A Demolished House as the Epitome of the Nation’s History,
Jerusalem, despite the impression that successive Israeli governments have been trying to market, its not really one city, but rather a disintegrated and divided space that is home to two antagonistic communities: the dominant Jewish community and the dominated Palestinian community. It bears noting that the Palestinians constitute close to 40% of the total population of the city. The Palestinian community is living under Israeli rule since East Jerusalem was occupied by Israel during the Six Day War in June 1967, and despite the fact that 65 years have already passed since the annexation began, the gap between the two parts of the city remains enormous, creating the impression that these two sectors are like two foreign and alien planets: Planet Israel, modern and beautiful, deeply rooted in the 21st century, and on the other side, the Palestinian planet, neglected and backward, as if it were stuck in the 19th century. Those differences between the two parts of the city are not random and are not the results of a heavenly decree, they are the consequence of a systematic Israeli policy reflected mainly in the non-egalitarian distribution of budgetary funds that grotesquely deprives the Palestinian section of the city. It is possible to write many books to describe the causes and motivations behind the policies of discrimination, but in this book, which focuses on the destruction of houses, it will suffice to offer a general description of this particular phenomenon which is one of the most difficult plaguing the Eastern sector of Jerusalem.
House demolitions is not only cruel for the family losing their home, but the fact that one-third of the houses in East Jerusalem were built without permits, casts fear and anxiety over tens of thousands of other area residents. Demolitions do not only destroy a physical structure, but also cause very serious harm to the family as a whole. Savings collected over many years go down the drain, much personal property gets damaged or destroyed, the family’s dignity gets severely trampled over, many becoming needy and dependent on charitable assistance, and the trauma caused by this remains with the children throughout their entire life.
The Arab residents of East Jerusalem find themselves between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand, the procedure to issue a building permit is extremely complicated, and in many regions, it is almost completely impossible. On the other hand, the “laws of life”, require that a family build a roof over their heads, and naturally, when “state law” conflicts with the “law of life”, the latter becomes a stronger reality. In Arab culture, building a home for marriage or as the family expands, it is a norm that is stronger than the state law itself. If you can build with a certificate – they will. If the state refuses to grant a permit, then the necessity will lead them to build without a permit. To the government, they become criminals, in the eyes of Arab society however, they are required to do what tradition commands them to do.
The difficulties confronting those who wish to build legally are so complicated, encourages residents of East Jerusalem to build without a permit. They actually tend to follow the practices of the Jewish community during the period of the British Mandate, when people built entire communities despite not being allowed to build, or purchase land and even immigrate to the country. The difference between these two situations is that the Jewish settlements of that period were based on larger national motives, while present day residents of East Jerusalem build their homes out of existential necessity, rather than a desire to conduct a national struggle.
Housing demolitions in East Jerusalem is a component issue within a much broader political goal, that is – enabling to exercise a territorial control system designed to perpetuate the hegemony of the city’s Jewish majority and reduce the city’s Arab presence by limiting construction on their own land areas. What could be straightforwardly expropriated and confiscated for the purpose of building Jewish neighborhoods, has already been done, and since there no longer are any new territories to take over, the city imposes a rigid regime, rampant with restrictions and prohibitions, all cleverly designed to prevent the Arabs residents from building and developing.
General context. As seen above, housing demolitions are not an isolated phenomenon in the context of East Jerusalem, but are part of a broader policy designed to systematically and comprehensively perpetuate Israeli control over East Jerusalem and maintain herein a Jewish majority. “Control” in the context of Jerusalem is a broad concept consisting of different elements, some visible, some invisible, and some symbolic, aimed at acting like a steamroller over the consciousness of the Palestinian people, their self-image and innermost desires, creating a very hostile environment focused on the suppression of any possible thoughts of independence. In this process participate a wide range of state ‘agents’ – from the bureaucratic apparatus of the city of Jerusalem, the State’s Ministry of the Interior as well as the police apparatus and the General Security Services – each in their respective fields, and according to their capabilities. Extensive networks of “collaborators” (which have emerged and proliferated due to the economic crisis affecting the east of the city), complements the tasks of inspection and are constantly reporting on anything that moves in the eastern side, or rather, on anyone who dares raising his head. The demolition of houses is certainly the most dramatic aspect, but it is only one part of the larger machinery of suppression that penetrates all areas of the lives of the Arab residents. The global policy is to offer them less opportunities for residency, impose restrictions on construction, subject them to land confiscations, provide them with lesser municipal services and put them through the personal degradation inflicted on them by the security forces and others.
All these elements are like a steamroller that creates stress and a suffocating atmosphere, resulting in what could clearly be regarded as ‘psychological terror’. There isn’t even one family in East Jerusalem, that does not suffer under one of the evils mentioned above. No family in East Jerusalem that is not trapped within this complex bureaucratic network that has been inserted into every corner of their lives, not busy trying to find a way through the maze the establishment created to deepen their dependence on the machinery of government. The Arabs of East Jerusalem do not know what the next day will bring, they feel abandoned and are like a tenant who does not know when the landlord will go crazy and simply evict him. All the emotional and physical energy needed to be invested to overcome these harsh conditions, stand on their way and rob them of any ability to build and develop. They are purposely placed on the defensive and in an endless exhausting survival mode, robbing them of the strength to stand up for their basic rights.
