Jump to content

Talk:Israel/Archive 78

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 75Archive 76Archive 77Archive 78Archive 79Archive 80→Archive 85

1950s

@Moriori: In this edit what article are you referring to? ImTheIP (talk) 22:29, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

The one which is linked to, which does not contain the words "retaliatory attacks" which you inserted. Moriori (talk) 23:02, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
There are four linked to. Which one of them contains the formulation "leading to"? Is Israel a state incapable of agency? ImTheIP (talk) 00:48, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
Seriously?
  • the article said "...leading to several Israeli counter-raids..."
  • you changed it to read "...which Israel responded to with retaliatory attacks..." without giving an edit summary. I reverted you, saying in my edit summary "let's say what the article says", beleiving it was better for the article to not include the POV tabloidy phrase "retaliatory attacks" which is not contained in the link.
Within both statements I mention here, is the article I mentioned (wikilinked), specifically dealing with Reprisal Operations. It mentions raids, reprisal operations etc but nowhere does it state "retaliatory attacks". Your third sentence is a mystery to me. Moriori (talk) 05:36, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
Yes, seriously. It doesn't matter what the linked to Wikipedia article says. Only thing what matters is what the sources say. Please refer to them, not other Wikipedia articles. "leading to" akin to me saying "Yesterday a driver cut me off, leading to me shooting him in the face." It's pov language. ImTheIP (talk) 13:11, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
Moriori's edit is an improvement in terms of flow and style. 11Fox11 (talk) 19:34, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
I agree with the revert. ImTheIP’s proposed edit strikes me as misleading and not NPOV. Île flottante (talk) 21:44, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
It certainly is. @ImTheIP: seems intent on evading the point. He says the only thing that matters is what the sources say. But he added the phrase retaliatory attacks which is not sourced, a true POV addition by any measure. Sigh. Wikipedia was such a good idea. Moriori (talk) 20:38, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
"Reprisal" means "retaliation". If Israel conducted "reprisal operations" it means that Israel "retaliated." Now exactly how did Israel retaliate? By "attacking". Thus, "retaliatory attacks." Here is what the very pro-Israel Jewish Virtual Library has to say about it: "As a result of the intensification of the Fedayeen attacks (see Figure 1), the Israeli leadership was forced to find ways to cope with the challenge and in July of 1953, the IDF formed its first counterterrorism force—Unit 101 The Israeli military leadership decided that retaliatory attacks would be able to deter the Palestinian recruits and damage the Fedayeen’s military infrastructure." Note also that the Israeli military leadership decided to employ retaliatory attacks as a deterrent. ImTheIP (talk) 20:54, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
You are a tenured professor? Yeah right. Moriori (talk) 00:02, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
WP:NPA, please. ImTheIP (talk) 19:50, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

What is meant here?

"Jacob and his sons had lived in Canaan but were forced by famine to go into Egypt for four generations, lasting 430 years"

If the bible has a different measure for generation, it is not mentioned in the reference. Moriori (talk) 23:25, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

IOP

Hello, I don't understand why there is an entry "Israel(proper)" in the "Israel occupied territories" section. It's taking the bias very far. Also I noticed the introduction is based on criticism rather than Neutral point of view. I don't see criticism of Iran or other countries on wikipedia. Please fix that. --Mafiosaalarabica (talk) 00:59, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

We know that an article is neutral when it pisses off both sides of the conflict. Like the article historical Jesus pisses off both bigots and hardcore atheists. Tgeorgescu (talk) 02:45, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Tgeorgescu, Isn't that kind of a "middle ground" fallacy? The truth does often lie in the middle but using that as a rule of thumb is a bad idea. Let it be remembered as well that conflicts or topics like these are not simply two sided/black and white. I'm not sure if your comment is intentionally informal, but I don't think trying to make everyone "pissed off" is a good metric for neutrality. Boris J. Cornelius (talk) 02:34, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Foreign relations

Israel has diplomatic relations with Sudan, and to some extent with Morocco as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:A040:19B:31A9:88F0:E40D:6B10:2735 (talk) 06:37, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Sources please. Also, sign contributions with four tildes (~~~~). Diplomacy has protocol. Wakari07 (talk) 14:52, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

December 2020 updates needed for Morocco and Bhutan. https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-inks-deal-establishing-diplomatic-relations-with-bhutan/ https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/10/politics/trump-israel-morocco/index.html One-Off Contributor (talk) 23:38, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 December 2020

In light of the new developments, please remove from this section the phrase "Only three members of the Arab League have normalized relations with Israel:", since other Arab countries are establishing relations with Israel (maybe it could be replaced for "Among members of the Arab League that have normalized relations with Israel..."). Also, after where it says "Mauritania opted for full diplomatic relations with Israel in 1999.", please add the following text:

As part of the 2020 Abraham Accords, Israel established relations with the United Arab Emirates, Bahrein, Sudan and Morocco.[1]

For the same reason Sudan should be removed from the list of enemy countries in the following sentence. Also the sentence "As a result of the 2008–09 Gaza War, Mauritania, Qatar, Bolivia, and Venezuela suspended political and economic ties with Israel." should be replaced for the following text:

