Concession regarding the Nation-State Law is forbidden

Opponents of the "Chok Ha'Leum" (National-State Law, aka Nationality Law) are those who fear any emphasis on the Jewish character of the state, and wish to blur the uniqueness of the Jewish people *

Rabbi Eliezer Melamed, | updated: 12:52

מצווה. הרב מלמד
מצווה. הרב מלמד
פלאש 90

Summary: Opponents of the "Chok Ha'Leum" (National-State Law aka Nationality Law) are those who fear any emphasis on the Jewish character of the state, and wish to blur the uniqueness of the Jewish people * This same position is also responsible for helplessness in the face of agricultural crime and illegal construction, because it ignores their broad national context * In normal circumstances, the left should be taken into account, but not in a situation where their imperviousness to reality creates a real danger to the state * Some of the Druze were influenced by the Israeli left, but the Druze, who are truly loyal to their tradition, continue to show loyalty to Israel, like all other Druze minorities in other countries, and it is to be hoped that the loyal approach will win out

The Roots of the Debate over the National-State Law

The debate over national law draws the line between those who participated in the building of the state in recognition of the special purpose of the People of Israel to proclaim faith and morality to the world, and those who want Israel to be a civilized Western country that also serves as a haven for Jews against anti-Semitism.

Those who want to fulfill the Zionist vision wish to give the state a special character inspired by Torah, prophecy and the Oral Law, together with all the best that can be learned from the nations of the world. A model state would be developed - morally, socially, scientifically and economically, with the vision of 'tikun olam' (repairing the world). Those wishing to do so wish to emphasize the uniqueness of the State of Israel as a Jewish state.

In contrast, those wishing for a "democratic" state are concerned about the emphasis on the Jewish character of the state. They tend to deny the special merit of the Jewish people, and strive to blur the historical uniqueness of our people. This is what most academic scholars do as they try to explain all the unique phenomena in the history of the Jewish people using technical and tangential reasons. The moral motive for their position is that they fear that the idea of ​​Israel's virtue will lead to xenophobia, just as nationalistic ideas have caused negative phenomena among different peoples in history.

Ignoring the National Context is Dangerous

In addition to the sin of denying vision, the second route will not succeed. Even if many Jews flee from themselves and deny their national identity, the Arab people around us recognize it in all its validity, and fight us. The war takes place in various modalities within the State of Israel, and if we do not understand that - we lose!

For example, if you interpret the crimes of Arabs against Jewish farmers as personal crimes, a way to fight them cannot be found, because what is useful against a private criminal is not helpful against someone who has a national ideology (and this can be attested to by the Jewish defense volunteers of 'Hashomer Hachadash'). When referring to illegal Arab construction throughout the country as a personal crime, we are unable to enforce the law because it involves terrible violence. But when we understand that all these crimes are committed within the framework of a national struggle, the criminals can be defeated easily.

If the interpretation of Arab immigration into the State of Israel is accepted as "family reunification" that stems from feelings of love, the result is that the Supreme Court does not allow the Israeli government to prevent the granting of citizenship to an Israeli Arab citizen who marries someone who is not an Israeli citizen. Thus, some 150,000 Arabs have immigrated to Israel, and they and their children now number about 400,000. But if we understand that the land is part a national war, then all the couples are allowed to realize their love in their former place - and not in the State of Israel.

Consideration of the Left will Lead to Disaster

In a normal situation, if a certain law greatly hurts the left, it is worth taking them into consideration. But when the Israeli left is so impervious to reality that it fails to recognize the exisitng state of war, consideration of it abandons the future of the State of Israel to a national and social disaster. It could lead to civil war, after Arab emigration rises, and with it, nationalistic crime. If the Supreme Court had restrained itself, the need would have been less urgent; but after they broke the rules and forced the Jewish people out of its national assets and undermined its ability to defend itself, there is no choice.

In a normal moral situation, people who for national reasons cannot join the army of the state and will not sing the anthem, are not entitled to ordinary rights of a citizen. In Israel, instead of accusing them of disloyalty, they are given full civil rights, and some of them are even appointed judges, policemen and senior officials. Not only that, but people on the left also claim that the state should change its flag, symbol, anthem, and language to suit them. They do not understand that without its Jewish identity, the State of Israel does not have the right to exist, nor does it have the ability to exist.

The Next Basic Law: Loyalty

The Nation-State Law in its present form is only the first stage in determining the national identity of the State of Israel.

The second and necessary stage is a profound change in the judicial system.

The third stage is a determination in a Basic Law that any person who lives in the State of Israel and is not loyal to it and refuses for national reasons to join the army or national service for the benefit of the State of Israel as the state of the Jewish people is not entitled to all civil rights. There is no more moral position than this, and all the talk about equal rights that are not conditional on obligations leads to moral injustices that corrupt society.

The Druze: Loyal to their Tradition,oyal to Israel

In the present situation, in which the public discourse in the secular-left media deals only with human rights, and cynically expresses reservations about Jewish nationalism, many Druze have internalized the values ​​of the left. Ignoring the war waged over the Land of Israel between Jews and Arabs, they chose the wrong side, in a position that weakens the Jews and strengthens the Arabs.

On the other hand, the Druze who are loyal to their ancient tradition do not interfere with the Nationality Law, because their basic position is loyalty to the state in which they live. Thus, they were loyal to the Turks and unfortunately even participated in the slaughter of the Jews by order of the regime, and so the Druze in Syria and Lebanon are loyal to the central government even when it discriminates against them disgracefully.

The traditional Druze did not participate in the demonstration against the  Nation-State on the contrary, they want the strengthening of the State of Israel as a Jewish state in which the Druze community is respected and has the best conditions in the world. Precisely because they are loyal to their tradition, they took part in the fortification of the State of Israel, and for that, we greatly appreciate them.

Incidentally, the leftists urged us to listen to the "touching" words of the reporter Riyad Ali, so that we would understand how much the Druze were harmed by the Nation-State Law. "My son is a policeman in the Israel Police, and at this very moment he is protecting the security of Jews who are delusional against fanatic Muslims on the Temple Mount." Where did he get such evil ideas, to call Jews who go up to the Temple Mount "hallucinatory"? How did he compare Arab rioters and murderers to Jews who wish to pray in the place sacred to the Jewish people for thousands of years? How would the Italians have treated the father of a Swiss policeman who would have said that his son was protecting the delusional Catholics coming to the Vatican? That very day he would have been fired.

In the present situation, the position of many of the Druze poses a dilemma: as long as they maintain loyalty to the people of Israel as sovereign, they are our partners, but those who rebel against the founding principle of the State of Israel as the state of the Jewish people are moving from a minority partner to a hostile minority, which we must find a way to deal with.

It is to be hoped that the majority does not share this uprising, and the folly of some of the Druze leaders, who believe that the promises to improve their position on the part of the left will be realized, while in reality, the Jewish people is leaning to the right. Even if, God forbid, the Left rises to power, the big benefits will be given to Arab Muslims, who hate the Druze, at the expense of the Druze. Precisely because of their deep familiarity with the Arabs, they should have immediately understood how much the new law was necessary and even protects and is beneficial to them. Minister Ayoub Kara should be commended and the leaders who courageously continue to express traditional Druze views of support and loyalty to the Zionist Jewish enterprise called the State of Israel.

Let us hope that Prime Minister Netanyahu, with his political cleverness, together with Minister Ayoub Kara, will know how to leverage the Druze protest to promote a law that will strengthen the status of minority members loyal to the state and contribute to its security, and give them proper compensation.

This article appears in the 'Besheva' newspaper, and was translated from Hebrew.






top