Demolition of houses is the most dramatic tool used by the government to control not only the ground but also demographic processes that is related to it, and the spirit of the residents of East Jerusalem. The number of families suffering from which you could call “bulldozer anxiety” is huge. since, the number of demolition orders stands at approximately 11 thousand, that is one quarter of all families in East Jerusalem live under constant threat. This is a black cloud hovering over them constantly, going to sleep without knowing what will the day of tomorrow bring . Although on account of municipal budgetary reasons most homes will not be demolished, no one knows in advance who will be hit next and when. The State of Israel has managed to get the ‘bug of dread’ deep into the arteries of Arab East Jerusalem, and fear creates submission or “discipline”, a term coined by the French philosopher Michel Foucault to describe a common pattern in totalitarian societies, one which becomes like a member of the citizenry itself, censoring their thoughts, designing their lives according to the model imposed by the regime and at the same time making sure it does not upset the government itself on the very least. Residents are disciplined rewarded accordingly – National Insurance benefits, along with health funds and benefits-certificate – are all carrots followed by the whip of ruins, expropriations, restrictions, etc. The combination of rewards and punishment ensures that no lines will be cross as marked by the regime.
However, as noted, in the case of Jerusalem, not only a ‘disciplined’ resident- is required to keep at bay the demographic threat, It is also required to significantly reduce the number of Arab residents in order to preserve the Jewish majority. As the number of Jews citizens is falling, while the Arab rate of growth soars, the greater the effort to “encourage” them to leave the city and move into PA designated areas. There is a systematic regime of legal restrictions implemented by the state in order to accomplish a ” voluntary” transfer of the population. This is a migration due to lack of choice. Walaja and Nuaman are just examples of what the state seeks. Silwan and Sheikh Jarrah are signs of the direction where the country is racing towards. Thousand of houses destroyed during the last decade are mute testimony to what the state can do to achieve its goals. True, the script looks today excessive, ‘Apocalypse – Now” style. There will be no such Jerusalem, not in the era of CNN, say many, because the State is very careful not to antagonize the other much bigger “friend overseas,”. But the state already faces the slippery slope it started and who knows in advance where it will stop.
In this regard, the ongoing destruction and the constant threat that hovers over thousands of families have created a situation that can be defined as “urbanicide”, which means urban-destruction – accompanied by psychological violence experienced by thousands of families who are trembling with fear at the sound of a bulldozer’s engine, or seeing a police car driving near their home. The term is difficult to digest due to the terrible associations it raises, but have to call ‘a spade a spade, and recognize that our forces, without realizing the great urban destruction they are causing, as urban research shows, the same type of devastation visited Serbia, Bosnia and entire villages in Rwanda. Value terms are not subject to a quantitative dimension, ie the number of buildings destroyed but the political realm on the basis of an ideology behind it. Both over there and here, what is behind the urban wreckage is a nationalist and religious ideology and ethnocentrism that seeks to take over an entire area and remove its residents. This, in our case in order to preserve the Jewish majority, or to preserve the purity of race as is customarily said in the Balkan Peninsula. Urbancide is the name of the game, and one day this activities will be taken to the International Court in The Hague.
The term “non – legal.” It is important to emphasize that we use the term “illegal construction” has entered our general discourse – both Israeli and in regards to international law, although it is clear that no construction is “Illegal, but the occupation of East Jerusalem itself is. The term “illegal construction” is intended only to align a status quo with the common terminology encompassing all those involved in this phenomenon. Moreover, the definition of the term “illegal” requires diving into the legal field, or rather – the ethics of the justice system. There is no other construction underway that does not straddle between the two options but in opposite directions – the prohibition to build without a legal permit on the one hand, against a moral obligation to provide a roof over one’s home when the circumstances require it on the other
There is the Western law principle of deep necessity. Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben, proves that from the beginning of Western civilization to the present day, thinkers justified so-called violations of the law, when they are the result of necessity that leaves no other choice. Popular Law in Ancient Rome penetrated the western legal system stating that “necessity has no law, “necessitas legem non habet” and medieval thinkers, such as Graciano or Tomas Acquinas believed that necessity makes the unlawful retroactively into a law. The Principle of Roman law deep-necessity is what introduced the legal status called, in modern law, as the “state of exception”. Agamben claimed that necessity is not only not illegal, but more importantly, the necessity must be the basis for law as such, and from it, the law draws its legitimacy. Laws that do not reflect social need or necessity, shall be liable to degenerate sooner or later. They will act in a way that necessarily will follow the law “retroactivity” because necessity is anchored in principles of unwritten positive law and hence serve as the basic and ultimate justification of the judicial system. For Romano, is indeed true that the law is the foundation of modern society and it is a good organizing principle to have laws, but there are situations in which there should be no law, or even better, not to have written law. The term ‘must’ according Agamben will always be a subjective concept and context, which is only natural, because a ‘must’ can never be an expression of a world view, reflecting a social order rulers seek to preserve.
Final remarks if to follow an observation made by Walter Benjamin, a demolished house may be viewed as the epitome of the nation’s history, a road map on which the path and direction of Israeli society may be read. According to Benjamin, even a minor, seemingly insignificant detail can embody the world surrounding it, and from it the characteristics of an entire culture, the DNA of its era, may be recreated, if only it is observed with the appropriate awareness. For it should be understood that the demolition of a house is a symptom of a defective society. It is a window which allows us to glance into a mechanism of evil, the tip of the iceberg in a process of disintegration of values that undermines the very foundations of the state. It is dreadfully banal, carried out in accordance with the law, by a state that looks out for its own interests and them alone. If we are to understand the behavior of people dining at a table, Benjamin tells us, one should not watch them while eating but instead examine how the table is left after the meal is over. Similarly, in order to understand the character of Israeli society, we must examine what is left after a house has been demolished, and more importantly, what becomes of the family who used to live in that house. The image that it reveals is unbearable.
Leave a comment