As a result of the 2008–09 Gaza War, Mauritania, Qatar, Bolivia, and Venezuela suspended political and economic ties with Israel,[2][3] although Bolivia renewed ties in November 2019.[4]

Thanks.--Watchlonly (talk) 20:43, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

 Done. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 16:04, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Morocco latest country to normalise ties with Israel in US-brokered deal". December 10, 2020 – via www.bbc.com.
  2. ^ "Qatar, Mauritania cut Israel ties". Al Jazeera English. 17 January 2009. Retrieved 20 March 2012.
  3. ^ Abn, Abi (14 January 2009). "Bolivia rompe relaciones diplomáticas con Israel y anuncia demanda por genocidio en Gaza" (in Spanish). YVKE Mundial Radio. Archived from the original on 5 January 2011. Retrieved 14 April 2010.
  4. ^ "Bolivia Renews Diplomatic Relations With Israel After Over Decade of Severed Ties". Haaretz. 28 November 2019.

Some code hanging out in the reflist

In an ongoing attempt to fix the references list, I removed the following code as it should be cited in the article proper.

Reflist code
<ref name=occ>
* {{Cite book|url={{Google books|hYiIWVlpFzEC|page=PA429|keywords=|text=|plainurl=yes}}|page=429|first=Andrew|last=Sanger|chapter=The Contemporary Law of Blockade and the Gaza Freedom Flotilla|journal=Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law 2010|volume=13|editor1=M.N. Schmitt|editor2=Louise Arimatsu|editor3=Tim McCormack|date=2011|isbn=978-90-6704-811-8|quote=Israel claims it no longer occupies the Gaza Strip, maintaining that it is neither a Stale nor a territory occupied or controlled by Israel, but rather it has 'sui generis' status. Pursuant to the Disengagement Plan, Israel dismantled all military institutions and settlements in Gaza and there is no longer a permanent Israeli military or civilian presence in the territory. However the Plan also provided that Israel will guard and monitor the external land perimeter of the Gaza Strip, will continue to maintain exclusive authority in Gaza air space, and will continue to exercise security activity in the sea off the coast of the Gaza Strip as well as maintaining an Israeli military presence on the Egyptian-Gaza border. and reserving the right to reenter Gaza at will.<br />Israel continues to control six of Gaza's seven land crossings, its maritime borders and airspace and the movement of goods and persons in and out of the territory. Egypt controls one of Gaza's land crossings. Troops from the Israeli Defence Force regularly enter pans of the territory and/or deploy missile attacks, drones and sonic bombs into Gaza. Israel has declared a no-go buffer zone that stretches deep into Gaza: if Gazans enter this zone they are shot on sight. Gaza is also dependent on israel for inter alia electricity, currency, telephone networks, issuing IDs, and permits to enter and leave the territory. Israel also has sole control of the Palestinian Population Registry through which the Israeli Army regulates who is classified as a Palestinian and who is a Gazan or West Banker. Since 2000 aside from a limited number of exceptions Israel has refused to add people to the Palestinian Population Registry.<br />It is this direct external control over Gaza and indirect control over life within Gaza that has led the United Nations, the UN General Assembly, the UN Fact Finding Mission to Gaza, International human rights organisations, US Government websites, the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office and a significant number of legal commentators, to reject the argument that Gaza is no longer occupied.|doi=10.1007/978-90-6704-811-8_14|series=Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law}}
* {{cite book|title=International Law and the Classification of Conflicts|editor=Elizabeth Wilmshurst|first=Iain|last=Scobbie|author-link=Iain Scobbie|publisher=Oxford University Press|date=2012|isbn=978-0-19-965775-9|page=295|url={{Google books|GM90Xp03uuEC|page=PA295|keywords=|text=|plainurl=yes}}|quote=Even after the accession to power of Hamas, Israel's claim that it no longer occupies Gaza has not been accepted by UN bodies, most States, nor the majority of academic commentators because of its exclusive control of its border with Gaza and crossing points including the effective control it exerted over the Rafah crossing until at least May 2011, its control of Gaza's maritime zones and airspace which constitute what Aronson terms the 'security envelope' around Gaza, as well as its ability to intervene forcibly at will in Gaza.}}
* {{cite book|title=Prefiguring Peace: Israeli-Palestinian Peacebuilding Partnerships|first=Michelle|last= Gawerc|publisher=Lexington Books|date=2012|isbn=978-0-7391-6610-9|page=44|url={{Google books|Hka8FZ4UdWUC|page=PA44|keywords=|text=|plainurl=yes}}|quote=While Israel withdrew from the immediate territory, Israel still controlled all access to and from Gaza through the border crossings, as well as through the coastline and the airspace. ln addition, Gaza was dependent upon Israel for water electricity sewage communication networks and for its trade (Gisha 2007. Dowty 2008). ln other words, while Israel maintained that its occupation of Gaza ended with its unilateral disengagement Palestinians – as well as many human right organizations and international bodies – argued that Gaza was by all intents and purposes still occupied.}}</ref>

—Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) (🎁 Wishlist! 🎁) 03:07, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: It's a list defined reference. I've added it back in non-LDR because we shouldn't mix citation styles. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 10:06, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
Works for me. Thumbs up icon —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) (🎁 Wishlist! 🎁) 17:30, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 December 2020

Footnotes at the beginning don't work. Please restore the normal parameters like every other country in Wikipedia, which doesn't have footnotes for this:

Israel (/ˈɪzriəl, ˈɪzreɪəl/; Hebrew: יִשְׂרָאֵל; Arabic: إِسْرَائِيل), officially known as the State of Israel (Hebrew: מְדִינַת יִשְׂרָאֵל, Medinat Yisra'el),

I don't want someone to revert those edits entirely because none other country has the word "country" linked at the begining (which would be an WP:overlink) with the exception of the United States for whatever reason. Also where it says "Not long after, the Second World War saw Israel bombed heavily and..." in third paragraph of lede it should say "Palestine" or something similar since Israel didn't exist at the time.--Watchlonly (talk) 20:20, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Watchlonly, I've added {{notelist}} to the Footnotes section. Would that work? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 20:25, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
I'm not sure, why should Israel have footnotes for its original name in Hebrew and Arabic when none other non-English speaking country has footnotes?--Watchlonly (talk) 20:28, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Watchlonly, Danloud made the change to footnotes in this revision; I would assume they did it per MOS:FIRST? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 20:35, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
It's not a long parenthesis and none other country has this, but whatever. It's a matter of taste, I guess. Could you change "Israel" for "Palestine" where I indicated? Israel didn't exist during WW2.--Watchlonly (talk) 20:39, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Watchlonly Many other countries also have footnotes: Russia, Belarus, Albania etc. Footnotes make the lead look cleaner and easier to read through. I changed the word "Israel" to mandate. Danloud (talk) 10:02, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Ok. Thank you very much.--Watchlonly (talk) 16:50, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Showing Hiding Wrapping unwrapping References

Showing Hiding Wrapping unwrapping References is very needed especially as they span on more than one screen / page.

Please forward that request to wiki engine maintenance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.187.202.138 (talk) 22:19, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

RfC - Democracy

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The consensus is yes, the lead of Israel should define the state unequivocally as a democracy, with no qualifications or caveats. To sum up the themes of the two sides:
Opposing comments mostly discussed or referred to Israeli occupation and disenfranchisement of voting rights of those individuals. Some editors cited sources which criticised Israeli democracy. They argued that it would be UNDUE to make the statement without listing caveats. Comparisons to apartheid states were common amongst opposers.
Editors supporting had the numerical majority by far, and argued mostly the following: (a) that the term represents a state of government, rather than the perfection of democracy or lack of issues. This group commonly made references to various democracy indexes and rankings, and Israel's position in them; and (b) that occupied territories are not part of Israel-proper, and hence should not be counted as part of the question. They considered the occupation an issue separate to its form of government. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:28, 12 January 2021 (UTC)


Should the lead of Israel define it unequivocally as a democracy, twice, and with no qualifications or caveats? Onceinawhile (talk) 17:10, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Multiple reliable and mainstream sources define Israel as a democracy and/or a parliamentary republic. it's throughout the article! All citizens have the same rights under the law. Israeli Arabs might face some discrimination, but it doesn't mean Israel is not a democracy, just like it doesn't mean European countries are not democracies because Muslim minorities face some discrimination or inequalities. Palestinians, on the other hand, are not Israeli citizens, and they are governed by the PA or Hamas, as I explained before. They are under occupation, but that's already covered extensively. Those are general facts, it's not appropriate to start flooding this article with opinion pieces to condemn or justify Israel. For more information, see WP:NEWSORG.--Watchlonly (talk) 17:35, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
In the lead the source Freedom House, used in various places, is given in support of this statement:

In its Basic Laws, Israel defines itself as a Jewish and democratic state and the nation state of the Jewish people.

The Freedom House "Overview" for Israel is as follows:

Israel is a multiparty democracy with strong and independent institutions that guarantee political rights and civil liberties for most of the population. Although the judiciary is active in protecting minority rights, the political leadership and many in society have discriminated against Arab and other minorities, resulting in systemic disparities in areas including political representation, criminal justice, and economic opportunity.

