Arab residents in the West Bank are not Israeli citizens. They have a 'basic law' which is similar to a Constitution and it now was changed to say that only Jews have a right to national self determination, and removed all references to democracy and equal rights.
The west bank is not a part of Israel. Arab residents in areas that Israel annexed from the west bank (East Jerusalem) are (or at least could be if they wish) Israeli citizens.
The west bank is not a part of Israel. Arab residents in areas that Israel annexed from the west bank (East Jerusalem) are (or at least could be if they wish) Israeli citizens.
Basic law is not similar to a constitution. It is a foundation on which a constitution will be made in the future, its is not as robust as a constitution and can be changed easier (some laws with a regular majority and some with more than 50% of the seats, which makes it easy for every government to change them). The law didn't remove anything from previous legislation it only added to the set of basic laws we have today a law that says Israel is the nation state of the Jews.
more about basic laws you can find here (still missing the last one):
http://knesset.gov.il/description/eng/eng_mimshal_yesod.htm
But the law fails to mention either equality or minority rights -- both of which were integral parts of Israel's Declaration of Independence in 1948, which explicitly states that Israel "will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture."
Israel is occupying the West Bank and taking more of it every day. And no, Arab residents in E. Jerusalem could NOT get citizenship if they wanted. Many of them do want it, and can't get it.
Yes it did:
But the law fails to mention either equality or minority rights -- both of which were integral parts of Israel's Declaration of Independence in 1948, which explicitly states that Israel "will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture."
The truth is that Israeli society isn’t exactly embracing the East Jerusalemites, as indicated by the incredible obstacles they must overcome to obtain Israeli citizenship. Until a decade ago, few applied for citizenship – it wasn’t socially acceptable and also unnecessary since East Jerusalemites have Jordanian travel papers. But the construction of the separation barrier changed that, and requests for Israeli citizenship have increased dramatically. The number of those actually obtaining citizenship, however, is dropping, with citizenship being granted to only a small percentage of applicants.
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news...ans-are-prisoners-in-their-own-city-1.5486255
Ahhh.... so now they COULD get a citizenship, earlier you wrote they COULDN'T.
clearly from your posts you are pretty ignorant on the Israeli legal system and legal status of Israeli residents\citizens.
Israel is occupying the West Bank and taking more of it every day. And no, Arab residents in E. Jerusalem could NOT get citizenship if they wanted. Many of them do want it, and can't get it.
My issue with the West Bank, in addition to the obvious never-ending occupation, is that Israel keeps stealing more and more of it for Israeli citizens, a status the Arab residents of the WB can never hope to gain.
Israel has stated there will be no two state solution. Only Jews have the right to national self-determination. They just changed their Constitution to say that.
They will never give up the West Bank, nor will they ever let the Arab residents be citizens.
The government claims to offer citizenship to eligible residents who came under Israeli sovereignty after 1967. In fact, after many years in which applications were handled relatively efficiently and about half were approved, the process has now all but stopped
Fine, you have issues, unfortanatly, those issues don't support any of the arguments you've made here:
What else does 'Only Jews have the right to national self-determination' mean if not that Palestinians don't? I.E. they have no right to their own state. I.E, no two state solution. The status quo will continue. One state occupying and oppressing a stateless people.
You are correct, it means exactly that, the problem is that "Only Jews have the right to national self determination" is not a section in the law you are referring to.
The law says "the right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people". The west bank and the gaza strip are not a part of the "State of Israel" hence there is no problem to have a two state solution, or with Palestinian right to self determination.
You are correct, it means exactly that, the problem is that "Only Jews have the right to national self determination" is not a section in the law you are referring to.
The law says "the right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people". The west bank and the gaza strip are not a part of the "State of Israel" hence there is no problem to have a two state solution, or with Palestinian right to self determination.
Yeah well they consider the West Bank and the Golan 'theirs', so this is problematic. If they don't intend on annexing the West Bank, they wouldn't keep building settlements there.
Yeah, I was expecting a story about kangaroos being set loose in Israel.
The territories occupied since 1967 as per the international consensus on the two state solution ( all but dead now nevertheless that's the territory to which I refer )
Yeah well they consider the West Bank and the Golan 'theirs', so this is problematic. If they don't intend on annexing the West Bank, they wouldn't keep building settlements there.
Prior to 1967 the West Bank was Jordan.
Kangaroo courts reference perhaps?