[ad_1]
The new national law does not respect the principles of democracy and equality that are the basis of the Declaration of Independence. He betrays the Zionist inheritance of the founding fathers
In May, Israelis waving flags in front of the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem, the entrance to the Muslim part of the Old City . (Photo: Ariel Schalit / AP)
In the Knesset, the controversial national bill on the constitution was made constitutional on Thursday night. He was initiated by rights and aims to strengthen the Jewish character of Israel. 62 of the 120 deputies voted in favor of the law, 55 against. Two parliamentarians abstained. The third and final vote was preceded by a one-day rush for individual passages. The original intention of the initiators was to allow the establishment of exclusive, ethnic and religious "pure" communities and to degrade Arabic, which until then had been the official language in Israel.
Angry Arab Demonstrations
No legislature has been as polarized in recent years as the law of the national state, and this was easy to read in reactions. Prime Minister Netanyahu welcomed, with his own gravity, a "decisive moment in the history of Zionism and the state of Israel," protested and confused Arab deputies, the third largest faction of the Knesset. It is a deeply racist law, said MP Ahmed Tibi of the Arab Talal, Movement for Renewal. The adoption of this bill meant the "death of democracy" in Israel. The Adalah Center for Minority Rights in Israel spoke of a "colonial law with characteristics of apartheid". Members of the Meretz Socialist Party, who made the sarcastic proposal to submit the bill under the title "Israel – only for Orthodox Jews", expressed similar clarity.
The Israeli political debate always tends towards the exalted, and here some have gone through the safeguard. While rights have declared that without this law, the land would perish, Mordechai Kremnitzer wrote dramatically in Haaretz that the bill announced the end of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state. Only a few ventured into the balancing center, such as Yitzhak Herzog, who on Wednesday decorated his last start as opposition leader with the clever remark that the question was simply whether this law would harm or benefit Israel. "This will answer the story, in any case, I hope we will not permanently damage the delicate balance between a Jewish state and a democratic state."
Intervention of the head of state
Many opponents of the law fear that this happens. A little satisfaction, however, was also noted with them because they were able to impose many mitigation measures. Thus, they managed to block the most abstract desire, the right to create communities of settlement based on a single religion or nationality. Against this demand, a wave of outrage was raised throughout the country, as it would have threatened apartheid rights, claimed aloud or aloud by many supporters of the right wing . Keeping people of other religions or races in a state with a uniform legal basis in certain areas would have been unique as a law – and not as a reality – around the world. It was also the opinion of President Reuven Rivlin. He wrote to the Knesset that this passage could "harm the Jewish people, Jews around the world, and the state of Israel." Since then, any community could exclude ultra-Orthodox, Mizrahim, Druze or representatives of sexual minorities at will. In the end, the passage was weakened.
Already in May, the dubious request was dropped to force the Supreme Court to give the Jewish character of Israel a better rating than his democratic counterparts. But other suggestions could hold up. Thus, as the capital of Israel is called "unified Jerusalem", Arabic is now, according to the Basic Law, only a language with "special status" – an envious affront and especially totally useless to all Arabs, who represent more than a fifth of the population. The rest is devoted to the Jewish character of the country by affirming the significance of the flag and coat of arms and granting official status to the Hebrew calendar and Jewish holidays.
Democracy Is Secondary
It is understandable that Arabs have little desire to live in a state of Jewish character, always aware that they are at best tolerated hosts. The official devaluation of their idiom does the rest. However, liberal and left-wing Jews around the world meet others. The fact that Israel is a Jewish state is neither national nor international. Israel was dreamed and founded as a farm and refuge for the Jews. The Balfour Declaration speaks of this in Churchill's White Paper, as well as in the 1947 United Nations Sharing Plan. In the Declaration of Independence, the term appears in virtually every paragraph, and even the very meritorious Meretz does not do not question this definition.
No, what complains liberals and leftists, it is the abandonment of Zionist appreciation for democracy and equality. What is important is what is not said in this law. Unlike the declaration of independence of mid-May 1948, the new law renounces any mention of the principle of equality. Theodor Herzl and David Ben Gurion went beyond these principles, resorting to them deliberately thwarting the distorted image of the Nazis of the Jews as the cultural "Oriental". The Declaration of Independence clearly states that the state of Israel will ensure "the full equality of social and political rights of all its inhabitants, regardless of religion, race or sex". The liberal minds had tried to translate this passage into the new law, they failed. Even the double term "Jewish and democratic" does not appear. The right does not want such language.
Premature Funeral Songs
Still, Israeli democracy is not buried here, as many claim today. Amir Fuchs, of the Institute of Israeli Democracy Left, was one of the most fervent warnings of the time and he speaks of a very dangerous development. But at the same time, he points out that Israel is still a constitutional state, that the Declaration of Independence is valid and that no one has addressed the rights of Arab citizenship. It is an essentially symbolic law, and therefore just after the enthusiasm of Netanyahu, who still happily proves to the electorate how far he stands right without too much terrifying the international community. But it provides a long time for those who are tired of the secular and enlightened principles of the founding fathers who do not want to see an "exaggerated" consideration for the Palestinians and the Israeli "Erez Zion" between the Mediterranean and Jordan . If Israel really wants to make its way into the lowlands of authoritarianism and right-wing populism, it can now do so on a much stronger legal basis.
Source link