and constitutes additional support for the reverted edit.Selfstudier (talk) 10:17, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Comment: The existence of discrimination in a democratic society does not negate the existence of the democratic system; if that were so, we would need to revise the definitions of many supposedly exemplary democracies for the treatment of their minorities or immigrants, including but not only the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, France, Australia, etc. Rather democratic societies grapple with correcting those inequalities such as electing representatives to the legislature, pubic meetings and protests, freedom of expression etc., and the fact that not only is all this legally permitted but is vigorously pursued in Israel by all citizens, Jewish and non-Jewish alike, is clear evidence that it is a full-fledged democracy like any of the others mentioned who also grapple with the issues of eliminating discrimination and inequalities in their socities. Chefallen (talk) 19:18, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
What do you mean by "pariah state"? I'm just curious. It's a very subjective term, since... you know, this "pariah state" is a military and technological power that recently signed peace agreements with the Emirates, Bahrein, Sudan and soon is very likely to establish relations with Oman and Saudi Arabia. Not to mention it's an ally of the biggest superpower in the world (yes, also under a Biden administration), several European countries and other Far East countries. It has diplomatic and economic relations with 162 nations and counting. It's not under economic sanctions or political isolation like apartheid South Africa in the 1980s or North Korea. So what do you mean by "pariah"? I personally don't like the Chinese government and many other human rights violators around world (specially those sorrounding Israel), but I wouldn't call China a "pariah state". And the op-ed citing Sima Vaknin is exactly what I meant with WP:NEWSORG (see my comment above).--Watchlonly (talk) 18:20, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
The lady said it not me, probably Pariah state.Selfstudier (talk) 18:38, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
For context on the points made by Watchlonly, see Foreign relations of South Africa during apartheid#Outward-Looking Policy. Onceinawhile (talk) 18:39, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
Well, the lady was simply wrong or was trying to convey a message by being hyperbolic. Israel certanly doesn't face "international isolation, sanctions or even an invasion by nations who find its policies, actions, or its very existence unacceptable." Not a "pariah state", but a country you don't like. Also I find interesting that you consider an official of the Israeli ministry of foreign affairs an authoritative source when it suits your narrative. If the lady was saying that Israel is an exemplary democracy, something tells me you wouldn't consider her opinion something meaningful.--Watchlonly (talk) 18:54, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
I just remembered I said I wasn't going to engage with an unqualified editor. Thank you for reminding me. Bye now.Selfstudier (talk) 18:59, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, I guess that's easier. Good luck trying to convince other "qualified" editors of your viewpoint for this article after seeing this.--Watchlonly (talk) 19:15, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
Watchlonly is missing the point. This is not about which viewpoint is right. It is about whether there is only one reasonable viewpoint, or more than one. Please read WP:BALANCE. Onceinawhile (talk) 19:38, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Yes – the terms used in the lead are accurate. "Israel defines itself as a Jewish and democratic state" is a self-description within Israeli constitutional law and Israel is widely considered to exhibit the traits of a "liberal democracy". Israel is frequently noted as being one of the region's only liberal democracies, and by far the most robust and established of these (its only competitors are Lebanon and Tunisia). It was ranked 28th, placing it in the category of upper-tier 'flawed' democracies, by the 2019 EIU Democracy Index, which is usually seen as the go-to index for a basic analytical overview of liberal democracies. Other countries in this category include the USA (25th) and Italy (35th). The term "liberal democracy" (or Western democracy; a form of representative democracy) is used to describe a type of political system with certain characteristics such as separation of powers between different branches of government; competitive elections; a free press/open society; a capitalist economic system; rule of law etc. Very few of these features are absolute, they are mostly relative and measured. Israel is considered to meet most of these criteria, even though it's recognised to have serious flaws in some areas. A democratic system does not necessarily mean a country is well behaved towards its minorities or that its whole population is equally enfranchised. More democratic democracies, such as the UK and USA, still have significant issues with parts of their populations being effectively disenfranchised or disadvantaged. I think this RfC is conflating these social and political injustices with a term that has a specific meaning in political science; while liberal democracy is fundamentally a normative term, determining whether a state is a liberal democracy can be done with relative confidence. @Onceinawhile: I noticed that one of the sources you quoted is published by Pluto Press, an activist press rather than a traditional academic publisher. I'm sure it publishes plenty of great things, but it openly comes from an anti-capitalist POV and is generally critical of Israel, so it's worth bearing in mind that it's a partisan source on this topic. Jr8825 • Talk 05:12, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Can you really compare it 2 US and UK? I don't think so. - GizzyCatBella🍁 06:33, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
@GizzyCatBella: While you can't compare occupied West Bank and the Israeli settlement program with anything you'd find in the UK/USA, within Israel proper Palestinian voters are a significant voting block and their votes denied Netanyahu a majority in elections this year. You obviously wouldn't call occupied West Bank remotely democratic, but the Israeli parliamentary system itself and the court system can be termed liberal democratic. The UK and US each have their own issues, perhaps not on the same scale, but the EIU only places the US 0.1 points (out of 10) above Israel, which I find interesting. Netanyahu is a right-wing populist, but his undermining of constitutional precedent probably has more in common with the behaviours of Boris Johnson or Trump than it does with Orbán in Hungary, who has quite successfully dismantled that country's liberal democratic system. Jr8825 • Talk 07:09, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Thank you. Just to remind you, Global Democracy index of The Economist records Israel as a “flawed democracy”, perhaps that could be mentioned in our article. Several other issues that undermine Israel's status as a stable democracy are unique to Israel and could not be found anywhere in the world, but I'll not go into it right now. Ask yourself this question - Can you envision a scenario of Palestinian citizen of Israel be ever elected as head of the Jewish State? - GizzyCatBella🍁 09:46, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
We don't call the USA or Italy flawed democracies in their article leads. This is also about keeping a consistent encyclopedic approach. I'm not trying to apologise for Israel's behaviour in the occupied territories or defend its second-class treatment of Palestinians. However, we're not calling Israel a democracy in a utopian sense, we're describing its political system as a "liberal democracy" (many socialists would not consider a liberal democracy to be democratic because of its capitalist components). The UK has had one Welsh PM since 1721 – that doesn't stop the UK being classed a full democracy. Is there an absolute legal barrier preventing a Palestinian from becoming Israeli PM in the next 300 years? I'm not familiar with the Israeli constitution, but as far as I'm aware there isn't. Jr8825 • Talk 10:10, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
How manly, for example, African refugees asking for protection face unspecified detention in Israel? Do you know? - GizzyCatBella🍁 00:10, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
