Israel at 70:Heritage Preservation and Social Resilience Yossi Ben-Artzi (bio) The strength of the State of Israel on its 70th anniversary is generally assessed in such standard terms as security, international status, economics, medicine, science, and social services. Its social strength as a democratic state can be appraised daily in its social security system, control over the Palestinian population in the West Bank, and the tense internal relations between political trends, religious affiliation, gender discrimination, and class stereotypes within Israeli society. The article deals with the cultural component of social resilience, and purports to describe and analyze to what extent Israel at 70 is prepared to look at its distant and recent past with its eyes wide open, in terms of preserving the historical evidence of its tangible heritage. It deals with the issue of preservation of the country's heritage and the readiness of Israel to advance toward maturity as regards this heritage and its role in the current landscape. The opening remarks of the State Comptroller's 2005 report on the preservation of historical sites in Israel, noted: The preservation of buildings and sites of cultural, historical and architectural value attests to the attitude of society toward its past and its values, which are in harmony with the principles of sustainable development, whose purpose is to ensure the preservation of material and spiritual resources for future generations as well. The loss of sites and historical buildings depletes the cargo of collective memory and therefore it is appropriate to preserve them.1 The State Comptroller is mandated to deal with issues related mainly to the existence and/or fulfillment of the provisions of the Fourth Appendix to the Planning and Building Law of 1991, which is erroneously identified as the Law for the Preservation of Sites and is primarily in charge of [End Page 84] the establishment of Preservation Committees and preservation lists in local authorities. This addendum, which at the time of its enactment was applauded by activists lobbying for the preservation of historical sites in Israel, was merely one step toward the development of a policy toward the preservation of sites in Israeli society but did not bring about a fundamental change. Moreover, to this day, in Israel's 70th year, it has no governmental authority comparable to the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) or the Nature Conservation and National Parks Authority, which have supervisory and enforcement powers. The time has come to scrutinize the past as a significant factor in shaping the image of Israeli society in the future, to deal with the past of the country and the heritage of all the factors that have shaped its cultural landscapes. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND British rule introduced new notions of conservation of the landscape in general and historical sites, especially in Jerusalem, in particular. However, the British were fully aware that the Holy Land was replete with ancient remains that they could not protect. As early as December 1918, the military command issued an "Antiquities Ordinance", and in October 1920, the Civil Administration established by virtue of the Mandate issued a similar order. Soon after, the "Department of Antiquities" was set up. The State of Israel followed their example, and in 1978 enacted a new and more advanced law, which granted the IAA extensive powers and improved methods of enforcement. This Authority also initiates the rehabilitation of antiquities sites and their integration into national parks as well-maintained tourism and study locations. The Antiquities Law is based on the definition of an antiquity as an asset made before 1700 ce or a zoological or botanical relic dating back as far as the year 1300 ce. Thus, this law did not cover any structure or other human action affecting the landscape after 1700 and exposed the entire built heritage of the past 300 years to disrepair and destruction, and to absolute dependence on the 1965 Planning and Building Law, and its substantive conception was regulatory; that is, the regulation of physical planning in Israel by creating a planning mechanism, the issuance of permits and authorizations for construction, road works, and infrastructure. In contrast to the Antiquities Law on structures of historical value, it exposed [End...
Read full abstract