← Covering Palestine

The New York Times · 12 June 1967

CP-1967-054

JERUSALEM ARABS DIVIDED ON FUTURE

Well-to-Do Say Israel Must Pull Out, Poor Don’t Care

By TERENCE SMITH, Special to The New York Times

JERUSALEM ARABS DIVIDED ON FUTURE — The New York Times, 12 June 1967
The New York Times · 12 June 1967

Shown from the top. The whole column — 7.9 times taller than it is wide — is in the enlargement.

Scan 152 × 1200 pixels

Send this clipping to somebody

Transcribed from the clipping

JERUSALEM, June 11—A portly Arab businessman sat in the living room of his home in the comfortable Sheik Jarach section of Jerusalem. “Israel must not keep all of Jerusalem,” he said in a quiet, firm voice. “It is just as holy a city to us as it is to them. If they try to keep it all, there will be no end to the fighting.”

Less than a mile away, in a hovel in the walled Old City, Badwizen Muhammed, a grocer, told a visitor: “We don’t care who is the government. We don’t care if it is Israel or Jordan or the United Nations. We just want peace. We want to be able to open our shops and make a living.”

Among the Arabs of what was the Jordanian sector of Jerusalem, who have been under Israeli rule for five days now, concern about the future seems to vary with affluence. The well-to-do businessmen insist that the Israelis must withdraw to the former border, which divided Jerusalem and left the Old City in Jordanian territory.

The very least that would be acceptable, they say, would be to internationalize the city and have it administered by the United Nations. No Time for Politics The poor of the Old City have no time for politics. They have been without water and electricity for nearly a week, and their food supplies are running low.

They want help, and they are in no position to worry about where it comes from. According to the Israeli military government that is administering the captured section of the city, they are about to get help. Some 20,000 bottles of milk are due in the Old City tomorrow, along with truckloads of food and supplies.

Before the hostilities there were about 61,000 people in the Jordanian sector, about half of whom lived within the gray stone walls of the Old City. Some of the 61,000 are assumed to have fled during the three-day siege, but no one is sure how many. The best guess on the current population is somewhere between 45,000 and 55,000.

The job of feeding these people, providing them with the essential services and policing them has fallen to the Israeli military government, headed by Brig. Chaim Herzog. A curfew has been imposed on the Jordanian population from 5 P.M. to 9 A.M.

How this transcription was made

Transcribed from the slide scan by a reader working off magnified crops, not by optical character recognition. The clipping carries no masthead and no folio; the date is derived from the printed dateline, “JERUSALEM, June 11”, and from the article’s statement that East Jerusalem had been under Israeli rule “for five days now”. The newspaper is identified from the printed credit line “Special to The New York Times” beneath the byline. ONE READING IS UNCERTAIN AND SHOULD NOT BE RELIED ON: the grocer’s forename, transcribed here as Badwizen, sits in a column only about 120 pixels wide on this scan and does not resolve even at 26x; Badwisen and Budwizen are equally possible from the ink. His surname, Muhammed, and his trade, grocer, are legible. The clipping should be re-scanned before that name is quoted anywhere.

Cite this clipping

"JERUSALEM ARABS DIVIDED ON FUTURE," The New York Times, 12 June 1967. Covering Palestine archive, CP-1967-054. https://coveringpalestine.org/archive/cp-1967-054

More from The New York Times

More from the 1960s

Last updated 2 November 2026

This record is part of Covering Palestine, an archive of American newspaper clippings about Palestinians, 1724 to 2023. Researched and assembled by Maria Robles.

The clipping belongs to the newspaper that printed it, or to the news agency that supplied the copy. It is reproduced here for research, criticism and commentary. A city here is where the newspaper was published, not where the story came from, and on most records it was taken from the masthead.

Something wrong here, or something you know about this clipping? The archive is still being built and corrections are wanted: maria@rozumstudio.com, quoting CP-1967-054.

Everything printed in 1967 · Printed on this day · See it in the archive reel · Full text of every clipping · Dataset