This is about WP:BALANCE. There are hundreds of sources which question Israel's claimed status as a true democracy. Here are some more: Alan Dowty (1999). Is Israel Democratic? Substance and Semantics in the "Ethnic Democracy" Debate. Israel Studies, 4(2), 1-15: "there is remarkably little disagreement over the actual substance of Israeli politics in the recent debate over "ethnic democracy" in the pages of Israel Studies. Sammy Smooha classifies Israel in the historically-rare category of "ethnic democracy"; As'ad Ghanem, Nadim Rouhana, and Oren Yiftachel challenge the "democracy" component of that taxonomy and suggest instead the label of "ethnocracy," a somewhat less rare but still infrequent species; Ruth Gavison argues for moving the debate into explicit rather than submerged normative terms, and concludes that there is no necessary conceptual inconsistency between a state being Jewish and its being a democracy. All, however, describe the actual situation of non-Jews in Israel, in law and in practice, in similar terms." and Professor Martin Beck, The Political System of Israel – Not a Democracy?, German Institute for Global and Area Studies, number 01, February 2020, ISSN 1862-3611: "However, is the political system of Israel really that of a democracy? This question is a controversial one within academia. Giving an exact answer depends on the underlying concept of democracy drawn on. According to a broad concept of democracy, which promulgates the equality of all citizens as a defining feature hereof, Israel is at best a flawed democracy and at worst no democracy at all. On the basis of a minimalist concept of democracy, which limits itself to a few core criteria such as freedom of expression and freedom to form and join organisations as well as the right to vote, Israel is a democracy within the borders of 1949. However, following the June War of 1967, the space over which Israel would rule now extended to East Jerusalem, the Golan Heights, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip. If a minimalist concept of democracy is consistently applied to the entire territory governed by Israel, a clear conclusion is to be drawn: After the conquest of the June War, Israel – which had just taken an important step towards democratic consolidation by abolishing military law in 1966 – took the path of de-democratisation in the last third of the twentieth century. This path was completed in the twenty-first." Onceinawhile (talk) 09:16, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
The article does not say that Israel is a "democracy" (with all the inferences that term may imply), it says that Israel is a "liberal democracy" because it has "a parliamentary system, proportional representation, and universal suffrage", so in this sense we're clearly following what your source labels "a minimalist concept of democracy" – this is the standard we apply as an encyclopedia. The subject of the article is clearly separate from the Palestinian territories (the second sentence delineates the two), which makes the rest of the point moot. Jr8825 • Talk 09:28, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
I suggest you read the whole paragraph - at the beginning it says that the question of whether Israel is a democracy is "controversial... within academia" and at the end it says "the path of de-democratisation... was completed in the twenty-first [century]". We are not debating who is right or wrong, just whether there is more than one reasonable perspective on this question. On your second point, I assume you also consider that the Bantustans were "clearly separate from" South Africa? Onceinawhile (talk) 09:38, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Again, the article doesn't unequivocally call Israel a "democracy". Your article is exploring a more fundamental question, related to ethics and political theory. For the purpose of an encyclopedia article on Israel, calling its political system that of a liberal democracy is accurate and not subjective. The West Bank is different from Bantustans or Indian reservations in that it is not an artificially created internal zone – it is occupied, not accepted as being part of Israel under international law, which is why our article separates the two. Jr8825 • Talk 09:53, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
I suggest we agree to disagree on what the lead of the article says. Others can judge for themselves. On Bantustans, you have described a minor technical difference; in practice they are exactly the same thing – a framework to control a minority population within small enclaves, without giving them citizenship of the controlling power. Remember that Jews living in the West Bank are Israeli citizens and subject to Israeli law. Onceinawhile (talk) 10:15, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Indeed, I completely understand the direction you're coming from and agree with many of your points, we're simply disagreeing on the protocol here. Cheers, Jr8825 • Talk 10:19, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Protocol? Which protocol caters for two separate legal systems in the same space, civil for Jews and miltary for Palestinians? I guess you must mean the Apartheid protocol.Selfstudier (talk) 14:13, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
@Selfstudier: I don't appreciate the suggestion that I support apartheid. I'm not going to rehash my argument as I've already laid it out above, but to reiterate, it's not about supporting Israel's treatment of Palestinians. Jr8825 • Talk 14:25, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
I'm not talking about whether you support Apartheid I am talking about whether "democratic Israel" is in effect "Apartheid Israel". I can bring a small mountain of sources as if they were needed, the case stacks up whether it's inside Israel (Nation State Law is quintessential Apartheid) or in the occupied territories where Israel illegally implements its own laws outside of Israel, in occupied territory.Selfstudier (talk) 14:47, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Yes: Israel's democratic institutions certainly have flaws, but so do most democratic states. Wikipedia having decided to exclude the West Bank and Gaza from the Israel article, those factors must be excluded. Otherwise, the US would not have been democratic during its occupation of Iraq: Iraqi civilians were not able to vote in US elections during the US occupation. Île flottante (talk) 10:17, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
No, it shouldn't. As Onceinawhile has demonstrated, there is significant disagreement on that point. Israel has existed for 72 years and the occupation has existed for 53 years. The numbers speak for themselves here. ImTheIP (talk) 11:11, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Comment: The situation in the Palestinian territories is not relevant to this point. Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza have never been Israeli citizens and do not wish to be. Israel has not extended its sovereignty over those areas, and by implication the same full democratic political rights to its inhabitants that all citizens of Israel, whether Jewish, Arab or Druze, have inside sovereign pre-1967 Israel. Israel has made offers to give up nearly all of the West Bank to the Palestinians, most recently in 2000 and 2008. Palestinian leaders said no and made no counteroffers and so it seems Israel is waiting to reach a settlement when the Palestinian leadership is finally ready, so that ordinary Palestinians would enjoy the full political rights in their own sovereign state. Chefallen (talk) 19:53, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Yes The West Bank and Gaza are not counted in Israel. If they are ever annexed, the question might have to be revisited. According to Freedom House 2020 report: "Israel is a multiparty democracy with strong and independent institutions that guarantee political rights and civil liberties for most of the population."[1] (This is ahead of the nominally democratic Hungary, classified as a hybrid regime).[2] The Economist's Global Democracy Index for 2019 ranks Israel as a "flawed democracy", on the other hand it's ranked considerably better than Tunisia and still considered the most democratic country in MENA, as well as being well ahead of many EU countries like Hungary, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, and even Slovakia, Greece, and Latvia. I don't see significant disagreement with the claim that Israel is a democracy outside of a handful of cherry-picked sources. (t · c) buidhe 15:58, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
