Israel And Palestinian Heritage Destruction

Last month, Palestinian Minister of Tourism and Antiquities Hani Al-Hayek warned that during its 2023-2025 war on Gaza Israel damaged or destroyed more than 316 archaeological sites in Gaza and the West Bank. While most were from the Mamluk and Ottoman eras, others were from the early Islamic centuries and the Byzantine period. He argued that Israel is conducting “systematic targeting” of Palestinian historical sites as part of its long-term strategy of colonising and annexing the West Bank.

While the current right-wing Israeli government flatly rejects withdrawal from Palestinian territories conquered 58 years ago, the Arab world and the international community argue that regional peace depends on the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza. This means that Palestinians should be in charge of archaeological remains in these territories.

Hayek was prompted to speak out after archaeologists protected by Israeli troops raided a Byzantine era site near Ramallah and stole five columns. Israel claimed Palestinians had built a structure in the centre of the site, damaging the archaeological remains.

Both Israelis and Palestinians claim a second site, Sebastia, near Nablus in the northern West Bank belongs to their cultural heritage, although it has been ignored and unexcavated for decades. Israel holds the archaeological park, which is in Area C under full Israeli control, while the Palestinian town of Sebastia is in Area B, under joint Israeli and Palestinian Authority security control but Palestinian administration.

Israel has begun to expropriate 1,800 dunams of land for the “preservation and development” of Sebastia which has been settled from the Iron Age (1200-586 BC) through modern times. The site contains layers of history reaching back nearly 3en,000 years and contains Iron Age dwellings, walls, and a palace which exist alongside remnants from Roman times.

Sebastia was the capital of the northern Israeli Kingdom during the first half of the 10th century BC. Conquered by the Assyrians in 720 BC, Sebastia became an administrative centre under the Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, and Romans, Muslim Arabs and Ottomans.

The site and the modern village of Sebastia – which has about 3,200 Palestinian inhabitants – have been declared a World Heritage Site by UNESCO as the town is the location of Roman royal tombs, a Roman amphitheatre, medieval buildings, and a historic mosque built within a Christian church.

As the Israeli expropriation order covers the archaeological site and Palestinian olive plantations, Palestinian landowners were given two weeks to file legal objections to the seizure and their expulsion. This is the largest antiquities-related West Bank expropriation order issued by Israel since the 1967 occupation. While international law prohibits occupiers from carrying out excavations in areas they control, Israel has ignored this as well as most other laws governing occupations. In May 2023, Israel allocated $9.2 million for Sebastia.

The Israeli Peace Now movement declared: “Israel continues to harm Palestinian rights, expropriating thousands of dunams in violation of international law and settling the northern West Bank, an area with only a few thousand settlers compared with more than a million Palestinians.” The movement warned, “Israeli greed harms not only the landowners, but also the prospect of a peaceful solution that upholds the rights and heritage of both peoples.”

Emek Shaveh, an Israeli anti-occupation group founded by archaeologists, and Yesh Din, an Israel rights movement, issued a joint report in 2018 which stated, “Since 1967, Israel has endeavoured to appropriate the archaeological assets of the West Bank, based on the view that the Jewish heritage of places and antiquities testifies to a bond between the antiquities and the state of Israel, and constitutes a justification for deepening its control over ancient sites. This perception underlies every aspect of Israel’s archaeological practices in the West Bank.

“Israel’s control enables the physical exclusion of Palestinians from the sites and ancient finds through various means, ultimately weakening their connection to their heritage. It also enables Israel to shape the historical narrative of the sites by highlighting and glorifying their significance for the Jewish people and downplaying the role of other peoples and cultures who also had a part in the history of the region…

“Under the guise of concern for heritage, the government is investing tens of millions ..in turning heritage sites into weapons of dispossession and annexation.” The group added, “The intention to expropriate private land is anything but preservation; its purpose is to establish a tourism settlement that will detach Sebastia’s heritage from the [Palestinian] town and Judaize the area through the tourists who visit the site.”

Israel has weaponised archaeology to assert the legitimacy of its take-over of the land between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River. While striving to discover, develop and preserve Jewish archaeological remains in Palestine, Israel neglects or even harms non-Jewish or Palestinian heritage at the expense of Palestinians.

Meanwhile, Palestinian Archaeologists are trying to restore damaged sites. They have begun work on the Qasr al-Basha museum, a Mamluk-era palace located on a UNESCO heritage site dating back to 800 BC. After destroying 70 per cent of the museum by bombardment, Israeli troops occupying the site looted 20,000 ancient and medieval artifacts stored there.

UNESCO has reported damage to the Saint Hilarion Monastery, one of the oldest Christian heritage sites in the region, and the 7th century Omari Mosque, Gaza’s main place of Muslim worship. Due to the Israeli blockade on building material restorers have been compelled to scrabble in the ruins of these buildings for material for restoration.

