Israel has long been a divided state, but it has been divided in more than one direction. Being a Jew in Israel is both an ethnicity and a religion, and the latter of the two has recently come into the news columns of Israeli papers in a way that needs thought where the much desired but not so far close peace deal between the State of Israel and the new Palestinian state is concerned.
The Jewish people of Israel have almost since the beginning been a blend of folk from the militantly atheist through and including the strictest Orthodox. Struggles between groups as to various matters, segregation of buses, zeal in respecting Sabbath, wardrobe, validity of conversions and a host of other issues are common, and not just vigorious but occasionally forceful. That is the norm. In the last days numerous articles have appeared concerning events which in the aggregate raise the question as to whether the state which will be on the Israeli side of the deal if there ever is one is the sort of democratic one we usually talk about or something different, because the norm seems to be shifting.
Some thought on that might be useful in a time so confused that today's paper reported that the group which took credit for a recent rocketing from Gaza turns out to be a Fatah organization, here, in Ma'an, there have been a number of events and articles which are worth a look and a thought, below the squiggle.
The first and most secular of four groups of articles is this one, reporting that for the first time the state of Israel has seized and officially expropriated land in the WB from the Palestinian community which once owned it, something prior governments had promised the international community not to do, for the express purpose of expanding a settlement there. The purpose was to legalize the settlement, which in other respects as reported, isn't legal in a way that has not been remedied either for reasons unrelated to the expropriated land . This was done in addition to this. Every few days there are more articles about cutting down more olive groves, closing wells and taking down supposedly unpermitted Bedouin or Palestinian homes or settlements. A fast tracking of Jewish housing in East Jerusalem is another. Also a push by some parties to annex as a part of Israel all of the West Bank settlements, in the event the UN matter goes through. Netanyahu has also recently made problematic statements here about his intentions for Israeli Jews and Palestinians of any kind. Then there is this, account of land to which Bedouins in Israel were relocated in 1956 from which they are now being moved in Israel so a Jewish town can be built there,
A change of policy of this kind, literal expropriation, in the context of delayed negotiations one of whose issues is settlements, is a major matter.
Number 2 in the list is this article, please disregard the title, which points out that for the purpose of allowing freedom of worship at Joseph's tomb, the IDF has not only found it necessary for monthly gatherings to lock down a nearby refugee camp and a good bit of the city, in WB territory, but to deploy a thousand troops and officers to protect the Jewish worshipers to some degree, but also to protect the community in which Joseph's Tomb exists from said worshipers, and the various Jewish groups who come from themselves. Of course the worshippers are a mix of those whose only purpose is to come and worship, but also various radical and settler factions which seem to have additional goals, a good bit of which, IDF has concluded, puts either them or the local residents in danger without such substantial intervention.There have been other articles from several points of view such as this one about a substantial rise at the level that challenges IDF in clashes between settlers in WB and Palestinians there over land and price tag issues. Here is another similar.
Number 3 is a continuing issue about renting land to Israeli Arab residents, which was directed by rabinnical authority, of which this is a followup article to a situation begun some time ago. and an issue which arose as to the form of prayer for the IDF fallen, concerning whether the dead should be remembered by G-d or by the people of Israel, that is, whether the official prayer for the IDF dead should be specficially religious or not. So far 'not' seems to be winning but the battle is not over.
Number 4 involves a book called in English The King's Torah, published last year, which contains various statements about what traditional Religious law provides with respect, inter alia, to the Religiously legal requirements as to treatment of those not Jews, perhaps in time of war. While the book was written by a settlement Rabbi, it was approved for correctness by several other rabbis of higher authority, two of whom have recently been called in for questioning or arrested, the term varies but they were released, by reason of their approval. The arrests occurred because the rabbis were summoned to discuss the approvals, and refused because it was a religious matter. and nothing the state could natter at them about. In effect a claim that they and their teachings and doings are above the laws of the state. This article is one about one of the two rabbis. There have been demonstrations reported in Israel in which hundreds of demonstrators have objected to the arrestssuch as this article. and poliltical threats such as this one. Bibi's response thusfar, save for item 1 above has been that no one is above the law, presumably the secular democratic legislative law.
In part as a result of this matter, a number of articles have appeared, four or five tonight, in the Israeli papers raising the question of which this opinion piece is just one of whether Israel is becoming or should become a state governed by Torah or other forms of specifically Jewish religious law, or should stay or fight to stay a not specifically religious and certainly democratic state.
- - - -
No matter how conservative the Netanyahu government is, it is at its core on the securlar and legislative side of this issue.
But the underlying question this run of disputes poses is whether the state which those here who believe in peace are asking to do the deal with the Palestinians for peace and safety of all, is presently or will be a state which will be willing to do a deal given the views of certain of the conservative religious communities which seem to include most of the settlers outside the Jerusalem areas, that the lands promised to them are theirs, not to be shared with Arabs at all, and whose governing law is nothing the Knesset does, but Torah or halakha, and what those groups propose to do in order to make their opinion the binding one, or may otherwise do in accordance with their governing Religious Law.
I am aware that many of the ultra religious groups were in Israel before without this issue arising, but that was then and this is now, and now they have their own troops in the form of settlers which they didn't have before and whose control by the government is questionable at best, although the financial underwriting of settlers and the rabbinate is something the government still does.
So far the Netanyahu government position has been to begin an investigation, in which the 'arrests' figured, looking to the question of whether the Kings Torah and those who approve it are encouraging hatred of an illegal sort, and violence, against the argument that Torah says what it does and a Jewish state has no business restricting the religious freedom of Jews, assuming there is agreement between the groups on who is or is not one., accompanied by the pushing of WB settlements noted above, and the attempts to deal with religious at Joseph's Tomb and the like protectively, regardless of what happens to the Palestinians involved.
My concern is that if the balance of power shifts even a little, the matter of peace will be resolved by the internal politics of the state of Israel, and without regard to anything having to do with Palestinians at all. And will not lead to any deal, but rather something much less tolerable than even what is now the case as to WB and Gaza, and inexplicable to the rest of us.
The large gap in views backed up by demonstrations and politics on this, seems to be growing in the time the peace deal has not gotten done or worked on in this round. This concerns me and leads me to raise the issue here, for the reason that if a religious group of factions comes to control the government, the probability of any peace deal seem essentially nil.
I also wonder if the fact that a peace treaty is being attempted now is bringing these matters to a head before something is done that the conservative faction cannot tolerate and would do a lot to undo or prevent if it gets done while the matter of the theocracy is not settled first, which gets us all back to nil.
Bibi's majority which allows him to govern is very small, and these groups in small parties have controlled much because they give him the majority which makes him PM at all.
He also has Liebermann, not apparently an Orthodox religious partisan, who holds very similar views, whose party is also essential to his coalition, and who has his own ambitions.
Part of my concern is also whether a change in government to a more expressly Religiously governed one will also affect the position in which Israel seeks to have itself held as a modern, democratic institution like in all material respects to its peers in Europe and North America. That position is one which as I understand the matter is seen as very important in obtaining assistance and cooperation from Europe and North American Diaspora and governments because of the democratic system and the alleged similarity to that of Europe and North America. I do have a concern that the change in content of governance considered here to something more nearly if not outright a theocracy might if it went forward result in a change in perspective on the international relationships of Israel, for good reasons or bad, but realistically a risk even now. In particular, I do not know what the US government would think or do if the switchover is made.