DOCSLIB.ORG

BG Cover Israeli Knesset

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
BG Cover Israeli Knesset WMHSMUN XXXIV First Israeli Knesset 1949 Background Guide “Unprecedented committees. Unparalleled debate. Unmatched fun.” Letter From the Director Dear Delegates, My name is Kate Hentz, and I am ecstatic to be your director for The First Israeli Knesset. I am a sophomore at the College majoring in International Relations, and I hope to minor in Arabic Studies. I’m from the tiny town of Lexington, Virginia, where I was a member of Model UN since my freshman year of high school. In high school, I traveled to multiple college conferences and directed committees at our own conference. Since I joined the International Relations Club, I have been a rapporteur at WMHSMUN, our high school conference, a director for WMIDMUN, a director for &MUN, a member of the &MUN Secretariat, and now your director for WMHSMUN. This will be my first time directing in a high school conference, and I cannot wait to direct this amazing committee. Outside of Model UN, I am a member of Amnesty International and a social sorority on campus. In my free time, you can find me practicing Arabic in local coffee shops, sleeping on the Sunken Gardens, and buying absurd amounts of cheese at the Cheese Shop. I want to remind all of you that this is a learning experience for everyone. WMHSMUN is the perfect place to learn about diplomacy, parliamentary procedure, International Relations, and current events. An online conference will not be easy, but we’re all in this together. When preparing for this conference, I encourage all of you to research your legislator’s party and position on each topic because they will differ from each other. In Model UN, you must represent the position you have taken, not your own opinions. I am very interested in the first Israeli Knesset because it set the stage for one of the most tumultuous conflicts that continues to be on the news today. Furthermore, it is full of large political figures all with different positions and agendas for Israel. Thank you all for joining this committee; I cannot wait to see your solutions to these issues in October! Kate Hentz [email protected] Background Guide – First Israeli Knesset 1949 Introduction In February of 1949, as the War of Independence was coming to an end, a body of 120 newly elected legislators convened to discuss the future of the first government of Israel. The legislative body functioned as a unicameral parliament, where multiple parties selected their representatives to propose laws that lined up with their beliefs. In a parliamentary legislature, where no single party holds a majority, parties form coalitions to push their similar agendas into amendments. However, in 1949 party members were not pushing for amendments and new laws, but the actions and policies of a new country on the world stage (The Knesset: History & Overview). In the First Israeli Knesset there were multiple parties that saw different futures for the country of Israel. The largest party faction was the Mapai Party. The Mapai party believed in a government’s active role in the citizen’s life by providing social services such as workers’ aid, health funds, youth movements, and a strong education system. In order to maintain a majority, the Mapai party formed a coalition with the United Religious Front, the Progressive Party, the Sephardim and Oriental Communities and the Arab minority list (Mapai). The United Religious Front was the third largest party and stressed Judaisim’s significant involvement in the government’s decisions and citizen’s lives (United Religious Front). The Progressive Party focused on socio-economic issues, such as their support for private enterprise, and the separation of church and state (Progressive Party). Similar to the Progressive Party, the Sephardim and Oriental Communities believed in private enterprise, a secular state, property rights, and a capitalist economy (Sephardim and Oriental Communities). In opposition to this coalition, was the Mapam Party, the second largest party, and collection of smaller parties that held few seats. The Mapam Party pushed for a Marxist economy and favored Arab rights and their protection from increasing Israeli settlements (Mapam). Although many expect parties in the same coalitions to agree on many issues it is important to remember that they often substantially disagree on a number of issues regarding the creation of a new government. For example, The Mapai Party’s coalition may be predominantly right winged in their political beliefs, but the coalition is full of differing opinions on religion’s role in the government (Mapai). However, in the year 1949, the Knesset members must not only focus on their view of their government’s 2 Background Guide – First Israeli Knesset 1949 fundamentals, but the immediate issues their country is facing after the War of Independence. Before they can decide the fate of a new constitution, they must immediately respond to the pressing issues of Arab refugee crisis and the new surge of immigration. Topic 1: The War of Independence Aftermath and Palestinian Rights In May of 1948, despite the continuation of the War of Independence, Israel declared its independence. As a result, fighting intensified in the region as surrounding Arab countries invaded Palestinian land to fight off Israeli forces. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians fled their homes and villages to neighboring countries to avoid the violence (Jones and Bickerton). As Israel forces continued to gain momentum, they burned many of the villages they came across to encourage further Arab expulsion and gain strategic land for the war. By the end of 1948 close to 700,000 Palestinians were displaced and 160,000 remained in Palestinian land (Timeline). In February of 1949, Israel signed an armistice with surrounding Arab nations, such as Egypt and Lebanon, and obtained the majority of Palestinian land in dispute. In accordance with the armistice, Jordan gained occupation of the West Bank and Egypt gained control of the Gaza Strip. Therefore, many Palestinians continued to take flight to the refugee camps lining their borders. The world witnessed the massive refugee crisis and the United Nations took action as refugee camps became severely overcrowded. In Resolution 194, the United Nations urged Israel to allow refugees to come back to their homes and offer compensation to the refugees whose homes were destroyed in the war. However, in the beginning of 1949 Israel only allowed around 100,000 refugees to return (Jones and Bickerton). At the time of the First Knesset, Palestinians represented about one-eighth of the population in Israel. Most of the Palestinian minority had their land confiscated in the war, and along with it their ability to farm which was their means of life. The Knesset must address how they will economically integrate Palestinians into their country. Furthermore, they must decide how to maintain peace with the Palestinians 3 Background Guide – First Israeli Knesset 1949 as well their rights in this new country. As for the Palestinian refugees, the new government must decide whether they should continue to accept more refugees, offer them compensation, aid the refugee camps conditions, or urge surrounding Arab countries to integrate them (Timeline). Questions to Consider 1. What proactive steps can the Knesset do to ensure peace among Israeli and Palestinian citizens? 2. How can the Knesset help economically integrate Palestinians that lost their land and previous jobs? 3. How will the Knesset address the rising Refugee crisis along Israel’s borders? 4. What proactive measures can Israel take with Egypt and Jordan on their border to ensure security and peace in the region? Topic 2: The Immigration Crisis Immediately after Israel declared independence it encountered its largest surge of immigration to date. In just one year, over 200,000 Jewish immigrants came to the shores of Israel. The first influx of immigrants was primarily Holocaust survivors followed by Jewish migrants from Africa and Asia. The two large groups of immigrants had considerable differences. While the European survivors were older with few children and generally well educated, the migrants from Asia and Africa brought large families and had little education. These demographics presented an onslaught of new challenges for Israel. The larger number of older immigrants could not participate in the workforce and came to Israel with little to support themselves. The increase in children and youths from Africa and Asia would have to be placed in schools, but Israel still did not have a clear picture of what their public education system would look like. Furthermore, the majority of immigrants had little experience in the agriculture sector, for which at the time Israel had a dire shortage of workers (Kaplan). One of the greatest concerns facing Israel was the replacement and finding homes for the 200,000 new immigrants. A small number of immigrants settled in the Arab villages that were not destroyed, but they filled up quickly and intensified hostility with the Palestinians. More than 90,000 of the immigrants settled into tent camps. In these tent camps, families would live in small shacks made of tin, cloth, or wood. Camps would also 4 Background Guide – First Israeli Knesset 1949 have a small shack for an infirmary, synagogue, grocery store, and school. Families would live in these shacks with no electricity or running water, and no knowledge of when they would have a better home. Scarce work opportunities were available to the families nor adequate education for their children. Camps had scarce amounts of public bathrooms and showers leaving many susceptible to diseases as well (Kaplan). New immigrants also faced hostility from prior-Israeli citizens. While most immigrants came from societies with little industrialization and more traditional ideas, such as women’s place in the household.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Who Will Save the Redheads?
