“Go West”: Reflections on the “West” in West Jerusalem

By Elan Ezrachi

* Published in Saliba Sarsar and Carole Monica C. Burnett, eds. What Jerusalem Means to Us: Jewish Perspectives and Reflections. North Bethesda, MD: Holy Land Books/Noble Book Publishing Incorporated, 2023.

** Dr. Elan Ezrachi is a Jerusalem-based consultant and independent scholar of the relations between Jewish Diasporas and Israel. His book, Awakened Dream: 50 Years of Complex Unification of Jerusalem, was published in 2017. Dr. Elan served in various executive roles, including Director of the International Department of Melitz –Center for Jewish Zionist Education, Director of the Charles Bronfman Mifgashim Center, Executive Director of Masa Israel Journey, and Director of the International School for Jerusalem Studies at Yad Ben-Zvi. He is an active player in the Israeli Jewish Renaissance scene and was the founding chair of Panim for Jewish Renaissance in Israel.

My father was born in Jerusalem on April 1, 1925. On that day, another iconic event took place in another part of the city: the opening ceremony of Hebrew University. My father, Eitan, was born in the newly settled modern Jewish neighborhood of Rehavia located in West Jerusalem. According to our family records, he was the first baby boy who was born in the neighborhood that had sprung up just a year before. Those three benchmarks: the founding of Hebrew University, the birth of my father, and the founding of Rehavia frame my essay.

Let’s go back a few years. In 1911, my father’s father, Shmuel Brisker, left Odessa and sailed to Jaffa. He was 23 years old and an active Zionist. Unlike most of his Jewish contemporaries who were emigrating from Eastern Europe to the United States, he chose to go to Palestine. After arriving in Jaffa, he moved to Jerusalem, a place he never left until his death in 1969. Soon after his arrival, he was joined by Bella Temkin, his girlfriend from Odessa. They got married in Jerusalem and started their journey as a family. One feature of their journey was to change their name into a Hebrew name: Ezrachi.

My grandparents were secular modernist Eastern European Jews. By the time they had arrived in Jerusalem, there was a very small modernist community present in the city. Most of the Jews in Jerusalem at the time were traditional-Orthodox, representing the ‘old’ (pre-Zionist) community of Jews that had lived in the city for centuries. Still, my grandparents found a small group of like-minded people who chose to live in the city that was governed by the Ottoman Empire. Their community was the nucleus of what would later become modern West Jerusalem.

World War I wreaked havoc in Jerusalem. Many residents, Jews and Arabs, were deported or ran away. The city was in shambles; those who remained suffered from dire physical hardships. My grandparents, like many others, were forced to leave the city and were exiled to Tiberias in the Galilee. In December 1917, the fate of Jerusalem changed dramatically when the British army conquered the city and marked the beginning of a new era. Shortly after, my grandparents returned to Jerusalem. At first, the British had to restore basic living conditions but soon afterwards they midwifed a glorious chapter that transformed Jerusalem into a modern city. In 1920, the British military administration was replaced by a civil system paving the way for further progress. This status remained until May 1948, when the British Mandate ended.

During the British rule of Jerusalem, the city’s visual image and character were radically altered, as well as its geographical and demographic dimensions. While the British did not build many monumental buildings themselves, they were catalysts for a robust process of urban planning and development. They set new planning guidelines that shaped the look of the city for the years to come. Already in 1918, they brought a city planner, architect William McLean, the Alexandria city-engineer, and commissioned him to draft a new masterplan for the city. Urban planning was an entirely new concept for the city that until then had evolved without clear guidelines. McLean’s concept was to move the city toward the west and keep the Old City separate, as a protected heritage site. Around the same time, Ronald Storrs, the British governor of Jerusalem, established the Pro-Jerusalem Society, a civil organization aimed to ensure that Jerusalem would develop according to strict guidelines that would preserve its beauty and significance. Several other planners came after McLean, among them Professor Patrick Geddes, who participated in the planning of Tel Aviv. Those plans and the actual developments that followed them had a clear Western-modernist orientation.
The British invested tremendous efforts in the development of Jerusalem. Once the Old City was defined as a heritage site, the westward sprawl began. The developing New City was part of Jerusalem, but it also had a distinct Western character, with a feel of a different city. The British planning codes were strictly modern and Western-oriented. They facilitated specific neighborhood masterplans that shaped the character of the new city. Those plans included zoning of private and public land uses; supervision of construction quality and the requirement that all building facades use natural limestone. In short, Jerusalem under the British rule went through a radical transformation that has influenced its character until this very day.

