4.3.07

Against my last post, I received a comment accusing me of painting the whole Israeli government of the same colour. I don't really intend to make that generalisation, for my commenter says that NU-NRP controls only 9 seats of the 120 Knesset seats, so even though it is extremist it controls only a small share of the seats. So I propose to paint the colourful picture of the Israeli Knesset.















Party NameSeatsArab DuruzOrientation*
Kadima 2901c
Labour-Meimad1920cl
Likud1200r
Shas1200er
Yisrael Beitenu 1100er
Mafdal- I.L.900er
Gil Pensioners7 00^
United Torah J.6 00er
Meretz500l
Ra'am Ta'al440^
Hadash320l
NDA (Ex. Balad)330^

* C= centre; cl=centre left; cr= centre right; l=left; r=right; ^=God knows (actually these party are single theme parties so cannot be identified as to which orientation they belong)

so out of 120 Knesset seats there are 10 Arab MKs i.e they control 8% of the seats while they represent 20% of the population. Thirty two percent of the seats are held by extreme right parties, a further 10% are held by the rightist Likud party while parties with leftist orientation hold 8 seats corresponding to less than 7% of the total number of seats, in addition to a further 16% held by the somewhat leftist Labour party. In sum, the party that calls for the transfer of Arabs (even those who are Israeli citizens) holds more seats in the Parliment than Arabs do.
The overall picture is not very beautiful. Because zionist parties, whether from the right or the left (except maybe for Hadash) well never accept to have 'a country for all its citizens' as is the constant theme of the National Democratic Assembly.
So, I am really sorry that I presented the views of NU-NRP as if they were the overwhelming voice in Israeli politics, but I cannot really see that other voices diverge significantly.
I have to admit though, that while I tried to highlight The issue of MK Majadleh, I am not in a position to think that this is an important step in any way. Here are the reasons:
1- It comes 59 years after the establishment of the state.
2- MK Majadleh's nomination came through Labour-Meimad list which is a zionist list. Meaning that MK Majadleh does identify with the zionist priniciple of Labour-Meimad, yet he still gets harrased for his ethnic origin nonetheless.
3- The State, by this nomination, is trying to hide the reality of the discrimination it practices against its Arab citizens.
4- MK Majadleh's Labour roots will mean that he is not going to be representing the views of the Arab minority in the Cabinet.
5- MK Majadleh is really participating in this game of covering the discrimination by taking up this post. It gives further legitmacy to Israel's claims that they are 'the only democracy in the Middle East' while they continue to act to the contrary on the ground.

2 comments:

Brady01 said...

Thank you for the clarification. I am impressed by your thorough research.

I still, however, find your analysis lacking.

You argue that because Minister Majadleh belongs to a "Zionist" party and he is Arab, he is "not going to be representing the views of the Arab minority."

This is twisted logic. Obviously, Majadleh DOES represent the views of the Arab minority, because he is a prominent politician from a political party that historically recieves significant Arab support.

Furthermore, Israel does not disciminate against Arabs or Muslims. The only difference between Jews and Arab/Muslims in Israeli law is that Jews seeking to move to Israel recieve the Right of Return, while Muslims seeking to move to Israel do not.

However, Israel has twice offered (most recently in 2000) the Palestinians a state of their own wherein Muslims can have a Right of Return.

This in my opinion, would be the best possible solution to the conflict--one that would ensure a place in the Holy Land for both Jews and Muslims.

nuh ibn zbigniew gondek said...

As salaam alaikum.

I write for a largely Muslim audience. Come by daily inshallah when you have some time to read.

Wa salaama,

nuh ibn