Equality and Israeli Citizenship

[Shusha]

It's all hypothetical since there is no Palestinian state and we don't know what form it will take or how it's view towards citizenship will end up in reality but, for example:

Assuming there are landswaps, and Israel retains the larger more established settlements, but will likely have to give up on other settlements.

Should those settlers be forced to leave against their will?

Should they be stripped of their Israeli citizenship if they choose to stay?

I think it largely depends on the behaviour of the people involved. Will the people who end up on the "wrong" side be able to dedicate themselves to furthering the interests of the nation they live in?

 

[Phoenall]

Coyote, et al,

I agree here, but I would like to stress that Israelis have to decide this. It is there country.

So - citizenship and equality.

Citizenship is important because it's the only guarantor of rights, isn't it? A stateless person has no rights and no protections. It's also an important component of one's identity.

So this raises an interesting questions. My opinions on this are evolving.

1. Should citizenship EVER be revoked?
Yes.

2. If yes, under what conditions?
If the person has committed a crime and holds dual citizenship.

3. If a person committed no crime, is it ethical to revoke their citizenship?
No.

I'm thinking in particular of landswaps should there be a two-state solution.

Landswaps would mean, potentially, that Israeli citizens (both Arab and Jewish) could be on the wrong side of the border. This was ethically acceptable 70 years ago...is it still?

In this case, I think it's the only realistic solution to the conflict, so yes - if people are treated fairly.

Should Israeli citizens be stripped of their citizenship and forced take on a new citizenship?
No.

Should they be all be given a choice and if so what choice?
Three possibilities occur to me. They could be given the choice of dual citizenship, or to keep the one they have and have permanent residency, or take on a new citizenship in the new state.

I'm giving my answers in blue.

(COMMENT)

I think it is important that non-Israelis temper their voice when it comes to these issues.


R

I think the same needs to apply to a future Palestinian state as well - people should be given a choice. Citizens who are citizens of Israel, should not be forceably stripped of citizenship, or property. Whether they remain in Palestine or Israel. IMO.

And again you ignore international treaties and international laws when they apply to the Jews. The arab Palestine lane is what is now Jordan, and that is where they are meant to be. What would you say if the Israelis declared that the Jewish refugees are still refugees along with their offspring and need to be given the same rights as the arab refugees. Do you think that is fair and honest, if not why is it fair and honest for the Palestinians. You are aware that Palestinians living in the US still class themselves as refugees and see their home as what ever land in Israel takes their fancy. If the arab's ever manage to gain full control you can expect modern day Israel to be destroyed within 3 years and all the Jews ethnically cleansed. The only solution is the one agreed by the LoN that saw the peaceful muslims allowed to stay in Israel and the extremists given two chances, move willingly to Jordan with a small compensation package ( about $100 at the time ) or be forcibly relocated by the armed forces of the LoN

How does any of that relate to what I am saying in regards to a two state solution and citizenship?

Are you suggesting that Arab Israeli's should be stripped of citizenship and sent to Jordan?

Is that what I replied to, or did I reply to your above post that had absolutely nothing to do with a two,three or fous state solution.

There has been a two state solution in place since 1924 when the LoN mandate portioned Palestine into Jewish and arab sections. You deny this because it means the Jews are covered by international laws protecting their rights to what is now gaza, west bank and Golan heights.

I am suggesting those arab muslims that see themselves as Palestinians and not as Israelis should have their Israel citizenship revoked and be asked to leave Israel. Told if they stay they will no longer be covered by Israeli health care and welfare. Just as all those Americans that see themselves Africans, Italians, Irish et al should be told the same

 

[Phoenall]

Coyote, et al,

What are we talking about here?

I think the same needs to apply to a future Palestinian state as well - people should be given a choice. Citizens who are citizens of Israel, should not be forceably stripped of citizenship, or property. Whether they remain in Palestine or Israel. IMO.

(COMMENT)

Can you give me an example scenario?

Most Respectfully,
R

It's all hypothetical since there is no Palestinian state and we don't know what form it will take or how it's view towards citizenship will end up in reality but, for example:

Assuming there are landswaps, and Israel retains the larger more established settlements, but will likely have to give up on other settlements.

Should those settlers be forced to leave against their will?

