Nationality law supporters see Arabs as a problem
Op-ed: The State of Israel conveys the message that there are those who are equal and those who are less equal. Now it wants to turn it into a law.
Because in fact, even without this dubious law, the State of Israel is the state of its Jewish citizens. And the Arabs? More than being citizens, they are a "problem": A demographic, security or cultural problem – depending on how you look at it.
By the way, we don’t need surveys and sophisticated articles to know this; a pair of eyes will suffice. And whoever wants to see it can actually find the big things in the small details.
Take, for example, the death of Palestinian teens Nadim Nuwara and Muhammad Salameh in Beitunia. Here are the details: The cameras showed Nadim Nuwara walking. Then they showed him falling down dead. They also showed a Border Guard officer firing at him. Nuwara was throwing stones, although he didn't die while throwing the stones but later, when he was no longer a threat.
The first stage is always the stage of denial. Because it's clear that IDF soldiers don’t kill people for no reason. It's clear – to the IDF and to us – that the shooting had nothing to do with the youth's death.
Why did he die? Who knows why Arabs die? And the video? "It was edited," according to the IDF's spokespeople, "in a biased manner." IDF soldiers, they stated, only fire rubber bullets and only on walls, in order to intimidate. You don't die from a rubber bullet (the reality in which "rubber bullets" are rubber-coated metal bullets which can actually kill people never bothered us).
The problem was the projectile. The projectile which caused the teen's death was removed from his body. It was an IDF projectile.
An additional inquiry revealed that a Border Guard officer had replaced the bullets in the special magazine for rubber bullets with bullets for an M16 rifle. He made sure that the change of bullets won't harm the discharge cup, shot and killed. A problem.
At first, before coming to their senses, the authorities accused the officer of murder. It seemed like a reasonable decision: The officer knowingly replaced bullets which are meant to cause limited damage with bullets which are meant to kill. He fired at the youth although he did not pose a threat to him, and the shooting led to Nuwara's death. And he did everything to conceal his actions.
A murderer? Not really. In the next stage, the murder charge (intentional killing of a person who did not pose a threat to the killer) was replaced with manslaughter. Why manslaughter? Because who knows if the Border Guard officer actually intended on killing. Maybe he did what he did in order to shoot a live bullet next to the youth, and it was only Nuwara's bad luck that made him he stand in the bullet's way? Maybe he intended on wounding rather than killing him. Maybe. When someone fires a live bullet at you at short range, it's not entirely clear what his intention was.
At this stage, the murder charge has been replaced with manslaughter; later on, it's reasonable to assume, attenuating circumstances will be found; then, it's reasonable to assume, a symbolic punishment will be given; then, it's reasonable to assume, the punishment will be cut short.
And why do I think it's reasonable? Because we already have years-long experience with such unpleasant affairs. In Israel, soldiers (and settlers) are not punished severely for murdering or killing Arabs. It began with the Kafr Qasim massacre, where all those responsible for the death of innocent people were sentenced to serious punishments and set free within a year. And it goes on.
The State of Israel conveys the message that there are those who are equal and those who are less equal. Now it wants to turn it into a law.
