Jerusalem cannot handle another five years of left-wing policy

A few weeks ago I met with Aryeh King to discuss Nil Barkat left wing views. King also told me of Barkat’s duplicity, namely presenting himself as favouring a united Jerusalem but acting otherwise. He gave me a number of examples none of which Lion mentions. Together their case against Barkat is unassailable. Ted Belman

By MOSHE LION, JPOST

Let’s start by acknowledging the facts. Both Jerusalem’s current mayor and myself care deeply about Jerusalem and want to do the job to the best of our ability. Having worked closely with Nir Barkat for the past five years, I can attest to his good intentions, and judging by the complimentary content of a letter he sent to the prime minister saying that he had “full faith” in me because of my “extraordinarily good work on behalf of the development of Jerusalem,” he can attest to mine.

However, apart from the reversal of the order of priorities for Jerusalem and its residents, meaning less champagne events costing tens of millions and more investment in education, sanitation, transportation and employment, the greatest differences between us are in our ideological outlooks.

In Jerusalem, perhaps more than any other city in Israel, political outlook and worldview has a very great bearing on a mayor’s activities and decisions.

Our beloved, eternal and indivisible capital city is in danger.

While claiming to be in favor of a united and sovereign Jerusalem, over the past five years, Jerusalem’s current mayor has acted against these interests. Unbeknown to most, the extreme Left has been allowed to gain control over east Jerusalem.

The Jerusalem municipal portfolio for east Jerusalem is in the hands of none other than Meir Margalit, a prominent member of Meretz, and was awarded to him by Barkat himself.

While his name may not be familiar to many, Margalit, who openly and proudly advocates a return to the pre- 1967 lines, is also a founder and leading member of The Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD).

ICAHD, funded heavily by the European Union, is a prominent member of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against the State of Israel, participating in anti-Israel events across the globe, accusing Israel of “ethnic cleansing,” “genocide,” “collective punishment,” and “apartheid.” Furthermore, Margalit’s ICAHD cofounder, Jeff Halper, has said “I think it is impossible to have a Jewish state.”

Margalit’s extreme positions are not theoretical. In 2010, he and his Meretz cocouncilors signed a letter addressed to Adidas executives calling on them to withdraw their sponsorship of the Jerusalem Marathon because part of its route passed over the “Green Line.”

What was Barkat’s reaction to such a blatant attack on Israel’s sovereignty? A few months later, Barkat handed Margalit responsibility for east Jerusalem.

For the past few years, we have had the absurd situation of the mayor investing power in someone who not only rejects Israeli sovereignty in over half of the city, but is part of an international network working to boycott our state.

This might seem strange behavior for a mayor who tries to position himself as right wing. However, this is merely a political façade maintained to garner votes.

Barkat has always been on the Left of the political spectrum, and came as little surprise when, immediately after the Gaza Disengagement in 2005, Barkat, at the behest of Ehud Olmert and Omri Sharon, became the official Kadima representative in Jerusalem. While those expelled from Gush Katif were left homeless and unable to restart their lives, Barkat was busy lobbying on behalf of the party responsible for the Disengagement, claiming that “Kadima is a worthy party to lead the country at this time.”

It is this concessionist attitude which is creating facts on the ground in Jerusalem in a very worrying manner.

The number of demolitions of illegally built houses in east Jerusalem has been dramatically reduced under the Barkat-Meretz alliance. While Barkat seemingly supports the removal of Jews from their legal homes, he appears to be far less sure about upholding the law and demolishing illegal homes in the Arab sector, and thus provides encouragement for more and more illegal Arab building, further upsetting the already delicate demographic balance.

Furthermore, in 2011, during a speech at the National Defense College, Barkat suggested a plan to divide Jerusalem and give parts of it to the Palestinian Authority.

The plan was lauded by the extreme Left, and in particular by Oslo-architect Yossi Beilin, who wrote a whole article congratulating Barkat on coming clean on his views to divide Jerusalem.

