2.3. Eyal Weizman
2.3. Eyal Weizman
2.3. Eyal Weizman
Since the 1967 war, when Israel occupied the West Bank and the Gaza
Strip, a colossal project of strategic, territorial and architectural planning
has lain at the heart of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The landscape and the built environment became the arena of conflict.
Jewish settlements — state-sponsored islands of “territorial and personal
democracy”, manifestations of the Zionist pioneering ethos — were
placed on hilltops overlooking the dense and rapidly changing fabric
of the Palestinian cities and villages. “First” and “Third” Worlds spread
out in a fragmented patchwork: a territorial ecosystem of externally
alienated, internally homogenised enclaves located next to, within,
above or below each other. The border ceased to be a single continuous
line and broke up into a series of separate makeshift boundaries,
internal checkpoints and security apparatuses. The total fragmentation
of the terrain on plan demanded for the design of continuity across the
territorial section. Israeli roads and infrastructure thereafter connected
settlements while spanning over Palestinian lands or diving underneath
them. Along these same lines, Ariel Sharon proposed a Palestinian
State on a few estranged territorial enclaves ‘connected by tunnels and
bridges’, while further insisting that Israel would retain sovereignty on
the water aquifers underneath Palestinian areas and on the airspace and
electromagnetic fields above them.
1 This lecture and chapter was extracted from Weizman, E., ‘The Politics of Verticality:
The West Bank as an Architectural Construction’, Mute Magazine, 1 (2004), 27,
https://www.metamute.org/editorial/articles/politics-verticality.
Indeed, a new way of imagining territory was developed for the West
Bank. The region was no longer seen as a two-dimensional surface of
a single territory, but as a large three-dimensional volume, containing
a layered series of ethnic, political and strategic territories. Separate
security corridors, infrastructure, and underground resources were
thus woven into an Escher-like space that struggled to multiply a single
territorial reality.
What was first described by Meron Benvenisti as crashing ‘three-
dimensional space into six dimensions — three Jewish and three
Arab’ became the complete physical partitioning of the West Bank into
two separate but overlapping national geographies in volume across
territorial cross sections, rather than on a planar surface.
The process that split a single territory into a series of territories
is the “Politics of Verticality”. Beginning as a set of ideas, policies,
projects and regulations proposed by Israeli state-technocrats, generals,
archaeologists, planners and road engineers since the beginning of the
occupation of the West Bank, it has by now become the common practise
of exercising territorial control as well as the dimension within which
territorial solutions are sought.
Archaeology
When the Zionists first arrived in Palestine late in the nineteenth
century, the land they found was strangely unfamiliar; different from
the one they consumed in texts photographs and etchings. Reaching the
map co-ordinates of the site did not bring them there. The search had
to continue and thus split in opposite directions along the vertical axis:
above, in a metaphysical sense, and below, as archaeological excavations.
That the ground was further inhabited by the Arabs and marked
with the traces of their lives complicated things even further. The
existing terrain started to be seen as in a protective wrap, under which
the historical longed-for landscape was hidden. Archaeology attempted
to peel this visible layer and expose the historical landscape concealed
underneath. Only a few metres below the surface, a palimpsest made of
five-thousand-year-old debris, traces of cultures and narratives of wars
and destruction was arranged chronologically in layers compressed
with stone and by soil.
8. Archaeology, Architecture and the Politics of Verticality 125
Archaeological Architecture
The 1967 war marks a stylistic transition in Israeli architecture. The wave
of nationalistic sentiment that followed the “liberation” and unification
of Jerusalem, together with the surveying of abundant archaeological
sites in the West Bank were incorporated overnight into a new mode of
architectural production. The practice of archaeology was extruded into
a new building style.
In the 1950s and 1960s state-sponsored housing developments
reflected the socialist ethos in the austere, white-block model of
European Modernism. But as Zvi Efrat claims, when the Six-Day
War wound-up, national taste was radically transformed. The focus
of architectural inspiration shifted from European Brutalism to
Jerusalemite Orientalism. The “organic” structures of the oriental old
city of Jerusalem were reproduced in endless light and material studies,
in charcoal drawings and in archaeology albums.