    :+2:,//6$9(7+(5('+($'6"72:$5'6$1 $17,%8//<7+(25<2)-8',&,$/5(9,(:$1' 3527(&7,212)'(02&5$&< <DQLY5R]QDL Dedicated in memory of Israeli Supreme Court Justice Mishael Cheshin, a brilliant jurist; bold protector of democracy and judi- cial independence; and a redhead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³5HIRUPD&RQVWLWXFLRQDO\'HIHQVDGHOD'HPRFUDFLD´KHOGLQ2YLHGRIURPWKHWKWRWKHVW RI0D\DQGSXEOLVKHGLQ6SDQLVKLQWKHERRN³5HIRUPD&RQVWLWXFLRQDO\'HIHQVDGHOD 'HPRFUDFLD´E\WKH&HQWURGH(VWXGLRV3ROtWLFRV\&RQVWLWXFLRQDOHVDOORIZKLFKKDVEHHQSRV VLEOHWKDQNVWRWKHUHVHDUFKJUDQWRIWKH6SDQLVK0LQLVWU\RI(FRQRP\DQG&RPSHWLWLYHQHVV 0,1(&2'(53,ZLVKWRWKDQN%HQLWR$ODH]&RUUDOIRULQYLWLQJPHWRMRLQWKLV LPSRUWDQWSURMHFWRQFRQVWLWXWLRQDODPHQGPHQWVDQGWKHGHIHQVHRIGHPRFUDF\$QHDUOLHUYHUVLRQ ZDVDOVRSUHVHQWHGDWWKH&RPSDUDWLYH&RQVWLWXWLRQDO/DZ5HVHDUFK6HPLQDU &KLQHVH8QLYHUVLW\ RI+RQJ.RQJ2FWREHU &HQWHUIRU&RPSDUDWLYHDQG3XEOLF/DZ6HPLQDU
    [Show full text]
  • Israel As a Jewish State
    ISRAEL AS A JEWISH STATE Daniel J.Elazar Beyond Israel's self-definition as a Jewish state, the question remains as to what extent Israel is a continuation of Jewish political history within the context of the Jewish political tradition. This article addresses that question, first by looking at the realities of Israel as a Jewish state and at the same time one compounded of Jews of varying ideologies and per suasions, plus non-Jews; the tensions between the desire on the part of many Israeli Jews for Israel to be a state like any other and the desire on the part of others for it to manifest its Jewishness in concrete ways that will make it unique. The article explores the ways in which the tradi tional domains of authority into which power is divided in the Jewish po litical tradition are manifested in the structure of Israel's political sys tem, both structurally and politically; relations between the Jewish reli gion, state and society; the Jewish dimension of Israel's political culture and policy-making, and how both are manifested through Israel's emerging constitution and the character of its democracy. Built into the founding of every polity are certain unresolved ten sions that are balanced one against another as part of that founding to make the existence of the polity possible, but which must be resolved anew in every generation. Among the central tensions built into the founding of the State of Israel are those that revolve around Israel as a Jewish state. on Formally, Israel is built themodern European model of central ized, reified statehood.