You appear to have forgotten that part of the West Bank has already been illegally annexed so revisit it now. aka East Jerusalem and Apartheid is in full swing there along with breaches of just about every piece of International Humanitarian Law that there is. While you are at it explain why there are so many books on the subject, this one due shortly. Gal Ariely (31 March 2021). Israel's Regime Untangled: Between Democracy and Apartheid. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-108-84525-0. Selfstudier (talk) 18:07, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Arab residents of East Jerusalem were granted permanent residence status in 1967 and most chose to maintain their Jordanian citizenship; however, they can apply for Israeli citizenship and as such, there is no "apartheid in full swing" there; even as permanent residents who have opted not to apply for Israeli citizenship, East Jerusalem Arabs are entitled to receive assistance from the Israeli National Insurance Institute and other welfare services that Israelis are entitled to, and the free education system is open to them. Chefallen (talk) 20:11, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Yes and this RFC seems awfully pointy or disruptive. Every citizen in Israel has equal rights, the third largest voting bloc in the Knesset is the Arab Bloc parties. The Supreme Court is diverse, the police are diverse. There is a very independent judicial system and to claim that Israel isn't a democracy is just way beyond the pale of what I've come to expect on Wikipedia. Sir Joseph (talk) 16:09, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
"Every citizen in Israel has equal rights" That would be ezrahut, right? And what is "le'um"? Selfstudier (talk) 23:34, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
WP:CCC. After all, lots of comments there from Icewhiz, Yaniv..meh.Selfstudier (talk) 00:08, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Yes Obvious case, really. As pointed in many comments, there are a few authoritative rankings of democracies that we tend to follow on WP. We do not WP:CHERRYPICK by following these rankings for all other countries but ignoring them for Israel. Jeppiz (talk) 19:14, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Yes also the rfc is malformed no WP:RFCBEFORE also the question it self not exactly neutral. Every democracy has its own problem it doesn't meant it stop being a democracy also no policy based reason was brought for the change --[User:Shrike|Shrike]] 19:35, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
That you Shrike? Park a sig on here when you get a minute. It depends on whether you think the preceding section counts as rfcbefore or not. There was a perfectly sound well sourced edit reverted without good reason at the instigation of an unqualified editor. So what would any further discussion have achieved exactly? Might as well proceed directly to the rfc, seems to me.Selfstudier (talk) 22:36, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
  • No An apartheid state can not be a democracy.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 11:05, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Yes: As buidhe says, we can unequivocally call Israel a democracy from just about any standard index of democratic government, such as the Freedom in the World report. This is the overwhelmingly dominant view of political scientists. Challenger.rebecca (talk) 14:02, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
  • False Premise Yes The question is based on the false premise that the current claim of democracy is without equivocation or qualification. "In its Basic Laws" is a strong equivocation as it makes clear the what follows is de Jure and not de Facto. "Liberal" and "Parliamentary" are both important qualifications. I wouldn't say no to a note following "universal suffrage", which honestly you could add to quite a few countries. This RFC would also be a lot more useful if it contained a recommended change since for all I know I might agree with what is requested if it was concrete.AlmostFrancis (talk) 18:48, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
The rfc originated because of a revert (this rather uncontroversial edit) but the rfc is composed as a discussion of what the original edit means or might be taken to mean. Perhaps not the most straightforward way of doing the rfc, I agree. It might have been simpler to have simply gone for reverting the revert as it is factual well sourced and entirely unobjectionable except on the grounds of "I don't like it".Selfstudier (talk) 19:31, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
With all due respect, after reading this conversation I do not think your perception of what is uncontroversial and unobjectionable would be broadly shared. If anything it looks like your opinion in this case is in the minority. For avoidance of doubt I have updated my vote to yes since is seems that corresponds to keeping the status quo. AlmostFrancis (talk) 21:28, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Yes per Jr8825, buidhe and others; by all objective measures and rankings, Israel is unequivocally a democracy, with a political and legal system based on equal political and civil rights for all its citizens, including its non-Jewish minorities, notwithstanding the issues that every democracy needs to address. The Palestinian territories are not part of sovereign Israel, as noted above in several places, and therefore the political rights there are subject to a whole other set of circumstances and considerations not applicable here. Chefallen (talk) 20:31, 15 November 2020 (UTC) 
  • Yes per Jr8825. The large number of Arabs in the Knesset (currently 17 according to List of Arab members of the Knesset) provides additional backup. Adoring nanny (talk) 03:18, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Yes Israel can be defined as a democracy. Israel is described by sources as a democracy. Like other democracies in the world it is flawed but only to a small degree. Bus stop (talk) 22:38, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
  • No Five million people live under the Occupying Power but they cannot vote in Israel. More than five million people—of which two million also live under Israeli occupation—are registered refugees and they cannot vote in their homeland, now Israel. A country that denies civil and political rights to more than eight million people cannot be called a democracy. Also, 153 countries call for "permanent sovereignty of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and of the Arab population in the occupied Syrian Golan over their natural resources". The United Nations are WP:RS on the opinion of world governemnts. Wakari07 (talk) 02:24, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Sir Joseph, that is exactly the point. It is a fiction to pretend that Israel does not treat the WB as part of Israel, per Israeli law in the West Bank settlements. Onceinawhile (talk) 08:46, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Sir Joseph, this is 2020. Two million people in the Gaza Strip are held outside the rule of law too. An estimate of five million shocked the Knesset already in 2018 [3][4]. The UN has a mean projection by 2100 of 12 million [5]. Under what democracy? Wakari07 (talk) 15:16, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Why would someone in Gaza vote in Israeli elections? Sir Joseph (talk) 16:02, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
I think he probably just means that holding a bunch of people in an open air prison is not something ordinarily associated with democracies, seems more like a China/Uighur thing.Selfstudier (talk) 16:33, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
The people in Gaza are under effective control of Israel and so, under international law, Israel is responsible for their human rights [6]. If Israel was a democracy, all of the people under its rules would enjoy equality before the law. Now, people in Tel Aviv are rather "more equal" than people in Gaza. Wakari07 (talk) 18:37, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Wakari07—on average, wouldn't it be more apt to characterize "people in Gaza" as acting more belligerently toward the State of Israel than "people in Tel Aviv"? Bus stop (talk) 19:06, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Bus stop, on average, over the last 13 years, 22 Palestinians are killed for each Israeli fatality. And you know that's not the subject of this RfC. Wakari07 (talk) 22:58, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Are "islamic" countries, like Iran and palestine, apatheid states too? Do they have to stop being Islamic in order to stop being apartheid states? Or that is a thing applied to jews only? - Daveout(talk) 04:09, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

