UNESCO's Position on the Haram al-Sharif

by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem

In April 2016, UNESCO’s Executive Board (the UN’s science and culture organization) recommended that Jews have no right to the Noble Haram al-Sharif in the city of Jerusalem, and the recommendation stated that the Buraq Wall, sacred to Muslims and called by Jews the Wailing Wall, has nothing to do with Jews.

France was among the states that ratified this recommendation to raise it to the organization’s Board of Trustees, made up of 58 states.

The Board of Trustees met in October 2016 to affirm the recommendation, turning it into a resolution. Twenty-six states voted in favor of the resolution, 24 states abstained, two states — Turkmenistan and Serbia — were absent, and six states voted against the resolution: America, Britain, Latvia, Estonia, the Netherlands, and Germany.

It is noteworthy that not a single European state voted in favor of the resolution — even France, which had ratified the recommendation, abstained from voting because of Jewish and Israeli pressure on it.

Israel mobilized after the organization’s Executive Board ratified the recommendation, attempting to convince states not to vote in favor of the recommendation, because passing the resolution would demolish the Zionist argument the Zionists have adopted to convince the world that Palestine belongs to them alone. The Zionists have said, and continue to say, that the holy land that is Palestine, or the land of Canaan, belongs to them because they were the first to establish a state on it, and because the Lord granted it to them as His chosen people.

Although the Zionists’ claims cannot withstand scientific logic, many states, Western ones especially, wanted to rid themselves of Jews and found in the land of Palestine their solution, deciding to adopt the Jewish argument despite its rottenness and its contradiction of historical facts.

UNESCO did not make its decision arbitrarily or to please anyone — it made it on scientific grounds, after a thorough study of the Zionists’ arguments and the arguments of Palestinian Arabs.

UNESCO found no evidence or proof of the Zionists’ claims, and found no archaeological materials supporting Jewish presence at the Haram al-Sharif. This finding is not new for many historians and researchers. The Samaritans, for example, who constitute one of the sects of Judaism, reject any sacred status for Jerusalem, considering it like any other city or village in Palestine.

The UNESCO resolution states that Jerusalem is sacred to the three religions — Islam, Christianity, and Judaism — but the Samaritans do not believe this, insisting there is no sacred place for them in Jerusalem at all. The Samaritans add that Jewish holy sites are found on Mount Gerizim in the city of Nablus, located in the West Bank.

On the mountain stands the altar of Isaac, where the Lord redeemed Isaac with a great ram, there stands the rock that was laid bare when Moses asked the Lord to speak with him, and there also stands the Temple of Solomon.

American historian Thompson wrote that there is no trace of the construction of a first Jewish temple, and no evidence has been found supporting Jewish claims, though he confirmed there are traces of a second temple. Arab historian Kamal Salibi, for his part, affirmed that the geographic names appearing in the Torah in Jews’ possession are not found in Palestine at all, but in a location in the Arabian Peninsula, and denied that Jews have any connection to Palestine.

The UNESCO resolution is very useful for the Palestinian-Arab argument on the international stage, and Arabs no longer need much evidence and proof to establish that Palestine is Arab, and that its Palestinian people has the right to return to it. The resolution is pivotal for Arab diplomatic activity at both the popular and official levels.

Arabs can now confront the Zionists with a new UN resolution in international forums, conferences, and meetings, and can also reinforce their positions at the United Nations, wresting new resolutions in favor of Palestinians in the General Assembly, and also influence Security Council members. Israel’s argument, meanwhile, has suffered a powerful blow, especially since its settlers continue violating the sanctity of Al-Aqsa Mosque, claiming it is a sacred place for them, and that the Haram al-Sharif stands on the ruins of Solomon’s Temple.

But the question that always arises: do Arabs benefit from international resolutions in achieving their interests? So far, we have not benefited from international resolutions, especially those related to the Palestinian cause.

There is, for example, UN General Assembly Resolution 194, concerning the return of Palestinian refugees, which America and the Soviet Union supported at the time. Since 1948, we have sung its praises without any practical benefit from it.

There is a ruling by the International Court of Justice declaring illegal the wall Israel built around most areas of the West Bank, and it seems we have forgotten it. There is the International Criminal Court, which we have long roared about returning to in order to try Israel, but it seems our roaring is nothing but a voice in a hollow drum.

Along the same lines, I do not think we will benefit from the UNESCO resolution, and it is likely we will forget it after a while. Here our fundamental problem appears: Palestine suffers from the absence of leaderships sincerely devoted to the cause, willing to sacrifice their comfort and interests for the homeland to live.

Source: Translated from the original Arabic, “موقف اليونيسكو من الحرم القدسي” by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem.