Israeli Arabs have multiple identities related to nationality, religion and citizenship. Despite institutional discrimination, constitutional scholar Mohammed Wattad argued that the Arab minority in Israel is guaranteed equal civil and political rights in a state that is both Jewish and democratic.

“Most Israeli Arabs, when asked about their identities, say that they are Palestinians, that they are Muslims or Christians, and that they ‘hold' Israeli citizenship.”

By Peggy McInerny, Director of Communications

UCLA International Institute, March 3, 2015 — In a wide-ranging lecture organized by the Y&S Nazarian Center for Israel Studies in February, Mohammed Wattad examined Israel’s Arab minority in terms of identity and civil rights. Wattad is assistant professor at Zefat Academic College School of Law in Israel and editor-in-chief of the journal Medicine and Law. He is currently Schusterman Visiting Israeli Professor at UC Irvine.

Mohammed from Israel

Wattad said that he began giving talks about the Arab minority in Israel, which represents 20 percent of the country’s population, after he met an educated judge in Canada who knew nothing about its existence. An exploration of identity followed, leading him to ask: “How many identities do I have?”

The word “Palestinian,” said Wattad, has roots in both the Ottoman Empire and the British Mandate of Palestine, where it historically referred to the inhabitants of the geographic area known as southern Great Syria. Prior to Israel’s creation in 1948, in fact, “Palestinian” referred to both Arabs and Jews (then the minority) who lived in Mandatory Palestine, and was recorded on their official identification documents.

“Most Israeli Arabs, when asked about their identities, say that they are Palestinians, that they are Muslims or Christians, and that they ‘hold’ Israeli citizenship,” remarked the speaker. By contrast, Wattad considers himself an Arab — not a Palestinian — by nationality, a Muslim by religion (although he is not a religious person) and an Israeli by citizenship.

“[S]o where does the word Palestinian fit?” he asked. “Is it a bi-national identity, is it a citizenship identity or a religious identity?” For Wattad, the term currently connotes a political identity based on the idea of a future Palestinian state. Born and raised in the state of Israel, Wattad said he identifies with the Arab “nation” largely because no Palestinian state yet exists.

The speaker freely admitted that most of his Arab Israeli colleagues do not share his views and that he has been attacked for not identifying himself as a Palestinian. “[I]t's not that I’m trying to negate my history or disengage myself from certain people, or condemning Palestinian citizenship as something negative,” Wattad explained. “Not at all, I am just trying to be accurate about things."

Israel as a Jewish and democratic state

Wattad considers Israel a Jewish and democratic state based on his reading of Israel’s Declaration of Independence, the “Basic Laws” adopted by the State of Israel over more than six decades and the Israeli Supreme Court’s decisions on civil rights.

The bill on Jewish nationhood being promoted by Naftali Bennett and his Jewish Home Party is, in the speaker’s view, unnecessary and thus political in purpose.* (Wattad noted that the Basic Law of the Knesset, adopted in 1958, already prohibits any parliamentarian from submitting a law that fails to identify Israel as both a Jewish and democratic state.)

The United Nations Partition Plan for (Mandatory) Palestine of 1947 — whose adoption and implementation is recommended by U.N. Resolution 181 — envisioned two states for two nations: a Jewish nation and an Arab nation, said Wattad.

One of the major conditions for international recognition spelled out in the plan is the establishment of constitutional democratic regimes in the two states. Resolution 181 refers to the existence of minorities in both states and their rights, specifically mentioning language, cultural and religious rights, plus the protection of their respective holy sites. Updated to reflect 1967 borders, Wattad claimed that the 1947 plan remains an excellent foundation for a future peace agreement.

In his view, the Arab countries’ rejection of the U.N. Partition Plan and Resolution 181 in 1947 was a decision made without Palestinian representation. Following the Arab-Israeli War of 1948, David Ben-Gurion created the State of Israel based on the constitutional democratic state outlined in the two U.N. documents. “Ben-Gurion was smart. . . he said, ‘You reject it, I take it as it is,’” said Wattad.

The Israeli leader, he continued, set out to create a Jewish and democratic state. “How do I know that?” asked the speaker. “I read the [Israeli] Declaration of Independence.” The document speaks of Israel as the homeland for the Jews and then goes on to speak about the democratic facets of the State of Israel — including equality, freedom of speech and freedom of religion.

“[S]oon after, the Declaration speaks to Arab minority in the State of Israel, extending its hand to them in peace living as full citizens of the state of Israel, granting them full civil and political rights not only as individuals, but also as a collective. This was the promise,” added the speaker.

