JERUSALEM — In a decisive blow to the nineteenth century, Israel on Thursday formally ended the career of the British Consulate General in East Jerusalem, a mission that had survived Ottoman rule, the British Mandate, the King David Hotel, and several foreign secretaries who could not find it on a map. Consul General and roughly twenty diplomats were instructed to collect their passports, their unread briefing notes, and whatever remains of the empire’s self-esteem, and to leave.
Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar announced the closure with the calm of a man who has finally found a lever that moves. “Every state that works against the State of Israel must understand that we will take our revenge,” he said, revenge in this case consisting of a reduced headcount and a new nameplate. A task force of seven Britons may remain in the building Britain owns, provided their scope of activity is “very limited.” Analysts believe this covers tea, apologies, and the occasional strongly worded email that will not be read.
London disagreed, which is the traditional British response to facts occurring east of Cyprus. Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband insisted Israel has no legal right to close a consulate founded in 1839, and that the premises will continue as the “UK Mission, Jerusalem.” The mission, he added, remains independent, operational, and devoted to the Palestinian people, a portfolio now apparently manageable by seven people and a kettle. Staff withdrawn “temporarily” were last seen at the airport explaining to their children that history is a circle and Daddy’s circle has been downsized.
The row began last month when Britain banned trade in goods from West Bank settlements and spoke of settler violence in terms usually reserved for things Britain no longer does itself. Israel answered by removing British officials from a Gaza coordination center, ending a training program for Palestinian Authority forces, and barring a selection of British politicians whose chief export had been statements. The consulate was the centerpiece: a diplomatic presence that reports to London rather than to the embassy in Tel Aviv, precisely so it can embody the view that East Jerusalem is occupied. Israel’s view is that the occupation in question ended when the sign came down.
Both capitals claimed success. Israel noted that the consul general is gone and the word “consulate” has been retired. Britain noted that the flag is still flying and that it has not yet expelled anyone in return, a restraint it described as statesmanship and Israel described as running out of diplomats worth expelling. A compromise source called the arrangement a “ceasefire.” In diplomatic usage this means both sides have agreed to pretend the other side lost.
Historians were divided on the symbolism. One recalled that Britain once administered the city and left behind a legal status so ambiguous that two governments can now argue about a single doorway. Another observed that expelling the consul is an efficient way to reduce the number of people who can say “nearly two hundred years” in a press release. The seven who remain have been advised to describe themselves as a mission, a task force, or, if asked by a taxi driver, “just visiting.”
At press time the building was still there. The sign was not. Somewhere between those two facts, each foreign ministry located a victory large enough to brief.
