Sunday May 31, 2009

Window on Israel: Israel's troubled legislative proposals

Posted by Ira Sharkansky
Comments: 3
BOOKMARK or SHARE: technorati digg del.icio.us reddit newsvine facebook What's this?
Print  |  
Decrease text sizeDecrease text size
Increase text sizeIncrease text size

Israel is going through a season of proclamations and legislative proposals that remind me of American campaigns about prayer in schools, abortions, and gay marriage.
 
The equivalents here are a proposals to outlaw the mourning of Israel's existence (Nakba) by the country's Arab population, jail sentences for those who deny the Jewish character of the country, and rabbinical demands that soldiers refuse orders to remove settlements.
 
What links these Israeli and American issues is their capacity to inflame marginal issues with religious fanaticism.

I will let those closest to the American scene ponder their pros and cons. The Israeli cases are enough to worry me.
 
The holiday of Shavuot may have added to the efforts of religious activists. It commemorates the giving of the Torah to Moses on Mt. Sinai. Religious Jews mark it by studying the law, including rabbinical interpretations delivered from then until now, all night long. Commentators are emphasizing the Lord's grant of the land to Israel.
 
Another impetus to this flurry of activity is the election of a right-wing government, whose components include Jewish approximations to Christian conservatives who expected action from Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu made his own contribution when he said that Palestinian representatives must recognize Israel as a Jewish state as a condition for moving forward on bi-lateral negotiations.

US President Barack Obama meets with
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in
the Oval Office of the White House in
Washington, Thursday, May 28, 2009 [AP]

Netanyahu has a point in the context of Palestinian demands that Israel remove Jews from the territory that should become their state, and that Palestinian refugees be given the right of return to what became Israel. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said in Washington that he has no intention of flooding Israel with five million refugees. It would help if he said that, in Arabic, to his own population. The Hamas leadership, in control of Gaza and perhaps the most powerful party in the West Bank, is denouncing Abbas as an illegitimate claimant whose term expired in January, and who cannot speak for the Palestinian people.
 
We can argue if Netanyahu's demand for Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish state is just, superfluous, or just a clever way to avoid serious negotiations. Whatever he intends, he has lowered the barrier against other issues that are inflammatory with respect to the delicate balance between Jews and Arabs within Israel, as well as between religious and secular Jews.
 
Although tense, and occasionally violent, relations between Israeli Jews and Arabs have been managed with some success. It helps that there are opportunities for nationalist expression, usually checked only when religious or political figures cross the boundaries against overt incitement to violence, or give aid to an enemy state. There is considerable freedom of instruction in Arab language schools. Arab members of Knesset visit enemy countries and suffer no more than rebuke from their Jewish colleagues and interrogation by security personnel upon their return. MK Azmi Bishara has not been in Israel since he was said to violate the rules by supporting military action against Israel while in Lebanon during the 2006 War, and provided to the enemy sensitive information about Israeli forces.
 
It may offend Jews when Arab citizens mourn the state's creation each year on May 15th. However, outlawing the occasion or insisting on explicit expressions of loyalty may cause more trouble by driving nationalism underground, and adding to its intensity.
 
A prominent safety valve for the feelings of Israeli Arabs are the speeches given by their representatives in the Knesset. The Arab parties do not get much more than the opportunity to speak. Resources allocated to Arab constituents do not match those allocated to Jews. The situation is similar in Jerusalem, where almost all Arabs boycott local elections on the claim that Israel has illegally occupied Arab neighborhoods.
 
One can debate the fairness or the wisdom of allocations to Arabs by national and local governments. They would change if Arabs used their voting potential to bargain for tangible benefits. It is easy to dismiss claims of injustice by noting that Arab politicians give greater priority to persistent criticism than to obtaining more services for their people.

Ma'aleh Rehavam, near Nodkim, is one of
six outposts that received zoning notices.
Photo: Ariel Jerozolimski

Whenever authorities ratchet up their courage and embark on a process of removing small and "illegal" settlements from the West Bank, we can expect some rabbis to say that soldiers should disobey orders that violate the supreme law of the Torah. We also expect counter expressions, from religious Jews and rabbis, that military discipline is essential to Jewish survival.
 
The military is seeking to avoid responsibility for removing settlers. The head of the general staff has said that the police is more suitable for such work. The police is a force composed of volunteers, trained for the non-lethal control of hostile civilians. They are not troubled by highly-motivated religious draftees, who make excellent soldiers when sent against Israel's enemies, but are vulnerable to the calls of extremist rabbis who may have been among their teachers.
 
Involved in the flurry of rhetoric concerning settlements is what we could have expected from the prime minister. He returned from Washington with assuring statements that he and US President Barack Obama agreed on all the essentials. He said there would be no freeze in settlements. Natural growth would be allowed, in the building of housing for settlers' offspring, as would expansions already agreed by Israeli planning authorities. There would be negotiations about removing some illegal settlements, or making them legal by fusing them with nearby communities. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton countered by saying that American policy remains opposition to all settlement activity, of any kind.
 
