21 JULY 2022
OPINION 13
TO ADVERTISE CALL 020 3906 8488
OPINION
The opinions on this page do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper
The Dotted Green Line OPINION PIECE BY ROBERT FESTENSTEIN
The Green Line is and is not a lot of things. Officially the Green Line refers to the line of demarcation that separated Israeli, Jordanian, Syrian and Egyptian forces at the conclusion of Israel’s 1948 War of Independence. It was delineated in the 1949 armistice agreements that formally ended the war and served as Israel’s de facto international border until the 1967 Six-Day War. Its name derives from the fact that the diplomats drawing up the agreement reportedly used green ink to mark the line on the map. For some, like the BBC, it is described as the 1967 Border. Well, it might have been a de facto border (ie in reality the border between Israel and Jordan) but it was not and is not one in law. It was and remains an armistice line. Nothing more than that. So when calls are made for Israel to retreat to the 1967 Border they actually mean go back to the 1949 armistice line which of course excluded the Old City. The land beyond the Green Line is also mired in controversy. For some it is referred to as Judea and Samaria, ie the
provinces between the Green Line and the Jordanian border, and others it is known as the West Bank. The latter comes from the description used to describe that land west of the Jordan river. Enter then the reunification of Jerusalem in 1967. Until then it had been separated by the armistice line. The Old City comprising the Jewish Quarter and the Kotel (the western retaining wall of the Second Temple) was not accessible to Jews. When the Old City was liberated from the Jordanians it was a time of massive celebration. Eventually, in July 1980, the Knesset passed the Jerusalem Law as part of the country’s Basic Law, which declared the unified Jerusalem as being the capital of Israel and that part which had been separated before 1967 was formally adopted as Israeli land. Of course, the UN and other organisations have declared this is unlawful though on what grounds is unclear other than just screaming it is all not fair. In reality though the whole of Jerusalem has been part of Israel for 55 years and legally for 42 years.
Bear in mind though that the Old City is still on the wrong side of the Green Line. Hold that thought. Why the detail you might ask? Its simple. It is because the Jewish News reported that a UJIA Birthright tour was obliged to provide accommodation for the participants at Almog Kibbutz, a little known (until now) Kibbutz in the desert near the Dead Sea, well over the Green Line. This was too much for two people, one of them being a participant and the other being a tour leader. They left the tour on a matter of principle when they found out about the accommodation details. The problem with all of this is what principle? A Birthright tour by its very nature is going to involve taking Jewish youth to Israel, sometimes for the first time and introducing them to the county. Of course, no such tour could possible be complete without a visit to the Kotel. But its over the Green Line. And there is the problem with the principle. How is it okay to venture beyond the Green Line to visit the Kotel but not to
So when calls are made for Israel to retreat to the 1967 Border they actually mean go back to the 1949 armistice line which of course excluded the Old City.
WORTHY OF A
BRACHA!
THEJEWISHWEEKLY.COM
Almog Kibbutz to sleep? Hence the title of this piece – the dotted Green Line. It is very unlikely that these two would refuse to go to the Kotel on a matter of principle that it is over the Green Line. Both of them would have known from the outset that this was on the tour agenda. No possibility of being shocked and surprised. The Almog Kibbutz on the other hand was ideal. It was a last minute change of plan and so perfect for the show of principle. Only it wasn’t. Either the Green Line is in fact a redline, ie not to be crossed, or it isn’t. Picking and choosing is not a matter of principle, it is a matter of cynical opportunism. Finally, if I was part of the UJIA governing body, I would be asking for the money spent on the tour leader who left the tour to be returned on the basis they didn’t fulfil their obligation to look after the Birthright participants. Principles come with a price sometimes. Robert Festenstein is a practising solicitor and has been the principal of his Salford based firm for over 20 years. He has fought BDS motions to the Court of Appeal and is President of the Zionist Central Council in Manchester which serves to protect and defend the democratic State of Israel.
