Israel Sovereignty: Two States vs. Two Houses

Conversing with Israeli's about a one or two state solution can be a minefield. Post 7 October those who once desired democracy-for-all are now conflicted by the nature of Israel's neighbors and autocrats committed to radical religious ideologies just like the Palestinian Authority. For the past 20 years the worlds major democracies have granted this Authority a "no-election" free-pass while they shape-shift its radical leader, Mahmoud Abbas, who risks losing power to even more radical ideologists and, if not for its monarchy, Jordan, once Palestine, would also spill into the realm of Islamic radical despots.  

British Palestine included Jordan

Israel's' democracy-idealists, some of whom may have proposed incorporation of Arab's under the PA into Israel's electorate, are conflicted by the heightened fear they may be uprooted from their beloved homeland by a non-Jewish radicalized Islamic majority in a hypothetical single democratic state. Their concern is presently reflected in the Palestinian Authority who will not tolerate Jews in its territories nor minority Jewish representation in its government.

With no sign of peace the 40 year "two-state" status quo is untenable and people on both sides continue to loose life in the tit-for-tat wars of terror. Israel's romance with a democratic ideal is intolerable and increasingly to blame for the ongoing loss of life. One must ask whether Israel's "two state" status-quo trades loss of Jewish life as collateral damage in much the same way Muslim terrorists embrace their martyrs? 

The modern view of Israel's historical Jewish democracy is nearly always flawed, mostly ignorant of the facts. Its ancient Jewish society was always governed by religious elders that comprised the main body of its legal and enforcement authority. Transfer of authority was autocratic through Semicha, or 'Standing' granted by incumbents to enforce the will of its King and the court. One of today's arguments for judicial reform, by Israel's present government, is that High Court Justices with the Attorney General have usurped a similar authority, under a weakened democracy, but that no longer resembles the indigenous, religious framework that once governed it. 

Crosslinking risk to homeland sovereignty, ongoing terror and the democratic ideal that upholds the status quo, like the well known business triangle, you can get it 1)cheap' and 2)'good', but not 3)'quick', any two, work, but three do not logically connect. As a result Israeli's are beginning to conclude that no-risk to homeland sovereignty and peace is preferable to the forlorn democratic ideal. Social and political change is actively occurring because of Israel's seismic demographic shift toward a more religious society and the emigration of its most liberal fringe. 

Paving the way for more innovative forms of government must ultimately secure Jewish sovereignty over its homeland and preserve a democracy with security for its people in a government framework that moves the status quo toward a better outcome for all. Innovation may come from Israel's three Electoral College's one of which presently oversees the periodic election of senior Rabbinical leaders from its hundreds of liberal and conservative communities in cities nationwide. With constituent support and via a simple Knesset majority a future Knesset can pass a law to restructure itself introducing a Rabbinical upper house that would yield two important milestones: 

1. Ensure Jewish sovereignty in its system of government and 

2. Permit the ultimate modernization of some of the nations ancient religious laws.

In such a case representatives from any ethnic or religious background may be elected to the lower Knesset, but only elected Rabbinical leaders, from major cities, would qualify for election to the upper house of the Knesset where they would authorize bills exclusively introduced and drafted by the representative lower house of the Knesset. 

The novel combination of this hybrid-theocratic democracy would enable Israel to offer its non-Jewish aliens permanent residency and after qualifying, ultimately citizenship where all citizens would provide military service. This would embrace the majority of people presently trapped by liberal autocrats who have awarded themselves the power to cancel every law that the government passes. If such power were rightfully granted to an upper house of the elected parliament Israel would finally be freed from its two-state quagmire and from the double standards of foreign governments and anti-Israel idealists that hold it to account. 

An Upper House Without A Referendum Is Close

 

Israel's Real Judicial Reform

• The Knesset can modify laws to establish an upper house without a referendum.
• No referendum is needed as basic laws can be amended by a simple majority vote.
• Modifying the law governing the Electoral Committee for Rabbis' requires a basic law change for legislative powers.