*No Based simply on the fact that it is highly disputed by many valid sources, there should at least be some form of caveat. These views are pertinent, prominent, and deserve to be reflected in some manner. Many others here who support a yes standpoint rely mostly upon the fact that liberal democracy is the de jure government, but defining the de facto is equally if not more important in defining this controversial state. Boris J. Cornelius (talk) 00:07, 9 December 2020 (UTC) Account has 11 edits, and is not eligible to vote in ARBPIA. Vici Vidi (talk) 07:13, 9 December 2020 (UTC) :It should be noted that these views are also represented elsewhere on Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boris J. Cornelius (talk • contribs) 00:24, 9 December 2020 (UTC) Account has 11 edits, and is not eligible to vote in ARBPIA. Vici Vidi (talk) 07:13, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 January 2021

It seems the result of this RfC is pretty clear, and it has been going on for two months already (24 votes for Yes vs 8 votes for No). Yes, Israel is a democracy (no need for additional qualifications, clarifications, objections or caveats). Now could someone please remove this tag from lede? Thanks--Watchlonly (talk) 21:10, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

To editor Watchlonly:  Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. Two things: 1) that RfC should be closed before the tag can be removed. As a participant it would be inappropriate for you to close it, and since you have involved me by leaving a request on my talk page, that disqualifies me from closing it. 2) the result of the RfC might seem to you to be "pretty clear"; however, Wikipedia is not a vote, which means that discussions are closed based upon the strength of the arguments and not the quantity of them, not the number of !votes. Hopefully, the outcome you want and expect will come to pass. May you and yours have the Happiest of New Years! P.I. Ellsworth  ed. put'r there 09:58, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Ok. I understand. But that RfC has been going on for over two months! It doesn't seem editors keep discussing about this. How does one close an RfC with such a clear majority (75%) in favour of maintaining the current version? I thought RfCs had expiration date automatically. Is this RfC still opened to begin with? Could you please ask an administrator to make the final ruling here and maybe remove the tag from lede? Thanks in advance.--Watchlonly (talk) 17:47, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
It's probably best to wait for a couple of weeks since the last comment to request closure. This page may help. - Daveout(talk) 18:19, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

