The Question of Israel’s Right to Exist is a Red Herring

Some people around the world, including Jews who traditionally support Israel, ask or ask whether Israel has the right to exist. The spread of these private and public talks is the result of the Gaza war and the levels of genocide from violence and the associated destruction; Israel’s attack on Iran and its expansion in Syria; Israel refused to strengthen any peace plan with its neighbors; And its suppression of the West Bank Palestinians with the Jim Crow system on the apartheid system.

My answer to this question is, yes, that the State of Israel has the right to exist-but the Israeli regime of the Zionist Jewish privilege may not.

Most people do not think like political scientists, which means that they mix the categories of political life without realizing them. The state is a regional society that is recognized in this manner through its membership in the United Nations. The system is legal in a case that determines what it is permitted and what its institutions are not permitted and how people are chosen to fill positions and carry out the jobs they declare. The government is a specific group of individuals who, at any time, fill these positions and make policy decisions.

France is a country. The Fifth Republic is the system that it has formed since 1958, the legal system within the French state. Emmanuel Macron is the French Prime Minister-a group of officials and decision-makers authorized to politics through the procedures and laws that include the Fifth Republic system.

Only with this triple discrimination – the state, order, and government – we can understand the fate of countries that turn their behavior into international outlets. Only then we can clearly see the real question about Israel is now pressing the minds of people.

When the Jews include two things in the comparison that may indicate an equal between them, he does not intend to transfer them, they say Lyfeldel (“Let her understand there is a difference”). Therefore, I say that I am in this context, in this context, to the fate of the axis forces and Germany in particular – a fate that clarifies the difference between the position of the international community towards the state’s right to exist and the right of a specific system within it. Germany, Italy and Japan were occupied by the allies. Each of them was later allowed to join the United Nations as legitimate countries – but once the Nazi, fascist and empire regimes that covered these states were replaced in the war. The proposal of the US Treasury, Henry Morgngao, shows the severe hesitation of the state’s declaration that it is unsuccessful and ended its presence in this way.

The Morgenthau Plan has imagined Europe after the war that would end Germany as an industrialized country. Traditional large German lands will be given to Denmark, France and Poland. The RUHR industrial zone and the surrounding areas will be internationalized. All arms factories will be destroyed, along with the entire army. In the foreseeable future, no educational institutions outside the rules school will be allowed to work. The countries destroyed by the War will receive German forced work to help them rebuild. Germany, which has not been allocated to other countries, will be divided mainly into three separate and agricultural countries. Whatever the economic or social problems that the Germans faced as a result of these measures, the only responsibility of the German people is a solution with “facilities that may be available under these circumstances.”

The amazing advantage of the Morgenthau’s plan was that even this most extreme proposal returned from the explicit demand for state extinction. Germany was responsible for launching both the two global wars and the most destructive genocide in the history of mankind, but ending the existence of a major and capable state is still a distant bridge. Instead of punishing the case of Germany, the Nazi regime that ruled that the German state was responsible. Certainly, the West needed a strong German state to help in facing the Soviet threats of the central and Western Europe, but the principle involved is the distinction between the criteria applied to the countries and those that have been applied to the systems. Instead of the German state, it was the Nazi regime that was removed from Europe.

Thus, systems can become evil without pollution of the countries in which they operate. Systems can be replaced without ending the presence of countries governed by these regimes. Six years after the discretion, the Bonn -based Republic, to work on its own. In 1990, the regime disappeared in East Germany. The lands and population practiced by the authority of the Federal Republic. The governments that produce it enjoys respect the world because the system that produces it is acceptable as legitimate. Again, there is one large, prosperous, and capable German country in central Europe – an unlimited country. Governments produced by Bonn now control all Germany.

True, states can disappear. The Soviet state disappeared in 1991. But compared to the rate of system replacement, such a disappearance is rare. In 1989, regimes changed throughout Eastern Europe even when the states that ruled them remained in place. The Republic of the People’s Republic has displaced the national system that largely ruled China before World War II. Italy has been replaced by fascism with the Italian Republic. Japan is now constitutional property, not an empire. Recently, Ayatollah Rohlah Khomeini replaced the regime of the Balfafi regime in Iran in the Islamic Republic, and despite the presence of many calls to change the regime in Iran, no one challenged the right of the Iranian state to exist. In the 1990s, the world isolated South Africa and in an alliance with the African National Congress to rid the state of the apartheid regime, again without termination or even raising the issue of whether South Africa has the right to exist.