Should they be stripped of their Israeli citizenship if they choose to stay?

Then why are so many nations scrambling to recognise the state of Palestine that has been in existence since 1988. Why is their a seat in the UN observer area specifically for the Palestinian state representative. What you really mean is the Palestinians want the world to wipe out the Jews so they can walk into Israel and make it their own. Then to demand the world keeps them fully supplied with everything they need to live.

There will be no other option as the Palestinians have already stated that the Palestinian state will be devoid of any Jew born after 1875 ( the date of the alleged Zionist invasion ) They will face two options leave with just the shirt on your back or die.

They should with a proviso that they will reclaim it when they come running for safety.


To do a monte and go to South Africa for examples, when the whites were beaten by the ANC they faced being brutally murdered, raped and defiled even though the new government said that it was not to happen. Palestine will be no different, as they have already ethnically cleansed 90% of the Christians from the west bank and gaza.

 

[Phoenall]

OK, I can almost agree to that. There were Jews there who had lived there, like, forever. And there were some who came in 1492, for example, along with some Muslims from Spain.

Okay, so far we agree that there were people there -- both Jews and Palestinians -- who had either "lived there forever" or had immigrated so long ago as to give them some sort of claim to the land, yes? And we agree that those who have "lived there forever" or for a really long time have, equally, a valid claim to the land.

I hope you would also agree to the fact that there are people -- both Jews and Palestinians -- who immigrated more recently. And that, applied equally, would have to be treated in the same manner.


So what does all this mean in terms of a solution? Moving forward, what do we DO with all these different groups of people?

As far as I can tell there were no land disputes for hundreds of years before the Zionist colonial project.

More-or-less agreed. But its important to understand the REASONS why this is so and how it changed over time. neither group had national political aspirations under the Ottoman Empire; the one because it never occurred to them and the other because it wasn't thought possible; the villages were small and scattered and it didn't really matter if there was a Jewish village or a Palestinian village over the hill because one did not have much contact with the other; there was plenty of land to go around and one could set up a village far enough away from the next one so as not to encroach upon each village's cultivatable land. And there was limited "otherness" between the Jews living in the villages and towns and the Arab Muslims. They had different religious faiths, but they lived the same lives.

And, let's be honest, there were disputes between Arab Muslims and Jews intermittently. I wouldn't go as far as Phoneall, but they certainly existed. Dhimmis did pay a jizya or maktu tax up until 1856 in the Ottoman Empire, and the "military substitution tax" after that. (and as an aside to that, imagine the outcry at modern Arab Israelis having to pay a tax to avoid the military requirement in Israel!). Jews were not equal citizens, but had restrictions on where they could live, how they could dress, etc. There were pogroms and even outright massacres in Arab lands, especially in the 1800's.

The Zionist colonial project was/is the problem...All of the problems stem from the Zionist project. That is why the Jews lost land (and lives) in Hebron, East Jerusalem, and even in Gaza.

But that is narrative. And very simplified narrative, at that. One that absolves one side from responsibility and colors them as the sole victim.

Now, I don't have a problem with narrative. Narrative is important. Each side's stories are important. And in this conflict, each side excludes the other from the narrative and refuses to acknowledge that even though the two narratives are in conflict with each other, they are both true.

The way to solve the conflict is to stop creating or supporting narratives which identify unsolvable problems or assign the problems as an irreparable, inherent feature of the other group.

For example, one could as easily argue that it was Arab Muslim nationalism that was the problem, rather than Zionism. Why was it not possible to trade one overlord (Ottoman Empire) for another (the Jewish State)? The Arabs from that area never wanted an independent state and national sovereignty before. The Arabs never had a problem living next to Jews before. Why was it suddenly a problem to live under Jewish rule rather than Ottoman rule? Especially when lives were improving under that rule?

The Palestinians, including the Jews, wanted a single state where everyone had equal rights like they had been living for generations.

No. The Arab Muslims wanted a continuation of the status quo -- a world where rights belonged with the Arab Muslims and the Jews were mostly tolerated as long as they quietly paid their taxes and stayed out of the way. Everyone was equal, but some were more equal than others. (The Arab Muslims continue to want this -- witness the Temple Mount.)