Where were the Jews in the transformation of Jerusalem? In the early days of Zionism, there was ambivalence toward the place of Jerusalem in the Zionist enterprise. When the Zionists imagined their project, they saw new agricultural settlements and modern cities along the coastline. Hence, the Kibbutz and Tel Aviv were signature features of the Zionist activity. Jerusalem had an image of an antiquated, religious, and conflicted site – images that secular Zionists were keen to avoid. The arrival of the British changed this ambivalence. The British policy regarding the centrality of Jerusalem pushed the Zionist leadership to focus on Jerusalem and develop it as its future political center. In the 1920s it was already clear that Jerusalem would be the political hub of the Zionist project.

One of the key expressions was the construction of the headquarters of the central national institutions in Jerusalem on King George Street. The headquarters compound was built in the heart of the new city, adjacent to the newly built Rehavia neighborhood. The opening of Hebrew University in 1925 added another dimension of Western culture within the Jerusalem landscape. The University was designed with strong European academic codes. Though the campus was in the eastern part of the city (on Mt. Scopus), the faculty and students came mostly from the rapidly developing western side. The new University, as well as the newly-built Hadassah Hospital, the National Library, the central Zionist organizations, and the new commercial center – all served as opportunities for new Jewish migration that came into the city. Thousands of European Jews who immigrated to Palestine during those years found their home in a developing modern city: West Jerusalem.

Together with the development of the new western city center and the aforementioned public buildings, the period of the 1920s saw massive development of new Jewish residential neighborhoods. Here, again, the Zionists were proactive. They purchased massive lands from declining Christian institutions (primarily the Greek Orthodox Church). During the British Mandate era around 40 Jewish neighborhoods were built. Most of them were quiet suburban developments with one-story, village-like homes. The Zionists invited a German-trained architect, Richard Kauffman, to oversee the project. Kaufmann was known for planning many sites all over Palestine, and most famously the six garden suburbs of Jerusalem. “Garden Suburb” was a style that was popular in England in the 1920s. The Garden Suburbs were a new modern direction in the urban culture of Jerusalem. They became home to the Hebrew University faculty, medical doctors, professionals, and leaders of the Zionist movement. Rehavia was the most famous neighborhood in this trend. A parallel process occurred among the Arab community. Well-to-do Arabs also built new and elegant neighborhoods, among them, Musrara, Talbia, Katamon, Baka, and Abu Tor.
The new Jewish neighborhoods had all the features of modernity: detailed masterplans, modern infrastructure, private homes with gardens, Hebrew street names, lighting, public transportation, communal facilities (schools, synagogues), in short, a modern urban concept. My grandparents bought a lot in Rehavia and built one of the first homes in 1924. My father grew up in Rehavia, the new neighborhood that possessed a European feel and look. Most of the residents of those neighborhoods had a European education and lifestyle. Hebrew was my father’s first language, and that was the main language that was spoken in the Jewish sections of West Jerusalem. The immigrant parents spoke other European languages: Russian, Polish, German, and/or Yiddish, but their children were raised on Hebrew. My father attended the famous modern Gymnasia School, and in the afternoon hours he was part of a Zionist youth movement. As most others of that community, he did not speak a word of Arabic, and as a secular person he had no reasons to visit the holy sites in the Old City. Like many of his generation, when he graduated high school, he left Jerusalem to establish a new Kibbutz in the north. Several years later, he returned to Jerusalem to attend Hebrew University.

