By David Israel, JEWISH PRESS
On Thursday, MK Simcha Rotman (Religious Zionism) submitted a draft bill aimed at regulating Israeli immigration policy. It’s a basic law with broad powers, intended to blow out of the water the temporary provision of the Family Reunification Law which Prime Minister Naftali Bennett’s coalition is promoting.
The family reunification process is conducted in Israel by the Interior Ministry, which accepts requests by Israeli Arabs for their family members living in the Palestinian Authority or abroad. This process usually takes many years, and most applicants end up petitioning the Jerusalem District Court. Most of the applications submitted for family reunification in Israel are by Arab citizens of Israel who married a PA resident.
The reason for this tough treatment of applicants is that a staggering percentage of the offspring of PA Arabs who acquired Israeli citizenship have been involved in carrying out acts of terrorism. As of 2018, members of the second generation of family reunification constitute about 15% of those involved in terrorism among Israeli Arabs (three times more than their relative share of the population).
On May 12, 2002, the Israeli government proposed to restrict the family reunification clause of the Citizenship Law, by closing the door firmly before all citizenship seekers from the PA. There have been two appeals of the restriction to the Supreme Court, and both were rejected by a 6-5 majority.
However, the 2002 legislation was created with a one-year sunset, so that the provision must be renewed by the Knesset every single year. In fact, the current vote on renewing the law was submitted three months ago, as is the due process, by the Netanyahu government.
The goal of the right-wing opposition parties is to embarrass the three right-wing coalition partners—Yamina, New Hope, and Israel Beiteinu—assuming that Meretz and Ra’am would naturally oppose the proposed right-wing Basic Law on Immigration, which denies permanently the granting of Israeli citizenship to all PA Arabs.
The bill is signed by MKs Bezalel Smotrich (Religious Zionism), Amir Ohana (Likud), Amichai Shikli (Yamina), Uriel Uriel Buso (Shas), Yitzhak Pindros (United Torah Judaism) and Yinon Azulai (Shas).
Ayelet Shaked attacked the opposition last week, writing: “Next week I will put the citizenship law to a vote. I cannot imagine that the opposition will harm the security of the country in the name of political games. I am sure they will show the required maturity and support the law. I have no doubt that the head of the opposition will keep his word that in matters of Israeli security “there is no opposition and no coalition, in this matter we are all on one front.”
But now the opposition is determined to show up Yamina and New Hope, and demonstrate that by opposing the proposed permanent bill they act based on coalition interests and not Israel’s Zionist interest. And just as importantly, the opposition is sending a clear message to PM Naftali Bennett that they won’t be providing him tacit support from back benches. He’s out there on his own.
There’s no chance the opposition bill will be accepted any time soon (not by a Likud-led government, either), and its submission is just part of the perpetual waterboarding Prime Minister Bennett will have to endure for the remainder of his stint at the top. Will his potential voters embrace the confrontational message of the bill and turn away from the Yamina party? The answer to that, at least at this point, is, what Yamina voters? For the time being, everyone on the Yamina team has accepted that these may be the final four years of their political careers – the same may true for Gideon Sa’ar’s New Hope party.
The Minister of Regional Cooperation, Issawi Frej (Meretz), told Reshet Bet radio on Saturday that he would not vote in favor of renewing the temporary ordinance banning the unification of Arab families. He clarified “I will not vote against the government, but I will not vote for this law.”
Frej also said the coalition factions are trying to reach an agreement on the law. “There’s a dialogue among us on many issues, including this issue,” he said. “The dialogue is not over yet and I hope we reach an agreed point that would satisfy all the parties.” The Meretz minister did not say he wanted to kill the law, only to “fix it.”
Back in 2015, when the Knesset plenum voted on the same ordinance, Labor MK Nachman Shai, currently the Minister of the Diaspora, said that the Citizenship Law lies “at the important seam in our lives between Democracy and our Jewish foundation. It’s the connection that always accompanies us. Any tendency to one side or the other strikes the delicate balance. The dilemma is clear before our eyes. If we go in the direction of family reunification while the fight against terrorism continues, we are endangering the citizens of the State of Israel. If we go in the direction of unrestrained entry we threaten the Jewish character of the State of Israel. On the other hand, basic rights must be respected, and their right to live together with their spouses must be respected. To take care of their children. This is the dilemma we’ve faced since the establishment of the State of Israel.”
