There are many ways to test the notion of Jerusalem as the undivided capital

of Israel. One could do a comparative analysis of how much the Municipality

invests in East and West Jerusalemroughly 10:90. One could drive up the
road that neatly divides the bougainvillea draped neighborhood/settlement
of East Talpiot and Palestinian Jabal Mukaber, a model of a neighborhood
excluded from the city planning process; or consider that Palestinians, nearly
40% of the population of the city, are second class residents denied the right
to vote in national elections. For absolute clarity, one need only look at the 8
Jerusalem neighborhoods located squarely within the Municipal boundary
but relegated to the other side of the Separation Barrier.
Findings from Ir Amims comprehensive new report, Displaced in their Own
City, reveal that at least 80,000 and possibly more than 100,000 Palestinians
between 1/4 to 1/3 of the entire Palestinian population of Jerusalem, linked
to the city for generations by ties of family, livelihood, economics, identity,
culture, and religionnow live in these abandoned enclaves. The area of
Kufr Aqab and Semiramis as well as the Shuafat refugee camp, including the
neighborhoods of Ras Khamis, Ras Shehadeh, and Dahiyat al-Salaam, are
totally, indisputably divided from Jerusalem by a concrete wall and
checkpoints, as well as the Municipalitys near complete abdication of
responsibility for providing basic services, safety oversight and law
enforcement.
From afar, these neighborhoods appear to be thriving; one sees a skyline of
new development and ambitious construction rather than a sprawling,
dilapidated favela. But zoom in and one sees that buildings are being
erected within several meters of one another, with no municipal oversight to
ensure basic engineering and safety standards. UNRWAs project director in
the Shuafat refugee camp estimates that in the event of an earthquake some
80% of the buildings around the earthquake vulnerable camp will collapse.
Miles of roads across the eight neighborhoods are unpaved, posing a severe
health and safety hazard. In some places, sewage flows freely in the streets.
There is an intolerable dearth of schools and health care services, a
particularly acute problem given that Israeli ambulances will not enter the
neighborhoods, requiring Palestinian ambulances to meet them at
checkpoints for transfer to hospital. Delays can be fatal.
What is more shocking than the devastation itself is the realization that the
neighborhoods beyond the Barrier are not accidental; they are the creation
of policies which, since the annexation of Jerusalem in 1967, have
manipulated migratory trends toward an unstated goal: absorbing the land
without the people. Israeli policy has sought to maintain territorial control
over East Jerusalem and to ensure a substantial Jewish majority in the city:
first, through the expropriation of one-third of Palestinian land for Israeli use
and second, through the denial of Palestinian individual and collective rights

(i.e. denial of full civil status and attendant social and political rights).
Building on that foundation, in 2004 Israel began constructing a separation
barrier around Jerusalem, ostensibly designed to serve as a security buffer.
In fact, it delineated a political boundary to Jerusalem that sought to ensure
a firm Jewish majority and full territorial control of the city and surrounding
areas, conveniently excising 8 Palestinian neighborhoods in the process.
These neighborhoods are an extreme mirror of Israeli policy in East
Jerusalem, a pillar of which is Palestinians near complete exclusion from the
planning processand access to building permitsand the maintenance of
gross socio-economic disparities to which the Barrier has been a primary
contributor. For the poorest of the poor (the overall poverty rate in East
Jerusalem is 75.4%), the push-pull dynamic of housing within the Barrier in
East Jerusalem being cost prohibitive and the availability of more affordable
albeit unsafe alternatives beyond the Barrierdue to the Municipalitys
disinterestamounts to nothing less than the silent transfer of Palestinians
to the outer perimeter of the city.
As a possible harbinger of Israels ultimate intentions, in 2006 security
responsibility in the Kufr Aqab Semiramis area was transferred from the
Police to the Military (the IDFs Binyamin Brigade), effectively converting
civilians into subjects of a military administration. Justified by statements
from various political figures, one must ask if these steps indicate intentions
to relinquish the land as a trade for not locating a future Palestinian capital in
East Jerusalemin other words, unilaterally dividing Jerusalem without
addressing the Historic Basin, the very heart of a political resolution on the
city. Until such a resolution is reached, and so long as Israel maintains its
control over East Jerusalem, the Israeli government and the Municipality of
Jerusalem will continue to bear responsibility for the fate of the residents of
the eight neighborhoods beyond the Barrier. Failure to take action will
further undermine the stability of Palestinian life in Jerusalem, the
democratic foundations of Israeli society and any future political resolution
on the city.