The issue of the Arab citizens of Israel has returned to the headlines. This is partly due to the release of the book "Whose Country is This?", which chronicles the failed attempt to develop a new pact between Jews and Arabs, and even more so to a series of new documents setting forth demands formulated by various Arab groups.

There is no need for a sweeping rejection of these demands; they include legitimate ones for equal rights, along with unacceptable ones for fundamentally changing the identity of the State of Israel as the state of the Jews. The inclusion of both types of demands in the same documents is actually a serious mistake, since it reinforces the prevailing suspicion among the Jewish population that demands for equality are nothing but a stage leading toward the goal of undermining the Jewish character of the state.

It is fitting to say something about the timing of these documents as well, which came out precisely during a period when the Jewish population in any case feels it faces an existential threat from a coalition of Arab and Muslim countries and organizations. It is not clear whether those who developed the documents intended them to go public specifically now, but in any case it would have been appropriate for them to take the timing into account. As it stands, the timing is liable to lead to emotional and harsh negative reactions that will actually weaken the standing of Arabs in Israel instead of strengthening it.

	Advertisement

The response to the new demands must therefore focus on a clear separation between equal rights and the question of the overall character of the state. The status quo with regard to the state's Jewish character must be maintained, meaning that the Jews don't need to demand that the Arabs formally recognize the Jewish character of the state - and so there is no need to despair of the failure of the pact, which apparently stemmed from the Jewish attempt to demand such recognition. In addition, all Arab demands regarding such a change must be rejected.

On the other hand, when it comes to civil status, it is fitting not only to advance the equality of rights and resources, but also to take an additional step that has a chance of changing the trend of radicalization spreading among part of the Arab population and its political representatives. This means ending the boycott, which exists in practice, of Arab parties in Israeli coalitions and governments. The Arab parties must be invited to coalition talks like every other party, and the positions they present will be what determines whether they participate in the government.

Such a move has two advantages: the removal of the primary symbol of the policy of excluding Arabs from public life in Israel, and the creation of an incentive to Arab parties to moderate their positions. As long as they are ineligible from the outset, the Arab parties have no reason for moderation.

Those who research the Arab sector have repeatedly noted that the Arab public is generally more moderate than its current political representatives. The possibility of Arab parties joining the government can therefore generate a fruitful debate within the Arab public, between a discourse of militant identity and a pragmatic approach that deals with individual and sectarian life within the state. In such a situation, it is possible that the parties now in the Knesset might become more moderate, or else over time, new political frameworks will be established that will express the desires of the Arab citizens more faithfully and more effectively.