Following Israel’s national elections and the forming of its new government, it did not take long for a storm of protest to arise. The freshly-appointed Minister for national security, Itamar Ben-Gvir, accompanied by police, briefly visited the Temple Mount on January 3rd. However, he did not use his the 13-minute visit – without fanfare or incident¹ – to pray on the site, something that is forbidden to Jews, but which he and others have long advocated.

The timing was not only related to his new duties; it took place on the 10th of Tevet, a Jewish fast day mourning the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem 2,500 years ago, which resulted in the destruction of the First Temple. Although his action was seen as deliberate provocation, others felt it understandable that the man newly responsible for Israel’s national security should inspect a well-known trouble spot.

Existing regulations

International condemnation was swift. Following a formal request by the United Arab Emirates and China, along with Palestinian and Jordanian UN missions, the United Nations Security Council undertook to convene an emergency meeting to discuss Ben-Gvir’s visit. Concerned by Ben-Gvir‘s visit to the Temple Mount, the British Consulate in Jerusalem stated that “all should avoid actions which inflame tensions and undermine the cause of peace.” The US Embassy made a similar statement.

International condemnation was swift.

Both these statements implied that ‘the Status Quo’ had been breached, hence it is clearly important to know what that is²:

1. The Waqf, (a branch of Jordan’s Ministry of Islamic Affairs and Holy Places), would continue to administer the site and would be responsible for religious and civil arrangements there.
2. Jews would not be allowed to pray on the Temple Mount but would be able to visit it. This right to freedom of access was eventually anchored in Israel’s Law on the Preservation of the Holy Places.
3. The Israel Police and the Israeli Security Agency would be in charge of security in the sacred compound, including its walls and gates.
4. Israeli sovereignty and law would be applied to the Temple Mount as to the other parts of Jerusalem, where Israeli law was extended after the Six-Day War.
5. The display of flags of any kind on the Temple Mount would be prohibited.
6. The essence of the arrangement, which was informal and remained unwritten, was to freeze the existing situation and create an unofficial division of the prayer areas between Muslims and Jews, whereby Muslims would pray on the mount and Jews at the Western Wall—the retaining wall of the Temple Mount compound, which derives its holiness from the mount and beside which Jews have prayed for centuries.

Changes to the ‘Status quo’

It is also important to recognise that since then there have been several Palestinian changes to the status quo:

• Jewish visits are often prevented or considerably restricted.
• Jews and other non-Islamic visitors can only visit from Sunday to Thursday, during four hours each day.
• Visits inside the mosques are not allowed.
• Jews with religious appearance must visit in groups monitored by Waqf guards and policemen.
• Muslims have inaugurated four new mosques on the Temple Mount since 1967: the Dome of the Rock, which originally was not built as a mosque; the El-Marwani Mosque, located underground in Solomon’s Stables; the ‘Ancient Al-Aqsa’ Mosque, established in 1998 under the existing upper mosque; and the Gate of Mercy (Golden Gate) prayer area, set up and turned into a mosque in 2019. No international protests have been made against the substantial modifications.
• The establishment of additional mosques on the mount stemmed from a new definition of the Temple Mount compound by the Muslims, who began to refer to all of the area as ‘Al-Aqsa’ and to regard the entire mount as one great mosque. Until the Six-Day War, the compound as a whole was called ‘Al-Haram al-Sharif’ (the Holy and Noble Place), and was defined differently from the Al-Aqsa Mosque.

Where is the international condemnation of the frequent Palestinian bloodthirsty rhetoric?

In the UK, on Jan 3rd, The Guardian commented: “Ben-Gvir has visited al-Aqsa numerous times since entering parliament in April 2021, but his presence there as a senior minister carries far greater weight. A controversial visit in 2000 by the then opposition leader, Ariel Sharon, was one of the main triggers for the second Palestinian intifada, or uprising, which lasted until 2005.”

Caption reads ‘Run over Zionists for the sake of Al-Aqsa’ (6 November 2014)However, as the Palestinian Authority’s Communications Minister, Imad Faluji, admitted, Yasser Arafat planned the second intifada months before Sharon’s visit. The intifada began with Palestinian Arab terrorists murdering Jews before Sharon set foot on the Mount. The P.A. security chief Jabril Rajoub had also assured Israel that if Sharon did not enter the mosques, no problems would arise. Sharon did not enter the mosques, but the P.A. still used his visit as a pretext for calling on Muslims to “defend Al-Aqsa” by attacking Jews praying at the Western Wall on Rosh Hashanah, murdering Jewish children in suicide bombings and numerous other atrocities.³

Incitement to violence

We should always remember that “the sacred Al-Aqsa mosque compound” (the Temple Mount area) is frequently used to provoke insurrection and murder in Jerusalem. This is in complete contrast to the Supreme Muslim Council’s ‘A Brief Guide to Al-Haram Al-Sharif’ published in the 1920’s⁴, which encouraged respectful visitors entering through ‘The Moor’s Gate’. It also acknowledged that David’s altar and Solomon’s Temple once occupied the site (which is frequently denied by Palestinians).Image from Arab News, 28 July 2017 (Note 6)

Incitement against Jewish/Israeli visitors well before Ben Gvir’s visit has raised grave tensions, particularly in regard to Jewish prayer. However, statements such as that by President Mahmoud Abbas in 2015 have no doubt exacerbated tensions: “The Al-Aqsa Mosque is ours. The Church of the Holy Sepulchre is ours as well. They have no right to desecrate the mosque with their filthy feet, we won’t allow them to do that”. Provocative images of ‘Al-Aqsa’ often prominently use the Dome of the Rock and the compound enclosure, with the actual mosque insignificant or even absent.

Jews have no desire to access the mosque, only the open court, and such rhetoric is blatantly antisemitic.

Oddly, Jews have no desire to access the mosque, only the open court, and such rhetoric is blatantly antisemitic. Much worse was the sermon preached by Sheikh Abu Sara in the mosque at Friday ‘prayers’ in November 2014: “I say to the Jews loud and clear: The time for your slaughter has come. The time to fight you has come. The time to kill you has come…Please do not leave in our hearts a single grain of mercy towards you, oh Jews, because when the day of your slaughter arrives, we shall slaughter you without mercy.”⁵

Calling for equality

Amid the current Temple Mount furore, one has to ask, where is the international condemnation of the frequent Palestinian bloodthirsty rhetoric? And why, amid accusations of racism against the new Israeli government, has there been no criticism of naked Palestinian antisemitism? The asymmetry is glaring.

How true it is that Jerusalem has become “a burdensome stone for all nations” (Zech.12:3) …. how crucial that we obey the injunction, “Pray for the peace of Jerusalem” (Ps 122.6-7).

Endnotes
1. See for example: Temple Mount Turmoil Creates Media Mess Ups | Honest Reporting 05 Jan 2023
2. the bullet points following this are from the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, accessed 07 Jan 2023
3. US demands Israel maintain discriminatory ‘Muslims only’ policy on Temple Mount – analysis, World Israel News, 07 Jan 2023
4. E.g. Supreme Moslem Council (1924), A Brief Guide to al-Haram al-Sharif, Jerusalem, Moslem Orphanage Printing Press
5. Preacher at Al-Aqsa Mosque Omar Abu Sara to the Jews: "We Shall Slaughter You Without Mercy" | MEMRI 27 Nov 2014
6. Arab News Cartoon by Mohammed Rayes _ Al-Aqsa Mosque | Arab News 28 Jul 2017