Then, without the rhetorical manifestos that announce the immanent
emergence of a new avant-garde, new neighbourhoods, especially in
and around Jerusalem, started boasting arches and domes (most often
reproduced in prefabricated concrete) colonnades and courtyards,
within “old city-like” clusters of buildings clad with a veneer of slated
Jerusalem stone.
Concrete skeletons were wrapped with layers embodying series
of references varying from the biblical to the oriental, crusader Arab
and even mandatory style, used separately or all together. It was this
architectural postmodernism “avant la lettre”, that reflected the confusion
of a newly inaugurated national-religious identity.
8. Archaeology, Architecture and the Politics of Verticality 127
Regarding the truth about the remnants of the Temple ‘in the depth
of the mount’, there are few and varied scholarly studies and opinions.
But Charles Warren, a captain in the Royal Engineers. who was in 1876
one of the first archaeologists to excavate the tunnels and subterranean
chambers under the Haram/Temple Mount, recorded no conclusive
ruins of the Temple, but a substance of completely different nature:
The passage is four feet wide, with smooth sides, and the sewage was
from five to six feet deep, so that if we had fallen in there was no chance
of our escaping with our lives. I, however, determined to trace out this
passage, and for this purpose got a few old planks and made a perilous
voyage on the sewage to a distance of 12 feet… The sewage was not water,
and not mud; it was just in such a state that a door would not float, but
yet if left for a minute or two would not sink very deep…
the time of his rather peaceful reign, the city’s growing poverty on the
one hand and its rapid expansion on the other threatened to overrun its
image much more than the potential destruction of war.
Whilst enacting the by-law demanding the stone finish, Storrs sought
to regulate the city’s appearance, to resist time and change, and could
not have realised that whilst dressing Jerusalem in a single architectural
uniform, he in effect created the conditions for its excessive expansion,
self-replication, and sprawl as a single entity.
In the context of contemporary Jerusalem, the stone does more than
just fulfil an aesthetic agenda of preservation — it defines visually the
geographic limits of Jerusalem and more importantly — since Jerusalem
is a holy city — marks the extent of its holiness.
The idea of Jerusalem as the City of God, and thus as a holy place,
is entrenched in Judeo-Christian belief. In their Diaspora, Jews started
yearning for a city that became in their imagination increasingly
disassociated from the reality of the physical site. Jerusalem itself
became holy rather than a place containing holy sites.
If the city itself is holy, then, in the contemporary context, the totality
of its buildings, roads, vegetation, infrastructure, neighbourhoods,
parking garages, shops and workshops is holy. A special holy status is
reserved for the ground. And if the ground is holy, its relocation as stones
from the horizontal (earth) to the vertical (walls), from the quarries
to the façades of buildings, transfers holiness further. As Jerusalem’s
ground paving of stone climbs up to wrap its façades, the new “ground
topography” of holiness is extended.
When the city itself is holy, and when its boundaries are constantly
being negotiated, redefined, and redrawn, holiness becomes a planning
issue. Shortly after the occupation of the eastern Arab part of the city, the
municipal boundaries of Israeli Jerusalem were expanded to include the
Palestinian populated eastern parts as well as large empty areas around
and far beyond them (and the municipal area of Jerusalem grew from
33.5 square kilometres in 1952 to 108 square kilometres in 1967). These
“new territories” annexed to the city, designed as “reserves” for future
Israeli expansions, were required to comply with Storrs’ by-law — their
buildings to be clad in stone, preserving the traditional and familiar
Jerusalem look — turning suburban neighbourhoods, placed on remote
and historically insignificant sites far from the historical centre, to
8. Archaeology, Architecture and the Politics of Verticality 131
Terrain
More, then, than anything else, the Israeli-Palestinian terrain is defined by
where and how one builds. The terrain dictates the nature, intensity and
focal points of confrontation. On the other hand, the conflict manifests
itself most clearly in the adaptation, construction and obliteration of
landscape and built environment. Planning decisions are often made not
according to criteria of economical sustainability, ecology or efficiency
of services, but to serve strategic and national agendas.
