Developing a defined understanding of the nature and character of the holy sites represents one half of the holy sites regime paradigm. It sets the scope and defines the basic needs for the regime. The second half of the paradigm falls into the realm of politics and administration. How can the needs of the holy sites be met on the ground? What are the tools to be used by the legal regime to effect its goals?

As outlined in Chapters 4 and 5, these political questions fall under four headings: sovereignty, ownership and control, municipal and regional governance, and the international interest. As previously noted, in discussing these issues, the goal of the project is not to offer a definitive solution, but rather to identify the key features of the problem and to suggest possible avenues or approaches to the negotiation for the creation of the regime.

Sovereignty

There can be little doubt that the question of sovereignty stands as the single largest stumbling block to the development of a legal regime to protect the holy sites. Sovereignty is the natural first question. An essential feature of the holy sites is that they exist as fixed objects within a specific geographic territory. They cannot be moved. As such, the obvious question is who controls that territory as sovereign?

To pose the Israeli and Palestinian problem, of which the holy sites are a part, as simply a conflict over territory, clearly fails.