    [Show full text]
  • Spotlight on Parliaments in Europe
    Spotlight on Parliaments in Europe Directorate for Relations with National Parliaments - Institutional Cooperation Unit Source: Comparative Requests and Answers via European Centre for Parliamentary Research and Documentation N° 28 - March 2020 Preventive and sanitary measures in Parliaments Following the COVID-19 outbreak and its consequences on the functioning of Parliaments, many national Parliaments followed the example of the European Parliament to adopt preventive and sanitary measures. Spotlight N0 28 focusses on sanitary preventive measures, changes in the work of the Parliament, travel and visitors, and the need for a statement and medical examination when entering premises. It is based on requests 4333 and 4350 submitted by the Polish Sejm on 26 February and 13 March 2020. In total 44 chambers replied to request 4333 and 39 chambers replied to request 4350. Due to the rapidly changing context of this crisis, the current situation may vary from the one outlined in this document. For updates, please contact the editor. General trends in national Parliaments Cancellation of events, suspension of visits and travel were the main trends in most national Parliaments. 37 Chambers mentioned the introduction of hand sanitizers and 30 Chambers mentioned some form of communication to staff via email, posters or intranet. Another general trend was the request to work from home, teleworking. In many Parliaments, a ‘skeleton staff’, only those who are essential for the core business, were required to go to work. Certain groups were allowed to stay at home, either because they were vulnerable to the virus (60+, medical history, pregnant) or because they had possibly contracted the virus (travelled to an affected area, in contact with a person who got affected, feeling unwell).
    [Show full text]
  • Taxonomy of Minority Governments
    Indiana Journal of Constitutional Design Volume 3 Article 1 10-17-2018 Taxonomy of Minority Governments Lisa La Fornara [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ijcd Part of the Administrative Law Commons, American Politics Commons, Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, Comparative Politics Commons, Constitutional Law Commons, International Law Commons, Law and Politics Commons, Legislation Commons, Public Law and Legal Theory Commons, Rule of Law Commons, and the State and Local Government Law Commons Recommended Citation La Fornara, Lisa (2018) "Taxonomy of Minority Governments," Indiana Journal of Constitutional Design: Vol. 3 , Article 1. Available at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ijcd/vol3/iss1/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Indiana Journal of Constitutional Design by an authorized editor of Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Taxonomy of Minority Governments LISA LA FORNARA INTRODUCTION A minority government in its most basic form is a government in which the party holding the most parliamentary seats still has fewer than half the seats in parliament and therefore cannot pass legislation or advance policy without support from unaffiliated parties.1 Because seats in minority parliaments are more evenly distributed amongst multiple parties, opposition parties have greater opportunity to block legislation. A minority government must therefore negotiate with external parties and adjust its policies to garner the majority of votes required to advance its initiatives.2 This paper serves as a taxonomy of minority governments in recent history and proceeds in three parts.
    [Show full text]
  • Israel: 2021 Parliamentary Election and New Coalition Government
    By Nigel Walker 14 June 2021 Israel: 2021 parliamentary election and new coalition government Summary 1 Background 2 2021 Parliamentary election commonslibrary.parliament.uk Number CBP 9189 Israel: 2021 parliamentary election and new coalition government Image Credits .Wikimedia Commons page – טימי טרנר (Israel) flag by (Timmy Turner) ישראל / image cropped. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0). Disclaimer The Commons Library does not intend the information in our research publications and briefings to address the specific circumstances of any particular individual. We have published it to support the work of MPs. You should not rely upon it as legal or professional advice, or as a substitute for it. We do not accept any liability whatsoever for any errors, omissions or misstatements contained herein. You should consult a suitably qualified professional if you require specific advice or information. Read our briefing ‘Legal help: where to go and how to pay’ for further information about sources of legal advice and help. This information is provided subject to the conditions of the Open Parliament Licence. Feedback Every effort is made to ensure that the information contained in these publicly available briefings is correct at the time of publication. Readers should be aware however that briefings are not necessarily updated to reflect subsequent changes. If you have any comments on our briefings please email [email protected]. Please note that authors are not always able to engage in discussions with members of the public who express opinions about the content of our research, although we will carefully consider and correct any factual errors.