@Reader
None of us hold a degree in ESP, unfortunately, as I would greatly like to have a fair understanding of where many things now unfolding might soon lead. But like yourself, I will learn of the certainty of such things from the annoying enlightenment of one days discovery at a time. Still, a view towards common reasoning would reveal that Likud can not trust this gov’t to do what is not in its interests of survival. Once this band-aid is renewed, no other proposal will be shouldered by this gov’t on this difficult topic – the Right(or however you would like to label them without the need of naming each of their many parties) know this as well as Bennett’s allies.
Bennett will either preserve this porous law without the opposition’s aid, or he will make use of them to produce a Right wing(you know what I mean here) agenda along the lines of Rothman’s proposal or something negotiated from it to a common support.
These things seem reasonable to me, but we will see what Bennett will find to offer the Brotherhood to avoid the difficulty of considering this Basic Law proposal.
@adamdalgliesh
If the coalition relying on Likud to support some of its legislation led to the fall of the government, Likud would have voted for the extension with both hands and both feet but it DIDN’T.
Otherwise, I agree with you.
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/308723
For peloni and Reader: I do think it was wrong for the opposition to oppose the extension of the restrictions placed on the Family Reunion law. The Likud had been supporting the extension of these restrictions only a few weeks before the new government was formed. It also has voted for them every year for the past twenty years. It’s only reason for voting against it was that the new government was now supporting it.
This sabotaging of legislation to prevent “family reunified” Arabs from obtaining Israeli citizenship now means that the Arabs migrating from the “territories to fully incorporated Israel will now be able to get the vote, serve in parliament, etc., all of which nearly all of the Jewish oppositionists oppose. Voting ’no” on the extension for purely tactical political reasons was irresponsible in the extreme.
This “tactical” move actually strenghens the power of the anti-Zionists in the government by forcing Bennett and Lapid to rely more on them to stay in office. On the other hand, if the bill had passed with the opposition support while the anti-Zionists voted no, it would have meant that Bennett and Lapid would have had to rely on Likud and the rest of the Jewish opposition to pass this legislation, and perhaps many other laws in the future that were pro-Zionist, such as continued aid to the settlements. That iin turn would have led to the fall of the government and a new government with the Likud and the other parties in the opposition holding office.
@peloni
If it is not sanctimonious chatter, why doesn’t Likud help to quickly pass the extension law (in order not to cause it to be weakened) of which it approved before getting into the opposition AND THEN work together with the coalition on the better law that Likud has suggested?
The only answer is that the only thing the opposition is concerned about is smearing and bringing down the coalition – the country be damned!
I can’t understand why you keep calling these people “the Right”.
I would call them the traitors and the 5th column, and, yes, the bibuins.
And I don’t have ESP and pretend to know what anyone’s motivation is.
I just see what I see and make my conclusions based on that.
@Reader
In fairness to all, what Bennett has done was not undertaken 9 days prior to the signing and is still being negotiated at this time and will continue til the gov’t falls, should that be in two weeks or two years. It is a funny thing that Bennett seems to keep stating, almost daily, that this gov’t will last 4yrs – such a statement, if likely, shouldn’t need a daily pronouncement. In truth, there is no objective to gain a focus by these players whose only attraction to eachother was Bibi’s fall and their only cause to remain together lies in a mix of self-interest, political power and financial boons – no ties of religion, state or agenda binds them together.
With this in mind, the Right sees that this law provides Bennett’s gov’t a boon to offer Meretz and Raam by interpreting it less strictly. This concern, which should concern us all, of the Right can not be answered by Bennett and Saar’s assurances of ‘trust’ – there is no such bond to be played upon between these splintered members of the Right. This is the basis for the new law.
So it is not sanctimonious chatter, but a significant concern should you consider Bennett’s motives as less than Zionist in nature as he empowers the Anit-Nationalists and Anit-Zionists Camps at the expense of the Zionist Camps while appointing himself and the two-state Lapid as PM and co-PM, respectively. And don’t forget Lapid must sanction every action that Bennett takes per their agreement. Regardless of your political views of the Right or Bennett, it is a great concern that the Arabs could gain further control over this gov’t.
@peloni
If the extension law is really so bad and full of holes, why then Likud didn’t criticize it and plannned to pass it with no problem right before the Netanyahu bloc was unexpectedly kicked into opposition by Lapid putting together a coalition of 8 parties in 9 days (love him or hate him – it was quite an achievement)?