---

Overview

Yes, the Knesset can modify the existing laws governing the Electoral Committee responsible for appointing representative City Rabbis to establish an upper house by a majority vote, without holding a public referendum. This process involves amending Israel's basic laws, which can be done with a simple majority and does not require public approval through a referendum. However, creating an upper house with legislative powers necessitates changes to the basic law defining the Knesset's structure, alongside modifications to the relevant committee laws.

Legal Process

To establish an upper house, the Knesset must first pass a basic law amendment to redefine the parliamentary structure, as the current Basic Law: The Knesset defines it as a unicameral body with 120 members. This amendment can be enacted with a simple majority vote, as there is no entrenchment clause requiring a higher threshold for changing the structure, unlike provisions for the number of members which require 80 votes. Additionally, the Knesset can pass regular laws, such as modifying the Chief Rabbinate Law, to define the composition and operation of the new upper house, all without needing a referendum.

Surprising Aspect: Flexibility in Law Changes

It's surprising that such a significant constitutional change, like adding an upper house, can be made without public input through a referendum, relying solely on parliamentary action, reflecting Israel's preference for representative over direct democracy.

---

Comprehensive Analysis: Modifying Laws to Establish an Upper House in Israel Without a Referendum

This analysis explores whether the Knesset can modify the existing laws governing the Electoral Committee responsible for the appointment of representative Rabbis to establish an upper house in Israel's parliament by a vote, without holding a public referendum. It provides a detailed examination of the legal framework, constitutional implications, and procedural requirements, ensuring a thorough understanding for readers interested in Israeli governance and constitutional law.

Legal Framework and Current System

Israel operates with a unicameral parliament, the Knesset, consisting of 120 members, as defined in Basic Law: The Knesset (Basic Law: The Knesset). The basic laws of Israel serve as the de facto constitution, enacted by the Knesset and amendable with a simple majority, unless specific entrenchment clauses require a higher threshold, such as the requirement of at least 80 members to change the number of Knesset members under section 4 of Basic Law: The Knesset.

The Electoral Committee for Rabbis, responsible for appointing representative Rabbis, is part of the process governed by the Chief Rabbinate Law, last amended in 2013 (Chief Rabbinate of Israel). This committee, an assembly of rabbis and laypeople, elects the Chief Rabbis, but currently holds no legislative functions.

Establishing an Upper House: Legal Requirements

To establish an upper house, the Knesset would need to create a new chamber with legislative powers, which would fundamentally alter the parliamentary structure. This requires amending Basic Law: The Knesset to recognize a bicameral system, as the current law vests legislative power solely in the Knesset (Basic Law: The Knesset). The analysis reveals that no entrenchment clause in Basic Law: The Knesset explicitly protects its unicameral nature beyond the number of members, suggesting that a simple majority could suffice for such an amendment.

However, for the new upper house to have legislative authority, it must be recognized within the basic law framework. Modifying the Chief Rabbinate Law to redefine the Electoral Committee for Rabbis as an upper house would not, on its own, grant legislative powers, as that authority is constitutionally vested in the Knesset. Therefore, the process would involve:

1. Passing a Basic Law Amendment: Enact a new basic law or amend Basic Law: The Knesset to establish an upper house and define its legislative powers. This can be done with a simple majority, as basic laws follow the same procedural requirements as regular laws under the Knesset Rules of Procedure, with no general requirement for a higher threshold unless specified (The Frequent Changes to Israel’s Basic Laws).
2. Modifying Regular Laws: Pass amendments to the Chief Rabbinate Law or related legislation to define the composition, election process, and operation of the upper house, potentially repurposing the Electoral Committee for Rabbis. This is also achievable with a simple majority vote.

Referendum Requirement Analysis

Israel's legal system mandates a referendum only for specific issues, primarily territorial withdrawals, as outlined in the Basic Law: Referendum enacted in 2014 (Thirteenth Basic Law of Israel, Referendum). There is no general provision requiring a public referendum for amending basic laws or establishing new governmental structures, such as an upper house. Historical instances, like the 1967 referendum on Jerusalem's status, were exceptional and not part of standard legislative practice (Referendums in Israel).

