To what extent the attempts by certain Israeli interest groups and Knesset members to change the status quo on the Temple Mount has contributed to the emerging phenomenon is unclear but what is clear is that the Israeli government’s hesitant response to these attempts is seen by the Palestinians as yet another manifestation of Israel’s doctrine of “establishing facts on the ground,” according to one commentator. And the calls to defend al-Haram al-Sharif (the Temple Mount) and the al-Aqsa mosque have received wide support against the backdrop of the ISIS advances.
With the exception of a radical fringe, the Palestinians generally are not camp followers of ISIS in so far its radical religious ideologies are concerned. Still they appear to have picked up the tool used by ISIS. It is to maximise the exposure of terrifying images in order to enlist supporters and activists, according to Udi Dekel, a retired Brigadier General.
Pump priming the mood are two social media campaigns. One “Ada’es” (from the word “to run over,” which also sounds like “Da’esh,” the Arabic acronym for ISIS) and the other “Aten” (from the word “to claim,” which means “stabbing”. The pictures and videos in the social media fuelled their fanaticism
Dekel doesn’t subscribe to the general view that ‘defence of Jerusalem” has become an organised movement. “There is no evidence of organised activity”, he wrote in the INSS Insight (a publication of Institute of National Security Studies, Tel Aviv), pointing out that the attack on the synagogue attack was mounted not from the areas under the Palestinian Authority. The attackers came from Israeli security controlled areas.
To what extent the Palestinian Authority (PA) and President Mahmoud Abbas are responsible for the situation. Opinion is divided. But the Israeli expert appears to absolve President Abbas.
Says Dekel: Abbas is not interested in the outbreak of a violent, terrorism-infused intifada, because he believes it would not serve the Palestinian cause. To date, Abbas has believed that controlled escalation in Jerusalem supports the strategy pursued by the PA in recent years, a diplomatic strategy that turns to the international community for recognition of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders as part of a binding UN Security Council resolution that stipulates two years for implementation. Stressing Israel’s failure to provide freedom of access and worship at the holy sites in Jerusalem is designed to promote the strategy”.
A section of Middle East experts aver that the PA is losing control while the influence of Abbas is shrinking. For the Israeli government, however, both are favourite punching bags. And its decision to put the blame for the Jerusalem attack at the door-step of Abbas doesn’t come as a surprise. Targeting Abbas serves another purpose for Tel Aviv. It is undermining his campaign for recognition of Palestinian State. All this only helps to perpetuate Israel’s image as the main culprit for the Palestinian Sudoku.
Udi Dekel has an interesting take. “What Israel needs is a formative policy that will use the current period of time to change the paradigm of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This change should focus on promoting transitional arrangements in conjunction with the Arab world under the umbrella of Arab Peace Initiative, and the formulation of regional guarantees for implementing political agreements with the Palestinians”.
In essence he advocates a two pronged strategy for Israel. One it must become proactive on the political front. Two it must “invest colossal efforts” to prevent a response by Jewish radicals to attacks carried out by Palestinians and to “demonstrate actively’ that the Israeli government has “no intent to change the status quo” on the Temple Mount. To check the slide of the Palestinian conflict from political to the religious level, Israel will also do well to open a dialogue with the Arab civil society in East Jerusalem.
– By Ram Singh Kalchuri