    [Show full text]
  • Voter Protection Laws in National Elections
    Voter Protection Laws in National Elections Armenia • France • Germany • Haiti • Iraq • Israel Italy • Pakistan • Sweden • United Kingdom December 2012 LL File No. 2012-006966 LRA-D-PUB-000359 The Law Library of Congress, Global Legal Research Directorate (202) 707-5080 (phone) • (866) 550-0442 (fax) • [email protected] • http://www.law.gov This report is provided for reference purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and does not represent the official opinion of the United States Government. The information provided reflects research undertaken as of the date of writing. It has not been updated. Contents Comparative Summary ....................................................................................................................1 Comparative Chart...........................................................................................................................4 Armenia............................................................................................................................................8 France.............................................................................................................................................13 Germany.........................................................................................................................................17 Haiti................................................................................................................................................21 Iraq .................................................................................................................................................24
    [Show full text]
  • The Financial Management of Visitor Groups to the National Parliaments
    BRIEFING For the CONT committee The financial management of visitor groups to the national parliaments KEY FINDINGS In most Member States, visitor’ groups are not sponsored to visit the national parliament. A visit to the national parliament is free of charge, and all the costs related to the visit, for example travel costs, accommodation and local minor expenses, need to be paid by the visitors themselves. Germany is the only country which has various kinds of programmes where visitors can be reimbursed. Members of Parliament can invite up to 200 people a year of which the travel costs are partially covered by the German Bundestag. There is also a programme which consists of more days for which all the costs related to travel and accommodation are covered by the German government. The German Bundesrat has a programme in which the 16 federal states can invite people for a visit of multiple days to Berlin. In this case the travel costs and accommodation are paid for by the Bundesrat. For all reimbursements, the rules apply that the receipts and underlying documents need to be provided to the Bundestag and Bundesrat after the visit. All documents and receipts are checked through an ex-post control. The United Kingdom has a programme in which costs are reimbursed, and this programme is funded by the commercial tours of the parliament. In this case, it can be MPs, Peers or the House of Commons or Lords who can invite visitors who are eligible for reimbursement. In Hungary, only schools can get reimbursement for their travel costs and the entry fee for the national parliament.
    [Show full text]
  • Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians
    158th session of the Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians Geneva, 29 January - 8 February 2019 CONTENTS Page Africa Democratic Republic of the Congo: Mr. Ne Muanda Nsemi Decision adopted by the Committee ............................................ 1 Mauritania: Mr. Biram Dah Abeid Decision adopted by the Committee ............................................ 3 Americas Colombia: Mr. Oscar Arboleda Palacio Decision adopted by the Committee ............................................ 5 Venezuela: Sixty parliamentarians Decision adopted by the Committee ............................................ 7 Asia Bangladesh: Sheikh Hasina Decision adopted by the Committee ............................................ 11 Maldives: Fifty parliamentarians Decision adopted by the Committee ............................................ 13 Europe Belarus: Mr. Victor Gonchar Decision adopted by the Committee ............................................ 16 Russian Federation: Ms. Galina Starovoitova Decision adopted by the Committee ............................................ 19 DH/2019/158/R.1 - ii - Geneva, 29 January - 8 February 2019 MENA Bahrain: Mr. Matar Ebrahim Matar Mr. Jawad Fairooz Ghuloom Decision adopted by the Committee ........................................................................... 21 Israel: Mr. Jamal Zahalka Ms. Haneen Zoabi Mr. Basel Ghattas Decision adopted by the Committee ........................................................................... 24 Kuwait: Ms. Safa Al-Hashem Decision adopted by the
    [Show full text]
  • Lista Uczestników Konferencji Korespondentów ECPRD