The real problem is that the national aspirations of both groups, which grew and developed parallel to each other and in response to the other became essentially incompatible. They are currently incompatible. They may not be that way forever, but for now, they are. Thus, regardless of whatever narrative one wants to tell, whatever victimization one wants to assert, whatever injustices one wants to highlight -- the solution must be two states. (Two more states).


So, again, I ask you where do we go from here? What is the solution? I know you seek a one state solution (well, two, since I assume you don't want to dissolve Jordan). What do you want that one state solution to look like? How would it be different than it is now? What would bring about equality, as you claim to want, which is not there currently? How would you convince each side to give up national self-determination? How would you convince me that the Arab Muslims are capable of treating the Jewish people equally?

I don't think there will ever be a negotiated solution. I don't see it happening. There will be no peace until the world finally decides to enforce international law.

The Palestinians have consistently requested a solution based on international law. Of course Israel and its lackeys in the US government reject this concept.

Recently the Palestinians have brought this concept into public discourse internationally through its call for BDS. I don't see anyone else working on a solution.

Which international law, can someone you divulge the law and the date is was implemented. They have refused to obey international law since the ones laid down by the LoN that created Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and the Jewish national home. Like you the Palestinians make up international laws to suit their purpose, or try and use a law enacted in 2005 in 1949.

Which has failed because the Nazi's and neo Marxists have used it to attack the Jews, which is why it is banned in so many nations.

 

[Coyote]

It's all hypothetical since there is no Palestinian state and we don't know what form it will take or how it's view towards citizenship will end up in reality but, for example:

Assuming there are landswaps, and Israel retains the larger more established settlements, but will likely have to give up on other settlements.

Should those settlers be forced to leave against their will?

Should they be stripped of their Israeli citizenship if they choose to stay?

I think it largely depends on the behaviour of the people involved. Will the people who end up on the "wrong" side be able to dedicate themselves to furthering the interests of the nation they live in?

That is a good question, but how would you determine that?

They could be given a choice of assuming a new citizenship and staying or maintaining the old and leaving?

 

[Coyote]

Coyote, et al,

I agree here, but I would like to stress that Israelis have to decide this. It is there country.

So - citizenship and equality.

Citizenship is important because it's the only guarantor of rights, isn't it? A stateless person has no rights and no protections. It's also an important component of one's identity.

So this raises an interesting questions. My opinions on this are evolving.

1. Should citizenship EVER be revoked?
Yes.

2. If yes, under what conditions?
If the person has committed a crime and holds dual citizenship.

3. If a person committed no crime, is it ethical to revoke their citizenship?
No.

I'm thinking in particular of landswaps should there be a two-state solution.

Landswaps would mean, potentially, that Israeli citizens (both Arab and Jewish) could be on the wrong side of the border. This was ethically acceptable 70 years ago...is it still?

In this case, I think it's the only realistic solution to the conflict, so yes - if people are treated fairly.

Should Israeli citizens be stripped of their citizenship and forced take on a new citizenship?
No.

Should they be all be given a choice and if so what choice?
Three possibilities occur to me. They could be given the choice of dual citizenship, or to keep the one they have and have permanent residency, or take on a new citizenship in the new state.

I'm giving my answers in blue.

(COMMENT)

I think it is important that non-Israelis temper their voice when it comes to these issues.


R

I think the same needs to apply to a future Palestinian state as well - people should be given a choice. Citizens who are citizens of Israel, should not be forceably stripped of citizenship, or property. Whether they remain in Palestine or Israel. IMO.

And again you ignore international treaties and international laws when they apply to the Jews. The arab Palestine lane is what is now Jordan, and that is where they are meant to be. What would you say if the Israelis declared that the Jewish refugees are still refugees along with their offspring and need to be given the same rights as the arab refugees. Do you think that is fair and honest, if not why is it fair and honest for the Palestinians. You are aware that Palestinians living in the US still class themselves as refugees and see their home as what ever land in Israel takes their fancy. If the arab's ever manage to gain full control you can expect modern day Israel to be destroyed within 3 years and all the Jews ethnically cleansed. The only solution is the one agreed by the LoN that saw the peaceful muslims allowed to stay in Israel and the extremists given two chances, move willingly to Jordan with a small compensation package ( about $100 at the time ) or be forcibly relocated by the armed forces of the LoN

How does any of that relate to what I am saying in regards to a two state solution and citizenship?