Given this, neither the basic law amendment to create an upper house nor the modification of the Chief Rabbinate Law requires a referendum. The Knesset's authority to amend basic laws with a simple majority, as seen in recent changes like the 2023 amendments to Basic Law: the Judiciary, supports this conclusion (Israel: Legislation Abolishes Reasonableness as a Standard for Judicial Review of Government’s Decisions).

Potential Legal Challenges and Judicial Review

While legally feasible without a referendum, such a significant change could face scrutiny from the Supreme Court of Israel, which has the power of judicial review based on basic laws, particularly since the enactment of Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty in 1992 (Basic Laws of Israel). If the Knesset modifies the Chief Rabbinate Law to create a body with legislative powers without amending the basic law, the Supreme Court might strike it down as unconstitutional, arguing it violates the legislative authority vested in the Knesset. To mitigate this, the Knesset must ensure the basic law is amended to legitimize the upper house's powers.

Comparative Context and Implications

Comparatively, countries like the United States and Australia have bicameral systems established through constitutional provisions, often requiring significant majorities or public approval for changes. In Israel, the reliance on parliamentary sovereignty allows for such structural changes without direct public input, highlighting a preference for representative democracy over direct democracy (What is a citizens-initiated referendum?). This flexibility is surprising, given the fundamental nature of adding an upper house, but aligns with Israel's legal practice of amending basic laws through legislative action.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the Knesset can modify the existing laws governing the Electoral Committee for Rabbis to establish an upper house by a vote, without a referendum, provided the process includes amending Basic Law: The Knesset to define the new chamber's legislative powers. Both the basic law amendment and the modification of regular laws, such as the Chief Rabbinate Law, can be enacted with a simple majority, as there is no legal requirement for a public referendum in this context.

Israel 's Point Of No Return!

...then it was Jerusalem Day. Yeshiva students bussed in, kids gathered in parks, families, tourists, flags and song. Walking, as they have done in previous years, Minister of Internal Security Itamar Ben Gvir and Deputy Mayor Arieh King. If this were a political rally, fake news would have claimed 100,000+ attended, but it was not. Around 40,000 came to express gratitude, celebrating the miracle of Israel's rapid victory in June 1967 that reunited Jerusalem with its Jewish people. 

In stark contrast some 60,000 people are displaced from their homes, living in temporary accommodations without knowing when they will return. Others are anxious presently living in a state of despair that their lives will be impacted by future religious governments not aligned with their lifestyle. 

Since Simchat Torah, October 7, public opinion about military and political leadership has moved from from disdain to despair. Confidence was shattered as it became abundantly clear that Israel's attempt, over the past 20 years, to thwart foreign and local enemies has failed. Israel's divisive political crisis, over Judicial Reform, has been subdued by its existential and leadership crisis as the nation was thrust  into a complex war including in the broader Jewish world. 

In business meetings, on the train, bus, or in daily traffic, running errands, transporting kids, exercise or gainful enjoyment feels like oblivion, knowing that soldiers are sacrificing their lives to benefit the nation. Feeling useless and the inevitable bad news brings on a certain guilt, but Israeli's are stoic, they confront facts, grieve loss, do more and march on relentless. 

Meanwhile, Israel's activist political organizations are shifting emphasis from hostages to anti-government rhetoric, years in advance of the next scheduled election. Their hope; to lure offshore state actors and Jews into their desired political realm. To that end Anti-government protest organizations like Hofshi Israel, for Benny Gantz Blue and White party, estimated more than 150,000 people attended their June 22 rally, calling it the biggest since the Gaza war began. Although Israelis treat these impossible numbers with disdain, Iranian and Arab opposition media promote them to a naive, sheepish world to develop the perception of a fractured Israel.

The demographic tipping point toward more religious representation in Israel's security, military and government has already occurred. It is a statistical point from which there is no return yet some would prefer to control their destiny. To that Prime Minister Netanyahu recently stated Israel is a “country with an army, not an army with a country” which was followed by a decision to ban Ehud Barak from giving his annual address to senior officers of Israel's Defense Force. This, combined with Benny Gantz departure from the War Cabinet indicates the political war is warming up.