The current flurries of excitement may disappear without lasting impact. This is not the first time that MKs have garnered support for laws requiring Arab expressions of loyalty. As in the past, they may not find their way out of Knesset committees. If they do become law, they will have to pass an inevitable appeal to the Supreme Court, likely to be tilted against them. If they pass that hurdle, they may meet delay or dilution in the process of implementation.
 
The Labor Party's principal representative in the government, Defense Minister Ehud Barak, has been exercising his responsibility for the West Bank by removing some of the smallest and most isolated of the settlements considered to be illegal. The process has not touched the areas of greatest sensitivity, and it is not yet clear if those settlers removed are again setting up tents on the disputed sites.

BOOKMARK or SHARE: technorati digg del.icio.us reddit newsvine facebook What's this?
Print  |  
Comments: Post your own comment
1  |   Matt C, Canada, Sunday May 31, 2009
I am not so sure that Abbas has actually said that he has "no intention of flooding Israel with five million refugees". There have been several articles recently saying that he "reportedly" said that, and that he was going to announce it as part of a peace plan he was going to present Obama, but when he actually met with Obama no such announcement happened. Instead, in an interview with the Washington Post, Abbas said he rejected the notion that he should make concessions "such as recognizing Israel as a Jewish state, which would imply renunciation of any large-scale resettlement of refugees".
2  |   Biff Clement USA, Monday Jun 01, 2009
Dear sirs, You can tell Benjamin Netanyahu that he has many, many friends in the USA. Even though the government of Obama is out to squeeze you into submission, remember, that the majority of us over here love you and tell you to stand strong! After all, if God be on your side then who can dare be against you?
3  |   Jen USA, Wednesday Jun 03, 2009
Mr. Netenyahu must have a hearing problem! My country's representatives, have not made a public comment on supporting "natural growth". All of the comments I have seen, from Obama to Clinton to the major players in the Senate, have called for the ending of all new settlement & the elimination of all illegal (yes, illegal) settlements. As far as the settler's AND the Palestinian's right to express their dissent (with words), I support them. Mr. Sharkansky has it right, when he says that suppression will only lead to more intensity and more nationalism. Neither Israel or Palestine need that.
Add your comment remaining characters
Name and Location *

NOTE: Comments are moderated and will not appear on this blog, until they have been reviewed and deemed appropriate for posting.

For more information, please see our
Readers' Submission Policy.

E-mail * (will NOT be published)
Your Blog/Website
--------------------------------
* All fields are required

About this blog

Window on Israel Hebrew University Political Science professor evaluates the latest happenings in Israel.

Search this blog

Archives
Combined feed for all JPost.com blogs

Most Popular

  1. World opinion: who cares?
    Posted in Guest Blog by Glen A. Fritz
    Tuesday Nov 17, 2009
  2. Mr. President, bring the troops home
    Posted in Koch's Comments by Ed Koch
    Thursday Nov 19, 2009
  3. Interfaith dialogue - naïve or necessary?
    Posted in Guest Blog by Ruth Wasserman
    Sunday Nov 22, 2009
  4. Who will take care of my fruit trees?
    Posted in Making Aliyah by Jonathan Feldstein
    Sunday Nov 22, 2009
  5. Our base is broader
    Posted in Green-Lined by Yisrael Medad
    Sunday Nov 22, 2009

Top Rated Posts

Recent Comments

Laine Frajberg Montreal: Response to John R #10, Why not set an example John and return the southwest to Mexico which Pres. Polk STOLE fron Mexico in 1847?You Americans called it "manifest destiny".The rest of the world called it THEFT. Till then you have no right to criticize Israel for taking-and keeping- land in a DEFENSIVE WAR.Now go away!
Laine Frajberg Montreal: Response to EdB #1, Hey Ed,didn't your country steal northern Georgia from the Cherokee in 1838?You did this even though the Cherokee were at peace with you and your own Supreme Court declared that the Cherokee had a right to retain their land.Didn't make any difference.General Winfield Scott expelled them anyway-and over a quarter died on the way to their new homes.Contrast this with Israel,which took east Jerusalem after being attacked by Jordan on June 5,1967-so indeed Israel's Jews have every right to build anywhere they want in Jerusalem.
David USA: Just when did Gilo become part of Jerusalem? Surely not at the time of David hamelech. When and by whose idea was Gilo "Jerusalemized "? Pretty soon Maale Adumin will also be Jerusalem. And why not Ariel ?? The sky is the limit when it comes to gerrymandering. (For instance, Montreal could become New York just at some poltician's say-so, even if Canada objects).