Are you suggesting that Arab Israeli's should be stripped of citizenship and sent to Jordan?

Is that what I replied to, or did I reply to your above post that had absolutely nothing to do with a two,three or fous state solution.

I'm trying to figure out WHAT you are calling for because your response doesn't make a lot of sense in the context of the question.

There has been a two state solution in place since 1924 when the LoN mandate portioned Palestine into Jewish and arab sections. You deny this because it means the Jews are covered by international laws protecting their rights to what is now gaza, west bank and Golan heights.

That "solution" was never law or Israel, when it was founded, would not have had the borders it did. It's just a red herring.

There is NO LAW giving them rights to Gaza, WB or the Golan Heights which belonged to Syria. What they have, they have by right of conflict and occupation, however that falls out in the end.

I am suggesting those arab muslims that see themselves as Palestinians and not as Israelis should have their Israel citizenship revoked and be asked to leave Israel. Told if they stay they will no longer be covered by Israeli health care and welfare. Just as all those Americans that see themselves Africans, Italians, Irish et al should be told the same

There is nothing "legal" or ethical about that.

Should Jews who see themselves as Jews first, not Israeli's also have their citizenship revoked?

Where will all these people go?

 

[Coyote]

Coyote, et al,

What are we talking about here?

I think the same needs to apply to a future Palestinian state as well - people should be given a choice. Citizens who are citizens of Israel, should not be forceably stripped of citizenship, or property. Whether they remain in Palestine or Israel. IMO.

(COMMENT)

Can you give me an example scenario?

Most Respectfully,
R

It's all hypothetical since there is no Palestinian state and we don't know what form it will take or how it's view towards citizenship will end up in reality but, for example:

Assuming there are landswaps, and Israel retains the larger more established settlements, but will likely have to give up on other settlements.

Should those settlers be forced to leave against their will?

Should they be stripped of their Israeli citizenship if they choose to stay?

Then why are so many nations scrambling to recognise the state of Palestine that has been in existence since 1988. Why is their a seat in the UN observer area specifically for the Palestinian state representative. What you really mean is the Palestinians want the world to wipe out the Jews so they can walk into Israel and make it their own. Then to demand the world keeps them fully supplied with everything they need to live.

Where IS the nation of Palestine? What are it's borders? Why is there no such thing as Palestinian citizenship?

 

[docmauser1]

Where IS the nation of Palestine? What are it's borders? Why is there no such thing as Palestinian citizenship?

"I don’t think there is a Palestinian nation at all. I think there is an Arab nation. I always thought so... I think it’s a colonialist invention – a Palestinian nation. When were there any Palestinians? Where did it come from?” Azmi Bishara
Us wonders too ... .

 

[Coyote]

Where IS the nation of Palestine? What are it's borders? Why is there no such thing as Palestinian citizenship?

"I don’t think there is a Palestinian nation at all. I think there is an Arab nation. I always thought so... I think it’s a colonialist invention – a Palestinian nation. When were there any Palestinians? Where did it come from?” Azmi Bishara
Us wonders too ... .

The people have always been there. It's what you call them, that has changed.

 

[docmauser1]

Why is there no such thing as Palestinian citizenship?

Should ask them palistanians, no?

 

[docmauser1]

Where IS the nation of Palestine? What are it's borders? Why is there no such thing as Palestinian citizenship?

"I don’t think there is a Palestinian nation at all. I think there is an Arab nation. I always thought so... I think it’s a colonialist invention – a Palestinian nation. When were there any Palestinians? Where did it come from?” Azmi Bishara
Us wonders too ... .

The people have always been there. It's what you call them, that has changed.

Yeah, right. "So far from being persecuted, the Arabs have crowded into the country and multiplied till their population has increased more than even all world Jewry could lift up the Jewish population." Winnie said that.

 

[montelatici]

"(b)IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE

15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration. From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.

16. The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths.

https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/07175DE9FA2DE563852568D3006E10F3

 

[Hollie]

"(b)IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE

15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration. From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.

16. The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths.

A/364 of 3 September 1947

That's a bit disappointing in light of the "genocide" that you and others screech about.