Why is Likud being so sanctimonious about it now?
What they are saying now is “Take your pick – no family reunification law at all or our version as it stands! My way or the highway! And take the full blame for the consequences! ”
As far as I am concerned, they did make it even clearer that no party in the opposition (especially Likud) should even exist because they have lost their mandate to govern.
P.S.
I am told that among the “Russian” Jews in Israel one of the names for the opposition is “bibuins” (doesn’t mean that there are no Netanyahu fans among them, I just thought it was funny).
Finally, some clarity of the Right’s objections to the renewal of the Family Reunification law. Rothman noted that the law acts like a porous net that allows Arabs into Israel and extends them citizenship. This extension of citizenship to these new Israeli Arabs dilutes the existing Israeli population, and its political makeup, in favor of the Arabs.
The law allows a great deal of authority to the Interior Minister, who is currently Shaked. Now the question for the Right becomes, as is so much for any support of this gov’t, a matter of trust. Can Shaked be trusted by the Right to hold fast to the standards that have been used in the past regarding this already porous net, or should the Right expect this porous net be made less strict to gain the support of the Anti-Zionists members to support the gov’t on basic legislation needs, which would include the renewal of the Family Unification law among many other measures.
Given the declaration of betrayal that the Right sees in this experiment dominated by Left of center, Leftist and Anti-Zionists that Bennett/Shaked/Saars have incorporated into the elevated positions of gov’t, the obstinacy offered by the Right in replacing the existing law that could not be used to barter with the Anti-Zionists does become more rational.
And while Abbas is being made the offer of controlling multiple Deputy Minister-ships, it should be recalled that it was a demand of Abbas’ entry into the gov’t that he be made Deputy Minister of the Interior Ministry. And though this demand was wisely refused and converted into the Deputy Ministry of the PM, it should be noted that any role of authority or persuasion over that Ministry would grant him some input into the non-birth increase of the Arab population in the Jewish State at the expense of its native jewish population – fulfilling a clear objective of the Brotherhood towards diminishing the Jewish population by these emigrating Arabs.
“Abbas agreed that the UAL will not vote against the law’s extension…In exchange, Interior Minister Ayelet Shaked agreed to make a public statement committing the government to improving the ‘humanitarian conditions’ in Israel’s Arab sector.”
Curious if this is a new slush fund allocated to the Muslim Brotherhood or just referencing the previous slush fund placed at their disposal. Further funding and further solidifying the Arab street around a very dangerous movement within the state. Very unfortunate that an accommodation was not struck with the Right.
@peloni
Apparently, they can’t just push it (the extension) through.
If they could, they would.
The bill that Likud wouldn’t pass is the opposition bill not the extension bill.
Why don’t you ask David Israel?
This is the latest about the extension bill:
@Reader
Ok, but they could just push it thru with the Right+Yamina+Saar – they don’t need the coalition members. And the coalition might spit and stammer over the situation, but they face a hard reality. They all, including the Brotherhood, know they would have zero chance of returning to their position of power and political gifts should the coalition break – so it won’t, not over this. The coalition members have too much to lose by self-destructively ending the opportunities Bennett’s gov’t of spare parts affords them on a number of fronts. And an accomodation with the Right would work to Bennett/Saar’s benefit, especially as this is a very basic hurdle to pass as opposed to much more significant Zionist measures for which Bennett is sure to need their support. A stable gov’t based on several self-interested goals being simultaneously met could solve the great intemperance of the political situation that was created by Bennett’s adoption of this gov’t of many colors.
But my question was regarding David Israel’s perception that Likud would not pass the bill if they were in power. This seems fantastical to me, but so much of the cocky ego trips of recent memory would fit into this same category. So, based on David Israel’s premise there is something that Likud would not support in the bill and my question is: What is it? Putting all the political BS aside, if Bennett would support it and Likud would pass it, with or without amendment, what is not to like about it? I do not accept that this is an impossible solution should there be no source of self-eliminating measure that would preclude even the Right from supporting it, but I do not believe this is likely to be true. If there is nothing, it would seem to be a win – a win for the opposition, a win for the long term stability of the gov’t, and hence, a win for Bennett. It might also be noted that it could also be a win for the nation, but lets not discuss altruistic ideals in the same breath that we are describing the luxury of political self-interest of so many self-interested parties, but that is politics for you. Just some thoughts…
Why is my comment in moderation?
