Diane Davis, Associate Dean, School of Arch. and Planning; Political Sociology Professor, Urban Studies and Planning

AS WAR and armed struggle continue to create turmoil in the greater Middle East, as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict simmers relentlessly in an environment where Palestinians are fighting each other as much as Israel, and as the threats of escalated conflict with Iran and its allies hang like a specter over the entire region, it is time to re-assert the importance of peacemaking if Israel is going to survive without suffering more instability and the sustained threat of future bloodshed. The recent meeting convened in Annapolis by President Bush, after several years of relative administrative neglect of Palestinian-Israeli discord, is testament to this realization. One question is not just how to accomplish this goal, but where, exactly, to begin?

It is often said that the future of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict depends in large part on Jerusalem, and this clearly is the impression left in the wake of prior peace dialogues and attempted diplomatic settlements, most recently the Oslo Accords. If this is true, then Jerusalem itself is a natural starting point for peace-building. But can change and improvements in Jerusalem be achieved independent of a final Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement? Are there issues to be addressed that are important to the local residents and could also contribute to a politically negotiated agreement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority?

As an urban locale, Jerusalem has modern infrastructure, spectacular new housing complexes, historic beauty, and deep religious meaning. But it also is a site of resource scarcity, ecological degradation, segmented areas of built space, social tensions, fear, and insecurity. The local economy lags behind those of neighboring cities, particularly Tel Aviv and Haifa. Many middle and upper class families are moving out of Jerusalem and relocating to other cities. Socially, the city is divided ethnically and economically; housing is increasingly unaffordable. The desire for security and freedom from terror, combined with a fragmented transportation system, have slowed, if not prohibited, free movement within the city for all its residents. Many live in constant fear of violence, whether by suicide bombers or by military and police forces. Though some of these qualities could describe many other cities in the region, Jerusalem's location and the historical struggles of Palestinians to claim the city as their capital have created unique and unavoidable tensions over the city's built environment and among its peoples.

Just Jerusalem: Vision for a Place of Peace is an interdisciplinary initiative administered by MIT's Center for International Studies (CIS) and Department of Urban Studies and Planning (DUSP).

For all these reasons, it is important to think about ways to make the city of Jerusalem a more livable, sustainable, and harmonious place. If quality of life in this contested locale could improve for all its residents, and the city could show itself to be a model for future generations who seek to live together in peace and harmony, then some progress in the current national and regional conflict just might accrue. Through the vehicle of an international competition called Just Jerusalem: Vision for a Place of Peace, MIT's Center for International Studies and the Department of Urban Studies and Planning hope to enable just such an outcome. The competition asks potential entrants to imagine what would it take to make a city claimed by two nations and central to three religions 'just' a city, albeit a dynamic, historically unique, and prosperous one, a place of difference and diversity in which contending ideas and citizenries could co-exist in benign yet creative ways? What would make the daily lives of all Jerusalemites freer, more prosperous, more secure, and more peaceful? What are the ways that daily life and the city as a whole can be improved to become more economically viable, livable, and safe?

Mindful of the current political implications of any project focused on Jerusalem, the competition's aim is primarily to generate new ideas and discussions about Jerusalem as it might be in the future—a just city shared in peace by its residents, whether Muslim, Christian or Jewish, Palestinian or Israeli. All entries to the competition will be expected to describe what it would take to create this type of urban arena by the year 2050. The year 2050 is not an arbitrary point in time so much as a metaphor for a future far enough from the present conflict to allow some freedom to imagine a different situation, and to serve the next generation, but near enough to the present to generate serious proposals for deliberation and to possibly make a difference now.

The competition addresses the belief that the nature of the city, and the way out of its conflicts, cannot be reduced to a single, negotiated agreement or top-down master plan. In the case of Jerusalem, imposed blueprints and forced consensus-building strategies are often part of the problem, leading to conflict over the terms and outcomes—not to mention perceived betrayals—of negotiation. The process of negotiation pretends that all parties are brought to the table as equal partners; yet this is rarely, if ever, the case. This project sidesteps the standard route of negotiation between a small number of high level representatives and turns instead to the liberating and regenerative potential of individual imagination and vision.

The question arises: Why at this time in history would anyone want to solicit a call for new visions of Jerusalem as a city? For one, Jerusalem, as a city, is a meeting place of diversity, re-thrust on the center stage of global consciousness as turmoil in the region accelerates, with the historical patrimony to enable either collaborative work or fragmentation and conflict. For another, we are now facing a world in which the powers and responsibilities of the nation-state are being transformed by globalization, when the asserted value of the state as the primordial agent of domestic politics is under question on a variety of fronts, and when cities themselves are becoming actors in the global scene. If the superimposition of nationalist projects and aspirations on ethnically or religiously-diverse urban locales like Jerusalem has fanned the flames of aggression and violent conflict, could the contemporary reality of globalization inspire concerted efforts to think about what social, political, economic or spatial practices would release this city from nationalist blueprints, historical trauma, physical insecurity, and social injustices; and could these ideas possibly help lay a partial foundation for greater tolerance and perhaps even peace? This is our hope.

Given Jerusalem's global emotional, spiritual, and political importance, this project will surely invite controversy and possibly even opposition both within and outside the Middle East, either among Jewish or Palestinian diasporas, if not both. We feel that the only recourse is to embrace differences of opinion and use them as an opportunity to inspire creativity and innovation while also generating a dialogue in global civil society. As such, the competition is a deviation from many of today's prevailing conflict resolution techniques. It makes no assumptions about sovereignty. It has no presupposed political outcome. The competition's focus "just" on the city of Jerusalem entails an analytical transcendence of the constraints imposed by nation-states. It seeks not to negate the grounded and clear realities of national-state concerns, but to envision new urban frameworks and city planning methodologies for dealing with them. By-passing the nation-state structure to focus on the city as the primary entity, allows a purposeful focus on the needs and struggles of daily life and questions the "right to the city" for all Jerusalem's inhabitants.

While the nationalist politics of the greater Israeli-Palestinian conflict certainly cannot be completely ignored, Jerusalem's political status is not the only factor to be considered when seeking to create a more livable and just city for its inhabitants. Still, competition entrants are free to choose their own political scenario for Jerusalem, not as their final product, but as an orientation point for understanding how their proposal will create peace and sustainability. In the end, Jerusalemites will be the ultimate agents of their self-chosen and self-directed change. To aid in this endeavor, the Just Jerusalem Competition seeks to empower and inspire civil society and local government officials and planners through an inclusive global dialogue based on creative innovative ideas on all aspects of urban life, in the spirit of academic study and a shared common humanity.