Subscribe to Print Edition | Mon., June 02, 2008 Iyyar 28, 5768 | | Israel Time: 07:06 (EST+7) web haaretz.com   Back to Homepage Rosner's Domain Diplomacy Defense Jewish World Opinion National Print Edition Advertising Books Peres Conference Business Real Estate Easy Start Travel Week's End Anglo File

Last update - 02:29 24/02/2007 A country for some of its citizens? By Shulamit Aloni "Shel me haaretz hazot? Massa lenissuach amana yehudit-arvit be'yisrael" ("Whose Land Is It? A Quest for a Jewish-Arab Covenant in Israel"), edited by Uzi Benziman, Israel Democracy Institute, 336 pages, NIS 85 "Shel me haaretz hazot?" ("Whose Land Is It?") sums up discussions held in the course of 17 meetings between 20 Israelis - Jewish and Arab religious and secular academics - between January 1999 and January 2001. The discussions, conducted under the auspices of the Israel Democracy Institute (IDI), were aimed at clarifying and explaining what is preventing Israel's Arab and Jewish citizens from feeling that they were equal citizens in their own country, and especially at drafting a joint social covenant. In the final analysis, and after protracted talks, the parties were unable to reach any agreement and the project of drafting an agreement ultimately proved to be a failure. The discussions were chaired by Dr. Adel Manna, director of the Center for the Study of Arab Society in Israel at the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute, and Prof. Mordechai Kremnitzer, a senior fellow at the IDI who teaches at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem's Faculty of Law. Advertisement The basic premise of the participants, Jewish and Arab alike, was Israel's definition as a Jewish, democratic state, as specified in Israel's Basic Law on Human Dignity and Freedom (1992). Interestingly, none of the participants mentioned the law's first clause, on which the demand for full equality could be based. The clause states that the civil rights of all Israeli citizens are founded on the recognition of the value and sanctity of human life, and on the recognition that all human beings are entitled to freedom; furthermore, it states that these rights must be respected in the spirit of the principles set forth in Israel's Declaration of Independence. The Jewish participants in the discussions were all guided by an idee fixe - the perception of Israel as a Jewish, democratic state - and they accepted University of Haifa Prof. Sami Smooha's analysis that Israel is an ethnocracy where Jews were preferred over members of the country's ethnic and religious minorities. In light of this perception, it is very surprising that the Jewish participants actually believed it possible to draft such a social covenant. Sheikh Kamal Riyan (of Islamic movement and the Al-Aqsa Association for the Preservation of Waqf Property) stated that, as long as Israel is a Jewish state or the state of the Jewish people, there can be no concept of loyalty to Israel because people cannot feel a sense of loyalty to their village if they did not feel a part of it. Manna spoke of Israeli Arabs' need for security, equality and identity. Rahat Mayor Talal al-Krenawi asked how it was conceivable to talk about a Jewish state and, at the same time, to demand that Israeli Arabs join the army of that Jewish state. MK Michael Eitan demanded that Israeli Arabs recognize the Jewish nation and its Jewish state, whereupon Manna demanded that Israel recognize the Palestinian nation and accept Israeli Arabs as a national minority. Aluf Hareven was the only participant who referred back to Israel's Declaration of Independence and who proposed an amendment to it that would define Israel as a Jewish state that is a country for all its citizens. He further suggested that all Israeli citizens be required to do civilian or community service, not necessarily military service, from age 18 to 21. I found the discussions on symbols, the national flag, the national anthem, Israeli Jews' connection to the Jewish communities around the world and Israeli Arabs' connection to the Palestinian people somewhat tiring, and did not feel that they provided any impetus, because both sides adhered to their positions. Nonetheless, in the discussion on the granting of cultural autonomy to the Israeli Arab community, the opposition to this proposal surprised me. Initially, the majority supported it; however, gradually, the discussions exposed all the fears, suspicions and manipulations used to justify discrimination. The question asked by Smooha, who was dominant and frank in the talks, expressed all this. He wondered how much autonomy could be extended to a minority that is suspected of being basically disloyal by the majority. In my view, that question sums up why this project failed. Surprising exclusion It should be pointed out that the proposed draft of the Basic Law on Human Dignity and Freedom that defined Israel as a Jewish, democratic state included a clause that promised equal rights to all Israeli citizens, in accordance with Israel's definition as a democracy: "All are equal before the law, and there shall be no discrimination on the grounds of gender, religion, nationality, race, ethnic group, country of origin or any other irrelevant factor." However, the members of the Knesset's Constitution, Law and Justice Committee, then headed by Amnon Rubinstein, decided, on their own initiative, that the proposed act would state that Israel was Jewish and democratic, and would exclude the clause on equality. The Basic Law on Human Dignity and Freedom was ultimately passed in 1992 in that format. The exclusion of the principle of equality for all Israelis is surprising. A substantive democracy must be a country for all its citizens and must ensure full equality for all of them. However, Israel's definition as a Jewish, democratic state implies that Israeli democracy applies only to the country's Jewish citizens. Thus, it must be asked how the Knesset's Constitution, Law and Justice Committee could have decided on its own, without any broad public debate on the issue, to change Israel's status from a substantive democracy to an ethnocracy - namely, a country that rightfully belongs to only one ethno-religious group: the Jews. This is actually a revolutionary decision that ignores both Israel's formative document, the Declaration of Independence, and the guidelines of its first elected government. The refusal to recognize the declaration and those guidelines is so sweeping that it is commonly thought that the term, and the demand for, "a country for all its citizens," was invented by MK Azmi Bishara, although it is actually stated in Israel's Declaration of Independence. The clause in that document that determines the nature of the State of Israel and the rights of its citizens proclaims: "The State of Israel will be open for Jewish immigration (repatriation) and for the ingathering of the exiles; it will foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; it will be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its citizens irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture; it will safeguard the holy places of all religions; and it will be faithful to the principles of the charter of the United Nations." Further along, the declaration states: "We appeal - in the very midst of the onslaught launched against us