Under Barkat’s tenure, the Arabs of east Jerusalem – who according to polls wish to remain under Israeli sovereignty – have become infiltrated by the PA and other extremist organizations, which have gained a stronger foothold in the city in recent years.

In 2011, according to Haaretz, Barkat met with a group of radical Islamists dedicated to Israel’s destruction, including the brother of a terrorist involved in the Mercaz HaRav massacre in which eight yeshiva students were killed. This was against the advice of the Shin Bet and the Jerusalem Police, who made their concerns known to Barkat’s office before the meeting.

These are just some of the many ways in which Jerusalem is being changed, a situation which should be of deep concern to all those who care about our beloved capital city.

This is also seemingly why Meretz, and Labor Party leader Shelly Yacimovich, are strongly endorsing Barkat for another term.

For there to be change in this policy, Jerusalem needs to be led by someone with strong roots in the national camp, which is solidly behind me and has given me its strongest endorsement.

I know what needs to be done to return Jerusalem from the dangerous course it has taken in the last five years.

This is why, as one of my first acts as mayor, I will immediately strip Meretz of its control over east Jerusalem and give that portfolio to someone with a clear Zionist vision, who has no qualms about Israel’s control over every inch of Jerusalem. I will not give power to those who want to relinquish Jerusalem, meet with terrorist sympathizers or talk about conceding land in our capital city to the PA.

This is the clear difference between Barkat and myself.

The choice is clear: vote for Barkat and his Meretz partners, and another five years of the creeping disengagement from Jerusalem, or together we can make the sweeping changes necessary to maintain the unity of Jerusalem under full and unequivocal Israeli sovereignty.

The writer is the Jerusalem mayoral candidate for Likud Beytenu and the former chairman of the Jerusalem Development Authority.

October 21, 2013 | 21 Comments »

Subscribe to Israpundit Daily Digest

Leave a Reply

21 Comments / 21 Comments

  1. dove Said:

    I understand but there was no other candidate that was strong enough to defeat him other than possibly the haredi’s which would be worse.

    The first 4 words of my previous post to you were “I agree with you.”

  2. @ Shy Guy:
    I understand but there was no other candidate that was strong enough to defeat him other than possibly the haredi’s which would be worse.

    Just keep the pressure on Barkat that’s all you can do for now.

    I was actually quite surprised when I saw some of the coverage. I did not realize that Jerusalem was being ‘modernized’.

  3. dove Said:

    My real point was that even tho the current Mayor is what? more secular? I think his impact will be less damaging than if the haredi got control.

    I agree with you but Nir Barkat has done nothing special. The city is messy, the bureaucracy is flourishing and the costs and taxes just keep moving along. In addition, as being a Torah observant Jew myself, I am not happy with Barkat’s grandiose plans to make Jerusalem a multicultural metropolis like Paris or London or New York. I’ve had enough Hellenization these past 2300 years, thank you.

  4. @ Shy Guy:

    “Jerusalem also can’t handle an ultra Orthodox Haredi agenda either

    That is actually what I meant. I am not very good at this right wing left wing stuff. Been watching too much U.S. tv over the years.

    My real point was that even tho the current Mayor is what? more secular? I think his impact will be less damaging than if the haredi got control.
    He is being challenged and back peddling and realizes that a divided Jerusalem is not ever going to be acceptable so if he wants to make friends with what he claims are left that does not include an agenda that would divide Jerusalem.

  5. dove Said:

    So I was on the right track. How COULD they benefit Jeruselem? Wasn’t the candidate who came in 2nd haredi?

    You mean the “correct” track. 🙂 Yes.

    I didn’t say they would benefit Jerusalem. We’re here because you insinuated that this is a right versus left wing issue, with ultra orthodoxy thrown into the stew. If you simply meant to originally say “Jerusalem also can’t handle an ultra Orthodox Haredi agenda either”, then we are in agreement.