    List of participants Country Chamber Name Family name E-mail Parliamentary Assembly of the Horst Schade [email protected] Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly of the Yann de Buyer [email protected] Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly of the Kathleen Layle [email protected] Council of Europe European Parliament Christine Verger [email protected] European Parliament Ulrich Hueschen [email protected] European Parliament Jerry Hilbert [email protected] Parliament - Nationalrat and [email protected] Austria Elisabeth Dietrich-Schulz Bundesrat Azerbaijan National Assembly Mehman Namazov [email protected] Belgium Chambre des Représentants Alberik Goris [email protected] Belgium Sénat André Rezsohazy [email protected] Belgium Chambre des Représentants Marc Van Der Hulst [email protected] Bosnia- Parliamentary Assembly - House Sena Bajraktarevic [email protected] Herzegovina of Representatives Canada Parliament Joseph Jackson [email protected] Croatia Hrvatski Sabor Branka Martincic [email protected] Cyprus House of Representatives Evelyn Moridou [email protected] Czech Republic Chamber of Deputies Karel Sosna [email protected] Czech Republic Chamber of Deputies Robert Vyklicky [email protected] Denmark Folketinget Hanne Rasmussen [email protected] Denmark Folketinget Christina Ringvard [email protected] Estonia Riigikogu Margit Muul [email protected] Estonia Riigikogu Siiri Sillajöe
    [Show full text]
  • Israel: Background and U.S
    Israel: Background and U.S. Relations Jim Zanotti Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs November 1, 2013 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RL33476 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Israel: Background and U.S. Relations Summary Since Israel’s founding in 1948, successive U.S. Presidents and many Members of Congress have demonstrated a commitment to Israel’s security and to maintaining close U.S.-Israel defense, diplomatic, and economic cooperation. U.S. and Israeli leaders have developed close relations based on common perceptions of shared democratic values and religious affinities. U.S. policymakers often seek to determine how regional events and U.S. policy choices may affect Israel’s security, and Congress provides active oversight of executive branch dealings with Israel and the broader Middle East. Some Members of Congress and some analysts criticize what they perceive as U.S. support for Israel without sufficient scrutiny of its actions. Israel is a leading recipient of U.S. foreign aid and is a frequent purchaser of major U.S. weapons systems. The United States and Israel maintain close security cooperation—predicated on a U.S. commitment to maintain Israel’s “qualitative military edge” over other countries in its region. The two countries signed a free trade agreement in 1985, and the United States is Israel’s largest trading partner. For more information, see CRS Report RL33222, U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel, by Jeremy M. Sharp. Israel has many regional security concerns. Israeli leaders calling for urgent international action against Iran’s nuclear program hint at the possibility of a unilateral military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities.
    [Show full text]
  • The National Electoral Threshold: a Comparative Review Across Countries and Over Time
    The National Electoral Threshold: A Comparative Review across Countries and over Time Written by: Judah Troen, PhD Approved by: Deena Tzadok, Head of Inter-Parliamentary Research Date: 24 Tevet 5779, 1 January 2019 Comparative Review THE KNESSET - RESEARCH & INFORMATION CENTER www.knesset.gov.il/mmm The National Electoral Threshold: A Comparative Review across Countries and over Time Table of Contents Summary .............................................................................................................................. 1 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................. 2 2. Theoretical Aspects of the Electoral Threshold ...................................................... 4 2.1 The Natural Mathematical Threshold and the Number of Seats in a District ........ 4 2.2 Justifications and reservations .................................................................................. 5 2.3 Wasted votes ................................................................................................................ 6 2.4 Joint Party Lists ............................................................................................................ 7 2.5 Frequency of Change, Pace of Adaptation, and the Political Interest .................... 8 3. Comparing the National Legal Electoral Threshold: The Single National Constituency, Electoral Districts, and the Mixed System .................................................................... 10 3.1 The Single
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolving Israel-China Relationship
    The Evolving Israel- China Relationship Shira Efron, Howard J. Shatz, Arthur Chan, Emily Haskel, Lyle J. Morris, Andrew Scobell C O R P O R A T I O N For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RR2641 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication. ISBN: 978-1-9774-0233-2 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 2019 RAND Corporation R® is a registered trademark. Cover: Photo by esfera via Shutterstock. Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org Preface Since the early 2000s, relations between China and Israel have expanded rapidly in numerous areas, including diplomacy, trade, investment, construction, educational partnerships, scientific coopera- tion, and tourism.
    [Show full text]