The West Bank is a landscape of extreme topographical variation,
ranging from four hundred and forty metres below sea level at the shores
of the Dead Sea, to about one thousand metres in the high summits of
Samaria. Settlements occupy the high ground, while Palestinian villages
occupy the fertile valley in between. This topographical difference
defines the relationship between Jewish and Palestinian settlements in
terms of strategy, economy and ecology.
The politics of verticality is exemplified across the folded surface
of the terrain — in which the mountainous region has influenced the
forms the territorial conflict has produced.
Vertical Planning
Matityahu Drobles was appointed head of the Jewish Agency’s Land
Settlement Division in 1978. Shortly after, he issued The Master Plan for
the Development of Settlements in Judea and Samaria. In this master plan he
urges the government to
[…] Conduct a race against time […] now [when peace with Egypt
seemed imminent] is the most suitable time to start with wide and
encompassing rush of settlements, mainly on the mountain ranges
of Judea and Samaria… The thing must be done first and foremost by
creating facts on the ground, therefore state land and uncultivated land
must be taken immediately in order to settle the areas between the
concentration of [Palestinian] population and around it… being cut apart
by Jewish settlements, the minority [sic] population will find it hard to
create unification and territorial continuity.
The Drobles master plan outlined possible locations for scores of new
settlements. It aimed to achieve its political objectives through the
134 For Palestine
Community Settlements
The “Community Settlement” is a new type of settlement developed
in the early 1980s for the West Bank. It is in effect a closed members’
club, with a long admission process and a monitoring mechanism that
regulates everything from religious observance to ideological rigour,
even the form and outdoor use of homes. Settlements function as
dormitory suburbs for small groups of Israelis who travel to work in the
large Israeli cities. The hilltop environment, isolated, with wide views,
and hard to reach, lent itself to the development of this newly conceived
utopia.
In the formal processes, which base mountain settlements on
topographical conditions, the laws of erosion had been absorbed into
8. Archaeology, Architecture and the Politics of Verticality 135
Optical Urbanism
High ground offers three strategic assets: greater tactical strength,
self-protection, and a wider view. This principle is as long as military
history itself. The Crusaders’ castles, some built not far from the location
of today’s settlements, operated through the reinforcement of strength
already provided by nature. These series of mountaintop fortresses were
military instruments for the territorial domination of the Latin kingdom.
The Jewish settlements in the West Bank are not very different. Not
only places of residence, they create a large-scale network of “civilian
fortification” which is part of the army’s regional plan of defence,
generating tactical territorial surveillance. A simple act of domesticity,
a single-family home shrouded in the cosmetic façade of red tiles and
green lawns, conforms to the aims of territorial control.
But unlike the fortresses and military camps of previous periods,
the settlements are sometimes without fortifications. Up until recently,
only a few settlements agreed to be surrounded by walls or fences. They
argued that they must form continuity with the holy landscape; that it is
the Palestinians who need to be fenced in.
During the First Intifada many settlements were attacked, and
debate returned over the effect of fences. Extremist settlers claimed
that protection could be exercised solely through the power of vision,
136 For Palestine
The settlers come to the high places for the “regeneration of the soul”.
But in placing them across the landscape, the Israeli government is
drafting its civilian population alongside the agencies of state power,
to inspect and control the Palestinians. Knowingly or not, settlers’ eyes,
seeking a completely different view, are being “hijacked” for strategic
and geopolitical aims.
Shilo spreads up the hills overlooking Tel Shilo, where over three
thousand years ago the children of Israel gathered to erect the Tabernacle
and to divide by lot the Land of Israel into tribal portions… this ancient
spiritual centre has retained its power as the focus of modern day Shilo.
pastoral: ‘The city of Emanuel, situated 440 metres above sea level, has a
magnificent view of the coastal plain and the Judean Mountains. The hilly
landscape is dotted by green olive orchards and enjoys a pastoral calm.’