 

[Shusha]

I think it largely depends on the behaviour of the people involved. Will the people who end up on the "wrong" side be able to dedicate themselves to furthering the interests of the nation they live in?

That is a good question, but how would you determine that?

They could be given a choice of assuming a new citizenship and staying or maintaining the old and leaving?[/QUOTE]


If I was focusing on solutions, rather than delegitimizing the other, I would suggest the following in the parameters of a two-state solution with land swaps where Israel keeps the large Jewish blocs and swaps out equal portions of land, preferrably in areas with Arab populations.

1. Everyone who is on the "wrong" side at the end of the land swapping is offered a generous compensation package and incentives to move to the "right" side.

2. Anyone choosing not to move is granted dual Palestinian - Israeli citizenship. This dual citizenship applies only to the population at the time of the transfer and is not passed down to children and grandchildren. In other words, the children become citizens of only the nation in which they reside. (Though the other nation might offer an expedited application of citizenship should the child or grandchild wish to move there.)

3. Anyone who acts against the interests of the state in which they reside are stripped of citizenship and deported. (Since they have dual citizenship, this does not cause them to be stateless).

Basically, its an incentive to end up on the right side, and an incentive to play nice if you don't. Essentially, a humanitarian, non-forced population transfer.

 

[RoccoR]

Coyote, PHOENALL, DocMauser1, et al,

Sometime we forget what the actual conflict is all about. And in losing sight of this, we tend to ask for otherwise unresolved questions. And with time, more questions start to arise.

The original issue for which the conflict arises where outline in the Statement of 6 February 1948 (A/AC.21/10 16 February 1948) Communicated to the Secretary-General by Mr. Isa Nakhleh, Representative of the Arab Higher Committee (AHC); ultimately channeled to the UN Palestine Commission (UNPC). The UNPC was them the designated Successor Government over the territory over which the Mandate would terminate in Midnight 14/15 May 1948.

Several points were made by the AHC which represented the Arab-Palestinians on this matter.

• The AHC did not recognize the passing vote by the General Assembly on Resolution 181(II). The AHC stated in substance that: "did not represent the sentiments of the United Nations." {understanding the difference between a "How to Document" versus a "Instructional Document."
• The AHC alleged that the UN had "no jurisdiction to order or recommend the partition of Palestine."
• The AHC the whole legal issue raised for a ruling by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), was nefariously block from a vote.
• The AHC stressed that the Arabs of Palestine cannot recognize the Balfour Declaration, the Mandate of Palestine or any situation arising or derived therefrom.
• The AHC considered that imposing international alien immigrants on their country by force is nothing but an act of aggression and invasion, whether made by Jews themselves, through Great Britain, or by the United Nations.
• The AHC alleged that the creation of any Jewish State in an Arab territory was an "act of wiping out the existence of an Arab country, violating its integrity, subjecting its land and people to foreign Jewish Domination.“
• “The Arabs of Palestine are, therefore, solidly determined to oppose, with all the means at their disposal, any scheme that provides for the dissection, segregation or partition of their tiny Country, or that gives to a minority, on the ground of creed, special and preferential rights or status.
• The Arabs are duty and honour bound to defend their country to the last man.
• “The Arabs of Palestine stressed how unwise and fruitless it would be to ask UNPC to proceed to Palestine because not a single Arab will cooperate with the said Commission.
​

The genesis on the issue of "citizenship" and "borders;" began with the wrongful exercise of lawful authority by the AHC to adopt a position to avoid cooperation with the implementation and the rejection to coordinate the implementation of the Partition Plan. It is why the 1988 entity for the State of Palestine is in question. Although under the Oslo Accord, the Palestinian Authority (PA) has the authority to issue travel documents. Like it is with other sovereign matters, acceptance of PA issued documents is under the purview of the country in which you are entering.

Palestinian Citizenship --- is as vague as it sounds. All that Article 7 of the Basic Law says, is that "Palestinian citizenship shall be regulated by law." I've never seen "citizenship" criteria.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[jillian]

Is there any such thing as an Israeli Citizen?

Citizenship is divided - there are Arab Israeli citizens and Jewish Israeli citizens.