Wattad distinguished between the Jewish nationhood of Israel, Jewish religious identity and the rights conferred on Israeli citizens. “Once you are inside the country, you are an equal citizen, you have no extra rights,” he said. ”So Hebrew is the official language, the symbols of Israel are Jewish (again, I speak in terms of nationhood, not religion), the official holidays are all Jewish.” Yet, he pointed out, minority rights are protected, making the State of Israel a state for all its citizens.

Israel failed to adopt a constitution not because of its Arab minority, said the speaker, but because of disagreements between Orthodox and secular Jews. But over time, it has created a constitutional regime piecemeal by adopting a series of “Basic Laws” (of the Knesset, of the Government, of the Judiciary, of Jerusalem, of the Army, etc.) and by guaranteeing civil rights via major Israeli Supreme Court decisions.

“Read all the statutes in the State of Israel,” said Wattad, “There is no single law that says the people have the right to freedom of speech. We have the right of freedom of speech because of 15 people who are sitting in the Supreme Court of Israel.”

Specifically, he claimed that Israel Supreme Court Justice Shimon Agranat (president of the court from 1965 to 1976) virtually created the right to free speech out of thin air in a 1950 ruling of the Court. Reading the Israeli Declaration of Independence, the American Israeli jurist concluded that the Declaration included values of a democratic regime and therefore Israel was a democracy. In a state barely five years old with no constitution, the jurist wrote, “In our constitutional system, the constitutional right of a freedom of speech is an important one.” This assertion, observed Wattad, became a precedent supported by further cases on the same issue.

“It is very important to understand that the Supreme Court of Israel has played an important role in crystallizing the democratic facets of the State of Israel. This something that the Court must be commended for, not condemned,” he concluded.

Given that Israel grants equal rights and protections to its Arab citizens, Wattad insisted on the concept of fair play on the part of a future Palestinian state. “You can’t have one country for all its citizens and one country only for the Arabs,” he commented.

Arab Israelis and Israeli nationhood

Wattad was far from considering Israel a perfect state. He pointed to the existence of institutional discrimination, particularly the right of Arab Israelis to decide what to teach their children in school. Yet he noted that the government had recognized this discrimination and had adopted affirmative action statutes in response.

He also found fault with the Arab parliamentary leadership in the Knesset, claiming it had been ineffective in improving the lives of the Israeli Arabs. Wattad welcomed the recent creation of the first-ever united Arab faction in the Knesset, saying it was long overdue. The only way for Arab Israelis to become a serious power in the Knesset is to act as a coherent faction and force the institution to engage them, he said. Wattab urged Arab parties to consider eventually joining a potential Israeli government.

At the same time, he bemoaned the failure of most Arab Israelis to participate in elections. “I figured out recently that there is one constitutional right on which the Arabs cannot argue they are being discriminated [against in Israel]: the right to vote. Your vote means the same as a Jewish vote. So use it: vote, go out and have influence on the country,” Wattad urged his fellow Arab Israeli citizens.

Although Israel was more Jewish than Israeli in 1948, the speaker claimed the reverse was true today — again separating the idea of nation from religious identity. Given that the nation has created a real sense of Israeli nationhood, he urged the government to consider replacing the words in the national anthem, “the Jewish feeling is yearning deep in the heart” with the words “the Israeli spirit is yearning deep in the heart.” “

“Israel is a Jewish and democratic state, [so] that works. If I put people in a position to say this, I narrow the gap,” remarked Wattad. “Remember, you need two to tango, but he who leads has the power and that is the state.”

*Among other things, the “Basic Law: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People,” defines Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people, grants the right to self-determination in Israel only to the Jewish people, makes Hebrew the sole official language of the State of Israel and deems Jewish law a “source of inspiration” for the Knesset. In a decision adopted in late November 2014 by the Israeli Cabinet, the government supported two proposals for the bill that are intended to subsumed into a government-sponsored bill. (See Haviv Rettig Gur, “An Idiot’s Guide to the Nation-State Controversy,” The Times of Israel, December 1, 2014). In early December, the ruling government coalition broke apart and the Knesset voted to call new elections on March 17, 2015.

Mohammed S. Wattad is a legal scholar specializing in international and comparative criminal law, comparative constitutional law, international law, and legal issues surrounding war, torture, and terrorism. A graduate of Haifa University School of Law, Wattad holds a Master of Law degree from The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He also attended Columbia University as a Fulbright Scholar, where he earned his Juris Doctorate and another Master of Law degree. From 2003 to 2004, he served as a legal clerk at the Supreme Court of Israel under the supervision of Justice Dalia Dorner.​