Earlier this summer, Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, passed two troubling pieces of legislation: the first exempts the state from compensating Palestinians harmed during Israel Defense Force (IDF) operations in the territories. The second, aimed at curtailing the travel of Arab members of the Kenesset (MK), states that any Israeli who has visited an “enemy country” shall be considered a supporter of armed struggle against the Jewish state, and will be prevented from running for parliament in the seven years following the visit.

That law’s drafter, Zevulun Orlev, the head of the parliamentary faction of the National Religious Party, explained that the statute will prevent the election of “trojan horses” into the legislature. Arab MKs would now be forced “to decide between the Syrian parliament and the Israeli parliament.” On the same day these votes took place, the Knesset’s Constitution, Law, and Justice Committee extended

the validity of a provision exempting police from videotaping interrogations touching on security matters. The extended immunity is good for four years.

One does not need to be a constitutional scholar to worry about a democracy that eliminates access to its courts, curtails the right to be elected, and chooses to protect its police rather than detainees. Since all these measures were widely popular with Israelis, it is worthwhile reiterating an obvious point: Democracy is not only about the rule of the majority. Rather, its essence lies in empowering the majority without allowing it to tyrannise the minority. Such a balancing act is possible only if a robust set of political rights is in place. A state that jettisons these in favour of national security will probably stay safe, but it will rarely stay democratic.

To be sure, there are circumstances where it is appropriate to practice what former Israeli Chief Justice Aharon Barak has called “defensive democracy.” In extreme cases, constitutional protections can justifiably be curtailed. We have all heard of “ticking bomb” scenarios, and most agree that democracies have no special obligation to commit suicide. But, for such defensive action to be acceptable, the circumstances must, indeed, be extraordinary, the curtailments minimal, and the fact of curtailing considered a big deal. The Knesset’s new laws pass none of these tests. The sponsors of the new legislation remind us that we are engaged in an epic battle against the rising tide of political Islam. Perhaps so. But if this characterisation is true, the key to victory lies in becoming the best rather than worst example of ourselves. The US diplomat George Kennan saw this clearly in the days of cold war. Winning required that America “measure up to its own best tradition and prove itself worthy of preservation...”

Kennan’s lesson is worth learning. Unless Israel does everything it can to preserve its decency, it will not win because it will not be right. Failing to measure up to its best democratic traditions, failing to prove worthy of preservation, it might just not persevere. — The Christian Science Monitor