Proposals to cede Arab localities from Israeli to
Palestinian sovereignty, presented as “populated land
exchanges”, involve forcibly revoking the citizenship
of tens of thousands of Arabs. Since the October 2000 events
these proposals penetrated the heart of public discourse.
The Arab leadership and public vehemently oppose these
proposals. This study examines the Jewish discourse
supporting the idea alongside Arab opposition to it in
Israel and the territories as well as its implications on
the character of the State of Israel. It examines Israeli
and international legal perspectives and demographic and
territorial implications. The study emphasizes the danger
and folly of this idea and recommends discussing the idea as
part of the Arab-Jewish discourse and as part of the status
of the Arab minority in a democratic Jewish state.

The full publication is free on the net (see link) in Hebrew, Arabic, English and Russian.

….”The Galilee Triangle. Nor are such pro-Israeli sentiments limited to residents of Jerusalem. When Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s government released a trial balloon in February 2004 about giving the Palestinian Authority control over the Galilee Triangle, a predominantly Arab part of Israel, the response came strong and hard. As Mahmoud Mahajnah, 25, told Agence France-Presse, “Yasir Arafat runs a dictatorship, not a democracy. No one here would accept to live under that regime. I’ve done my [Israeli] national service; I am a student here and a member of the Israeli Football Association. Why would they transfer me? Is that logical or legitimate?” One resident quoted what he called a local saying, that “the ‘evil’ of Israel is better than the ‘heaven’ of the West Bank.” Shu‘a Sa‘d, 22, explained why: “Here you can say whatever you like and do whatever you want—so long as you don’t touch the security of Israel. Over there, if you talk about Arafat, they can arrest you and beat you up.” Another young man, ‘Isam Abu ‘Alu, 29, put it differently: “Mr. Sharon seems to want us to join an unknown state that doesn’t have a parliament, or a democracy, or even decent universities. We have close family ties in the West Bank, but we prefer to demand our full rights inside Israel.”

The entrance to Umm al-Fahm, the largest Muslim town in Israel, sports the green flags of the Islamic Movement Party that rules the town, along with a billboard denouncing Israel’s rule over Jerusalem. That said, Hashim ‘Abd ar-Rahman, mayor and local leader of the Islamic Movement, has no time for Sharon’s suggestion: “Despite the discrimination and injustice faced by Arab citizens, the democracy and justice in Israel is better than the democracy and justice in Arab and Islamic countries.” Nor does Ahmed Tibi, an Israeli Arab member of parliament and advisor to Arafat, care for the idea of PA control, which he calls “a dangerous, antidemocratic suggestion.”….

Perhaps it’s the multi/splinter party approach. Israeli Arabs who see themselves as Israeli first will vote more often for a more-mainstream party whose focus is on national issues; the people who support Arab parties (and therefore the people who the party’s candidates must satisfy) are the minority that consider themselves Arabs first.