The British who ruled the city for 31 years allowed the Jewish and Arab communities to develop, each side with its cultural and religious integrity. Jews and Arabs lived side-by-side in a mixed city with clear ethnic, cultural, and religious dividing lines. Aside from a few exceptions, Jerusalem was essentially a mosaic of separate Jewish and Arab neighborhoods.
*
At the end of 1947, the situation in Jerusalem changed dramatically. After the United Nations resolution of November 29, a war broke out between the Jewish and Arab communities all over Palestine. This war quickly spilled into the confines of Jerusalem. The City, which was once an integrated urban unit, became the battlefield between the local Jewish and Palestinian communities that were present in all parts of the city. Each side strived to gain control of significant strategic, political, and religious sites. In May 1948, the State of Israel was declared, and the Palestinians in Jerusalem were reinforced by the Jordanian Legion. As was described earlier, the Jewish community of Jerusalem was mostly located in the western part of the city. However, the roads leading to Jerusalem from the west were controlled by Palestinians and, as a result, the Jewish community of Jerusalem was under a harsh siege for several months. The Israeli forces struggled to break the siege and restore the connection between the Jews of Jerusalem and the rest of the newly declared country. They succeeded in this endeavor but stopped short of taking over the entire city to include the Old City.

This essay does not intend to cover the details of the battle over Jerusalem. Suffice it to say that the War of 1948 resulted in the division of the city. In November 1948, the two sides agreed to draw a line that defined two distinct neighboring cities. West Jerusalem was under Israeli control, and East Jerusalem was under the control of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. The dividing line reflected, for the most part, the demographic reality that existed prior to the War. Before 1948, most Jews resided in West Jerusalem, and therefore they remained in their homes. A small minority of Jews who lived in East Jerusalem, primarily in the Old City, were forced to move to the Western side. On the Palestinian side, a more significant number of individuals and families lived in West Jerusalem and because of the War they lost their homes and moved elsewhere.

From this point, the term West Jerusalem gained two new connotations: first, it was the site of the Capital of the newly established State of Israel. Shortly after the end of the War, Israel declared West Jerusalem as the Capital of the young country. Israel swiftly placed its central bodies in the city: The Knesset (Parliament), government offices, Supreme Court, and national memorial sites. Second, the term “West Jerusalem” now held a new geopolitical meaning; it was the part of Jerusalem that was under full Israeli control. The other part was in the hands of a different country. And above all – West Jerusalem was entirely Jewish.

While the division of Jerusalem was somewhat of a defeat for the Israeli side, it served as an opportunity to invest further in the development of West Jerusalem, a trend that had begun during the British era. In addition to the institutional development, the government of Israel settled large numbers of new Jewish immigrants who were migrating to Israel after 1948. Many of them were settled in new public housing projects that were swiftly built for them, mostly toward the southwest.

I was born into this city in 1955. All my childhood images and memories were rooted in Israeli West Jerusalem. The West Jerusalem of my childhood was a relatively small town, with under 100,000 residents in 1949 and 200,000 in 1967. The population in West Jerusalem lived either in the Jewish and (now empty) Palestinian neighborhoods that were built before 1948, or in the new immigrants’ housing projects that were added to the west of the veteran neighborhoods. The British western downtown that was created prior to 1948 became the main city-center of Israeli West Jerusalem.

When we wanted to get away from our immediate surroundings, there were two diametrically opposed options: going toward the east meant facing an international border. It was both dangerous and exciting. There were warning signs, barbed wires, and mined areas as well as occasional cases of sniper shooting. But going toward the border was also exciting as we could peek into the other side.

The other option was going toward the west, and that meant getting away from the border and being absorbed in the images of the developing western city. West of our homes there were distinctly modern images: the new campus of Hebrew University, the monumental Knesset (Parliament) building, Mt. Herzl, the Israel Museum, wide parks, and even a European-style pine tree forest. And if we wanted to leave the city, the only open exit route was to the west, toward Tel Aviv.
The term West Jerusalem of my growing up meant several things. First, it was that part of Jerusalem over which Israel could assert its control. It also meant that there is a part of Jerusalem that was not under Israel’s control and not within its reach. Second, there was the yearning to end this liminal stage and connect to the other side, primarily to the sites that were important to Jews. Third, West Jerusalem was also a stand-alone city.

