"Christians Call for a Shared Jerusalem" was the headline of a full page ad in the New York Times of Dec. 21, 1996. The message, which called Jerusalem the "Home, Hope and Heritage of Two Peoples and Three Religions," was signed by The Rev. Clifton Kirkpatrick, Stated Clerk of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) and the heads of many other Protestant churches and Catholic organizations.

This action received harsh criticism from Christian Right and Jewish community organizational leaders. While the churches' groundbreaking statement received minimal attention from the media, the debate on Jerusalem is now fundamentally changed with the concept of "Sharing" being a hot topic.

In early 2000, the call for a shared Jerusalem has been heard again-and this time from Jewish voices here and in Israel. But can the shared Jerusalem message be heard by U.S. politicians in the cacophony of campaign rhetoric? The position that Jerusalem is solely and eternally the capital of Israel has been vigorously supported by the U.S. Congress, which in 1995 mandated the move of the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv. The President has so far blocked the move through use of the waiver authority attached to the bill.

By contrast, the debate about Jerusalem that recently took place in a Congressional meeting room was a refreshing change. It was a discussion among Palestinians and Israelis about the possibility, indeed probability, of sharing Jerusalem. Sponsored by the American Jewish "Friends of Peace Now" with the cooperation of the American Arab "American Committee on Jerusalem," the February program's intent was to "provide a flavor of the type of conversations that are going on all over the Middle East."

"In one manner or another Jerusalem will be shared. We have won," said one panelist. While it is possible for historians and peaceseekers to see the inevitability of a shared future for Jerusalem, U.S. politicians find it hard to look beyond the next election and the pressures of domestic politics. As another panelist said, "the notion of a shared Jerusalem has not reached political fruition. We need to create the space for political leaders to do this."

What is Jerusalem?

The core issue of sharing Jerusalem centers on the reality that Israeli Jews and Palestinian Christians and Muslims have differing concepts of what constitutes "Jerusalem."

It is the walled city of historic Jerusalem-the subject of the prayers and hymns of worship- that is predominant in everyone's mind. Yet, this most revered portion of Jerusalem constitutes only 1 percent of the present city. Over half of today's Jerusalem was not part of Jerusalem at all before 1967, but part of Bethlehem and 28 West Bank villages occupied in the war.

After 1967, demographic considerations were the primary factor in Israel's determination of new borders for Jerusalem. The goal of ensuring a Jewish majority in the city was accomplished by excluding the populated Palestinian urban areas in the West Bank and annexing the sparsely populated and agricultural land.

Ten percent of the area now known as East Jerusalem was under Jordanian control from 1948-1967. The walled Old City lies within that area. The other 90 percent of East Jerusalem was West Bank land grafted onto the city. A University of Maryland survey has shown that neither Israelis nor Palestinians have equal attachment to all the neighborhoods of Jerusalem.

A group of American rabbis, looking at the dispassionate findings of the University of Maryland survey, have concluded that sharing Jerusalem is not only possible but "will be the strongest basis for lasting peace." Over 300 rabbis signed a statement titled "Rabbinic Call for a Shared Jerusalem" that was organized by the Jewish Peace Lobby and reported in the New York Times on January 20. The rabbis affirm the rightfulness of Jewish sovereignty in Jerusalem, then pose "whether the pursuit of both justice and lasting peace requires that, in some form, Jerusalem be shared with the Palestinian people. We believe that it does."

A few days later came a report from a joint project of the Universities of Oklahoma, Haifa and Bethlehem that brought Israelis and Arabs together to prepare guiding principles for negotiating Jerusalem. Time magazine, on January 31, reported that "for the first time, a group of Establishment figures in Israel has endorsed the idea of sharing Jerusalem with the Palestinians." Their number one guideline puts it clearly: "Neither the imposition of annexation nor the partition of Jerusalem could serve as a basis for the final status of the city. Jerusalem is to be the capital of both Israel and Palestine in Jewish West and Arab East of the city, respectively and on equal footing."

Then came the release of a Harvard University study funded by the U.S. Information Agency, the Ford Foundation and the Charles B. Bronfman Foundation. The changed nature of the debate was evident in the page one headline on February 25 of the American Jewish newspaper, Forward. "Jerusalem Sends Mixed Signals on Jerusalem, as U.S.-Funded Study Backs Sharing the Capital." Four Palestinians and four Israelis made up the working group which concluded that, "the solution of the Jerusalem problem should respect the national, cultural, religious, political, legal, and historical rights of both peoples. Jerusalem should be an open and undivided city, with free access to the holy sites, serving as the capital of both states."

Some scenarios involve increasing the size of Jerusalem in order to share it on equal footing; others call for decreasing the borders of Jewish Jerusalem (Yerushalayim) to allow for a Palestinian Jerusalem (Al Quds) alongside it.

The Old City

In any scenario, the Old City will require special arrangements reached through creative negotiations that take into account broader interests-including that of the international churches. The previously mentioned survey showed that the Old City/Mount of Olives area holds a unique and passionate religious, cultural and historical importance for Jews, Christians and Muslims.

For some years, the Vatican has sought a "special statute" for Jerusalem and "international guarantees" as necessary to preserve the religious character of the Holy City and to secure the rights of the living religious communities. Catholic authorities clarify that this "should be confused neither with the so-called 'corpus seperatum' proposed by the United Nations in 1947, nor with what is popularly called 'the internationalization' of the city."

