The Israeli Prime Minister has bet his political future on running against ANY deals with the Palestinians ….
That even though the Arab population in Israel is growing and gaining political strength ….
A lot of Israeli’s are tired of the fight against the Palestinians’s who in some way, touch their everyday lives….
After 27 years of sitting out decisions on who should lead Israel, Arab lawmakers on Sunday recommended that Benny Gantz, the centrist former army chief, be given the first chance to form a government over Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a watershed assertion of political power.
Ayman Odeh, the leader of the Arab Joint List, wrote in a New York Times Op-Ed published on Sunday that the alliance’s 13 incoming lawmakers — the third-largest faction in the newly elected Parliament — had decided to recommend Mr. Gantz because it would “create the majority needed to prevent another term for Mr. Netanyahu.”
“It should be the end of his political career,” Mr. Odeh wrote.
The Arab lawmakers’ recommendation, which Mr. Odeh and other members of the Joint List delivered to President Reuven Rivlin in a face-to-face meeting Sunday evening, reflected Arab citizens’ impatience to integrate more fully into Israeli society and to have their concerns be given greater weight by Israeli lawmakers.
“There is no doubt a historic aspect to what we are doing now,” Mr. Odeh said in the meeting with the president, which was broadcast live.
Great! Perhaps there is hope for Israel?
Gantz isn’t what we would call a Liberal even if he’s in that party to get the job…
The Arab population is moving towards a majority in the Jewish state BTW…
Democratic Socialist Dave says
It’s not clear if Arabs will become the majority in Mandate (pre-1948) Palestine, i.e. the West Bank, Gaza and (pre-1967) Israel proper. But they constitute only about a fifth of the population outside Palestine and Gaza, and their inhabitants (beyond the Green Line) can’t vote for Members of the Knesset — which seems unfair if Jewish settlers outside the Green Line can vote (chiefly in support of the most nationalist, reactionary and anti-Arab Israeli parties).
Because they tend to have larger families than most Jews (except the ultra-Orthodox and Hasidic haredim), I would presume that the Arab proportion of the electorate is probably less than one fifth.
But as a united joint list, the Arab coalition is now the third largest group in the Knesset,
They number 20% and they ARE citizens of the Jewish state….
Arab citizens of Israel are those Arab residents of Mandatory Palestine, who remained within Israel’s borders following the 1948 Arab–Israeli War, and the establishment of the state of Israel. It is including those born within the state borders subsequent to this time, as well as those who had left during the establishment of the state (or their descendants), who have since re-entered by means accepted as lawful residence by the Israeli state (primarily family reunifications).
In 2019, the official number of Arab residents in Israel was 1,890,000 people, representing 21% of Israel’s population. This figure includes 209,000 Arabs (14% of the Israeli Arab population) in East Jerusalem, also counted in the Palestinian statistics, although 98 percent of East Jerusalem Palestinians have either Israeli residency or Israeli citizenship.…
During the 1990s, the Jewish population growth rate was about 3% per year, as a result of massive immigration to Israel, primarily from the republics of the former Soviet Union. There is also a very high population growth rate among certain Jewish groups, especially adherents of Orthodox Judaism. The growth rate of the Arab population in Israel is 2.2%, while the growth rate of the Jewish population in Israel is 1.7%. The growth rate of the Arab population has slowed from 3.8% in 1999 to 2.2% in 2013, and for the Jewish population, the growth rate declined from 2.7% to its lowest rate of 1.4% in 2005, before picking up since then[when?] to 1.7%
I had read about the worry of Arab population growth in Israel….
Here’s a link to something along that line…
My Name Is Jack says
You see James it’s sort of like Social Security .
Like you see it’s going to start going broke in fifteen years.You are opposed to any discussions on his w to save it.Besides you probably aren’t going to be around to see it and you are paying too much taxes!
The Arab population is growing but it will be along time before it becomes anything near a majority and the present Israeli Jews will probably no longer be aroundWhy worry?
James couldn’t care less about anything that is 20 years away. He makes that clear frequently. Green initiatives – forget it. If you are not goung to be here in the long term, only the short term matters. Besides, only progressives think about the long term.
But the REALITY is that certain dreams are just that….
The American Congress and any Republican President will work overtime to defeat those dreams…
Obama had a Democratic majority for two years in BOTH houses and even he couldn’t get most of what he wanted….
I say this over and OVER….
Democrats need to stop DREAMING and get the basic’s done…
Win the US Senate….
Win the Presidency…
THEN try to get some things done for the someone other than. the millionaires…
Democratic Socialist Dave says
I’m not sure that Jack and Zreebs understood what I was trying to say (which James confirmed on Wikipedia) .
James originally wrote that Israel’s population was approaching a tipping point over time between Jewish Israelis and Arab (or Gentile) Israelis (just as Northern Ireland is always approaching, but never reaching, parity between Protestants and Catholics).
I was explaining that this was only true of the whole territory ruled by today’s Israel: pre-1967 Israel plus the West Bank and Gaza. This may well be a future concern at least in theory, but there’s little chance in coming decades that this will be true of pre-1967 Israel plus the Jewish settlers (the population, currently around 20%, whose adults can vote for the Knesset.)
