Beware of canceling the "grandchild clause".
The ultra-Orthodox claim to delete the "grandchild section" (Section 4A of the Law of Return, which also allows those whose parents are Jewish to become citizens of Israel) stems from a feeling that Netanyahu will eventually be forced to comply with every demand, because he has no "spare factions" for those who recommended him to the president .
More than three million people whose parents are not Jewish, but whose grandparents were Jews, are entitled to enter Israel according to the Law of Return.
In some years they made up the majority of the immigrants.
Most of them are absorbed in Israel, learn Hebrew, identify with the Jewish narrative and serve in the army.
They are not interested in converting because they are not religious, and they do not want to lie and promise their converts that they will observe mitzvot and send their children to religious schools.
Only those who oppose the Zionist idea can raise such a demand from the leaders of the Jewish state.
It should be rejected completely, and it should be guaranteed that our doors will be open to anyone who considers himself a Jew, and there is no reason to suspect the purity of his intentions.
Don't run away from The Hague.
On November 22, it will be 55 years since Security Council Resolution 242. In all the formal and informal peace agreements with our neighbors, it stars, at least in the introduction.
Egypt and Jordan accepted it immediately, Israel hesitated (in view of an ongoing debate between right and left regarding the legal status of the West Bank) but adopted it, and the PLO adopted it in 1988.
Many praised her, because she seemingly met the needs of all parties: on the one hand, she reiterated the principle that territories are not taken over by force;
And on the other hand, it hinged the withdrawal from territories on a peace agreement.
The problem is that both the parties to the conflict and the parties who drafted the decision (according to their written and oral statements in the period after it was accepted by the Security Council) believed that it would be a few years until an agreement was reached.
It is hard to believe that any of the drafters of the decision thought that even after 55 years the status of the West Bank would not be decided.
It was not difficult for Israel to cover itself with the blanket of 242. The three decisions of the Arab League leaders at the Khartoum Conference at the end of the summer of 1967 (no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it, and no peace agreement with it) allowed it not to withdraw from the territories, and it took upon itself the freedom (contrary to international law ) also to settle the territories occupied by it with Israeli citizens.
As long as there is no peace between Israel and the Palestinians, does resolution 242 grant the international legal backing and the right to continue the occupation?
The Palestinians are making a legitimate move when they refer the question to the UN institutions, and Israel does not have to repeat the mistakes of the past and boycott any entity connected to the UN.
It paid unnecessary prices for refusing to cooperate with committees (like Goldstone in 2009).
If the government decides to take part in the process, it will be entitled to appoint an Israeli judge to the court.
This is a significant advantage.
Before she automatically rejects any cooperation, she should think twice.
There is an opposition, and there is a government.
In 2006, Binyamin Netanyahu headed a party that was represented by 12 members in the Knesset.
He was the head of the opposition, and I was part of this opposition as head of Meretz.
In one of the meetings that took place between us privately, I asked him why he does not convene all members of the Knesset who belong to the opposition in order to coordinate more effective parliamentary activity.
He replied that he did not want to invite the Arab parties.
I told him that his method also has a big difference between establishing coalitions with certain parties and opposition coordination.
I didn't convince him.
During the days of the Olmert government, the opposition did not gather.
Yair Lapid will make a grave mistake if he follows Netanyahu's custom and boycotts those who might assist him in decisive moments.
were we wrong
We will fix it!
If you found an error in the article, we would appreciate it if you shared it with us