On Sunday morning, November 21,a Hamas gunman opened fire in the alleyways of Jerusalem’s Old City, killing one civilian and injuring another three. The attacker used a submachine gun which is quite rare these days, with most of the recent attacks being stabbings with knives. The terrorist, who was neutralized on the scene, was relatively older (about 42 years old) and initial specifications indicate that he was a man of religion.
This attack is another record in the rising tensions in East Jerusalem, which do not necessarily make headlines every day but have been heating and bubbling over the surface in a number of hotspots, including Nablus Gate, al-Aqsa compound, and the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood. There are several reasons for this flair-up; the ongoing friction between police forces and young Palestinians at Nablus Gate; the increasing phenomenon of Jews praying on the Temple Mount, which is perceived as provocation by the Waqf; and the problematic developments in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood in which the Palestinian Authority and Hamas have encouraged the tenants to prevent their eviction by refusing any Israeli court-offered compromise.
Moreover, Hamas continues its efforts to leverage its status and influence in the Palestinian arena regarding Jerusalem. The rising competition and rivalry between Hamas and the PA demands that each group take a dominant stance on this issue, resulting not only in a growing discourse within the Palestinian community throughout Israel and beyond but also in a dangerous escalation led by Hamas, with the PA being dragged into it. Hamas’s immediate manifestations of support for any attack, including the incident on Sunday, along with the lack of a guiding hand and a broad and comprehensive vision by Israel, are becoming the conceptual and motivational infrastructure for future attacks, which will inevitably escalate beyond Jerusalem.
Jerusalem is no longer just a mixed city. Jerusalem is a center of sensitivity and even explosiveness that requires responsibility and policies that rely on a broad and comprehensive understanding of the area, especially regarding coordinated and synchronized conduct in the centers of friction. It is doubtful if one truly understands the complexity of the situation, and even more doubtful is whether anyone is trying to formulate an overall policy or action strategy to solve this situation.
On Sunday morning, November 21,a Hamas gunman opened fire in the alleyways of Jerusalem’s Old City, killing one civilian and injuring another three. The attacker used a submachine gun which is quite rare these days, with most of the recent attacks being stabbings with knives. The terrorist, who was neutralized on the scene, was relatively older (about 42 years old) and initial specifications indicate that he was a man of religion.
This attack is another record in the rising tensions in East Jerusalem, which do not necessarily make headlines every day but have been heating and bubbling over the surface in a number of hotspots, including Nablus Gate, al-Aqsa compound, and the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood. There are several reasons for this flair-up; the ongoing friction between police forces and young Palestinians at Nablus Gate; the increasing phenomenon of Jews praying on the Temple Mount, which is perceived as provocation by the Waqf; and the problematic developments in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood in which the Palestinian Authority and Hamas have encouraged the tenants to prevent their eviction by refusing any Israeli court-offered compromise.
Moreover, Hamas continues its efforts to leverage its status and influence in the Palestinian arena regarding Jerusalem. The rising competition and rivalry between Hamas and the PA demands that each group take a dominant stance on this issue, resulting not only in a growing discourse within the Palestinian community throughout Israel and beyond but also in a dangerous escalation led by Hamas, with the PA being dragged into it. Hamas’s immediate manifestations of support for any attack, including the incident on Sunday, along with the lack of a guiding hand and a broad and comprehensive vision by Israel, are becoming the conceptual and motivational infrastructure for future attacks, which will inevitably escalate beyond Jerusalem.
Jerusalem is no longer just a mixed city. Jerusalem is a center of sensitivity and even explosiveness that requires responsibility and policies that rely on a broad and comprehensive understanding of the area, especially regarding coordinated and synchronized conduct in the centers of friction. It is doubtful if one truly understands the complexity of the situation, and even more doubtful is whether anyone is trying to formulate an overall policy or action strategy to solve this situation.