now for months - to the Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel to preserve peace and participate in the upbuilding of the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its provisional and permanent institutions." Furthermore, the law concerning the new regime's procedures and legal processes, the first law that Israel passed and which is a mini-constitution, opens with: "In accordance with the powers granted to the Provisional Council of State in the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel of Iyar 5, 5708 (May 14, 1948), and in the proclamation issued that same day, the Provisional Council of State hereby institutes the following piece of legislation: 'Section 1: Regime. Clause 1: The Provisional Council of State is composed of the people whose names appear in the appendix to this law. The representatives of the country's Arab residents who recognize the State of Israel shall be given the opportunity to participate in the Provisional Council of State as it shall be decided by the council; their lack of participation in the council will not diminish their authority.'" This principle of guaranteeing equality to all Israeli citizens clearly appears in the convention against racism that Israel ratified in January 1979 and which became effective in Israel the following month (as published in Reshumot, the Knesset's official gazette; Conventions, 168, August, 1979). The fact that the discussions in the collection being reviewed here ignore all the attempts made in the past - since Israel's Declaration of Independence and the platform of its first elected government - to lay the foundations of true democracy in Israel is very disappointing. Furthermore, it raises an additional, fundamental question: If Israel aspires to be a democracy, why is there any need altogether for a special covenant on equality for all its citizens? After all, democracy, by its very definition and nature, is such a covenant. Why is there a need for a "covenant" on religious matters between Prof. Ruth Gavison and a fanatical rabbi, if Israeli democracy is already committed to freedom of religion and to the freedom of not being religious and not being subject, by law, to an anachronistic rabbinical establishment or any other clerical establishment whatsoever? Would it not be simpler if all of us, all Israeli citizens, were registered as Israelis and if we could enjoy the same civil rights along with the right to be different and to maintain religious, traditional or secular communities as we see fit? Is there a need for a special agreement between the government of England, Germany or the United States and the Jews, that would enable the latter to maintain their own communities, educational system and institutions on an autonomous basis? Does the fact that Irish-Americans belong to the Roman Catholic Church and have a special relationship with Ireland require a special political treaty between them and the U.S. government? The central question is whether Israel's Arab citizens - as individuals or collectively as a community - should be denied the same rights accorded to ultra-Orthodox Jews, Druze and Circassians, simply because of their numbers and their special relationship with the residents of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, who have been living under Israeli occupation for the past 40 years? The denial of basic rights would mean that, instead of being a democracy, Israel would be reduced to an Orthodox Jewish ethnic group with a strong army, compulsory military service, detention centers and prisons, tremendous greed for the land of the natives, and immense fear. The Israel Democracy Institute can use that name only if it adopts the basic premise that all Israeli citizens are entitled to full rights irrespective of gender, race or religion. In a democracy, a consensus is unnecessary; disagreement and differing beliefs are legitimate, and rights cannot be denied to an individual or a community because that individual or community thinks differently, dresses differently or eats different foods. Even if people speak a different language, that is no reason to rob them of their rights as individuals and citizens. The agreements the IDI initiates almost daily - or so it seems - are simply constructing a consensual democracy between various groups, while, at the same time, demanding that women (of all ethnic groups) and the members of ethnic groups and traditions that do not fit the rubric "Orthodox Jewish," surrender some of their fundamental rights. Mobilize energies It is hard to be optimistic these days; however, that should not prevent us from trying. It should be recalled that the magnificent American Declaration of Independence of 1776, drafted by Thomas Jefferson, did not immediately grant freedom to all and that in his Gettysburg Address of November 1863, in the midst of the U.S. Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln reminded his audience that the American nation had been born in liberty 87 years earlier and that it was now involved in a civil war intended to guarantee that liberty for all, and to free the slaves. The Civil War ended in 1864 and slavery was officially abolished; however, another century would pass before all Americans would enjoy full citizenship and equal rights. So after all, perhaps, there is hope for us. The IDI should reread and study the principles on which Israel was founded and then perhaps it will mobilize its energies for peace and human rights and cease drafting bizarre agreements between the religious and the secular, between Jews and Arabs, between a regime of religious establishments and those who wish to live as free individuals unencumbered by the yoke of religion and ritual. Israel urgently needs a struggle for human rights - for all individuals - a struggle against discrimination, against degradation, against arrogance. And Israel especially needs peace and open debates. Bookmark to del.icio.us   Building Google How an Israeli hi-tech guru inspired Google's 'magic formula'. La femme Tzipi Colleagues regale the Sunday Times with stories of Livni's days on a Mossad hit team.   1.   Some people are not more equal than others 04:58  |  Dutch 24/02/07   2.   Tenant versus Principle 07:02  |  Matthew A. Sawtell 24/02/07   3.   Democracy, Constitution and Rune of Law 11:08  |  B`Galil 24/02/07   4.   Israel needs to admit violent past 11:57  |  Marilyn 24/02/07   5.   Re: Matthew 14:24  |  Sami 24/02/07   6.   Israel needs to admit violent past 14:52  |  Mike 24/02/07   7.   please somebody explain me... 15:20  |  cristina 24/02/07   8.   It is for all of you 15:27  |  Dan 24/02/07   9.   Yes, Israel is a militant theocracy 16:40  |  Nick Ferriman 24/02/07   10.   Israeli Dreamworld 16:56  |  Walid 24/02/07   11.   Walid 17:37  |  Ariel 24/02/07   12.   Christina 18:34  |  Sami 24/02/07   13.   to sami, so without a constitution... 20:28  |  cristina 24/02/07   14.   Arieal:I guess Iranian dominance is better than Israeli apartheid 22:23  |  Sami 24/02/07   15.   Christina, Sami 22:53  |  Dani Renan 24/02/07   16.   To Shulamit Aloni - American Civil War 23:24  |  Dani Renan 24/02/07   17.   Democracy? 19:05  |  Rachel 12/03/07   18.   democracy 10:38  |  Mike 13/11/07   19.   Response to Dani 03:19  |  Erich Walrath 02/06/08   20.   Civil War 03:29  |  Erich Walrath 02/06/08

