Live data from Hacker News

Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

reuters.com

441–450 of 735 posts

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#441

Consider the following word replacements. [Ukraine/Israel] is established as an ethnic state after the end of the [Soviet/British] regime. [Ukraine/Israel] passes laws to protect its language and national identity in the face of its neighboring [Russia/Arab states] [Ukraine/Israel] is persecuting its [Russian/Arab] minorities by enacting discriminatory laws. [Ukraine/Israel] does not recognize [DNR/Palestinian] state…

So-called "DNR" region of Ukraine was created with the help of Russian army. There was nothing similar to Israel-Palestine situation. So your analogy is wrong.

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The restriction applies to everybody, not just Israeli Arabs. However it is true that Israeli Arabs are the ones most affected by it.

Laws that make it illegal to sleep under bridges apply to everybody, not just the homeless. Does that mean a law against sleeping under bridges is not targeting the homeless?

It targets people who sleep under bridges. If, for example, there is a major safety hazard associated with sleeping under bridges, it would make sense to prohibit it, and it would be bizarre to criticize the law just because it affects mostly homeless people. If, on the other hand, the law prohibits only homeless people from sleeping under bridges, it becomes clear that the intent is discriminatory, and this becomes a valid criticism.

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#443

Look I always encourage people to read the Israeli constitution. Jewish state. Fact. Not multicultural, not secular. Jewish. That was the founders design.

What’s your point?

“The Zionist Jews who founded Israel had three basic objectives in mind when they thought about the kind of state they wanted to build, Israeli political scientist Areyh Naor liked to tell me: They wanted to create a Jewish state, a democratic state, and a state that would be located in the historical homeland of the Jewish people—the land of Israel—which technically included all of Palestine from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River, and even some areas beyond, in what is today Jordan.”

“Ben-Gurion essentially said in effect to his nation: ‘In this world we can only have two out of three of our objectives. We are being offered a chance for a Jewish state and a democratic state, but in only part of the land of Israel. We could hold out for all the land of Israel, but if we did that we might lose everything. If we have to compromise on our objectives, let it be on obtaining all the land of Israel. We will settle now for half a loaf, and dream about the rest later.’”

“Then came June 1967. Israel, in the course of the Six-Day War, occupied the West Bank and Gaza Strip, extending, in the process, Jewish control over virtually all the historical land of Israel originally sought by Zionism. From that moment on, Israelis again faced the monumental question: What kind of nation do we want to be? Once again, it could only have two out of three of its objectives. One choice was to keep all the land of Israel, including the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and to remain a Jewish state, but this could be done only by curtailing Israeli democracy. The only way Israel could permanently control the Palestinian inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be by physically suppressing them and ensuring that they were never given political rights.”

From Beirut to Jerusalem, Thomas L. Friedman

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#444
post #424

Most comments here are attacking the decision, or just quoting the decision, and following it up by a "wtf". Just being shocked is not an argument. Jews are or have been persecuted in all middle eastern countries. What would happen if they were a minority in a democratic state in the Middle East? Why would it be different than in the other democracies in the Middle East? Laws like these lower the probability of Jews…

> Jews are or have been persecuted in all middle eastern countries. Jews have been prosecuted on many parts of the world and on different timelines of history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Jews They have also found refugee in Muslim community from Christian prosecution multiple times: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_under_Musl... > Laws like these lower the probability of Jews becomi…

> Jews have been prosecuted on many parts of the world and on different timelines of history > They have also found refugee in Muslim community from Christian prosecution multiple times

Nevertheless persecution seems more likely now in the Middle East than in in non middle eastern countries. In any case, the fact that they have been persecuted by everyone wouldn't be an argument against them being less worried, on the contrary, they should be terrified then.

> It doesn't. The children still remain Isreali citizens. Which means this is an inconvenience to the spouse and a quite racist law.

Note I find this abhorrent, but inconveniencing mothers or possible future mothers does lower the probability of Jews becoming a minority. And yes, inconveniencing here is an euphemism.

> History shows that their prosecution, demographics, and geography are not that related. Jews got prosecuted because they held significant wealth in a certain societies. It's a power/wealth grab in certain cases; and finding an easy scapegoat in other cases.