 

 

The clear image of West Jerusalem ended abruptly in June 1967. It happened quickly as a result of the Six Day War. On June 7, only 48 hours after the war erupted, Israel conquered all parts of East Jerusalem, and shortly afterwards, the entire West Bank was under Israeli control. The stunning military conquest set the stage for a new Israeli narrative: United Jerusalem. East and West Jerusalem would now need a new framing. They were no longer two cities, side-by-side, divided by an international border.

Two weeks after the war ended, the Israeli government announced new municipal boundaries for the city. The new city limits included all sections of the Jordanian city as well as surrounding areas that were populated with small Arab villages. Israeli law was extended to these new boundaries. The Palestinians who were living in those newly added areas received the status of permanent residents of Israel. The walls that separated the two cities were quickly removed, and once again, Jerusalem was one urban universe. Jews and Arabs who had been separated for 19 years were again residents of one city that would now be governed by one administration. This time, the city was not controlled by an outside force, i.e., the British, but by Israel, the dominant power. And this Jerusalem was much larger than any prior definition of the city.

For me, as an adolescent growing up in the western (Israeli) side, the unification was a very exciting change. A new and exotic city that had been hidden behind a wall was revealed. Within walking distance from my home, I could experience other languages, cultures, historical and religious sites, enchanting markets, and human diversity. But this honeymoon was short-lived. As time went by, it became clear that the unification of Jerusalem was a forced artificial maneuver. The international community did not recognize the unilateral Israeli decision, and the Palestinians of Jerusalem saw themselves as a community under occupation. Israel asserted its rule by massive building all over East Jerusalem, settling Jews in the newly added areas. New roads, archeological excavations, a new national holiday (Yom Yerushalayim), naming streets and sites in Hebrew – all were aimed at creating an irreversible reality. Jerusalem became the heart of the Palestinian-Israeli dispute.

What happened to the concept of West Jerusalem? Did it retain its significance? In many ways, the term lost its meaning. West Jerusalem as a modern, Western-oriented, secular, Israeli urban space was no longer the lead narrative of Jerusalem. Israelis turned their attention eastward with the focus on intensification of the unification narrative. Jerusalem today is more religious, more conflicted, and its future is amorphous. The residents of Jerusalem are insulated from each other in their discrete religious and ethnic communities. They tend to focus on their daily lives. Perhaps the dominant narrative is survival until the next chapter.
Still, to me, the term West Jerusalem is not completely lost. It represents the vision of what Jerusalem can be. It is my story, and I would like to see this story continued. As a community activist, I believe that there is a tremendous vitality in the city and there are many groups and communities that wish to restore the idea that Jerusalem is a liberal, Western-oriented place and not a site of controversy and dispute.

References
Abdelrazek, Adnan. The Arab Architectural Renaissance in the Western Part of Occupied Jerusalem. Cyprus: Rimal Books, 2017.
Ben-Arieh, Yehoshua. The New Jewish Jerusalem in the Mandate Period (1917-1948): Neighborhoods, Houses, People (Hebrew Edition). Jerusalem: Yad Ben-Zvi, 2012.
Benvenisti, Meron. Jerusalem, the Torn City. Minneapolis, MN: Minnesota University Press, 1976.
Biger, Gideon. “Early British Contributions to the Development of Jerusalem, 1918-1925.” Mehkarim Begeagrafiyah shel Eretz Yisrael 9 (1976): 175-200 (Hebrew).
Elon, Amos. Jerusalem: City of Mirrors, London: Little, Brown and Company, 1989.
Ezrachi, Elan. Awakened Dream: 5o Years of Complex Unification of Jerusalem (in Hebrew). Herzlia, Israel: Albatros, 2017.
Halamish, Aviva. Jerusalem Throughout the Ages, Unit 10: Jerusalem during the British Mandate, Second Edition (in Hebrew). Ra’anana, Israel: Open University Books, 2020.
Schmeltz, Uziel O. Modern Jerusalem’s Demographic Evolution, Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1987.
Segev, Tom. One Palestine, Complete: Jews and Arabs under the British Mandate, London: MacMillan, 2000.