An expanded Israel will be both democratic and Jewish

By Ted Belman

The NYT published an Op-Ed by Gadi Taub titled In Israel, Settling for Less

He warns the the religious settlers numbering 130,000 out of 500,000 settlers by their “actions could spell the end of the Israel we have known.” [..]

    The consequences of these differences are huge. If the settlers achieve their manifest goal — making Israel’s hold on the territories permanent — it will mean the de facto annexation of a huge Arab population and will force a decision about their status. In Israel proper, the Arab minority represents about a fifth of its 7.2 million citizens, and they have full legal equality. But between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River, there are roughly equal numbers of Arabs and Jews today.

His argument is only as good as his facts and they are lousy. The most recent and authoratative demographic study reports that in this territory the Jews would constitute 60% of the combined population.

    Even if Israel annexed only the West Bank, it would more than double its Arab population. With birthrates in the territories far exceeding those of Arabs and Jews within Israel, Jews would soon enough be a minority. This would void the very idea of a Jewish democratic state.

In this case the study reports that Jews would constitute 67% of the population. Even more important the study says that the Jewish population would maintain their percentage due to changing demographic trends.

    Israel would have to choose between remaining democratic but not Jewish, or remaining Jewish by becoming non-democratic. Israel’s enemies have long maintained that Zionism is racism and that Israel is an apartheid state. If the settlers succeed, they will turn this lie into truth.

On the contrary, with these percentages, Israel could be both democratic and Jewish.

Mike Wise who was closely involved with the New Demographic Study wrote the Jewish One State Plan some six years ago based on their findings. In his plan, he proposed a constitution which ensured Israel would remain both democratic and Jewish.

Because Taub has based his analysis on erroneous facts it can be ignored as irrelevant,

August 30, 2010 | 11 Comments »

Subscribe to Israpundit Daily Digest

Leave a Reply

11 Comments / 11 Comments

  1. Report: Police Had Seized Personal Weapon from Victim

    Reported:20:40 PM – Aug/31/10

    A report said that one of the victims of the attack Tuesday night had recently been forced by police to surrender his personal weapon. Family members told reporters that if he had been carrying his weapon, things might have turned out different.

    According to police, the attack came from a gang that had been lying in wait, and after the initial shootings disabled the vehicle and wounded passengers, the Arab terrorists approached the car and shot the victims at close range in order to ensure that they were dead. “If he had been carrying his weapon, he might have shot the Arabs when they approached,” one family member told reporters.



    Jewish revenge is called for like : Offing 100 Arabs

  3. MKs to Netanyahu: Come Home Now, This is Your Fault

    by Gil Ronen

    MK Aryeh Eldad (National Union) called on Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu Tuesday to call off the planned direct talks with the Palestinian Authority and to return to Israel immediately to “actively participate in the immediate response that is required” following the multiple murder near Hevron.

    Eldad rebuked “everyone who took part in building the myth, in the past months, that [PA chief] Abu Mazen controls the territory” and called upon them to “sober up and immediately suspend the continued activity to strengthen the PA army that is being established with American sponsorship. This body cannot fight Hamas effectively and we will not be surprised if their weapons are turned against us.”

    MK Dr. Michael Ben-Ari (NU) said in response to the attack that “the terror attack on the outskirts of Kiryat Arba is a reminder to Netanyahu regarding the identity of his partners” in negotiations. “The Likud government’s talks with the terrorist Abu Mazen are a shot in the arm to murderous terror. The blood of the victims is upon the head of the Likud government.”

    MK Uri Ariel (NU) said: “It is clear by now – the most violent period is when there is a diplomatic process. Netanyahu must freeze the talks immediately and concentrate on safeguarding the security of the citizens of Israel.”



  5. Total fertility rate (2008)

    In Israel, the total fertility rate (TFR) is 2.96 children born per woman.

