BICOM

Key Points

• The approval of a draft loyalty oath will require those seeking Israeli citizenship to accept Israel as Jewish and democratic. The proposed bill has passed through the cabinet but still has numerous hurdles to clear before becoming law.
• The bill has little practical impact and is mostly a symbolic gesture. However, the passage of this bill through the cabinet has sparked a fervent debate in Israel, with many senior politicians and commentators from across the political spectrum voicing strong views.
• The issue sheds light on the internal discourse within Israeli society about the character of the Jewish states and the challenge of reaching consensus.

What is the proposed new law?

On Sunday the Israeli cabinet approved draft legislation that would amend the pledge of allegiance taken by non-Jews who wish to become citizens of State of Israel. Up until now the wording was simply a pledge of loyalty to the State of Israel. If approved, the new declaration will read, “I declare that I will be a loyal citizen to the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state, and I obligate myself to respect its laws.”

 

What is the political context to the law?

The bill is part of the agenda of Yisrael Beitenu party. The party’s leader, Avigdor Lieberman, raised the issue of loyalty during the 2009 election campaign, which coincided with Operation Cast Lead, Israel’s major military operation to stop rocket fire from Gaza. In the context of the conflict and vehement criticism voiced by some Israeli-Arab leaders, Lieberman found that raising the issue of Arab citizen’s loyalty to the state was a successful way of tapping into populist anti-Arab sentiment, which exists in some sections of the Israeli public. At the time he proposed asking Israeli-Arabs to declare their loyalty to the State of Israel using the controversial slogan ‘no loyalty, no citizenship’ in Yisrael Beiteinu’s election campaign. This proposal was always much more of a symbolic rallying cry than serious policy, and never had much chance of getting majority support in the government. The bill that has passed through the cabinet is a shadow of this original proposal, which has little practical implication, but is a symbolic achievement for Lieberman and his agenda. Given Lieberman’s isolation from Israel’s diplomatic agenda, he has few other practical achievements to show his supporters for his place in the coalition.

Prime Minister Netanyahu promised Lieberman as part of the coalition negotiations that the issue will be brought to the cabinet and supported by the prime minister. Some have speculated that the sudden progress of this bill through the cabinet in the last few days was an incentive to Lieberman to agree to an extension of the settlement moratorium. Netanyahu seeks such an extension, so that he can return to direct negotiations with PA President Mahmoud Abbas.

Initially, the proposed bill was supported by Israel Labour Party leader and Defence Minister Ehud Barak. However, he requested that the wording of the pledge include reference to Israel’s Declaration of Independence, which guarantees the equality of all citizens regardless of race. Barak’s amendment was rejected during the cabinet meeting and he eventually opposed the bill. Throughout the deliberations that preceded the cabinet vote, Barak was harshly criticised by senior Labour ministers including Welfare Minister Yitzhak Herzog and Minorities Minister Avishai Braverman. Reports in the Israeli press suggest that this has contributed to rising tension between Barak and the ministers from his party and fuelled efforts to oust Barak as Labour leader.

How has the bill been debated in Israel?

The sudden passage of this bill through the cabinet has sparked a fervent debate in Israel, with many senior politicians and commentators from across the political spectrum voicing strong views.

The case for the bill was made by Avigdor Lieberman’s deputy in the Foreign Ministry, Danny Ayalon, in the Jerusalem Post. Ayalon argued that the new wording merely recognises the national character of Israel, which have been enshrined in constitutional laws and repeatedly recognised by international leaders in the past six decades.

Prime Minister Netanyahu accepted the proposal on Sunday’s cabinet meeting. In his approach to peace talks with the Palestinian he has insisted on the centrality of Palestinian and Arab recognition of Israel as a Jewish state in the context of a two-state solution.

Some commentators have defended the bill, such as Yoaz Hendel, in last Thursday’s Yedioth Ahronoth. He argued that an oath of allegiance, which most countries demand of new citizens is only symbolic, and added that, ‘there is logic to requiring a new citizen to declare that he knows exactly where he’s come to, that he understands the nature of the country he’s so eager to join.’

However, the bill has also been met with a wave of criticism from across the political spectrum. Veteran political scientist Shlomo Avineri’s case against the bill, made in an opinion piece in Haaretz, is fairly representative. Avineri, who examined the issue with several other prominent scholars and jurists, concludes that although Israel indeed sees itself as a Jewish state, the meaning of the term is contested even among the Jewish population of Israel. As such, the prime minister would have been wiser to demand an oath that endorses the state and its legitimacy.

Kadima Knesset member Nachman Shai makes a pragmatic case against the bill, pointing out that it has no value, but only contributes to Israel’s delegitimisation, undermine government efforts to narrow the gaps between Jews and Arabs in Israel, and distract from the real challenges of promoting Jewish identity and democratic values. Speaking at the opening of the Knesset yesterday, opposition leader Tzipi Livni reiterated this point, accusing Netanyahu of creating international opposition to the idea of the Jewish state where there had been none previously.

It is important to note that some of the most fervent ideologues on the right-wing of the Zionist spectrum, including Likud Knesset members Benny Begin and Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin have come out strongly against the bill, fearing it will unnecessarily alienate the Israeli-Arab population and damage Israel’s international standing. This is consistent with a long-held view on the right that rejects relying on international support to give validity to Israel’s actions.

Arab-Israeli leaders have protested against the bill as a direct attack on them. Arab-Israeli Knesset Member Ahmed Tibi wrote, ‘even as Israel markets itself as the only democracy in the Middle East, it treats the Arab-Palestinian as a fifth column representing an existential threat to the state.’

Where does it go from here?

The proposed bill has passed through the cabinet but still has numerous hurdles to clear before becoming law. It will now pass to a ministerial committee which will vet the proposed law. The cabinet agreed that the ministerial committee will consider making the pledge obligatory for all new citizens, Jewish and non-Jewish, and will reconsider Ehud Barak’s amendment adding a reference to Israel’s Declaration of Independence. The committee includes some of the ministers who voted against the proposal in cabinet. So far, Shas and Yisrael Beiteinu have opposed these proposals. After the ministerial committee the bill will be debated on the floor of the Knesset. Given that even sections of the government, and Netanyahu’s own Likud party, object to the bill, it is not clear whether the measure will find majority support in Israel’s parliament.

If it passes to law it will then be open to applications for judicial review by the Supreme Court. The court checks legislation accords with existing basic laws and Israel’s Declaration of Independence, and the process of judicial review is available to any applicant. Israel’s Declaration of Independence defines Israel as a Jewish and democratic state, and also stresses the equal rights of all citizens regardless of race.

Read more:

BICOM Briefing: Recognising Israel as a Jewish State

“The Citizenship Law amendment: Racist, just, or stupid?” Nachman Shai, Ahmad Tibi, Arye Eldad and others respond to the proposed bill.