[runarberg]

Finding justifications for apartheid will only be an exercise in racism.

Apartheid is a crime against humanity, illegal under international law, and countries have an obligation to prevent apartheid policies from persisting.

Israel’s policies in the West Bank has been ruled to be an apartheid by the ICJ, and Israel has been ordered (non-binding though) to stop apartheid practices, reverse the damage and pay reparations.

[vladgur]

The accusation of apartheid against Israel makes no sense because of what Apartheid means -- institutionalized racism against country's own citizens.

If non-jewish citizens of Israel(that as you know DOES NOT include West Bank or Gaza) had different rights than jewish citizens, than you could argue Apartheid.

Again we are talking about Israel proper, not Westbank(controlled by Fatah) or Gaza(formerly controlled by Hamas).

Please tell me which rights do non-jewish citizens of Israel lack institutionally within Israel that Jewish citizens have?

[aguaviva]

Please tell us about the JNF, and what happens when non-Jewish citizens attempt to purchase or lease land from it.

After that, please tell us what happens when a non-Jewish citizen seeks to marry and obtain citizenship and residency rights for their spouse, and how this differs when a Jewish citizen makes the same application.

After that you can tell us about the Nation State Law, and the not-so symbolic language it contains.

And after that you can tell us about the 14,000 Palestinians annexed into Israel after the latter's illegal annexation of East Jerusalem, who were then forcibly expelled according to criteria determined by the occupying regime. If there's no apartheid in Israel, why weren't their rights protected?

[runarberg]

Apartheid has a legal definition which does not include provision about citizenship. See the Rome Statute Article 7. Paragraph 2 (h): https://legal.un.org/icc/statute/99_corr/cstatute.htm#art.7

> "The crime of apartheid" means inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime;

The word apartheid in popular discourse is not this clearly defined, but I’ve personally never heard this provision. After all, the prototypical case of Apartheid in South Africa insisted that their victims were actually citizens of independent Bantustans and thus not subject to equality under South African laws.

But even so, countries occupying territories have an obligation to protect the people of that territory, subjugating them to apartheid policies under such occupation is at best failure to protect them from apartheid, which is still a crime under international law, and has been ruled as such by the ICJ, which actually goes much further.

> Please tell me which rights do non-jewish citizens of Israel lack institutionally within Israel that Jewish citizens have?

Irrelevant, but I’ll do it anyway: https://www.adalah.org/en/law/index