On May 10, 1992, a letter was sent to the Ministry of Interior in which we raised a number of questions concerning the residency rights of spouses of Arab citizens in Israel and asked for clarifications regarding several cases. For two months, this letter remained unanswered. A second letter was sent on July 20, and finally, on December 17, it was found worthy of an answer. It took the Ministry of Interior more than half a year to respond to our questions. 
In the first lines of his letter, Mr. David Efrati, Director of the Population Administration in the Ministry of Interior, informs us of the good news that three of the four cases presented by us have been solved, and that the women received (or are in the process of receiving) permanent residency status in the State of Israel. The fourth case was not approved, in his words, because of the husband’s criminal record. All this we knew already in June, when the Ministry of Interior hurried to solve all those cases which the Alternative Information Center had presented at a press conference held on the occasion of the publication of its report about residency problems faced by foreign spouses of Arab citizens. 

More interesting are those answers by the Director of the Population Department which refer to our general questions. For example, we had asked in our letter: 
“According to the Israeli government, is the principle of Family Reunification applicable to Jews only?” 
The answer given by this high-ranking official states: 
“The principle of Family Reunification is applicable also to non-Jews ... if they are members of the family of the Jewish person (who was born to a Jewish mother, or who converted to Judaism and does not belong to any other religion) ...” 
Another example: 
“What is the fate of an Israeli citizen who is not covered by the Law of Return, who falls in love with a non-Israeli woman, and wishes to establish a family together with her? Does he have to chose between his love and his homeland? 
Mr. Efrati’s answer: 
“Love as such does not grant rights to the foreign spouse of a citizen, these follow only after his marriage”, something which is certainly incorrect, given the growing number of citizens who married their foreign spouses and are still unable to obtain residency permits for their wives. 

Regardless we feel that our letter has moved matters a little in the Ministry of Interior, because, although Mr. Efrati writes that, “there is no need for new legislation regarding the issue”, he concludes: 
“Finally, I instructed all those handling the matter, to do as much as possible to speed up the treatment, and to act to shorten the procedures of other, similar cases.” 

Inshallah!