On Thursday, police said this week's Friday prayers on Temple Mount would be open to worshippers aged 50 and up. This step was a necessary evil, but it had to be done. Likewise, the police did what it had to do when it shut down the Holy Basin on Thursday after Jewish activist Yehuda Glick was shot and his suspected assailant was killed in a shootout. That said, the decision played right into the hands of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who, despite his efforts to have us believe he is wholeheartedly against violence, has tried to fan the flames of Palestinian attacks. I dare to predict, without having any factual data to support this, that had the Temple Mount not been reopened on Friday this would have resulted in a worse situation at Al-Aqsa mosque and the Dome of the Rock, and the threat of riots would have increased substantially. The security breach that may have led to the assassination attempt on Glick should be investigated by those whose job it is to handle such cases. Such events happen every so often in an ethnically diverse city, where thousands of Arabs are considered a potential threat. But this local problem gets complicated when an ostensibly moderate force such as the Palestinian Authority fuels more violence -- in this case it could set the whole Temple Mount ablaze. Somehow, the Palestinians have been able to convince the world that Israel wants to discard the status quo established by Defense Minister Moshe Dayan in 1967 in the wake of the Six-Day War. An overhaul would be unwise because it would shatter the delicate equilibrium that has been maintained in recent years and undermine the Israeli-Jordanian peace treaty. Channel 2 analyst Ehud Yaari reported Thursday that Jordanian pundits covering this story have essentially presented Israel with a choice: Al-Aqsa or the peace treaty. Israel must make it clear that it does not seek to alter the status quo on the Temple Mount. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu does not want to rock the boat and this might disappoint several extremists in the coalition. But there is no better alternative. The radicals on both sides are not going to be content with a return to the challenging status quo. Jews are naturally going to try to have the restriction on Jewish prayer on the mountain lifted. We should not be expected to capitulate to Abbas' racist demand that Jews be denied access to the site where the two Jewish temples were built and where, according to tradition, the Binding of Isaac took place. Our resolve is doubly important as Israel and the United States go through another rough patch over construction in Jerusalem. Washington has condemned the expansion of predominantly Jewish neighborhoods, and it will likely express a similar sentiment when Jews try to show a more noticeable presence on the Temple Mount. Any responsible person would want to leave this hot potato untouched, but many Palestinians and a handful of Israelis are particularly bent on making thing worse. There is no permanent fix that would untie this Gordian knot. That is why those who are in charge of the negotiations with the Palestinians have trained their sights on an interim deal, expecting nothing more. The fragile status quo on the mountain can be restored, and it will accommodate neither side: be it the vision articulated by Glick, who is still fighting for his life, or the one promoted by radical Palestinians. In 1996 riots broke out when Israel inaugurated a new exit from the Western Wall tunnel in the Muslim Quarter. As a result, Netanyahu and then Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat met and ultimately found a way to restore the calm. Perhaps such a resolution can be replicated this time around by having both leaders convene. Let's hope the Palestinian president truly wants to keep the peace and exert his authority over his people.
