Special status for Jerusalem - Problem solved?

Here's a wonderful example of my ADD tendencies. As I was getting started on today's post (still unfinished) I noticed an interesting article about Jerusalem. Of course, it is summarizing and commenting on an article in this month's Foreign Affairs, which has been sitting in the front seat of my car for a week now, unread. So today's post will wait for tomorrow, and I'll comment on the newspaper, rather than the journal article.

Two thoughtful academics (don't you love them!) have proposed an innovative idea to solve the seemingly intractable problem of Jerusalem. Since the idea of dividing Jerusalem has fouled up many a deal in the past, why not create a "special regime" for the city?

The idea involves joint administration by both Palestinians and Israelis, an "internationally staffed police force"- but the plan would not constitute the "internationalization" of Jerusalem, a big fat RED LINE for the Israelis.

How this would work remains to be seen. I hate to make analogies to personal life, but sometimes it is so appropriate! If two people can't get along well enough to be married, what makes anyone believe (especially judges in divorce cases) that they can cooperate after their divorce to raise their kids? So, is there any way to expect that warring factions could closely cooperate in such a fashion?

Well, in fact, on some issues like security, I expect that it could work. And by eliminating the geographic importance of demography, many of the issues that are sensitive today would no longer be so. However, on issues where power and identity remain intertwined with politics, I fully expect the system to have all sorts of problems, including the one of expecting cooperation where there is none.

But first, not mentioned in the article, is the likelihood of even adopting such a scheme in the first place. The scholars tout the virtues of their idea, but that doesn't mean that people mired in the day to day, mundane details of power politics on the ground would think it's a great idea. So what if Jerusalem "is too small, too densely populated, too architecturally linked, and the Israelis and the Palestinians are too riven by systemic distrust for them to govern the Old City on their own"? That's very abstract for people living in Jerusalem, whose IDs get taken away if they leave Jerusalem (Arabs, that is), whose houses get demolished (Arabs, once again), who almost never get building permits (Arabs, again).

Let me just say that it's an interesting idea, and I hope it gets a lot of looks by pundits and policymakers. As an academic, I like neat little ideas, but if they don't take off on the ground and in policy circles, they will go nowhere.