Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, January/February
2004, pages 18-19
Special Report
Love and Marriage in Israel: Palestinian and Non-Orthodox
Israelis Need Not Apply
 |
 |
At their 1997 Orthodox Jewish wedding
Moishe Katz walks in front of his bride Macle, granddaughter
of Rabbi Moshe Yehoshoa Hager, spiritual leader of the Vishnitz
dynasty. Despite the fact that many Israeli Jews believe the
ketuba, or Orthodox marriage contract, discriminates against
women, no other marriage ceremony performed in Israel is recognized
as legal (photo credit Sven Nackstrand/STF). |
| |
|
By Suraya Dadoo
IN FEBRUARY of last year, Gili and Sagi, a young Israeli couple,
were “married” at sea—a marriage not legally recognized by the State
of Israel. Although both are Jewish, the couple objected to the
only marriage option open to them in Israel: an Orthodox Jewish
ceremony. Instead, they chose a marriage contract they drew up together
with a lawyer, thus rendering their union illegal.
On the other side of the divide, Aneesa, an Arab Israeli who holds
a Jerusalem ID, married a Jordanian three years ago. “Because he
also carries a Gaza identity card, he is not allowed in Jerusalem,”
said Aneesa. “Forget getting his own Jerusalem ID—he is not even
allowed to visit here.”
She cannot remember the last time she saw her husband.
For all their seeming differences, the two couples have one thing
in common: unhappiness with current Israeli marriage laws. For,
while touted as the only “democracy” in the Middle East, Israel
does not offer its citizens the option of civil marriage. Since
1953, the only marriages recognized as legal by the Jewish state
are Orthodox Jewish marriages, and civil marriages performed outside
Israel. While it does not prohibit interfaith and other religious
marriages, Israel does not recognize them as legal unions.
Aneesa’s problem stems from a new law passed by the Israeli Knesset
in July which prohibits Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza
Strip who marry Israeli Palestinians from obtaining residency permits
and/or citizenship in Israel. Anyone else who marries an Israeli,
however, is entitled to Israeli citizenship. Under the new law,
only Palestinians are excluded from obtaining citizenship or residency.
This means that “Arab Israelis”—about 20 percent of the Israeli
population—who marry Palestinians from the West Bank or Gaza Strip
must choose between moving to the occupied territories, or living
apart from their spouse, as is the case with Aneesa. Children will
be affected, too: after the age of 12 they will be denied citizenship
or residency and forced to move out of Israel.
According to Palestinian-American political activist Ali Abunimah,
the new marriage laws are aimed at limiting the number of Palestinians
with Israeli citizenship and, consequently, political and economic
rights within Israel. Abunimah’s claims were given substance when,
in June of last year, Maj. Gen. Uzi Dayan, chairman of Israel’s
National Security Council, claimed that by 2020 Arabs in Israel
and the Palestinian areas would outnumber Jews by 55 to 45 percent.
Israeli Knesset member Zehava Gal-On called the new law “racist
and discriminatory.” International human rights groups such as Human
Rights Watch and Amnesty International also have condemned the law
as racist, and it has even been compared to apartheid-era South
African laws that banned interracial marriages.
The Israeli government contends that such a law is necessary for
security reasons, while advocates of the current marriage laws claim
they are necessary to preserve Jewish identity and life. Some analysts,
however, have suggested that the new laws pertaining to Palestinian
marriages reflect a sense of panic in some sections of Israeli society
over demographic research that suggests that Jews—as recognized
by the Orthodox rabbinate—could be in a minority in Israel within
30 years.
Israeli government representatives, however, deny this. According
to Daniel Pinhasi, first secretary at the Israeli Embassy in South
Africa, Israeli law does not favor any one religion or group. Pinhasi
claims that in addition to marriages performed by religious office
holders (Christian, Muslim, Jewish and others equally), Israeli
law recognizes other associations—from civil marriages performed
abroad, to agreements facilitated by “authorized” persons in Israel,
to arrangements between same-sex partners. According to Pinhasi,
“the current situation reflects the unique combination of tradition
and modernity to be found in Israel.”
Not everyone agrees with that argument, however. According to
Rabbi Charles Wallach, executive director of the South African Union
for Progressive Judaism (SAUPJ), “there are many ordinary Israelis
who see the traditional words and documents used as not speaking
to them. The growing equality between men and women needs to have
expression, and it is that that many ordinary Israelis miss.”
Wallach’s words ring true when one considers the statistics: between
1975 and 1996 Israel’s Jewish population grew by 57 percent, but
that same period saw a decline of 2 percent in the number of Jewish
couples who married under the Orthodox Rabbinate.