Read & React Germany: Transfer of bodies by Hezbollah is bid to advance prisoner swap talks Responses: 193 Report: Livni hunted Palestinian terrorists for Mossad in Europe Responses: 143 Barak and Olmert delay cabinet vote on Gaza Strip cease-fire Responses: 54 Israel urges EU: Show 'caution' in contacts with Damascus Responses: 95 Former minister and journalist Yosef Lapid dies at 77 Responses: 41 More Headlines 04:58 Israel 'surprised' to get soldiers' remains from Hezbollah 05:20 Not just a gesture 05:29 Families of missing reservists hope deal is a sign of progress 05:34 Official: Public pressure may force Olmert indictment 05:39 Who didn't attend New York's Israel march? Israelis 02:40 Mahmoud Abbas says Israel, PA still far from breakthrough 03:52 Forensic experts: Identifying body parts could take weeks 02:18 IDF soldiers: Nature authority killed dogs cruelly 04:06 Government admission of drought triggers compensation for farmers 04:37 In U-turn, gov't says will link pensions to wages 04:54 The right to air - or to a living Previous Editions Select Day 01 jun 30 may 29 may 28 may 27 may 26 may 25 may 23 may 22 may 21 may 20 may 19 may

Special Offers Advertisement Dead Sea Products Buy Dead Sea mineral skin care and beauty products. Coupon code Haaretz for 10% off. Jerusalem of Gold Luxury apartments in Jerusalem's finest location Your vacation starts here Israel Travel Center Guaranteed Lowest Rates Istudy Learn Hebrew in 3 months The Terraces Your Ultimate Coastal Address On Nitza Boulevard, North Netanya Together Celebrating Israel's 60th The Jewish Agency and You - together making history Pardes Institute Summer Sessions http://www.pardes.org.il/ Free the Palestinians from: Corrupt Kleptocracy, Tyrannical Theocracy, Abysmal Anarchy Fattal Hotel Chain Perfectly located hotels on best resorts of Israel. ISRAEL BONDS Build Israel Israel bonds - a multi-purpose way to celebrate Israel's 60th Eldan Rent a Car Israel's leading car rental company offers you a 20% discount on all online reservations Junkyard Junk a car - get free towing nationwide and a tax-deductible receipt

Home | TV | Print Edition | Diplomacy | Opinion | Arts & Leisure | Sports | Jewish World | Underground | Site rules |

Real Estate in Israel

Haaretz.com, the online edition of Haaretz Newspaper in Israel, offers real-time breaking news, opinions and analysis from Israel and the Middle East. Haaretz.com provides extensive and in-depth coverage of Israel, the Jewish World and the Middle East, including defense, diplomacy, the Arab-Israeli conflict, the peace process, Israeli politics, Jerusalem affairs, international relations, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, the Palestinian Authority, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, the Israeli business world and Jewish life in Israel and the Diaspora.

© Copyright  Haaretz. All rights reserved