Do any other countries have a divided citizenship based on ethnic groups? (I don't know of any)

Can a society have true equality if it has different categories of citizenship? Does that not in and of itself foster an atmosphere of inequality?

I think yes, and I think it creates a subconscious belief that some citizens are better than others and this is reinforced in a system of citizenship that gives different rights and obligations to each group. It strives for a "different but equal" system, but I don't think that can truly work.

do you ever post anything that isn't anti-israel? just wondering.

can jews get citizenship in muslim countries?

until the answer is yes, no one really cares about your concerns.

 

[montelatici]

Is there any such thing as an Israeli Citizen?

Citizenship is divided - there are Arab Israeli citizens and Jewish Israeli citizens.

Do any other countries have a divided citizenship based on ethnic groups? (I don't know of any)

Can a society have true equality if it has different categories of citizenship? Does that not in and of itself foster an atmosphere of inequality?

I think yes, and I think it creates a subconscious belief that some citizens are better than others and this is reinforced in a system of citizenship that gives different rights and obligations to each group. It strives for a "different but equal" system, but I don't think that can truly work.

do you ever post anything that isn't anti-israel? just wondering.

can jews get citizenship in muslim countries?

until the answer is yes, no one really cares about your concerns.

Jews are citizens of several Muslim countries, as are Christians.

 

[Hollie]

Is there any such thing as an Israeli Citizen?

Citizenship is divided - there are Arab Israeli citizens and Jewish Israeli citizens.

Do any other countries have a divided citizenship based on ethnic groups? (I don't know of any)

Can a society have true equality if it has different categories of citizenship? Does that not in and of itself foster an atmosphere of inequality?

I think yes, and I think it creates a subconscious belief that some citizens are better than others and this is reinforced in a system of citizenship that gives different rights and obligations to each group. It strives for a "different but equal" system, but I don't think that can truly work.

do you ever post anything that isn't anti-israel? just wondering.

can jews get citizenship in muslim countries?

until the answer is yes, no one really cares about your concerns.

Jews are citizens of several Muslim countries, as are Christians.

And in so many cases, those non-Islamists are under siege.

Tell us about the status of Jews and Christians in Pakistan, for example with reference to the Hudood Ordinance. South African apartheid had nothing on Islamist hell holes.

 

[Coyote]

I think it largely depends on the behaviour of the people involved. Will the people who end up on the "wrong" side be able to dedicate themselves to furthering the interests of the nation they live in?

That is a good question, but how would you determine that?

They could be given a choice of assuming a new citizenship and staying or maintaining the old and leaving?

If I was focusing on solutions, rather than delegitimizing the other, I would suggest the following in the parameters of a two-state solution with land swaps where Israel keeps the large Jewish blocs and swaps out equal portions of land, preferrably in areas with Arab populations.

1. Everyone who is on the "wrong" side at the end of the land swapping is offered a generous compensation package and incentives to move to the "right" side.

2. Anyone choosing not to move is granted dual Palestinian - Israeli citizenship. This dual citizenship applies only to the population at the time of the transfer and is not passed down to children and grandchildren. In other words, the children become citizens of only the nation in which they reside. (Though the other nation might offer an expedited application of citizenship should the child or grandchild wish to move there.)

3. Anyone who acts against the interests of the state in which they reside are stripped of citizenship and deported. (Since they have dual citizenship, this does not cause them to be stateless).

Basically, its an incentive to end up on the right side, and an incentive to play nice if you don't. Essentially, a humanitarian, non-forced population transfer.

I like that!

I think that would be fair, and just to all involved

 

[Coyote]

Is there any such thing as an Israeli Citizen?

Citizenship is divided - there are Arab Israeli citizens and Jewish Israeli citizens.

Do any other countries have a divided citizenship based on ethnic groups? (I don't know of any)

Can a society have true equality if it has different categories of citizenship? Does that not in and of itself foster an atmosphere of inequality?

I think yes, and I think it creates a subconscious belief that some citizens are better than others and this is reinforced in a system of citizenship that gives different rights and obligations to each group. It strives for a "different but equal" system, but I don't think that can truly work.

do you ever post anything that isn't anti-israel? just wondering.

can jews get citizenship in muslim countries?

until the answer is yes, no one really cares about your concerns.

Thank you for your valuable contribution to this discussion