Palestinian Citizens Divided Over Participation in Israeli Knesset Elections

Palestinian citizens within Israel are experiencing a deep division regarding participation in Israeli Knesset elections, grappling with issues of violence, crime, and internal discord. While normally participation is encouraged for citizens to elect representatives and voice demands, the current reality is starkly different. Proponents of participation cite the need to address the specific demands of the Arab community, alongside national and political issues. Conversely, those who boycott the elections view it as a political right exercised based on their ideological convictions, independent of engaging with other participating parties.

Professor Ibrahim Abu Jaber, acting head of the Al-Wafa and Reform Party, outlines the constants and variables in Knesset elections, urging an objective analysis devoid of emotion. Key constants include the principle of the state's Jewish identity, as affirmed by the Declaration of Independence and the 2018 Nation-State Law. Centrality of security in Israeli doctrine is another constant, reflected in massive budgets allocated to the military and security agencies, which are non-negotiable. The Knesset is also identified as a factory for discriminatory laws, citing examples like land laws, the Nation-State Law, and laws permitting the demolition of Arab homes or the execution of Palestinian prisoners.

Furthermore, a constant is the rejection of establishing a Palestinian state and the right to self-determination, leading to increased settlement expansion and Judaization of occupied territories. Abu Jaber argues that participation can lead to a "fluid identity," gradually eroding core principles and fostering dual identities. He also contends that participation mixes the constant with the variable, as engagement in government institutions can distract participants with daily service issues, causing them to lose sight of fundamental ideological principles. This participation, especially within a governing coalition, can dilute identity and belonging, forcing compromises on core issues to gain acceptance from the ruling majority.

He further asserts that participants will only achieve "fragile gains," temporary and easily reversible, rather than substantial, permanent achievements. Full partnership in coalitions, even by providing a safety net for the government, implicates participants in actions like military campaigns, discriminatory legislation, political persecution, home demolitions, and continued settlement activity. Abu Jaber concludes by calling for national unity around the Higher Follow-up Committee, adherence to the people's constants, and avoidance of unproductive media battles to preserve identity and belonging.