From the Scene: Temple Mount Troubles

On Friday a week ago, three Arab-Israeli gunmen carried out a terrorist attack in Jerusalem’s Old City, shooting dead two Druze Israeli police officers. That those terrorists opened fire from within the Temple Mount compound itself makes this terror attack different from others that have occurred in the Old City in recent months.

How is it that within the space of a few days, the focus of media coverage is no longer on the terror attack itself or the question as to how weapons were able to be brought into the area of the Temple Mount? Instead, Israel is once again on the receiving end of charges that it is seeking to change the delicate status quo on the Temple Mount at the expense of Muslim worshipers.

Joining a journalists’ field tour gave me the opportunity to see firsthand some of the issues that are being played out in the full glare of the media. A briefing from an Israel police spokesperson gave a perspective on Israeli security concerns. Israeli security has been present at the entrances to the Temple Mount as part of the status quo that places security for the compound in Israel’s hands, while the Temple Mount itself falls under the custodianship of the Jordanian Hashemite monarchy and administered by the Islamic Waqf.

Video footage from the terror attack clearly shows that the Israeli police officers had their backs to the Temple Mount. In Israeli eyes, any potential threats were perceived to be from the outside. Those Israeli police officers were protecting the entrance to the Temple Mount from any attackers who may have wished to enter the compound. This assumption was destroyed in a hail of bullets.

The spokesperson stated that following police investigations of the terror attack, some of the gates to the Temple Mount had been reopened following the installation of metal detectors.

According to the spokesperson, hundreds of Muslim worshipers had passed through these metal detectors despite calls from the Palestinian leadership to “boycott” the Temple Mount in protest at their installation. As it was pointed out, many holy sites around the globe, including the Vatican and Mecca are subject to security checks, which are sadly a necessity in today’s world. Jews and tourists wishing to visit the nearby Western Wall have had to pass through metal detectors and security checks for many years without complaint. According to Israeli authorities, these new metal detectors will remain in place as long as necessary.

But security is the last thing on the mind of the Palestinians responsible for Muslim prayer on the Temple Mount. This became evident at the statements of Waqf officials who came to speak to the journalists.

What I heard was a salutary lesson in how Palestinian spokespeople are able to appeal to the media.

There was barely an acknowledgement of the terror attack that had led to the current situation. Instead, journalists were told that Israel was attempting to change the status quo and that the freedom of movement of Muslim worshipers was under severe threat. There was no way that the Waqf authorities were going to compromise. Security was the Israelis’ problem and not theirs.

But if journalists were beginning to digest this uncompromising stance, the Waqf officials started to wax lyrical about how the Jews were their brothers, laced with comments about peace and non-violence. What had effectively been a hardline response to recent events was suddenly a pathetic attempt at kumbaya. Did the journalists fall for it? Impossible to say but the lasting impression was one of Palestinian moderation and victimhood.

By 12.45 p.m., it was approaching early afternoon prayer time. We headed to the Lion’s Gate, one of the main entrances to the Old City and the Temple Mount. Around two hundred Palestinians were gathered outside of the Gate watched by a contingent of Israeli border police.

It was a media circus. Fifty or so journalists and camera crews all set up waiting for things to kick off. There is a symbiotic relationship between the Palestinians and the media. Where there is trouble, in many cases, it is the presence of the media that fuels the flames. The journalists need a compelling story, the photographers want dramatic images and the Palestinians are only too willing to supply these in return for the publicity it generates for their cause.

That was certainly the case today. In front of the assembled media, the Palestinians chanted in prayer and bent down in the street, rather than pass through metal detectors to enter the Temple Mount. A tense situation became further inflamed as the prayers turned to protests. Aggressive chants of “In spirit and blood, we will defend al-Aqsa mosque” as well as “Khaybar, Khaybar, Ya Yahud! Jaish Muhammad Sawfa Ya’ud!” (“Khaybar, Khaybar, O Jews! The Army of Muhammad Will Return!”) referring to the 628 massacre of Jews in Arabia at the hands of Muhammad.

This chant is widely seen to be an anti-Semitic call for bloodshed. Would the journalists ask for a translation let alone bother to report on this?

This was certainly a combustible atmosphere given the inciting chants, the presence of beefed-up Israeli security forces and the intense heat of an Israeli summer. And, of course, the media. Only a minute after walking away from the scene, two loud bangs pierced the air. I looked back to see smoke wafting past the arches of the Lion’s Gate. Israeli police had evidently used stun grenades to disperse the crowd. That throngs of journalists were in the thick of the action is certainly not a positive for the Israeli police and it demonstrates just how easy it is to report on a situation that happens in an instant yet developed in a context that had been building for much longer. Again, will the journalists present report on the incitement against Jews and the blocking of the area of Lion’s Gate by protesters?

Instead, most of the media most likely got what they probably came for – pictures of Israeli security forces engaged in seemingly aggressive actions against Palestinians, creating negative publicity for Israel’s image and feeding into the predominant Palestinian victimhood narrative.

Throughout this “performance,” Israeli authorities had not prevented Palestinians from entering the Temple Mount to pray. Is it too much to ask that these worshipers undergo a quick security check like Jews at the Western Wall experience or visitors to other holy sites? Israel has made it crystal clear that it does not intend to change the status quo that governs the Temple Mount.

Yet the headlines will undoubtedly be of tensions and confrontations allegedly caused by Israeli provocations at a Muslim holy site. That the status quo changed the moment terrorists opened fire and desecrated Judaism’s holiest site and a sacred space for Muslims as well, will be forgotten. Instead, Palestinian intransigence and provocations will supply the media with the story that they really want.

But it’s not the real story.