Letter from Foreign Minister Eban to Secretary-General U Thant on Jerusalem, 15 November:

On 25 September 1971, the Security Council adopted Resolution 298 (1971), which, among other things, called upon Israel "to rescind all previous measures and actions and to take no further steps in the occupied section of Jerusalem ". The following letter is the Israeli reply to the communication from Secretary-General U Thant which informed the Government of Israel of the Resolution:

Sir,

I have the honour to reply to your telegram of 26 September 1971, transmitting the text of Resolution 298 (1971) adopted by the Security Council at its 1582nd meeting on the previous day.

The central operative paragraph of the Resolution calls upon Israel "to rescind all previous measures and actions and to take no further steps in the occupied section of Jerusalem which may purport to change the status of the city, or which would prejudice the rights of the inhabitants and the interests of the international community, or a just and lasting peace". I propose to analyse the main provisions of this paragraph in order to place the situation in Jerusalem in its true light.

If the "status of the city" referred to in the Resolution means the situation existing before 5 June 1967, the renewal of that "status" would involve the restoration of a military demarcation line and other barriers cutting through the centre of the city, the cancellation of free access to their Holy Places for Jews and Israeli Moslems, which has prevailed only since 7 June 1967, and the re-imposition of a ban on residence or visit by anyone of Jewish faith in the Old City. Moreover, in order to restore the previous status Israel would have to demolish the synagogues and other sites destroyed by the Jordanian authorities and restored since then, and to close the cultural, humanitarian and -educational institutions on Mount Scopus which have been re-opened since June 1967. Thus the restoration of the previous status would involve rescinding the unity, peace and sanctity of Jerusalem today in order to restore the divisions, conflict and sacrilege which made the period 1948-1967 one of the darkest ages in Jerusalem's long history.

It is inconceivable that the majority of Security Council members could wish to restore that situation. Some of them have indicated that they do not.

The position of Jordan in a part of Jerusalem for nineteen years resulted from an aggressive invasion carried out against the injunctions of the Security Council in the first half of 1948. That position was never recognised by the world community. Thus it is not the case that an internationally accepted or valid status for Jerusalem has been set aside by anything done in the city since 1967. If one dismisses as inherently untenable the proposition that the Security Council wishes to tear Jerusalem apart again, one is left with the assumption that the concern expressed by the Council is for the effective status of the ethnic and religious communities. It has been asserted in some quarters that Israel is undertaking or planning actions with the aim of annulling the present heterogeneous character of the population. I can give assurance that this is not the case. Since 1967 the flight of Christian Arabs from Jerusalem under Jordanian occupation has been stemmed. The figures in 1967 were 10,800. Today they are 11,500. At the same time, the Moslem population has grown from 54,963 to 61,600 at the end of 1970, while the Jews, who numbered 195,700 in 1967 are now 215,500. There is nothing to indicate that these relative proportions are likely to be substantially changed in the coming years, and in absolute terms the Christian and Moslem populations are likely to increase and not to dwindle. Israel's view is that development of the city's services and amenities should be undertaken for all its communities, and not for one community alone.

Jerusalem has a population of 300,000, about three-fourths of whom are Jews, 61,600 are Moslems and 11,500 are Christians. For the past two hundred years, Jews have been the largest community. The 'rights of the inhabitants', whether Jews, Arabs or Moslems, include the right to administer their own city, to develop it, and to repair the havoc of war. Jerusalem has the right to normal existence as a living city, its life and institutions must be allowed to grow in the interests of all its inhabitants, and it cannot be artificially frozen at the point which it had reached over four years ago.

Since 1967, all Jerusalem's citizens have had their due voice in the administration of the city. In the last municipal election under the Jordanian occupation in 1963, there were only 5,000 eligible voters in a total Arab population of some 60,000. Only males over 21, property owners and rate-payers were permitted to vote. Irrespective of the results of the voting, the mayor was appointed by the Jordanian Government in Amman. On the other hand, in the 1969 election for the municipal council, universal suffrage for those over 18 years was introduced in the sector formerly under Jordanian occupation. The number of Arab citizens who actually cast their vote for the administration of the unified city in that election was greater than the total of those eligible to vote in 1963, during the Jordanian occupation.

All the citizens of Jerusalem, both in the western and the eastern parts of the city, have the right to normal municipal services. All the city's inhabitants now receive such services, which were non-existent or inadequate during the nineteen years of illegal Jordanian military occupation.

Since 1967, compulsory education laws have been strictly applied. A system of kindergartens, which did not exist under the Jordanian conquest, has been extended to the eastern part of the city. Vocational training has been expanded, including the opening of a night-school for working boys. The network of free medical services for schoolchildren, new mothers and babies, has spread to this section of Jerusalem. In a special program carried out in 1967, all children in East Jerusalem were given thorough medical check-ups, including skin, tuberculosis and eye tests, as well as vaccinations against diphtheria, tetanus and second shots against small-pox. Trachoma and malnutrition have now all but been eliminated. A new 300-bed hospital on Mount Scopus, to serve the northern and eastern parts of the city, will soon be opened.

The eastern section has been connected to the Jerusalem water-mains, providing round-the-clock water supply for the first time in history. A central sewage system has been introduced. The Municipality of Jerusalem has provided playgrounds, parks, libraries and youth clubs, where there were none before. An Arabic language theatre has begun performances. A developed social welfare system has been applied for the first time to this part of the city. The citizens living in East Jerusalem have the services of a Government Labour Exchange, 40 percent of the sections's workers have joined, and are protected by, the Israel Labour Federation. There is no unemployment in Jerusalem, low cost public housing and generous mortgage opportunities are being provided by the municipality to Arab residents.