    TFR was 2.88 for Jews (2.69 in 2005, 2.67 in 2000), 3.84 for Muslims (4.03 in 2005, 4.57 in 2000), 2.49 for Druze (2.59 in 2005, 2.87 in 2000), 2.11 for Christians (2.15 in 2005, 2.35 in 2000) and 1.57 for Others (1.49 in 2005, 1.55 in 2000).

    TFR is very high among Haredi Jews. For Ashkenazi Haredim, the TFR rose to 8.51 in 1996 from 6.91 in 1980. The figure for 2008 is estimated to be even higher. TFR for Sephardi/Mizrachi Haredim rose from 4.57 in 1980 to 6.57 in 1996

  6. Ted also does not take into consideration that at least 400,000-500000 non Jewish Slavs are counted on the Jewish side of Teds Stats. Most are not loyal and many if not most are antisemitic and neo Nazis. 35% of all Arab Israelis are under 12 yrs of age. If the Arabs in Israel reach the 35% level along with the Israeli Left and non Jewish Slavs, The Zionists would lose their majority or remain with only a plurality..

    In any event Israel will cease to be in all but name a Jewish State.

    Democracy, stupidity and negative demographics will finish us off without a bullet or nuke being fired

  7. the choices are very simple… a terrorist state overlooking Tel Aviv and Ben Gurion Airport or full annexation ending the limbo status of the minority population on the former west bank of the hashemite kingdom of transjordan.
    israel has annexed “territories” several times. 1. after the independence war: parts of the partitioned arab area and parts of jerusalem (do not forget jerusalem was to be an neutral arena for ten years), 2. after 1967: the golan and an expanded jerusalem. The population in the annexed areas get hysterical when anyone threatens that they will become part of a terrorist hamas/fatah state. apparently there is a small cadre of militia and terrorists many imported by our two illustrious nobel laureates who continue the two state myth for their own corrupt agendas. they have been successful in delegitimizing the state of Israel internationally, but the local population understands full well where their best future lies…

  8. Ted, the 60 to 67% you quote is far from reassuring. I don’t know of any nation-state which could survive with such low numbers. Even present-day Israel, with 79-80%, is very much on the low side.

    If you want to maintain a nation-state where the founding people are — and have a reasonable chance to remain — sovereign, look at countries such as Japan, Iceland and Poland, where the ratio is invariably higher than 95%.

  9. This is horrific news, absolutely terrible!.

    Outlines Emerge of Future State in the West Bank
    — As preparations intensify for a Palestinian-Israeli summit meeting in Washington on Thursday, the crude outlines of a Palestinian state are emerging in the West Bank, with increasingly reliable security forces, a more disciplined government and a growing sense among ordinary citizens that they can count on basic services.

    : Gaza StripPersonal checks, long shunned as being unredeemable, are now widely accepted. Traffic tickets are issued and paid, movie theaters are opening and public parks are packed with families late into the summer nights. Economic growth in the first quarter of this year was 11 percent over the same period in 2009, the International Monetary Fund says.

    “I’ve never seen Nablus so alive,” Caesar Darwazeh, who owns a photography studio, said on Sunday night as throngs of people enjoyed balloons and popcorn, a four-wagon train taking merrymakers through the streets.

    Of course, the West Bank remains occupied by Israel. It is filled with scores of Israeli settlements, some 10,000 Israeli troops and numerous roadblocks and checkpoints that render true ordinary life impossible for the area’s 2.5 million Palestinians.

    The central question facing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel and President Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority is under what circumstances Israel might yield its control over the bulk of this territory to the emerging Palestinian state apparatus.

    Most analysts remain skeptical of such a deal emerging soon, given a history of failed promises — and entrenched interests on both sides that oppose even the concept of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian problem.

    There are few signs of a breakthrough. Mr. Abbas and his aides insist that Palestinian refugees have the right to return to their homes in what is today Israel, which for many Israelis would be tantamount to ending the existence of the Jewish state.

    Palestinian officials say their central demand at the start of the talks is for the current settlement-building moratorium to be extended. Mr. Netanyahu and his aides have so far rejected that.