 Done as ProcrastinatingReader has now closed the RfC in favour of the status quo. Jr8825 • Talk 13:09, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:"Infobox member of the Knesset"

Template:Infobox member of the Knesset has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox officeholder. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 02:05, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Reliablility of MidEastWeb

Is http://www.mideastweb.org/palpop.htm reliable? The introduction seems pretty POV to me. Firestar464 (talk) 10:25, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

No, it is a private blog. But replacing it by a reliable source was simple. Zerotalk 11:40, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Transport

Can this section be expanded? Maybe mention Haifa's Carmelit, the shortest metro/subway/underground in the world. Discuss future plans for the Tel Aviv Metropolitan area (Gush Dan), such as the light rail being built, and the future metro. Mention the port of Haifa. There are many things that can be done.--Impossiblegend (talk) 08:54, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Natalie Portman § "Neta-Lee Hershlag"

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Natalie Portman § "Neta-Lee Hershlag". Discussion related to her Hebrew birth name. Sundayclose (talk) 17:47, 6 February 2021 (UTC) Sundayclose (talk) 17:47, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Footnotes

@Watchlonly: Can you explain why you removed the footnotes in this diff [7]? They were added a month ago by Danloud and I think they are a good idea as they reduce clutter. The Hebrew and Arabic name is in the infobox on the right. It is perhaps inadvisable to take reverts of your edits personally. ImTheIP (talk) 02:11, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

It's not necessary. Parenthesis is too short and there's no need to make separate footnotes just for that. Most countries don't have footnotes for the original names anyway.--Watchlonly (talk) 16:20, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
As I wrote, it reduces clutter. And the information is in the sidebar on the right. At this point, me and Danloud think the footnotes are a good idea and you don't. So I suggest you stop edit warring. ImTheIP (talk) 16:54, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
I suggest you stop following me around. You know what I mean.--Watchlonly (talk) 18:02, 25 January 2021 (UTC)Blocked sock. Selfstudier (talk) 19:05, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Ysrael as redirect?

DONE
Redirects are free, and many names seem to start with Ysrael and not Israel so it seems very plausible to type in.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


In dealing with speakers of English in the Philippines, it appears that the spelling Ysrael is sometimes used in various contexts, including those to the Modern state of Israel. Given that Yisrael is a redirect to this page, does anyone have an issue with adding Ysrael as a redirect?Naraht (talk) 13:40, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Done. Sir Joseph (talk) 18:32, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Please assist with new article about leaked Zarif audiotape

Leaked Mohammad Javad Zarif audiotape Thank you The Kingfisher (talk) 21:07, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 May 2021

It is incorrectly stated that 'Jerusalem' is the capital of Israel. This can cause much confusion as the correct capital of Israel is 'West Jerusalem' where 'East Jerusalem' is the capital of Palestine. 82.46.82.216 (talk) 04:13, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Read the footnote on that entry in the infobox. --OuroborosCobra (talk) 04:13, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:57, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Largest cities of Israel

Template:Largest cities of Israel which is used in this article has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 May 17#Template:Largest cities of Israel. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 21:09, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Should the West Bank be marked as a disputed/controlling territory?

Israel has occupied the West Bank since the six-day war and it has established many settlements in certain parts of the region. I believe it should be marked as a disputed territory in a light green color similar to other territorial disputes like North/South Korea. This move is not meant for any political reasons or acknowledged of one side over the other but simply to better reflect the current situation. Albert257 (talk) 02:17, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Please propose a specific map, because last time everyone supported that notion but the discussion was closed with no action. Sokuya (talk) 21:39, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 June 2021

Remove Arabic as according to Israeli law Hebrew is the official language. 71.173.75.168 (talk) 18:39, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

No, we won't be doing that. The article says Hebrew is the official language; Arabic has "special status", whatever that means, but it is spoken by more than 20% of the population. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 19:00, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Israel/Archive_78&oldid=1255287792"