Citizenship in the Middle East
[Guest post by DRJ]
Egypt signed a peace treaty with Israel in 1979 but it seems Egyptians are still reluctant to accept Israelis:
“A court in Cairo has upheld a ruling urging the government to consider stripping of their citizenship Egyptian men who are married to Israeli women.
The ruling requires officials to send all such cases to the cabinet, to be decided on an individual basis.”
The law is based on national security and impacts the entire family, including any children. For comparison purposes, commentators claimed it was racist and discriminatory when Israel blocked Palestinians married to Israelis from becoming Israeli citizens or residents for security reasons.
If it’s racist to refuse immigrants by marriage the right to residency, what does that make an Egyptian law that strips its own people of citizenship?
— DRJ
I’d imagine being stripped of Egyptian citizenship is a wonderful thing what opens up a world of possibilities. It’d be like finding a cure of herpes or chronic halitosis.
happyfeet (682797) — 6/5/2010 @ 5:03 pmwhat does that make an Egyptian law that strips its own people of citizenship
Consistent with the fact that Anwar Sadat wanted peace, not so much the rest of Egypt.
MD in Philly (cb8efe) — 6/5/2010 @ 5:15 pmCan’t they be citizens of more than one country like our dirty socialist president?
daleyrocks (1d0d98) — 6/5/2010 @ 5:39 pmReagan thought turnabout was fair play and limited embassy total personel to the number allowed in the other country namely russia.The israelis could strip citizenship of muslims who marry egyptians.The last thing they need is more of thier own citizens dedicated to a judenfree near east.
clyde (652ae4) — 6/5/2010 @ 6:07 pmjudenfree
Look, if you want to slip in sly references to the Nazis at least use the correct term. Judenrein.
stari_momak (09acb3) — 6/5/2010 @ 6:43 pmThe Camp David peace treaty was a farce from day 1. As Sadat said at the time, “Poor Menachem, I got the whole Sinai, and the Alma oil fields, and all he got was a piece of paper”. It was entirely one-sided; Israel gave away invaluable territory, both in terms of a buffer zone against attack and in terms of natural resources, committed a crime against its own citizens who had settled in the Sinai by dragging them away from their homes, and got absolutely nothing in return. The “peace” with Egypt has been no better than the “war” with Syria; both borders are quiet, but both must be defended in case of attack, because only a fool would trust that Egypt won’t tear up the treaty the moment it becomes inconvenient. In fact, Sadat said openly that his treaties with other Arab countries come first!
Israelis can visit Egypt as tourists and spend their money there, but they meet a hostile reception, and meanwhile almost no Egyptians come to Israel. And without the Camp David treaty the entire Gaza situation would not be happening, because there would be no Egypt on the other side of the tunnels, from which weapons could be smuggled. Nor would there be terrorist infiltrations through the Egyptian border, as there have been regularly (though it’s hushed up in the press).
And the worst thing is that in return for giving up the Sinai and its resources, Carter promised Israel a steady stream of aid, to which Israel has become addicted. (Meanwhile Egypt was promised a matching amount for deigning to accept the Sinai and its resources!) And this money has become the means for the USA to blackmail Israel and treat it as a sort of colony or vassal.
So no, Sadat the former Nazi was not a man of peace, and the treaty was a terrible deal for Israel.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 6/5/2010 @ 7:04 pmJudenrein
stari – Look, if you want to criticize another commenter for an appropriate choice of a word, make clear why your choice of a different word is better. Not everyone here pretends to be an intellectual, but judenfrei and judenrein are equally acceptable under the circumstances, acknowledging the different connotations. Who gives a rip if Netanyahu is rumored to have used the latter.
Sophistry is not a valued commodity on this blog. YMMV.
daleyrocks (1d0d98) — 6/5/2010 @ 7:08 pmWould be interesting to know – what percentage of these Israeli women are of arab heritage
EricPWJohnson (cedf1d) — 6/5/2010 @ 7:22 pmLook, if you want to slip in sly references to the Nazis at least use the correct term. Judenrein.
Surprised??? No, but what other than rubbish can be expected from the type of person who would compare Republicans to Nazis without blinking an eye, but would miss the obvious comparison here.
GeneralMalaise (8de279) — 6/5/2010 @ 7:37 pmThere’s nothing “sly” about the Nazi reference. The plain cold sober fact is that a judenrein Middle East is what the Arabs want. But no need to rip into #4 for blanking on the exact term. It’s not on the tip of everyone’s tongue.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 6/5/2010 @ 8:17 pmMilhouse – I disagree. There’s a difference in connotation between the terms, but both are acceptable. Pure pedantry to come here and criticize another commenter for his word choice. We’ve seen this type many times before.
daleyrocks (1d0d98) — 6/5/2010 @ 9:09 pmIslamic?
highpockets (cf4a2b) — 6/5/2010 @ 9:18 pm#8 hard to give an answer as you ask it, but about 20% of the Israel population are considered Arab (which is not quit the same as being of ‘Arab heritage’) and it could very well be all of them. The issue is also no doubt confused by the Bedouin Arabs who have culture which extends into both countries.
max (2f2a28) — 6/6/2010 @ 12:03 pmhalitosis or bad breath can be combated by using those moutwashes or gargles with antibacterials like hexetidine'”:
Amp Accessories (5c50cc) — 10/19/2010 @ 5:00 amwell a nice diplomatic said…
Gulf Jobs Vacancies (9720d7) — 3/28/2011 @ 4:51 am