Jerusalem, divided

The 1662 Book of Common Prayer translates Psalm 122 more elegantly even than the King James Bible. “Jerusalem is built as a city that is at unity in itself.” Hubert Parry set those words to music in 1902 for the investiture of King Edward VII, and his gorgeous anthem has been sung at every subsequent British Coronation.

But Jerusalem has rarely been “at unity in itself,” and it certainly is not today. Neither the dazzling Anglican hymn, nor Thomas Cranmer’s baroque translation, nor, indeed, the original Hebrew words bear much relation to contemporary reality.

The status of Jerusalem isn’t part of the Israel-Palestine dispute. It is the Israel-Palestine dispute. Everything else might be resolved by negotiation. A border could be agreed that took account of demographic reality, probably involving land swaps. A compromise could be reached on the right of return, perhaps offering compensation to those whose theoretical right was not a practical reality. Steps could be taken to ensure the security of both sides. But the City of David, Al Quds to Muslims, remains the nub of the quarrel.

Hence the rage over President Trump’s decision to move the U.S. embassy there. When we consider the frequency with which the region is cursed by terrorism and war, the movement of a few dozen diplomatic personnel to a piece of land in West Jerusalem which will, in any conceivable final deal, remain Israeli, seems disproportionate.

After all, it is normal diplomatic practice to allow states to designate their own capitals, and to situate foreign legations in those designated capitals. Israelis have considered Jerusalem their capital since 1949, and, like the Psalmist, have declared it indivisible. That position was also taken by the U.S. Congress in 1995. Barack Obama told an AIPAC meeting in 2008: “Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided”.