Gaza Strip by 2010, noted that "a large percentage of Jewish West Bank residents would be living in the 'non-ideological' suburbs of Jerusalem like Ma'ale Adumim [current population 17,000, planned population of 60,000], Pisgat Ze'ev [current population 29,000, planned population 70,000], and Betar [population 1,800]," where, the paper reports, a population of 60,000 by the year 2000 is forecast.
"In two or three years it might be too late to set up a Palestinian state because of the policy of continued settlement building around Jerusalem," warned Haidar Abdel Shafi, former head of the Palestinian delegation to the Washington peace talks.
Greater Jerusalem's West Bank region fits the Labor Party's criteria for continuing vibrant settlement activity: successful and growing towns supported politically by the vast majority of Israelis as a natural part of Israel. Communities like Ma'ale Adumim, Givat Ze'ev (population 7,100), four miles from Ramallah, and the Etzion Bloc of ten settlements closer to Hebron than to Jerusalem are not viewed by Israelis as "settlements" in the conventional meaning of the term. Rather they are accepted as "normal" communities no different than similar communities within Israel's borders.
The settlement priorities of the Rabin government, which are allocating a greater percentage of development resources to this area than did Likud, will result in enlarging the importance of Greater Jerusalem relative to other West Bank settlement areas.
"No one worries especially about the peace process," noted a newspaper portrait of the Efrat settlement, southwest of Bethlehem. "No one--in the Etzion Bloc and even more in the government--believes that this area will be returned."
"I don't believe that we will return the [Etzion] Bloc. The fact is that this [Rabin] government encourages settlement here," observed Rabbi Riskin, one of the founders of the greater Jerusalem settlement of Efrat.