There is a paradox in this description. The very thing that renders the
landscape “biblical” — traditional inhabitation, cultivation in terraces,
olive orchards and stone buildings — is made by the Arabs whom
the settlers come to replace. The people who cultivate the ‘green olive
orchards’ and render the landscape biblical are themselves excluded
from the panorama.
It is only when it comes to the roads that the brochure mentions
Arabs, and that only by way of exclusion. ‘A motored system is being
developed that will make it possible to travel quickly and safely to the
Tel Aviv area and to Jerusalem on modern throughways, bypassing Arab
towns’ (emphasis in the original). The gaze that can see a “pastoral,
biblical landscape” will not register what it doesn’t want to see — the
Palestinians.
State strategy established vision as a means of control, and uses the
eyes of settlers for this purpose. The settlers celebrate the panorama as
a sublime resource, but one that can be edited. The sight-lines from the
settlements serve two contradictory agendas simultaneously.
The Emanuel brochure continues, ‘Indeed new Jewish life flourishes
in these hills of the Shomron, and the nights are illuminated by lights
of Jewish settlements on all sides. In the centre of all this wonderful
bustling activity, Emanuel, a Torah city, is coming into existence.’
From a hilltop at night, a settler can lift his eyes to see only the blaze
of other settlements, perched at a similar height atop the summits
around. At night, settlers could avoid the sight of Arab towns and
villages, and feel that they have truly arrived ‘as the people without
land — to the land without people’. (This famous slogan is attributed to
Israel Zangwill, one of the early Zionists who arrived to Palestine before
the British mandate, and described the land to which Eastern European
Zionism was headed as desolate and forsaken.)
Latitude thus becomes more than merely relative position on the
folded surface of the terrain. It functions to establish literally parallel
geographies of “First” and “Third” Worlds, inhabiting two distinct
planes, in the startling and unprecedented proximity that only the
vertical dimension of the mountains could provide.
8. Archaeology, Architecture and the Politics of Verticality 139
Bibliography
Boeri, S. ‘Border Syndrome’, in Franke, A., Weizman, E., Boeri, S. and Segal, R.
(eds), Territories (Berlin: KW and Walther Keoing, 2003).
Etkes, D., ‘Settlement Watch’, Peace Now, 2003, https://peacenow.org.il/en//
category/settlements
Graham, S., Urbicide, in Jenin, 2002, www.opendemocracy.net.
Halper, J., The Matrix of Control, https://icahd.org/get-the-facts/matrix-control.
Kemp, A., ‘Border space and national identity in Israel’, in: Yehuda Shenhav
(ed.), Theory and Criticism, Space, Land, Home, Jerusalem and Tel Aviv
(Jerusalem: The Van Leer Jerusalem Institute and Hakibbutz Hameuchad
Publishing House, 2000), pp. 13–43
Lein, Y., ‘Behind the Barrier’, Jerusalem: B’Tselem, 2003, http://www.btselem.
org/Download/2003_Behind_The_Barrier_Eng.doc.
Lein, Y. and Weizman, E., ‘Land Grab’, Jerusalem: B’Tselem, 2002, https://www.
btselem.org/download/200205_land_grab_eng.pdf.
Ministry of Agriculture and the Settlement Division of the World Zionist
Organization, Masterplan for Jewish Settlements in the West Bank Through the
Year 2010 and Masterplan for Settlement for Judea and Samaria, Development
Plan for the Region for 1983–1986. Jerusalem: Ministry of Agriculture and the
Settlement Division of the World Zionist Organization, 1983.
Rotbard, S., ‘Tower and stockade’, in Segal, R. and Weizman, E. (eds), A Civilian
Occupation, Tel Aviv and London (Tel Aviv and London: Babel Press and Verso
Press, 2003), pp. 59–67.
Segal, R. and Weizman, E., ‘The Mountain’, in: Segal, R. and Weizman, E. (eds),
A Civilian Occupation (Tel Aviv and London: Babel Press and Verso Press,
2003), pp. 39–58.
Sharon, A. with Chanoff, D., Warrior: The Autobiography of Ariel Sharon (New
York: Simon & Schuster, 2001).
Weizman, E., The Politics of Verticality, 2002, www.opendemocracy.net.