You're making the case that Jews shouldn't allow impoverished migrants into their land, again, I don't see why this should diminish their concerns.

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#445
post #84

This article doesn’t really provide much in the way of explanation for why this law is being enacted. Here [0] is a better article that quotes supporters and objectors to the law. It includes the (IMHO not very convincing) figures that "Between 1993 and 2003, around 130,000 Palestinians were given Israeli citizenship or residency through family unification, including children, according to court filings. The Shin Bet…

.037% terrorism sounds high to me

"being involved in terrorist activities" is pretty poorly defined. In the US at least that could amount to charitable giving that accidentally finds its way to the orphans of suicide bombers.

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#446
post #190

Here's an interesting exercise: 1. Substitute "Israel's Knesset" for ANY other legislative body anywhere. 2. Substitute "Palestinian" for ANY other nationality, ethnicity, race, sexual orientation, or other adjective describing a group to which YOU belong. 3. See if you like how it feels: "[Legislative body] passes law barring spouses who are [like you] from becoming citizens."

This is the law in China (my spouse is Chinese and we looked into this)

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Israel seems to care quite a bit about its image in the west, which is why every time news such as this comes out you see the same arguments trotted out over and over about how this is what’s necessary. Is western oriented propaganda and it’s important that it is seen for what it is. Now, as to your point about persecution. I do care about the safety and well-being of all involved in this. But your argument boils dow…

> there is something inherent in middle eastern culture writ large that makes people utterly incapable of living peacefully together By any means this is the case, but in the current state of affairs, given the amount of hatred in the region, if Israel was a region of Palestine with no sovereignty, I don't think it would fare well for the Jews. How do I know this? This is publicly routinely announced by the Palestini…

There is no unified Palestinian government. I’m going to assume you are referring to hamas, who hasn’t faced election since the mid 2000s in Gaza (though to be fair they would probably win again today).

I’m not asserting there is any clean path forward, but at the same time the hypothetical you are offering wouldn’t happen overnight either.

The question is whether we are able to justify actions as they are now. Will Israel work towards reconciliation and restitution or will it continue with its current policy of colonialism and expulsion?

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The hypothetical doesn’t ban marrying Russian speakers or citizens. It doesn’t ban naturalisation based on marriage for a Russian speaker. It bans naturalisation based on marriage for Russian citizens. While at war that seems fine.

Thank you, this is my point. The Israeli right wing views the Palestinian state as an extension of Jordan and other Arab states surrounding Israel, and while they are not currently shooting at each other, they are most definitely not at peace with them.

After Black September (Palestinian-Jordan war in 1970) and the bombings in Amman, the Palestinian state is definitely not an extension of Jordan. Even if there is a number of Palestinians living in Jordan, they are not Jordanians. That makes that view quite wrong.

Re: Israel passes law denying naturalization to Palestinian spouses

#449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. The premise of a state which is 'for' a specific group inherently employs segregation. I say subjugation because I think there is a version of that system that maintains a Jewish ruling majority without subjugating the minority. Again, you can agree or disagree with a state that is built on segregation, but I ask that you include in your judgement the history and context of Israel's existence.

out of genuine curiosity, how would that system work? how can you prevent subjugating the Arab minority?

It's definitely a very difficult issue, and the answer is definitely better left to someone with more political experience than myself (having zero), and with more knowledge of the Israeli political structure, but to start with-

1. Israel should move its capital to Tel Aviv and Jerusalem should become a U.N. Mandate. No single group should have exclusive claim over what many groups consider their holiest place. 2. There remains a permanent group like the U.N. security council in the Knesset that represents the Jewish people and their interests in the state of Israel, so regardless of the makeup of the coalition government, the interest of a Jewish state/state of the Jews remain effective - this is the least undemocratic way there could be representation while maintaining representation 3. All occupied territories are either returned or annexed--if annexed, full citizenship and rights are given to those who live there

Those are just my thoughts. I'm sure greater minds would come up with greater opinions. I just firmly believe there is a way to co-exist.

Post reply on HN