Tag Archives: beaurocracy

Just Married at Makor

Just Married

Just Married

Just Married by director Ayelet Bechar was really good. It documents the difficulties of two couples Israeli Arabs who marry Palestinians from Gaza or the West Bank. As of 2002 there is a law prohibiting family reunification.

Suhad and Rabia are a young couple that met at university. To be together Suhad becomes an illegal resident in Jerusalem. The film depicts her change from vibrancy to depression as she stays in her home most of the time so she is not caught. In a depressing bit of circular beaurocracy, her husband Rabia (the one with legal status in Israel) requests a permit for her and is told he must file for Family Reunification but that no requests are being taken at this time and she cannot be given any other sort of document because she needs the one of family reuinification.

For the older couple on the film Kifach and Yazeed, the solution is to stay in Berlin until the law changes and they can go home. Kifach struggles to learn German and at the same time, she must be in Israel for part of the year so she does not lost her status as is threatened in one municipal office. She had been very active in the struggle for coexistence in Israel and has many photos with major Israeli political figures such as Shulamit Aloni and Ehud Barak. Her husband views Barak as slime and does not want to see the photo, there is elegant symmetry in the film as Kifach later confronts Barak at a conference in Berlin about this law keeping families apart.

There is also a beautiful symmetry as the film ends with both families giving birth to children.

It is a complex issue. The situations these people are in are terrible. They are being kept from having a family with the person they love in their homes. The Israeli government believes that this horrible law may be saving someone’s life; it feels it must ignore the fact that it is also adding much misery to many innocent civilians.

The law was ammended so that women above the age of 25 and men above the age of 35 may now apply for family reunification. The director was at the screening and gave the update that Suhad was about to have her birthday and would more than likely obtain family reuinification and that Kifach’s struggle continues as well.

It makes me feel lucky that all I have to deal with is a bunch of paperwork and a $1000 fee for a fiancee visa to the UK. Our revolution was a really long time ago. (Though, it does suck that the price doubled as of April 1st of this year.)

There is a great summary of the Israeli law involved from a recent Jerusalem Post article (Background: Terror plot may have blown family reunification By DAN IZENBERG, April 11, 2007) :

“Prohibitions on family reunification were first introduced by the Interior Ministry on April 1, 2002, following the suicide bombing at the Matza restaurant in Haifa’s Neveh Sha’anan neighborhood in which 15 Israelis were killed. The driver of the car bomb was a Hamas terrorist who had married an Israeli and carried a blue identity card.

Initially, the freeze on family reunification was total. No Palestinian who married an Israeli could begin the five-year process for obtaining residential rights or citizenship, and those who were in the middle of the process could not advance.

On July 31, 2003, the Knesset turned the administrative decision into a one-year law, which was periodically extended.

On July 27, 2005, the law was amended so that Palestinian women above the age of 25 and men above 35 could live with their Israeli spouses if they met security criteria. Younger Palestinians were still barred from living in Israel.

On March 21, 2007, the law was amended again and extended until July 2008. The current law provides a humanitarian committee to consider exceptional requests for family reunification from women under 25 and men under 35, but toughens the security criteria and extends the restrictions to spouses from countries classified as enemy.

The law in all its forms has been harshly criticized by human rights groups in Israel and abroad. In May, the High Court narrowly rejected a petition to overrule it in its second version. The Association for Civil Rights in Israel, Meretz MK Zehava Gal-On and the Israeli-Arab rights group Adalah have already declared they will petition against the newly amended law.

The human rights groups claim the law violates the fundamental right of every citizen to a family and is motivated by Jewish demographic concerns. The law prevents roughly 20,000 Palestinians from living in Israel with their Israeli spouses and also prevents them from raising families in Israel.

The government insists the temporary law is based on security considerations. Granting Palestinians Israeli identity cards and the right to unrestricted freedom of movement throughout Israel is dangerous, officials say.”