I saved it, BTW.
Netanyahu is fighting like a cornered rat (and people are starting to notice):
@peloni
The reason even the Likud led government will not vote for it is probably because it is too radical and too general as presented and in order to be made acceptable it would need to be almost endlessly discussed, adjusted, and fought over, and, as I said, it may cause harm in the long run if it is thoughtlessly adopted.
The opposition is doing great harm to the state by refusing to support the extension bill because in order for the coalition parties to push it through on their own they will need to weaken it to make it acceptable to everyone in the coalition since doing this is still better than not extending it at all (it must be extended annually).
If this is acceptable to the opposition just because it may hurt the coalition, there are no words that I can find to describe it.
The only expressions that come to mind are something nearly forgotten, like “the enemies of the people”.
@Reader
Thanks for your input as always, Reader, I did read your comment yesterday or the day before. I’m questioning what are the specific problems with the proposed bill. I do understand all that you relate about the delay that it may hold to consider a new bill at this time any possible political situation it might create. But I am reading in the article above that Likud would not support it and if that is true, there must be a basis for that statement. I find that statement to be difficult to believe. But if it an accurate assessment of the situation, does anyone know why that would be so?
The problems with the Likud bill (I am repeating my post from 06-18-21):
Reader
June 18, 2021 at 10:03 pm
The bill that the opposition has introduced is damage control to show that they don’t prevent the extension or passing of the citizenship law introduced by the government but merely introduce a much better law than the “leftists” in the new government.
It is a distraction from the task of the voting on the extension of the citizenship law that the opposition refused to support.
It is also designed to make the opposition appear super “rightist” which it is not.
MOST IMPORTANTLY, it is also designed to interfere with the tasks that the new government has to accomplish and to waste as much time as possible because the opposition wants to force this government to collapse.
If the new government fails to pass a budget within 100 days, the Knesset will be dissolved.
This is the same trick (failing to pass the budget) that Netanyahu played on Gantz in order to prevent him from becoming prime minister.
It is much more important right now to just push through the extension bill and continue on to the budget which they have only 100 days to complete rather than fight and argue for weeks about this new comprehensive reform bill which makes no immediate difference to anyone and may actually make things worse in the long run.
I am wondering whether their “all-encompassing law”, if passed, would be able to severely restrict aliyah and the possible illegal entry (out of desperation) into Israel (the “Jewish” country) of the Jews persecuted in the Diaspora?
I don’t want the place to be turned into another Mandatory Palestine.
I mean, the Jewish state hasn’t been encouraging aliyah as it is, it seems to be a lot more interested in making life cozy for their 2 million Arabs.
Imagine if Israel now had 2 million more Jews, most of them living in Judea and Samaria!
I am starting to think that the parties in the opposition are so corrupt that they should be dismantled and most of their members should be barred from ever entering any government positions.
What is the problem with the bill that Likud et. al. proposed? I have read several things on this subject, but there seems to be no serious discussion of what is in the bill or why anyone would oppose it, just that “There’s no chance the opposition bill will be accepted any time soon (not by a Likud-led government, either)” which is, as Sebastien noted, vague to the point of being almost intentionally uninforming. Does anyone know more about this bill and why it seems no one might really want to pass it? It seems too cynical to believe that should Bennett support the Likud measure that Likud, Smotrich and others would not support it.
The eopposiiton are complete assholes to vote against the extension of the citizenship law. Now that the citizenship law won’t be extended, Israel will be flooded with “family reunion” Arabs who will gain full citizenship and committ lots of terrorism. No to mention adding many votes to the anti-Zionist, pro-Has Arab parties. Madness on Bibi’s part. Also on all the opposition MK’s.
In addition, had they voted for the law, the Abbas’ “United List” or “Ra’am”(a pro-Hamas Islamist party), and the Meretz party might have quit the coalition, because they strongly oppose any limitations on citizenship for Arab immigrants from Judea, Samaria and Gaza. Bringing in enough Arabs from the “territories,” all brainwashed to hate israel and support terror attacks on Jews, until they are a near minority within Israel and can overthrow it, has always been the PLO-Hamas plan. Ant Ra’am-Joint List shares these goals.
Article is spot on!
Too vague. What’s it say?