Lifta was a Palestinian village whose residents left in 1948 during the creation of the state of Israel. (The precise circumstances of their departure remains contentious.) Nowadays, the uninhabited remains of the village form an interesting historical site. This might change soon: there are proposals to turn the site into a luxury housing project.
I remember well the day I visited Lifta. It was a hot Saturday morning last summer. We were on a long ramble around Jerusalem and our tour guide showed us through the ruins of Lifta. We stopped by the water spring, where some locals were taking a relaxing Shabbat dip. (You can see us pass through Lifta in this video. I’ve joined the gym since then.)
As we stood in Lifta, politics naturally got raised, as did some voices. Our guide insisted on using Lifta to attempt to contextualise Palestinian terror. I insisted on replying that nothing justifies such terror, and that those who commit terrorism in the 21st century would have never lived in Lifta nor anywhere else in what became Israel. We agreed to differ and walked on.
It’s up to Israel what it does with Lifta. As an outsider, my for-what-it’s-worth preference would be for them to preserve the site as it is. This is not so much for any political reasons, nor for any related to the conflict and refugee issue. After all, the area Lifta is located in territory that would remains Israel’s under any conceivable peace deal. It belongs to Israel and always will – amen.
However, it is an area rich in history, mentioned in the Bible. Any development will loosen the sense of connection to the past. Architecturally, the ruins are fascinating and the area is an intriguing place to look around. There is controversy in Israel itself about this issue – Israelis disagreeing about something? Who’d have thought it? – which is expected to be resolved soon.
Your thoughts?
Look what we found in the coverage of Lifta…
http://honestreporting.com/guardian-places-knesset-on-arab-farmland/
There are places in Israel which should be maintained, as they are memorials to remind of history, e.g. the Kotel, Joseph’s tomb, etc. However, the vast majority of the land was given to Israel not as a museum, but as a place to live, grow, multiply, farm, harvest, etc. This land is for the people who are getting on with their living. There is a relevant verse in Isaiah 49:20 – The children born during your bereavement will yet say in your hearing,’This place is too small for us; give us more space to live in.’
I always prefer parks and trees and springs to buildings. But, people have to live somewhere.
I am curious; I can’t frame an argument on how Lifta could be a “context for terrorism”. What did the tour guide say?
Stan
Yes, there is no question that Lifta is a part of Israel and that we need places to build on in our tiny country, but as one who grew up happily in Jerusalem, I fondly remember many school trips and weekend family outings to Lifta, which is one of a few nature attractions in Jerusalem that haven’t been built on or over-modernised yet. In the eighties it was declared a nature preserve. So why don’t we let a few more generations of kids enjoy it before we have no choice and HAVE to build there. In any case, the locals had instructions from the Arab Higher Committee to evacuate the village so it can be used as a sniper base to shoot at Jewish neighbourhoods. The Hagana, Etzel and Lehi have taken over the village and stopped the sniping. It is part of Israeli history and has to be kept lest we forget it!
BTW, when you wiki Lifta, it is very interesting that ALL of their references are anti-Israeli / pro-palestinian websites! Biased much?
Better to make new history. Israel is full of history built on history built on history. That’s life!
“I’ve joined the gym since then”
There are, of course, two aspects to this issue. One is political and the other is about conservation.
From a conservation point of view, even in the UK where awareness on the subject is high, not every historical building or site merits conservation.
A candidate site or region has to have outstanding features in order for it to be classed as an area of special scientific/natural interest or historical interest.
Conservation costs money – usually public money – and therefore sites to be invested in must objectively justify that by having, for example, some outstanding architectural feature or being the site of some rare botanic species.
I don’t know if Lifta can justify itself from that point of view, but that is definitely a question for conservation professionals rather than the general public.
As for the other question – well it is pretty clear that there are plenty of people intent upon making political capital out of places such as Lifta.
It is surely telling that their concern does not appear to extend equally to other sites such as the Jewish quarter in Hevron or the ancient 8th century synagogue in Gaza, let alone the Jewish burial ground in Tripoli which is now covered in concrete.
[...] [...]
There obviously has to be a sensible balance struck between nature conservation and using land for housing & other facilities for Israel’s Citizens .
I would want to try to conserve as much of Israel’s countryside as possible because it is beautiful & we hold it in trust to hand on to the future generations of The Jewish People .
There is also the Spiritual aspect of The Land Of Israel to consider . In Judaism , Eretz Israel is Spiritually linked to The Jewish People – We should do everything We can to show respect to Our Sacred Land & help protect it .
For further information on Conservation in Israel – please go to the website of The Society For The Protection Of Nature In Israel :
http://www.teva.org.il/english/