About Israel as an "Apartheid State"

Israel isn't an apartheid state.

But if you change the definition, you can call it that.

At Sabeel's seventh international conference (see here, too) -

Dr. Uri Davis presented an argument for the use of the term "apartheid" to describe the Israeli state and its occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. Dr. Davis defined an apartheid state as “a state that regulates racism through acts of parliament,” in which the “constitution and the legal system obligates citizens of that state to make racialized choices. It criminalizes humanitarian action.”

Although pointing to differences between South African apartheid and the Israeli form of apartheid, such as the lack of petty apartheid (white-only bathrooms and drinking fountains, for example), Dr. Davis maintained that the classification of Israel as an apartheid state is accurate and calls for a response of economic activism--divestment and morally responsible investment.

Now, if you look up "apartheid" for its dictionary definition, you'll read something like this:

1. An official policy of racial segregation formerly practiced in the Republic of South Africa, involving political, legal, and economic discrimination against nonwhites.
2. A policy or practice of separating or segregating groups.
3. The condition of being separated from others; segregation.

or this one

Derived from the Afrikaans word for "apartness," apartheid is a term that came into usage in the 1930s and signified the political policy under which the races in South Africa were subject to "separate development." For the purpose of implementing these policies, apartheid recognized four races: Bantu, or black African; Coloured, or mixed race; white, and Asian. Apartheid met with both international condemnation and spurred a resistance movement among black South Africans. Apartheid was defined as a crime in 2002 by the International Criminal Court; the United Nations had declared it a crime against humanity in 1973, though many nations still not have signed on to the convention.

There are many defenses against this charge (here) but it's always easier if one side seeks to dominate the semantic play and therefore control the rules.

-------------
On Sabeel