Nothing, therefore, could be more inaccurate than to assert that the rights of the inhabitants of Jerusalem have been adversely affected by anything done or planned by Israel. Their rights to peaceful life and development, and to a voice in Jerusalem's affairs, have been fully respected and indeed advanced only since June 1967.

For twenty-two years Jerusalem has been Israel's capital and seat of Government. It is the unique and exclusive spiritual centre of Judaism as of no other faith. At the same time, the Government has always been conscious of the fact that the city is of deep concern to other faiths. Its religious and historical sites are precious to Christians and Moslems, as well as Jews. This concern was expressed by the Prime Minister of Israel on 27 June 1967:

"All the Holy Places in Jerusalem are now open to all who wish to pray in them and to the faithful of all religions without discrimination. It is our intention to place the internal administration and arrangements for the Holy Places in the hands of the religious leaders of the communities to which these places belong. "

The protection of the Holy Places is ensured by law. The Protection of Holy Places Law, 5727- 1967, states in its first paragraph:

"The Holy Places shall be protected from desecration and any other violation and from anything likely to violate the freedom of access of the members of the different religions to the places sacred to them or their feelings with regard to those places. "

No such law protected the Holy Places during the Jordanian occupation.

The intentions expressed by the Prime Minister, as well as the dispositions of the Law, are now part of the new reality in Jerusalem. The desecration of historic synagogues in the Old City and of the ancient cemetery on the Mount of Olives, which was carried out by the Jordanian authorities, and the denial of free access of Jews and Israeli Moslems to their holiest shrines have stopped. The churches, mosques, synagogues and other shrines are administered by each religious community. In Jerusalem today everyone is free to visit and pray at the Holy Places of the three great faiths. Pilgrims and visitors to the city, Government leaders, church dignitaries, parliamentarians, journalists, men of letters, tourists in their thousands, have testified that Jerusalem and the Holy Places are secure and open to all.

In developing the living city of Jerusalem we are, and shall be, constantly mindful of its historical treasures and spiritual heritage, and care is, and will be, taken to preserve them for the inhabitants of the world.

The policy of Israel concerning universal spiritual interests is as follows:

The measures taken to secure the protection of the Holy Places are only a part of Israel's effort to ensure respect for universal interests in Jerusalem. It is evident from United Nations discussions and documents that the international interest in Jerusalem has always been understood to derive from the presence of the Holy Places. Israel does not doubt its own will and capacity to secure the respect of universal spiritual interests. It has forthwith ensured that the Holy Places of Judaism, Christianity and Islam be administered under the responsibility of the religions which hold them sacred. In addition, in a spirit of concern for historic and spiritual traditions, my Government has taken steps with a view to reaching arrangements to assure the universal character of the Holy Places. In pursuance of this objective, the Government of Israel has now embarked on a constructive and detailed dialogue with universal religious interests. If these explorations are as fruitful as we hope, the universal character of the Holy Places will for the first time in recent decades find comprehensive expression.

As I informed you on 10 July 1967, Israel does not wish to exercise unilateral jurisdiction or exclusive responsibility in the Holy Places of Christianity and Islam, and is willing, in consultation with the religious interests traditionally concerned, to give due expression to that principle.

The changes which have affected Jerusalem's life and destiny as a result of the measures recently adopted may therefore be summarised as follows: Where there was hostile separation there is now intermingling and constructive civic union. Where there was a constant threat of violence there is now peace. Where there was once an assertion of exclusive and unilateral control over the Holy Places, exercised in sacrilegious discrimination - there is now a willingness to work out arrangements with the world's religious bodies, Christian, Muslim and Jewish, which will ensure the universal religious character of the Holy Places.

This is the first time that a Government in Jerusalem offers special expression for universal interests in Jerusalem instead of asserting its exclusive jurisdiction over all of them, The apprehension expressed in the Resolution lest interests of the international community have been adversely affected is thus without foundation.

The previous division of the city did not bring the Middle East closer to peace. On the contrary, that division was an open wound constantly exacerbated by outbursts of hostility and by recurrent Jordanian violations of the fragile armistice, which caused the murder of Jerusalem's citizens and made life in the city a frequent terror for many residents on both sides of the barbed wire. Today for the first time since 1948, Jerusalem is a city in which Jews and Arabs live together in peace and mingle in their thousands in the daily pursuits of their lives. Jerusalem has become an example of communal civic and regional co-existence, and is thus an augury of the just and lasting peace to which enlightened men aspire.

Jerusalem is for Israel the focal point of Jewish history, the symbol of ancient glory, of longing, of prayer, of modern renewal. It is also a source of universal inspiration. Israel's policy is to promote the rights of Jerusalem's inhabitants, to advance the interests of the international community, and thus to contribute to the promotion of a just and lasting peace.

The sharp discrepancy between the Jerusalem reality and the Resolution presented by Jordan and adopted by the Security Council has profoundly shocked the people of Jerusalem. This sentiment was expressed in the Prime Minister's statement of 26 October 1971, which remains valid. There are many difficulties in Jerusalem, as elsewhere, arising from regional tensions and hostilities as well as from economic and social factors. But in general, men of peace and good will have reason to be gratified by the peace, serenity, union and spiritual harmony which have been strengthened in Jerusalem since the barbed-wire fences went down and the Jews and Arabs of Jerusalem came together in a common devotion to their city. Nothing has been done or will be done to violate the rights of the inhabitants, the interests of the international community, or the principles of peaceful co-existence.