The guiding principle for the Old City that the Oklahoma/Haifa/Bethlehem group agreed upon is similar. "The protection and preservation of the unique religious interests of Christians, Jews, and Muslims, must be guaranteed and freedom of worship, and access to holy places must be assured."

"Injustice in the Holy City"

This is the title of an Israeli newspaper insert published by B'Tselem, the leading Israeli organization advocating for human rights in the Occupied Territories. While recognizing the profound symbolism of the holiness of the city, this publication focuses on the living city and the human rights violations faced by the 200,000 Palestinians of Jerusalem.

While the future status of Jerusalem has awaited negotiations, the government of Israel has explicitly stated its intention of creating a reality that will pre-empt any challenge to Israel's sovereignty in East Jerusalem. For the most part, Palestinians are prevented from building and when they do build without permits, the homes are subject to demolition. There are now 43,000 homes in Jewish neighborhoods in East Jerusalem-all built on expropriated land.

The Israeli Minister of Interior has announced that he would end the confiscation from Palestinians of their Jerusalem residency cards. But, the new policy is unclear as is the fate of all those thousands of Palestinians born in Jerusalem who have already lost their residency cards. B'Tselem points to the blatant discrimination of the policy. "Jews can live abroad, in another town in Israel, or in settlements in the Occupied Territories for as long as they like, with no fear of losing their rights."

Palestinians pay taxes in Jerusalem just like the Israelis, yet they do not enjoy the same services. Entire Palestinian neighborhoods are not hooked up to a sewerage system and there are few parks.

The Policy of Closure

Israel's closure policy has severely damaged Palestinian life in all dimensions. The policy that prohibits Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza from entering Jerusalem without a permit is justified by Israel as a security measure against terrorism. However, according to B'Tselem, many prominent Israeli security figures admit that the closure policy has little effect on Israeli security. This severing of Palestinians from their institutions in Jerusalem has had a withering impact on Palestinian religious, family, medical, educational and cultural life as well as the Palestinian economy.

The ability and right of Palestinians to freely enter East Jerusalem -to conduct business, to worship, to seek medical attention-must be restored even as negotiations are in process. The wholeness of Jerusalem should be upheld, with open access to Israelis and Palestinians alike.

While it is not the place of the churches to specify the political results of negotiations, it is essential that the principles of an agreement be better understood by policy makers and promoted by those who work for peace. The principles established by the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) could serve well as guides for the negotiators and for U.S. policy makers.

Suggested actions:

The high priority that Christian advocates for peace and justice give to Jerusalem is well placed. Considering the role of our government, the U.S. churches have a unique credibility and responsibility for advocacy on Jerusalem issues.

Since 1996, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has worked with the ecumenical coalition Churches for Middle East Peace to bring policy makers attention to the message: "Christians Call for a Shared Jerusalem." But the option of sharing Jerusalem is far from reaching political fruition. Whether the final status negotiations progress toward an agreement, are postponed or break down, the principle that Jerusalem must be open to both Palestinians and Israelis needs public attention and that of policy makers.

1. Write your members of Congress. Make your letter current by referring to recent news about Jerusalem.

Honorable ________
U.S. Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510

Honorable ________
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515

• Ask your representative and senators to support Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking and to reject efforts to force the move of the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem before a negotiated agreement. (Israeli Prime Minister Barak has asked Congress not to push for the embassy move. But Jerusalem's mayor, Likud leader Ehud Olmert, has chided U.S. Jewish organizations for not doing enough to implement the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995.)
  
  It is wrong for Congress to prejudge these sensitive negotiations and inflame the relations between Jews, Christians and Muslims.
  
  
• Appeal to them in this campaign season not to treat Jerusalem as a political football.
  
  
• Ask them to support the principle that Jerusalem should be shared by all, two peoples and three religions.

2. Write the President and the Secretary of State.

President William Clinton
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20500

Secretary Madeleine Albright
U.S. Department of State
Washington, D.C. 20520

• Ask the Administration to insist that Israel cease its practices that damage the Palestinians' ability to live, build, conduct business, visit or worship in Jerusalem.
  
  
• Urge the Administration to lend support to the principles and practices of sharing Jerusalem now and in the future.
  
  
• Remind the administration that according to international law, Israel must allow freedom of movement between the Palestinian territories: the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and Jerusalem. Insist that Palestinians have access to Jerusalem.

General Assembly Guidance.

• Calls upon the President to refrain from moving the U.S. embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv and to prevent any further steps toward the construction of a U.S. embassy building in any part of Jerusalem or its environs, until the permanent status of the city is established as part of a final peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.
  
  
• Recognizes that Jerusalem is an integral part of all Palestinian life-social, economic, religious, and political-and states that until a final negotiation of the status of Jerusalem is reached, access to the city by Palestinians must not be denied by Israeli authority.
  
  
• Calls for a negotiated solution between Israel and the Palestinian Authority that establishes an expression of the national rights of both Israel and Palestine in Jerusalem. Until the actualization of Palestinian sovereignty ... Palestinians in Jerusalem must have ... full access to building permits to meet the desperate need for housing, and equity in receiving city services, without abandoning the goal of national rights.
  
  
• Opposes all unilateral actions by Israel that change the demography and character of the city to the detriment of the Palestinians.