A decision to ban MK Azmi Bishara and his Balad Party from contesting elections sets a shocking precedent. Nyier Abdou talks to the standard-bearer of Arab-Israeli rights about what it means to be first in everything Azmi Bishara is good at being first. The first Arab to run for the Israeli premiership in 1999 -- and arguably the most prominent Arab-Israeli citizen -- Bishara has been a strident voice in the political arena and a well respected one. But being first is not always a privilege. Last May, Bishara was also the first member of the Israeli Knesset to be stripped of parliamentary immunity and put on trial. Last week, he became the first Arab candidate to be targeted and banned from contesting elections. In a string of controversial decisions, the Israeli Central Elections Committee (CEC) voted last week to ban both Bishara and his National Democratic Assembly Party (Balad) from contesting elections for the 16th Knesset, scheduled for 28 January. The decision came days after the CEC voted to ban Arab activist and MK Ahmed Tibi, of the Democratic Front for Peace and Equality (Hadash), from participating in the election, while approving the candidacy of far-right radical Baruch Marzel, who formerly led the banned Kach Party. The Supreme Court, which began hearing appeals on the decisions on Tuesday, was due to issue its rulings today. In an interview with Al-Ahram Weekly, Bishara, an MK since 1996, made clear that other cases deliberated by the CEC were part of the usual machinations of electioneering -- "MKs against MKs". His case stands out from the rest as the only case where the government itself has initiated disqualification. Attorney-General Elyakim Rubinstein explicitly recommended that both Bishara and Balad be banned, claiming that statements made by Bishara in support of Palestinian resistance at the June 2001 funeral of Syrian President Hafez Al-Assad amounted to an endorsement of suicide bombings. On the juxtaposition of his case and that of Baruch Marzel, Bishara is quick to reject the comparison, noting that any parallels being drawn are "totally unacceptable". "The guy's a racist and violent," he said, but rather than being outraged over the CEC's decision to allow his candidacy, Bishara is almost pleased. "At least they acknowledged they are racist; this is better than letting us both run." Bishara, who is still on trial for alleged sedition and "incitement to violence", is adamant that both his trial and the CEC ban are neither about the Knesset law or the nature of the Balad Party. Rather, his vocal calls for an internal revolution in the way Israelis view their democracy -- as a nation of "citizens" and not a Jewish nation -- eats away at the aggressive goals of the Israeli right. Bishara says that Rubinstein and Prime Minister Ariel Sharon fear "Arab nationalists putting on liberal masks" -- a group in which the right has clearly classed Bishara. And as usual, he's first in his class. What is most feared, says Bishara, is that his example will incur a "new generation" of Arab youth who seek to "change the character" of Israeli democracy -- a "new pattern of Arabs demanding full equality". These are the kinds of Arab citizens Bishara wants to go forth and multiply -- people who say: "You are not doing me any favour by giving me equality." The Israeli leadership is used to a weaker kind of Arab citizen, Bishara said, one "who thanks them for citizenship" and is willing to cooperate with Zionist programmes. On the other hand are the radicals and "all kinds of hypocrites". A straightforward approach -- "at the level of the eyes" -- makes Israeli leaders "hysterical", because they are comfortable thinking of citizenship as "theirs to give". The new kind of Arab national resists this idea and acts to "turn the Arab discourse against the system, against the oppression, from inside Israel". "This is the issue," he says. "But they can't say, 'We excluded this person because he's a liberal, because he's for democracy.' Democracy usually defends itself against anti-democratisation." So Israeli intelligence became vigilant -- "they were looking for the pretext," says Bishara. "They were looking for the words to incriminate me." Those words were supposedly clinched in his speech delivered in Syria. Bishara notes that he only expressed his belief in the right to resist occupation -- a right, he adds, that is enshrined in international law. But when called to defend his statements during CEC deliberations, Bishara was told that his failure to "specify" implied support for "armed struggle". Bishara, a former teacher of philosophy, seized on a flaw in this reasoning. "I asked, 'Is logical syllogism allowed in Israel?' And the judge said, 'Of course'." What followed was a lesson in basic deduction. If every nation has the right to resist occupation, and Palestine is an occupied territory, then "what's the conclusion? That Palestinians have the right to resist occupation." It's not, he added with some satisfaction, "that I support armed struggle against Israel." "I don't have to specify," he continued. "I cannot tell people how to resist occupation." As a member of parliament, Bishara says he is part of the government that occupies Palestine. "You can't occupy them, then tell them how to struggle against you." Particularly, he adds, when "you don't give them the democratic tools to resist occupation." As the Supreme Court, fielding an unusually high panel of 11 judges, deliberated over the CEC decisions, Bishara offered his vision of an election without Balad. "I think this would be an apartheid country [pretending to be] a democracy," he said. "Israel is telling Arabs who should represent them." If the Supreme Court verifies the decisions -- and Bishara is hopeful that it will not -- "I think a lot of Arabs will not see any sense in going to the ballot." Unconvinced by the argument that a failure to vote is a vote for Sharon, Bishara says, "Sharon is winning this election anyway." A failure to overturn the ban, he said, would break a tacit covenant between Arab Israelis and the Israeli government, and it will be a "historical break". "We are at a crossroads, in that sense," he said. Asked if recent events have eroded his faith in the democratic process, Bishara is steadfast in his belief that political participation is vital. "On the contrary, I feel that I was so right," he says, pointing to the Israeli government's "willingness" to show that they are against full democratic rights for Arab-Israelis. "This just proves how important it is for us to be in [government]. We are the democrats, not them." Denouncing the empty rhetoric that clogs Arab politics, Bishara heatedly describes the need to fight for a just case. "Our case is a just case. We want to win the case, not just justify ourselves," he says. And the fact that forces within the government so clearly want Bishara and Balad out, "means our being there is so important".
