We are intrigued, but not all that surprised, by the controversy, both within and without Israel, surrounding the current effort to secure legislation declaring Israel the national state of the Jewish people.
Although most Israelis seem to support the project, politicians such as Yair Lapid and Tzipi Livni oppose it, as do most Palestinians. What is clear is that once again Israel is being held to a particularly onerous standard when, in reality, what it seeks is not all that different from what obtains in other nations considered democratic. Moreover, given the history of attempts to destroy the Jewish people, we see it almost as a moral imperative that there be a place on this earth which heralds that which is Jewish.
Some critics question why such legislation is required now, when for 66 years after the founding of the state it was not deemed necessary. Still others worry about alienating Arab citizens of Israel and further eroding their fragile ties to the country. Others wring their hands over compromising the notion of Israel as a democracy by supposedly relegating non-Jewish citizens to second-class status.
And there are those who claim this is all an empty frolic on the part of right-wing Israeli politicians, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who are only interested in creating a rallying issue. These critics maintain this is a cynical maneuver, especially now with near-daily stabbings and other violence being perpetrated in Israel by Palestinians.
Not unexpectedly, The New York Times weighed in with a its own challenge to the proposed legislation in an editorial titled “Israel Narrows Its Democracy”:
Since its founding in 1948, Israel’s very existence and promise – fully embraced by the United States and the world of nations – has been based on the ideal of democracy for all its people.
Its Declaration of Independence, which provides the guiding principles for the state, makes clear that the country was established as a homeland for the Jews and guarantees “complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex.”
That is why it is heartbreaking to see the Israeli cabinet approved a contentious bill that would officially define Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people, reserving “national rights” only for Jews….
Israel’s courts and laws have consistently defined Israel as “Jewish and democratic,” giving equal weight to both, and on paper, at least, the Arab Israelis who constitute about a fifth of the population have full rights. To go back and emphasize nationality and religion in defining the country, moreover, runs counter to the long-term movement among liberal democracies toward a more inclusive vision of a state.
Of course, the simple answer to “why now?” can be found in a statement by Prime Minister Netanyahu: “There are many who are challenging Israel’s character as the national state of the Jewish people.” He also went on to say he does not “understand those who are calling for two states for two peoples but also oppose anchoring this in law. They are pleased to recognize a Palestinian national state but strongly oppose a Jewish national state.”
Indeed, it would be well to note that the 1947 UN Partition Resolution made countless references to the establishment of a “Jewish state” as well as an “Arab state.” (The notion of a “Palestinian” state developed decades later.) So the notion of a political entity defined as “Jewish” is not new.
And the Times certainly misleads its readers when it refers, in passing and out of context, to “national rights” being reserved only for Jews. While the current version of the proposed legislation provides, as Mr. Netanyahu explained, “national rights only for the Jewish people – a flag, anthem, the right of every Jew to immigrate to Israel and other national symbols,” he also stated that all citizens would enjoy equal civil rights.