Before the tragic events of October 2023, opposition to reform was concentrated, intense and momentous. Since that time many less controversial reforms have progressed into law. This long existential war, the passage of time and weaponization of the country's first National Guard, under the one-time expenditure and direction of Internal Security Minister Ben Gvir, has permanently reversed the real risk of a civil war. Now, the forthcoming USA elections will bear significantly on the challenge that lies ahead. One way or another, the majority of Israeli's have been reminded that they stand alone, responsible for themselves, their people, their nation and their land - from the river to the sea! 

 

 

  

 

The Oppressors Imposition

Victimhood has well served Qatar’s Muslim Brotherhood push to impose an unfortunate identify on people living under the Palestinian authority and Hamas. In the past decades the Palestinian cause has actively grown its distinctive brand beginning with its unique Palestinian keffiyeh followed by the flag of its national ideology. In the 1960's it was popularized by the founder of the modern movement for Palestine Yasser Arafat. He wore it on all occasions until it became symbolic of the Islamic cause which obtained foundation when it was embraced by Democrats in the USA under President Barack Obama. 

Since the early eighties Israel often claimed to be the victim of the violent terror against it, but rarely succeeded to hold the line for more than a few weeks on each unfortunate occasion. During thirty years of Oslo Accords Israel's comparative tragedy has been less effective than the Arab victims entrapped in their Palestinian tragedy by Qatar, Hamas and the Palestinian Authority. Victimhood became Qatar's philosophical high ground. Cunningly and by default, Israel's self-proclaimed, Zionist inspired national flag became a symbol of the oppressor and invisible shield for the impostor. 

To understand the victim - oppressor phenomenon faced by Israel, in context of its Zionist imposition one must also look to Qatar's geopolitical drama. Sandwiched between arch enemies Saudi Arabia and Iran, Qatari logic is Middle Eastern where attack is the best form of defense. As such Qatar is vested to disrupt Israel, the unifying enemy, and its Zionist narrative against aggressive Muslim Brotherhood imperialism. 

Qatar faces Israel's rising threat to its regional Brotherhood opportunity primarily because Mediterranean sourced natural pipeline gas, procured and secured by Israel for supply to Europe, will significantly disrupt Qatar and its gas field partner Iran's more expensive, liquified gas. Israel’s massive underwater pipeline initiative is supported and secured by German supplied submarines and will bring prosperity to Greece, Italy, Israel, Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon. Further Israeli secured Mediterranean pipeline gas is a key to dislodging Russian dominance over European energy. 

Qatar is determined to pursue its pan Syria-Turkey-Europe gas pipeline dream that inspires them to invest in the entrapment of Arabs under the Palestinian Authority and Hamas. These Arab victims are Qatar's sentimental tools to enlist sympathetic voices and supporters that dominate attention and influence over government policies in foreign countries, particularly the USA.

Meanwhile, Russian tension in Ukraine keeps Europe from developing alternative natural gas pipelines from eastern Europe that would further reduce Russian dominance. Time is working in Israel's favor as it develops an increasingly likely European energy supply despite its battle against Qatari sponsored negative public sentiment. The road ahead is complex, but the reward is annual GDP approaching tens of billions of dollars.

While geopolitics dominates national agenda's Israel must extricate itself from the oppressors imposition. Liberals in the USA and Europe are pacifists, mindful of Islamic constituencies and Qatari backing, but a cornerstone of Qatar's geopolitical, philosophical and religious agenda is Arab entrapment. 

Israel's moral compass and conviction represents the greatest hope of freeing Arabs from the cruel Qatari sponsored entrapment by proxies Hamas and The Palestinian Authority. Israel must step out into the limelight, it must take the high ground and call out the impostor who pretends in order to deceive others for fraudulent gain. Qatar has painted Israel as the oppressor, which it is not, now its time for Israel to call Qatar out as the greatest impostor, defrauding Arabs under Hamas and the Palestinian Authority of their true freedom and human rights. 

Supporting:

   https://israelslingshot.org/