United Nations headquarters
United Nations headquarters iStock

The Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations on Thursday denounced the passage at the United Nations General Assembly of the “Jerusalem resolution” which denies the Jewish connection to the Temple Mount.

The resolution, which was approved on Wednesday by a majority of 129-11 with 31 abstentions, refers to the Temple Mount solely by its Arabic name, al-Haram al-Sharif. The text is voted upon annually as part of a series of resolutions known as the "Palestinian Package."

"We are deeply disturbed by the deliberate and offensive omission of the 'Temple Mount' designation in the 'Jerusalem resolution,' passed by the United Nations General Assembly, which effectively denies both Jewish and Christian connection to one of the most sacred sites for all three faith communities," said Dianne Lob, Chair, William Daroff, CEO, and Malcolm Hoenlein, Vice Chair of the Conference of Presidents.

“It is an historical fact that the Temple Mount is the site of both the First and Second Temples and is the holiest place in Judaism,” they added.

“The vote sets a dangerous moral precedent that is both historically inaccurate and detracts from critical efforts to promote inclusivity and peace in the region. We welcome the Biden Administration and the governments of Australia, Canada, Hungary, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, and Palau for rejecting this shameful and false resolution, and call upon other nations to oppose resolutions that unfairly single out and condemn Israel while needlessly exacerbate political tensions,” the Jewish leaders said.

The US, which voted against Wednesday’s resolution, said, “We believe the practice of voting year after year on the same resolutions in the General Assembly does nothing to bring us closer to that goal. The majority of these texts are unbalanced and, in many ways, they undermine the prospect of dialogue and cooperation. In doing so, they also damage the credibility of the United Nations.”

“I want to highlight one specific issue of serious concern, which is the reference to the holy sites in the Jerusalem text. The text only references ‘Haram al-Sharif,’ rather than ‘Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount,’ which is agreed terminology that recognizes the shared and diverse history of the holy site. The omission of this inclusive terminology is of real and sincere concern. It is morally, historically, and politically wrong for the members of this body to support language that denies both the Jewish and Muslim connections to the Temple Mount and Haram al-Sharif,” said the US envoy.

Israel's Ambassador to the United Nations, Gilad Erdan, addressed the General Assembly before Wednesday’s vote and denounced the anti-Israel resolutions.

Erdan, in his remarks, attacked the Palestinian Authority, which is running a campaign of lies and incitement against the State of Israel and did not even condemn the murder of the late Eli Kay in Jerusalem last week by a Palestinian Arab terrorist.

"One of the most absurd demands in these resolutions is the call to maintain the status quo in Jerusalem, when in essence, the resolution does the exact opposite. By referring to the holiest site in Judaism, the Temple Mount, only by its Muslim name, the resolution itself is changing the status quo! The hypocrisy of these resolutions is truly outrageous. A resolution about Jerusalem that does not refer to its ancient Jewish roots is not an ignorant mistake, but an attempt to distort and rewrite history! At every Jewish wedding ceremony the newly married couple stands under the wedding canopy and pledges to never forget their deep Jewish connection to Jerusalem, 'If I forget you, O Jerusalem, may my right hand lose its skill,'" said the Ambassador.

“So let me be clear – whether it’s through terror attacks against Jews at our holy sites or biased UN resolutions that are completely detached from reality, the eternal bond between the Jewish people and Jerusalem – our capital – will never be erased," stressed Erdan.

Did you find a mistake in the article or inappropriate advertisement? Report to us