In August, Israel appropriated 63 Palestinian West Bank archaeological sites, 59 in Nablus governate, three in Ramallah governorate, and one in Salfit governorate. Sixty-three were declared “Israeli historical and archaeological sites,” excluding Palestinian ownership. In total, Israel has taken over 2,400 out of the 6,000 Palestinian sites in the West Bank. This process can endanger the study of archaeology and history in this area if archaeologists involved are political motivated and preserve only what suits them while wiping out layers of remnants above and below layers, they explore. Meanwhile, Israeli archaeological organisations and personalities indulge in bitter competition with each other.

This article is written by Michael Jansen for the Jordan Times.

CrossFireArabia

CrossFireArabia

Dr. Marwan Asmar holds a PhD from Leeds University and is a freelance writer specializing on the Middle East. He has worked as a journalist since the early 1990s in Jordan and the Gulf countries, and been widely published, including at Albawaba, Gulf News, Al Ghad, World Press Review and others.

Related Posts

Trump, Netanyahu Rift Hits Rock Bottom: View From Amman

By Saleem Ayoub Quna

The Epic Fury Operation launched by the US against Iran in February 2026, will go down in modern history as the first open military conflict, where a superpower like the United States, has willingly and openly played the role of a war-proxy, on behalf of its smaller ally, Israel.

The difference of attitude between the two close allies, US and Israel, in relation to what they perceived as Iran’s threat, imminent or potential, was a key factor behind the gradual crumbling of the American-Israeli coordinated military and intelligence efforts, to bring down the regime in Tehran.


Israel under Benjamin Netanyahu’s extreme right-wing government, kept saying Iran posed an imminent existential threat to Israel, and therefore it must be brought down by force. While the US position was constrained by its previous international commitments on the issue of Iran’s nuclear ambitions, as stipulated in the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), signed between Iran and the P5+1 powers, during the administration of President Obama.


Since that moment Netanyahu kept vigorously urging, more likely lecturing the US and the West, on the dangers of the JCOPA agreement. When Donald Trump was elected President in 2017, things took an important and completely different turn. In the following year, he took the United States out of that internationally-backed deal as he had promised to do during his election campaign. He also kept his promises of moving the US Embassy to Occupied Jerusalem and recognize the occupied Syrian Golan Heights as part of Israel.


These symbolic and important gestures, whetted Netanyahu’s appetite for more American concessions to Israeli demands.


Netanyahu’s golden opportunity came when Trump was re-elected to his second term in 2023, the same year when Hamas launched its massive assault on the Israeli settlements in the so-called “Gaza enevlope”. Other militias connected and supported by Iran, including the Houthis in north Yemen, Hezbollah in south Lebanon, Syria under the previous regime and Shia factions in Iraq coordinated their efforts to stand by Hamas during that long and unprecedented confrontation with Israel.

For its part, Iran did not shy from making it clear that it helped create this “chain” of resistance factions to encircle Israel from three directions.

The second turning magical point in the US position on the issue of direct military intervention against Iran came about when Israel succeeded in serving Hezbollah, the severest military blow ever, in the pagers’ operation and the subsequent assassination of Hezbollah’s top leaders, including its charismatic Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah on Sept 27, 2024.


Trump was very impressed with all of that Israeli action and Netanyahu gave himself the full credit for this unexpected success.


Accordingly, Netanyahu’s plan to Trump was simple. Based on the Israeli accumulated intelligence and expertise on the Iranian internal scene and emulating its operation against Hezbollah leaders in Lebanon, accompanied by massive American air strikes would provide both allies with the best chance to finish the Ayatollahs in Tehran once and for all!


But as events unfolded, all of Netanyahu’s plans, personally and strongly endorsed by Trump and his military aides, suddenly started crumbling, one after the other. His relations with Trump slipped into stages of deterioration by the day and week as the closure of the Hormuz Strait by Iran, started hurting the world economy led by the US.


Here new red lights went on and the phone calls between the two men became more intense and vulgar. Then Trump decided to pass on the torch to his deputy, JD Vance, who seemed comfortable to tell Netanyahu what Trump avoided to do!


Conclusion: It is tricky to switch roles of allies in wars. A smaller entity can always stay safe as long as its leaders know the limits of their power and leverage. When people like Netanyahu think they have more power and clout than they actually have, versus their stronger ally, then irritation starts to brew, especially in the case of Trump who likes to show he is always in the driving seat. It also means that the leadership on the side of stronger partner has some problems of its own!


Whether it is a wrangle, rift, collision, divorce or worse between Trump and Netanyahu, we will not know for certain, until the negotiators in Switzerland close their files and head back home!

Continue reading
Will The US-Iran Deal Last?

By Ali Bakir

On June 15, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif announced via the US social media platform X that a peace deal between the US and Iran had been reached, following over two months of mediation by his country. Sharif expressed gratitude to Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Türkiye for their significant contributions, stating that the official signing ceremony would take place on June 19 in Switzerland. Following this announcement, a memorandum of understanding was signed electronically by US President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance on the US side, and by Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf on the Iranian side.

The reported agreement is characterized as a framework peace deal aimed at ending the 2026 Israel/US-Iran war and transitioning the current ceasefire into a broader diplomatic process. Although the text of the agreement has not yet been published, key reported elements include immediate cessation of military operations, reopening of the Strait of Hormuz to international shipping, and a 60-day negotiation period to address unresolved issues, particularly Iran’s nuclear program, alongside discussions on sanctions relief and access to frozen Iranian assets during follow-up negotiations.

