as you define it.
In addition, here we all would sat we are American. No one in Israel can OFFICIALLY be called an Israeli - the equivalent of American in your analogy. (I personally have met many Israelis who called themselves Israeli - though obviously that is not what they are in the registry. It is difficult to come up with a good American counterpart - because religion does not create the same breaks between advantaged and disadvantaged here. Color comes closer, but I assume that the Columbia/Harvard educated Obama likely had at least as many whites in his inner circle of friends as blacks from the time he left college.
You would likely be more able to create an analogy for a country with a real ethnic/religious divide, (This is not to minimize that the US does have some problems with minorities.)
I know this was true in Sri Lanka - where the Tamils do not even accept the name "Sri Lanka". My daughter did a semester study abroad there in spring 2008. When Obama won the US presidency, she sent me a link to the comments in an English language paper there. It inspired many - but they were quick to note that a Tamil Hindu or Moslem or a Christian could never be elected to lead in Sri Lanka. Many noted it was unlikely to happen in their life time. There, your ethnic/religious status is who you are.
I admire the Israeli Jews who pushed this issue. I would guess that they support a one state solution with equal rights for all. This is a solution that would likely result in a secular country with a large Jewish minority - rather than majority in the near future. This is also why many wanting both a democracy and a Jewish state know that the 2 state solution is the only thing - other than an apartheid like state - that can have both.
= new reply since forum marked as read