    From my end they appear to behave more like ‘enemies of the state’ and will keep Jews off the Temple Mount but let Muslims do what they want? Wouldn’t they divide Jerusalem?

    There are nuts – bad nuts – among them, fewer than on the left. However, as Torah observant Jews, I would expect them to know better.

    The Haredi mayoral candidate’s letter to Arabs reflects the extreme spiritual and moral depravity of himself and the goons around him. The problem is that the Haredim are sheeple. They don’t think for themselves. Their rabbis control them like golems.

    I need to add that what I’m writing here are generalizations but legitimate ones. And the biggest generalization of all which is absolutely true is that the leftist secularist Jew-hating Israeli media will do anything to make Israel’s religious Jews – of almost all stripes and shades – look bad, whenever the chance arises.

  6. @ Shy Guy:

    In any case, what does serving in the IDF have to do with your point about Jerusalem not being able to handle them?

    From my end they appear to behave more like ‘enemies of the state’ and will keep Jews off the Temple Mount but let Muslims do what they want? Wouldn’t they divide Jerusalem?

  7. @ Shy Guy:

    And the Haredi sector has major problems

    So I was on the right track. How COULD they benefit Jeruselem? Wasn’t the candidate who came in 2nd haredi?

  8. dove Said:

    Then WHO are the baboons who won’t work or serve in the army? I thought it was the ultra orthodox?

    It’s them. But that has nothing to do with right or left. The left are just as bad, if not worse, about serving in the IDF. BTW, I’m for Moshe Feiglin’s call for a professional volunteer IDF.

    In any case, what does serving in the IDF have to do with your point about Jerusalem not being able to handle them?

  9. Now let’s get back to your original comment:

    dove Said:

    Jeruselem also can’t handle an ultra right wing agenda either.

    It has nothing to do with right or left. For the most part, the ultra-orthodox parties are expedient. Their principles are essentially who will benefit their sectoral interests the most.

    The key word is sectoral. And the Haredi sector has major problems. Their poverty rate is very high because they shun higher (and even lower) education and a tremendous proportion of the adults learn all day – and someone is paying for that.

    As such, they promote massive welfare benefits for themselves, subsidies for their institutions, lowering of their own taxes and raising everyone else’s.

  10. dove Said:

    Haredi is ultra orthodox right?

    Right, as in correct.

    Ultra orthodox do not believe that this is the time for Israel to be returned to the Jewish people right?

    Wrong. Very wrong. The vast majority of Haredim aren’t interested in the return of the British Mandate. However, many don’t practically care and almost every last one of them does not recognize the halachic (versus pragmatic) legitimacy of a secular Israeli government.

    What am I missing here?

    Accuracy.

  11. Back sooner than I expected but I plan on taking a little siesta before din as I have to work tonite – need to be well rested. I work from my home office so it’s absolutely Purrrfect!

  12. @ Shy Guy:
    I see I didn’t take long to respond to your comment – I just checked the time but I am going to be heading out again shortly and won’t be back before it’s nitey nite for you!

  13. @ Shy Guy:
    Haredi is ultra orthodox right? Ultra orthodox do not believe that this is the time for Israel to be returned to the Jewish people right? They are not claiming that the Jewish people are not the rightful owners of Israel but it has to be in a time that Hashem has given them the sign. Although, it was man – or the UN that sent the Jews back to Israel claiming that the Jews needed their own homeland – and even tho it may not have been Hashems timing to do that at that time Hashem would take it into consideration that the Jews had NO CHOICE. What am I missing here? Sorry I took so long to respond but I had a couple of errands to run.

  14. dove Said:

    ultra orthodox

    You first said “ultra right wing”.

    The two are not the same. For example, it was the ultra orthodox Shas Party which allowed Rabin to enter into the Oslo Accords.

  15. The Likud is a hypocrite on Jerusalem… its candidate hasn’t gained traction in the polls. Gee, I wonder why.