The Western Wall

Chapter 4 examines the state preference model of religion–state relations at contested sacred sites. Section A explores the case of the Women of the Wall as a case in which the state of Israel adopts the preference model—favoring ultra-Orthodox Judaism—in managing the contestation over prayer arrangements at the Western Wall in Jerusalem. Section B explores the general religion-majoritarian approach which serves as the framework for the model of state preference at contested sites. Section C presents the specific techniques and policy tools, as well as the advantages and main weaknesses, of the third model of governing contested sacred sites examined in the current study: the model of “preference.” The last section (D) presents several arguments for the undesirability of state support for religion from the perspective of religious interests, emphasizing the applicability of this undesirability to the category of contested sacred sites.

Conclusion

In this conclusion we offer an overview of the novel typology of five models for governing contested sacred sites developed in this monograph: “non-interference,” “separation and division,” “preference,” “status-quo,” and “closure.” As we have a full exploration of the five models of governance for contested sacred sites in front of us, we can offer a demonstration of the core structure of the models through their applicability to one contested sacred site—the Western Wall in Jerusalem—to facilitate direct comparison of each models’ practical value. Furthermore, we explain the pluralist grounds of the multi-model structure of this study that led us away from a “one model to govern them all” approach.

The Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the Temple Mount/Haram esh-Sharif (Jerusalem)

Chapter 5 explores two contested sacred sites—the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the Haram esh-Sharif/Temple Mount—and two models of governance of contested sacred sites—status quo and closure. Section A describes the status quo at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem to facilitate, in section B, a critical discussion of the structure, justifications, advantages, and disadvantages of the status quo model. Section C describes the Temple Mount/Haram esh-Sharif case study with an emphasis on the period of 1967 to the present. Section D defines, explores, and criticizes closure as a model of governance for contested sacred sites.

Devils Tower National Monument/Bear Lodge (Wyoming)

Chapter 2 explores the non-interference model in contested sacred sites through the examination of the struggle over rock climbing at the Devils Tower National Monument/Bear Lodge (Wyoming). It begins (section A) with an examination of the voluntary coordination between climbers and indigenous community members, assisted by a “nudge” from the authorities, aiming to bring about, but not legally force, the reduction of climbing activities at the site. The chapter then turns (section B) to a succinct description and analysis of the general approach of the separation between religion and state. Section C turns to a critical examination of the non-interference model upon its structure, justifications, advantages, and weaknesses. The final section (D), moves to map out and differentiate among three subtle policy variations of the non-interference model: “signaling,” “nudging,” and “ushering,” all of which aim to achieve successful coordination of activities at such sites between competing groups.

Basic Concepts and Strategies of Inquiry

Chapter 1 presents the conceptual and methodological tools that are required for this study. Section A examines the prevailing definitions of toleration in order to identify one that is specifically suitable for our subject matter—that is, contested sacred sites. This examination leads us to suggest a novel political definition of toleration. Section B situates our discussion of toleration at contested sacred sites within the framework of political and legal debates over the place of religion in public spaces. Section C proposes the concept of “thick sites” as a tool for encapsulating and investigating the distinct features of contested sacred sites. By using this concept, we aim to clarify the nature of such sites and the reasons for intractable conflicts that are often associated with them. Section D presents our contextual methodology and the rationale for developing a typology of governance models for contested sacred sites.

Introduction

The introduction offers a first glimpse into the complexities of contested sacred sites via the story of the Muslim holders of the keys to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. The chapter introduces the reader to the prevalent “status quo” and “closure” models for governance of contested sacred sites and hints at the various challenges and mechanisms involved in the religion–state relations that inform such policies. It then provides an overview of the structure of the book, with a succinct description of the content of each chapter, assisting the readers in navigating their ways to the issues in which they are most interested.

Ram Janmabhoomi/Babri Masjid (Uttar Pradesh)

Chapter 3 examines the second model of governance of contested sacred sites: separation and division. The first section begins with an exploration of the Hindu–Muslim struggle over Ram Janmabhoomi/Babri Masjid, which culminated in the destruction of the Babri Masjid in 1992. The suggested solution by the Allahabad High Court to this conflict is the division of the site into three parts, each granted to one religious group. The second section examines the general approach of even-handedness to religion–state relations. This approach serves as a theoretical background to the separation and division model. The third section examines and defines the separation and division model; it discusses the structure, justifications, and shortcomings of this model. Finally, the fourth section examines non-statist, bottom-up sources for the separation and division model, using Axelrod’s cooperation theory, and applying it to the complex context of contested sacred sites.