Israelis Appear Unperturbed by U.n.’s Vote on Jerusalem

Israeli officials are downplaying the significance of this week’s U.N. Security Council demand that Israel rescind its plan to expropriate roughly 140 acres of Arab-owned land in Jerusalem.

The failed resolution “is very moderate,” said Gad Ya’acobi, Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations.

Officials expressed gratitude for the American veto, the first in five years.

But the Israelis also noted that in contrast to previous Security Council resolution, the one voted on 14 to 1 did not condemn Israel.

The resolution ultimately placed before the Security Council Wednesday night was significantly toned down from the original draft proposed by the Palestine Liberation Organization last week, when debate on the issue began.

The final language called upon Israel to rescind the expropriation orders and to refrain from future expropriations.

It also reaffirmed support for the peace process.

And unlike most previous U.N. resolutions critical of Israel, it did not call on the world body to take any further action on the issue.

“The U.N. has a very well-known, consistent view on Jerusalem,” said Ya’acobi, explaining why he was not alarmed that the world body was taking up the issue now.

Ya’acobi said that representatives of several Security Council countries came over to him after the vote to insist that they were still close friends of Israel and of the peace process, despite their need to take a stand on Jerusalem.

Israel had argued that with Israel and the Palestinians engaged in direct negotiations, it was inappropriate for the Security Council to discuss the issue. Negotiations on Jerusalem are scheduled to take place as part of final- status talks, beginning next year.

That was the view taken by the United States in casting its veto.

Explaining the veto, Secretary of State Warren Christopher told a Senate committee Thursday: “We thought it was so important to protect the peace process and prevent institutions outside that process from taking steps that might interfere it.”

The veto prompted harsh reaction around the world.

But Israeli diplomats minimized the significance of the outcry.

“It will pass,” said one diplomat, speaking on the condition of anonymity.

“Give it a week or two,” he said, adding that he expected Israel and the Palestinians would soon agree to put the issue behind them.

Meanwhile, however, the Arab League continued efforts to summon a special meeting of its Jerusalem committee to discuss the issue.

These efforts were reportedly slowed by the animosity between several of the invited heads of states. But the American veto is said to have renewed the initiative.

Egypt’s Foreign Minister, on a visit in Morocco, which heads the Arab League’s Jerusalem committee, condemned the veto.

“It is inappropriate that a veto be used against a resolution which aimed to defend the peace process,” he told reporters Thursday.

And Jordanian Foreign Minister Abdul-Karim Al-Kabariti said he summoned the American ambassador and used “very harsh language” to convey his country’s stand.

This came as more than three-quarters of Jordan’s Parliament called on the government to recall Jordan’s ambassador to Israel and to expel the Israeli ambassador in Amman.

Among the parliamentarians supporting the non-binding measure were pro- government lawmakers who had supported to Israeli-jordanian peace treaty signed last October.

But speaking to a Jewish audience in New York on Thursday, Jordanian Crown Prince Hassan was sanguine on the future of Israeli-Jordanian relations and decidedly subdued in his response to the Jerusalem issue.

The Oxford-educated brother of King Hussein was elliptical in his comments to the Conference Of President of Major American Jewish Organizations.

He implied, however, that while the Israeli action on the land expropriation was unfortunate, so was the resulting storm.

“Unfortunately, over the past several days the Israeli actions in Jerusalem, albeit implying a decision to extend housing to all inhabitants of Jerusalem, has been not only misunderstood but mispackaged,” said Hassan, alluding to the Israeli argument that the expropriations are needed for the city’s natural growth.

“Somehow, the international media has picked this up an extension of the Israeli desire to control everything in Jerusalem,” said Hassan.

Hassan said the problem was caused in part by “absence of a structured Israeli- Palestinian discussion on Jerusalem, as promised over the horizon” in the final-status talks.

Hassan went on to offer what was interpreted as a relatively mild criticism of the American veto.

“As far as we are concerned, the role of the superpower is to promote stability on a range of issues,” including security, nuclear non-proliferation, he said.

The Israeli diplomat said although Hassan’s remarks were directed to the American Jewish community, he expected that the Jordanian anger over the issue would also blow over.