    A top Netanyahu aide, however, said that if Mr. Abbas accepted — even privately when the two leaders meet alone — an end to the conflict with Israel and its Jewish identity, “the whole conventional wisdom can change very quickly.”

    And these talks, the first direct negotiations in nearly two years with 17 years of failed diplomatic efforts behind them, have one advantage that past rounds have lacked: a West Bank administration that to many Israelis and Palestinians alike has begun to resemble, tentatively, a functioning state.

    A senior Israeli Army commander, speaking under army rules of anonymity, said security coordination with the Palestinian forces was better than it had ever been. Unlike the situation in 2000, he said, when Washington-sponsored peace talks failed and the West Bank exploded in violence, the area is stable because of both its economic growth and a strong security situation.

    “We probably have a year of stability if that happens,” he said of the prospect of failed negotiations. As much as he praised his Palestinian colleagues, however, he insisted that stability, for now, required an Israeli military presence.

    Israeli troops leave security in the cities to the Palestinians during the day. But the commander said that they carried out four or five operations a night — down from a dozen a year ago — and that without those actions the situation would deteriorate: armed groups from Hamas and others would attack Israelis.

    The commander noted that while there could be no long-term stability without a political deal, once the talks start, stability will be linked to them. If they fail, those among Jewish settlers and Palestinians who promote violence could take steps to disrupt the talks or exploit a sense of defeat, he said.

    He said that Israel could remove more checkpoints and Palestinian economic growth could continue, “but anyone who thinks this will be enough to keep the area stable over the long term is wrong.”

    He added that unless and until Israel hands over responsibility to the Palestinian forces, Israeli forces could not reduce their nightly interventions.

    The Palestinian security chief, Diab el-Ali, rejected that in a recent interview, saying that the Israeli raids were an embarrassment and that he wanted them to stop. He said the Palestinians were capable of providing full security.

    A Western security official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the situation publicly, said Israeli interventions and troop numbers could and should be cut further. But he thought that the Palestinian forces, while making progress, were not yet able to take control.

    A main challenge facing the Palestinian Authority is Hamas, the Islamist group that rejects Israel’s existence and controls Gaza, where 1.5 million Palestinians live. Hamas and Mr. Abbas’s more secular Fatah party are fierce rivals, and the prospect of reconciliation between them seems low. Hamas followers in the West Bank could play the part of spoilers, although the Palestinian and Israeli security forces work to keep them on the defensive.

    The American notion is that if talks with Mr. Abbas are successful, he will gain political strength as the deal is put into effect, and that strength could ultimately be used to return his party to power in Gaza. Israelis remain skeptical, however.

    Much of the credit for the positive changes in the West Bank go to Salam Fayyad, the Palestinian prime minister, who is halfway through a two-year plan to build institutions and infrastructure for a Palestinian state.

    In the past year, Mr. Fayyad has opened 34 schools and 44 housing complexes, planted 370,000 trees and increased tax revenue by 20 percent.

    “We have had 11 governments since the establishment of the Palestinian Authority, and we never got anything from any of them until this one,” remarked Ahmad Douqan, a leader in the Balata refugee camp near Nablus.

    “People in the camp look at Salam as someone who, more than anyone else, works for them,” he said.

    Mr. Fayyad is imposing discipline on his bloated bureaucracy, taking away free cars and cellphones from officials. He has reduced the authority’s dependence on outside budgetary aid, from $1.8 billion in 2008 to a projected $1.2 billion in 2010, according to Oussama Kanaan, head of the International Monetary Fund mission to the West Bank and Gaza.

    “The Palestinian Authority is determined to follow the path of fiscal consolidation with a view to substantially reducing reliance on foreign aid for government expenditures,” Mr. Fayyad said at a news briefing on Monday.

    Mr. Kanaan said the goal for 2011 was to bring the dependence below $1 billion.

    “The trend is good,” he said in an interview. “Due to the reforms, there is no case to be made for withholding aid. The situation is very different from three years ago.”