March 10, 2010

Interesting article about Israel's controversial citizenship law. The Citizenship and Entry Law was passed in 2003, during the second Palestinian uprising when suicide bombers were targeting Israeli public places, and it said that no one with a West Bank or Gaza ID card would be given permission to move to Israel to be with a spouse there. Initially the law was emergency legislation, but it has been extended every year since then. In 2005, the law was amended and they allowed women over 25 and men over 35 to apply for temporary permits to live in Israel, but they still didn't allow citizenship (except for a handful of cases). In 2007, the law was expanded to include citizens of Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon (i.e., they were added to the list along with West Bank and Gaza). In contrast, non-Jewish people that do not live in those areas who marry Jewish Israelis can apply for citizenship and it's a five-year process and they are subject to security checks.

The law is at the center of a long legal battle in Israel's Supreme Court; the latest hearing happened last week. Critics of the law, who include Jewish Israelis as well as Israeli Arabs, say that it goes against Israel's self-proclaimed standards of democracy and equal rights. They say it's a racist law and should be overturned. A lawyer for an Israel-Arab rights organization, who is one of several that has petitioned the Supreme Court against the law -- says that the principle behind the law is "very, very dangerous." She explained, "It stereotypes every person just because he belongs to a national and ethnic group and discriminates against him because of that." Israeli Arabs -- people of Arab descent who stayed in Israel after its creation in 1948 -- make up 20% of the population and they have long faced discrimination. Campaign groups estimate that at least 15,000 couples are affected by this law.

Israel says the law is a form of protection and it's been defended on security grounds. "For the Israeli government, it's about life and death -- the prevention of lethal attacks and the survival of the only majority Jewish state in a post-Holocaust war." The state representative for Israel said that in the past two years, 27 people who had applied for permission to join their spouses in Israel were directly involved in attempted or actual attacks. She said without the law, the numbers would be much higher. Defenders of the law say that security trumps any other rights. Other proponents of the law say it's important to maintain Israel's demographic make-up. They want Israel to remain a Jewish state. A lawyer for one of the right-wing organizations that support the law said that if the law is overturned then Israel will eventually become "a Muslim state" and "the Jewish people will become a minority in their own country" and thus be "exterminated." Wow, that is an extremely loaded term with historical implications. Obviously, fear is the tactic that these right-wing groups are using.

The article gave the story of the Khatib family. Mrs. Khatib is from the West Bank and Mr. Khatib is an Israeli citizen. They both consider themselves Palestinian. They met in 2001 and married in 2003. Mrs. Khatib was given permission to enter Israel for a single day. The next day, she went back home alone. They visited each other when they could, and she sometimes stayed illegally. Mr. Khatib said, "I was always afraid. It was hell. One day you have your wife with you, the next you don't." Things did improve after the 2005 amendment, but Mrs. Khatib still has no state health insurance, she is not allowed to work or drive, and she has to renew her permit to be in Israel every six months. They now have two children, who were both born and raised in Israel. Despite having an Israeli husband and two kids, Mrs. Khatib still cannot apply for citizenship. Mr. Khatib fears that one day they won't renew her permit, "It's very insecure. Maybe one day they won't give her the permission and I'll be left alone with two kids." The family currently lives in the mixed city of Acre in northern Israel. The family says they could leave Israel, but they are strongly opposed to it. Mr. Khatib explained that this is the land of his family, this is where his heritage is. This is his home. He says he understands the security concerns, but he wants couples to be screened on a couple-by-couple basis. However, Israel says there have been past attackers who would have passed security checks. The Supreme Court is likely to rule on this law within the next few months. (Full Story)