When all the territory Israel now controls (including 90%-Arab Gaza) ceases to have a Jewish majority, the danger is not of Arabs controlling the Knesset. It is of a Jewish Israeli government adopting a Bantustan solution, where a Jewish majority breaks up Arab-settled areas into quasi-autonomous areas with partial, titular sovereignty (displacing any right to vote in Knesset elections) but with their future closely-controlled by the Jewish Israeli government and army.
[Another partial parallel would be with nominally-sovereign American Indian reservations (it’s only in recent decades that Native Americans gained the right to vote for Congress and Presidential Electors, on the theory that their allegiance was to their tribal governments.)]
Bantustanization or its equivalent is in fact the explicit long-range policy of several right-wing and nationalist parties, as well as the implicit one of several others such as today’s Likud.
But that wasn’t the question that James’ original post was making. Nor was it the question I that addressed (with James’ later confirmation). Both were discussing the balance in the Knesset’s current electorate.
[Sorry my posts may be ambiguous or confusing; I haven’t had the time and/or wakefulness to give them all the re-editings they deserve. Especially as many of the terms themselves require ambiguous or confusing descriptions.
[From writing briefs in law school and legal practice, Jack must understand the problem.]
Clearly a two-state solution would be ideal, since almost all Israelis want Israel to remain both a democracy and Jewish.
The problem is that those who live in the areas that would theoretically become the second state do not want a two state solution. They want a one-state solution, with no Israel, and no Jews, permanently. They openly say as much.
So, until that changes, there is not much Israel can do.
Arabs living in Israel certainly have more rights than Arabs in other countries do and that Jews would have living without an Israel.
I also wonder if Amnesty International would be ok if the way an Arab state replacing Israel would treat homosexuals and political dissidents.
Your point is s recital of the political BS BOTH side throw out…
Israeli’s want peace…
Arabs want peace…
As in Iran ,m Russia and most other countries…
The politicians eek slogans to keep their power…
The ‘people’ just want to live their lives in Peace…
My Name Is Jack says
Oh I understood it completely .
I agree DSD…
Thanks for finding a way for both of us….
No BS at all. This is reality.
The everyday Arab may want peace, but those who govern them (i.e. Hamas) do not. Palestinian schools teach killing Jews. They have cartoons and Sesame Street like videos meant to indoctrinate children into becoming terrorists.
Eliminating Israel and killing all Jews is openly embraced by Hamas.
Hamas does not care about Arab lives. They would trade 3 Arab lives for the lives of one Jew.
Israel does not hold the same attitude towards Muslims, but simply has no choice but to defend itself.
It goes BOTH ways CG….
Not even close to “both ways” any more than your defense of men who beat up or assault women (as long as they are talented athletes or singers) goes “both ways” as you claim.
Corey says in his 12:09 that it is the Israelis who want a two-state solution and the Palestinians do not. But a 2013 Gallup poll fund 70% of Palestinians in the West Bank and 48% of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip support an independent Palestinian state together with the state of Israel. Only 52% of Israelis support a two state solution.
And I would suspect that the Israeli number of 52% who claim they support it is actually inflated. For example, Corey claims he supports a two state solution – while he also supports the “right” of Israel to annex the conquered territory it controls.
I said the “everyday person” may want a two state solution, but Hamas does not, clearly. Hamas is the government.
Hamas wants one state only. And not only that, they want everyone who lives there who does not ahdere to their religion or their version of the religion to be dead. That is what they openly preach.
My Name Is Jack says
What are the uh
What a Crock!Zreebs is absolutely right.The only thing he leaves out is that the reason you don’t want to discuss these “dreams.”(Who knew healthcare, the climate, social security and Medicare were “dreams?”) is that you lack the knowledge to intelligently discuss them,thus your resort to irrelevant diversions.
Sing your song Jack….
Democrats aren’t gonna join ya in the end…
NOBODY in Congress will…
It’s just a REALILTY…
They’re gonna have enough problem trying come to an agreement on extending paying the bill’s…
Congress can’t walk and chew gum at the same time and you want them to re-invent the healthcare wheel?
The cited “52 percent” would have to be the way things stand now, with all the security concerns and the un-realstic aspect of the situation any time soon.
If circumstances were different, I think nearly all Jews in Israel would be willing to accept two states, as long as Israel remains Jewish with Jerusalem as the indivisible capital.
My Name Is Jack says
My Name Is Jack says
That’s a lie btw!
James says the Democrats should only focus on winning the Presidency and the Senate, instead of trying to pass ambitious programs such as gun safety, the environment, social security and healthcare reform.
I am under no illusion that a Warren, Harris or Sanders presidency will bring in sweeping reforms. It won’t. But failure to talk about issues now will make the task of getting things passed in the future even more formidable.
Democrats have to be seen as standing for something. If you think that Democrats won’t get anything done with a progressive, then what do you think will get done if a “moderate” presidential candidate wins, but doesn’t have a clear mandate? So you think Biden will able to win support for his idea of requiring people to purchase health coverage – presumably from a private carrier? Why fight for something that won’t be politically popular and isn’t even a realistic long-term solution? Doing so, just damages the Democratic brand.
Right now, many Democrats appear to me to be spineless cowards. And that is not a winning strategy.
i have seen countless stories about House members of both parties doing town hall ‘s with NO mention of climate control or impeachment….Bur questions a talk about the economy , healthcare and EVERYDAY things that affect them….
Away from the Beltway it’s a different world…
Zreebs do you call me by my full first name (three extra key strokes) just because Keith told you to?