This agreement follows two significant developments. First, Israel conducted military strikes on Iranian targets in western and central Iran around a week ago, marking the first such actions since April. Explosions were reported in Tehran, Tabriz, Isfahan, and other cities in response to Iranian missile launches that were highly performative. Second, Trump warned that Iran would “pay the price” for what he described as slow progress in negotiations to end the conflict, indicating that the US could resume strikes against Iranian infrastructure.

5 bullet points on the agreement

Although the agreement does not necessarily mean that the root causes that prompted the war have fully disappeared, a few observations are worth mentioning and analyzing.

First, a lot of narrative spinning is occurring publicly at the moment. While the main parties are trying to sell the agreement as a victory, there are factions within the broader regional camps (such as hardliners in both Iran and Israel) that oppose it. Critics in Iran have labeled the agreement a “humiliating capitulation,” arguing that it involves unjustified concessions. Hardline opponents have publicly criticized the negotiating team, with Iranian MP Mahmoud Nabavian stating that the latest draft is “more damaging” than previous versions. Similarly, Israeli officials emphasized that Israel was not directly involved in negotiating the US–Iran deal and does not necessarily consider itself bound by its provisions. Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz declared that Israel would not withdraw from territory seized in Lebanon and would continue to act against threats from Hezbollah and Iran if necessary.

Second, the timing of the agreement suggests that Iran was running out of options. As the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) focused on messaging and performative measures, the gap between their narrative and reality widened, with Iran’s ability to endure further pressure significantly diminishing. Trump’s counter-blockade against Iran’s restriction of the Strait of Hormuz imposed significant economic costs on Iran, leading to the decision to sign the agreement. It is estimated that the blockade could have cost Iran over $24 billion in just two months — almost equal to Iran’s reported total reserves of foreign currency — leaving the regime with little choice but to agree to the terms or face economic collapse.

Third, despite the negative reactions from hardliners in both Iran and Israel, the agreement highlights Trump’s genuine interest in reaching a resolution with Iran, especially following last year’s swift 12-day war between Israel and Iran. However, radical elements in both Iran and Israel seem intent on using procrastination, escalation, or military actions to sabotage meaningful attempts to achieve peace. Given that there is reportedly a 60-day negotiation period following the signing of the agreement, it is likely that these factions will continue to work against a comprehensive resolution.

Fourth, while Pakistan played a significant role in the mediation process, Qatar’s involvement was also crucial, as acknowledged by American, Pakistani, Saudi, and Turkish officials. Notably, neither the Qatari Foreign Ministry spokesman nor the ministry itself reported any independent measures taken by Qatar, apart from endorsing Pakistan’s mediation efforts. In fact, a Qatari spokesman denied any independent role in the mediation at this stage. Qatar’s involvement appears to have been executed at the request of the United States and had several dimensions.

Primarily, Qatar facilitated technical issues between the US and Iran, such as enabling the transfer of Iranian funds without direct US involvement, thereby avoiding the perception of it being a US initiative or taxpayer-funded. Additionally, Qatar played a role in establishing a communication channel between the United Arab Emirates and Iran, which emerged later in the mediation process. Finally, Qatar aligned itself with Saudi Arabia’s position, providing support for the Pakistani initiative.

Changing actors

Fifth, two awkward positions regarding the agreement can be highlighted. Firstly, the Europeans have been largely inactive in resolving the crisis yet somehow managed to host the official signing ceremony between the Americans and Iranians. Instead of crediting Pakistan, Switzerland offered to host the ceremony, which can be seen as an act of opportunism. Secondly, Oman, historically a favored mediator between the US and Iran, has been notably absent from this current arrangement. Oman’s position during this war was not popular in the Gulf Cooperation Council and beyond. According to a senior US administration official, Oman was removed from its mediation role in negotiations with Iran after the US concluded that Muscat had acted “very duplicitously” during the talks.

Finally, we must approach the prospects of the agreement with caution. It is essential to recognize that this is not a comprehensive peace agreement but rather a transitional framework. The future of the agreement will largely depend on the outcomes of negotiations in the next 60 days. Given that several factions within Iran and Israel are opposed to the agreement, we should not dismiss the possibility of sabotage, particularly from Israel.

Ali Bakir is an assistant professor of international affairs, security, and defense at Qatar University and senior nonresident fellow at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs. Anadolu

Continue reading

You Missed

‘We Must Resist The Israelisation of Our Societies – Francesca Albanese

‘We Must Resist The Israelisation of Our Societies – Francesca Albanese

Kier Starmer Quits The Labour Party Leadership

Kier Starmer Quits The Labour Party Leadership

Israel Killed Raghad on The Way to School

Israel Killed Raghad on The Way to School

Trump, Netanyahu Rift Hits Rock Bottom: View From Amman

Trump, Netanyahu Rift Hits Rock Bottom: View From Amman

Youngest Palestinian Doctor Gets Guinness

Youngest Palestinian Doctor Gets Guinness

Palestine: 70 Killed Since The Start of 2026

Palestine: 70 Killed Since The Start of 2026