UPDATE: 29 Oct. 07: Israel to approve some 3,400 requests for family unification in one-time action

In Spitting Distance

Khalifa Natour - promo photo

Khalifa Natour

Saw In Spitting Distance a one man show written by Taher Najib, performed by Khalifa Natour and directed by Ofira Henig as part of the Israel Non-Stop Festival 2007. Official description: “Winner of the first prize in Israel’s TheaterNetto Festival, this moving and ironic personal drama touches on all the complexities of the Israeli/Palestinian situation. Experience a rare collaboration between Israeli and Palestinian artists in this humorous yet painful story of a Palestinian actor with an Israeli passport trying to travel from Paris to Tel-Aviv to Ramallah on September 11, 2002.”

Winning first prize at the Theaternetto festival is a big deal. It is a really amazing international theater festival in Tel Aviv for one-person shows.

The show itself is funny, in the everyman against spirit-crushing beaurocracy to the point of the absurd where the only reaction you can have is to laugh in the face of it. Reminiscent of this recent story about US immigration officials. I could definitely picture it as a short film (the words and acting were really vivid) and told the actor so after the show.

Ofira Henig the director and Khalifa Natour the actor were on hand for questions after the show.

The first question, more of a comment, related to what big important statement they were making = how wonderful…She said: “I am an artist before I am an Israeli.” This had me wondering how long it takes before you can say that earnestly without a shred of self-doubt. So at this moment I wanted to hate her but I really enjoyed the rest of the comments so good on her. She commented that they did not want to be seen as an example of coexistence – a thing she believes does not exist. This is their story, a personal story, art, no conclusions should be drawn to either side from it and this is the most important political act they could do.

The next question asked if the play wasn’t too kind to the horrors that exist in the region. Her response was that this was a Palestinian’s playwright’s story. She was not directing the story of the Palestinian People, only the story of Taher and Khalifa. She continued to the questioner: You are looking for a demonstration, maybe. But Art shouldn’t be propoganda, it shouldn’t give answers. It should be more complicated than that and should make you ask questions.

Khalifa joins the conversation a bit late. They both relate that in Palestinian theater the question of who is telling whose story is important. They would like to perform the play more but they are both involved in other projects and the play was produced independently, not as part of a theater company’s repertory.

She likens theater that demonstrates its politics to being sick on an audience. She does this less so in her later work even though she feels she is more radical than ever. She feels you have to touch the audience. You can’t punch or browbeat them. You need to make them feel something. I appreciate this sentiment a lot. I hate being at a performance and feeling like I am being hit over the head with a sledgehammer with the MESSAGE. She continues that they both work on works by Oscar Wilde, Chekhov and Shakespeare. Again she views this as the most political act one can do. That there should be issues of aesthetics and sophistication in art not just what you think.

When asked about the minimalism of the direction she responded it was a lesson in modesty. Not everything has to be Broadway. A good actor, text, lighting and music – you don’t really need anything else.

When asked about the play’s effect on Israeli and Palestinian audiences (It is performed in both Hebrew and Arabic) the response is that it has a big effect on Israelis because of the questions it raises within them. Is it about them, it makes them smile, theyr elate to it. That enjoyment raises questions and it’s quite strong though usually it is the people who are already convinced who attend.

The Palestinians feel immediate empathy. At the Arabic premier in Acco (Acre) there was a full house and from the very first word the audience was with him, identifying with his character immediately. They laugh really hard and empathize. They are laughing at themselves.

In Switzerland was the first performance they ever had abroad. There was complete silence. There were no Israelis or Palestinians in the crowd – all Swiss. They were panicked. It turns out they were really into it. They remembered every word but they didn’t allow themselves to laugh at the situation and to find the irony and humor in it.

There is a fine tradition of Gallows Humor. While this play is about facing beaurocracy rather than death – it comes from that same place where you can cry (with defeat or rage) or laugh so why not laugh or at least giggle hysterically.