Gili and Sagi are typical examples of this trend. As they explained
to Israeli TV and the press, they firmly objected to the Orthodox
Jewish marriage ceremony and what they perceived as discrimination
against the rights of the woman in the ketuba, the Orthodox
marriage contract. Not wishing to have any association with the
Orthodox Rabbinate, the couple drew up their own marriage contract.
Their symbolic, protest “marriage” on board a ship at sea was organized
by the Forum for Freedom of Choice in Marriage, which is managed
by Hemdat, the Council for Freedom of Religion in Israel.
Zamira Segev, Hemdat’s executive director and coordinator of the
Forum, described Gili and Sagi’s “civil marriage” ceremony as “a
protest against the sad reality that there are no options in Israel
for civil marriage by couples who prefer that form of marriage….It
is sad indeed that we must resort to this form of media event to
let the public know about this serious denial of basic civil rights
in Israeli society,” she added.
The Orthodox monopoly over marriage and divorce violates Israel’s
Declaration of Independence, as well as the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights.
The lobby group Israel Religious Action Center (IRAC), in collaboration
with other grassroots organizations, pioneered the drafting of a
constitutional freedom of religion bill, which included the right
to civil and non-Orthodox marriage and divorce. That bill recently
was rejected by the Knesset.
According to IRAC, the Orthodox monopoly over marriage and divorce
violates Israel’s Declaration of Independence protecting freedom
of religion, as well as the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, to which Israel is a signatory. Article 23 of
the Covenant declares that men and women have the right to marry
and to found a family, and are entitled to equal rights with regard
to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution. According to
IRAC, Israel’s current marriage laws do not allow for this, and
Israeli Jews wanting a non-Orthodox religious ceremony simply have
no recourse.
Responding to claims that the current situation in Israel discriminates
against non-Orthodox Jews, Rabbi Cyril Harris, chief rabbi of South
Africa’s Union of Orthodox Synagogues (UOS), argued that it is “important
to differentiate between the view of the secularist who wishes no
restrictions, and the Orthodox who wish to perpetuate the laws of
Judaism as given in the Torah. Hence the answer is dependent on
one’s view of Israel as a truly Jewish state.”
In Harris’ opinion, Israel should adhere to traditional norms.
Traditional norms, however, have called into question the religious
affiliation of a significant percentage of Israeli society. The
last decade has witnessed massive immigration into the Jewish state—mostly
from the former Soviet Union. Of this group, citizens without a
religion constitute a large number. It is estimated that, of the
800,000 new immigrants from the former Soviet Union whohave come
to Israel since 1989, approximately 30 percent are not Jewish by
Orthodox standards, according to Chief Rabbinate and Interior Ministry
sources.
Demographic research suggests that this trend is accelerating.
According to Sergio Della Pergola, head of the Institute of Contemporary
Jewry at the Hebrew University in Israel, of the 30,000 immigrants
from Eastern Europe, the former Soviet Union and South America who
arrived in Israel last year, over half of those arriving under the
1950 Law of Return were not considered Jewish according to halacha,
or Orthodox rabbinical law.
The rules on marriage are enforced by Israel’s small, but influential,
Orthodox community. Drawing on Old Testament statutes, these rabbis
argue that God recognizes only Jewish marriages conducted according
to Orthodox tradition. With secular and liberal Jews now constituting
a majority of the Israeli population, the situation has become increasingly
problematic.
According to halakhic law, a marriage can be terminated
in two ways: the death of a spouse, or the issuing of a get (divorce).
A husband can, in principle, refuse indefinitely to give a get,
meaning his wife cannot remarry or have children. In addition, childless
widows wishing to remarry must first obtain a ritual release from
the brother of their deceased husband (levirate marriage).
A large segment of Israel’s population—particularly its youth—perceive
the current marriage laws as religious coercion. According to IRAC
reports, 25 percent of all Israeli young couples seek, and find,
alternative forms of union. These include refraining from marriage
altogether, conducting unrecognized private religious ceremonies,
or traveling abroad for a civil marriage.
One in five Israeli couples reportedly choose the last option,
creating a niche market for travel agents, who now offer marriage
packages. Most couples fly to nearby Cyprus, then register their
marriages with the Israeli government upon their return.
It is not surprising that Israel’s determination to be a “Jewish
state” results in discrimination against its non-Jewish Palestinian
citizens—who presumably can marry and raise a family with anyone
not from the occupied territories without having to abandon their
home. Even more bizarrely, however—assuming that a Jewish state
would seek to accommodate all Jews—those who were born in Israel
or who, born abroad, have the “right” to return there do not necessarily
have the right to legally marry there.
To paraphrase George Orwell, in Israel some Jews apparently are
more equal than others. All, however, are more equal than the Palestinians
on whose land they live.
Suraya Dadoo is a researcher with Media Review Network (<www.mediareviewnet.com>),
an advocacy group based in Pretoria, South Africa. |