Israel is a country established by the Zionist movement, which was authorized by the United Nations General Assembly in 1947, which countries around the world recognized in 1948. Economic, political and military institutions in Zionism became the first system for the first state, and until now only.

It is a legal and ideological matter that depends on confrontation as a liberal democracy while it is devoted, above all, to implement and expand the existence and success of its Jewish population. From 1948 to 1966, Israeli Arab citizens ruled by a military government that helped an engineer confiscating the vast majority of their lands. After canceling the military government in 1966, separate departments from “Arab affairs” in various ministries, by coordinating by security services, continued to enforce the system for policies towards Arabs on the basis of discrimination, dependency, and fragmentation. Since 1967, more than 5 million Palestinian Arabs are now living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip under a copy or another of the military occupation and the loss of their water and land resources by Israel and the Israeli settlers. Not represented in the governments that control its movement and reaching the outside world, and denied any means of political mobilization and threats systematically, as it is exposed daily to violence from Israeli and civilian soldiers who suffer from the best annoying, degrading conditions and in the worst case.

Even a million Arabs who are citizens of Israel face dozens of laws and many regulations that are characterized, whether explicit or implicitly, against non -Jewish Israelis, especially against the Arabs. In 2018, the Israeli parliament issued the closest thing to Israel to a constitutional statement of the nature of its regime: “Basic law” entitled “Israel as the state of the Jewish people.” This legislation announced that Jews and Jews alone have rights to self -determination in the country, and declared the Jewish settlement as a “national value”, and stripped Arabic from its status as an official language. The purposes of their authors were clarified by their rejection of the amendments that indicate the equality of all citizens.

Although the Israeli regime managed to establish effective institutions, a dynamic economy, and a strong army, it failed to produce governments capable of making peace with state neighbors on the basis of satisfactory solutions to the minimum Palestinian disaster produced in the process of establishing and expanding the state.

Here is the place that hits the rubber. The government of Israel refuses to end the war differently as a device to protect the profession of its leader, as it is grilled but irreversible spasms, or as an increasing campaign of ethnic cleansing. News of children who are starving the Israeli soldiers, while trying to find food, raises questions about whether individuals, or the global community, do not have duties in dealing with the Israeli regime that produced the government in which human society is sponsored in Gaza.

Whether what Israel is doing is genocide or not, it is mainly a semantic problem. Whether the state of Israel has the right to exist is a mistake in the category. The real question, and the question that deserves the attention and discussion of both the Jews and the non -Jews, is whether the regime in Israel, which has ruled the state from its inception, has lost its right to exist. Have she lost, in other words, her ability to demand that others be respected and postpone the decisions made by their governments?

For many years, the liberal Zionists had hoped that harsh discrimination against Arab -Israeli citizens could be something of the past and that a nice form of Zionism could be achieved, recognizing the rights of minorities, but preserving Jewish political and cultural coloring. This vision was based, above all, on the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, which will simultaneously provide a means of Palestinian nationalism that many Israelis refer to as a demographic “nightmare” of the Arab majority in the supposed Jewish state. But Israel Lorsh to the extreme and fundamentalist right, the massive settlement of the Jews in the West Bank, and the virtual defeat of the Israeli peace movement has canceled the “two -state solution” negotiating except for anything other than Mirage, who serves the brief protest, the purposes and opponents of both the officials.

For three quarters of a century, the Israeli regime has demonstrated itself unable to integrate or reach civilized peace with the Palestinians, who, even with the exception of refugees who live outside the country, are equal in their number now for Jews who live in the region governed by this system. So it is appropriate to ask whether the regime in Israel deserves to be present. What is necessary for the observation is that not asking this question or reaching a negative conclusion means that the one Jewish judges illegal or excluding by nature. As for all these movements, Jewish nationalism, and even Zionism themselves as one expression of Jewish nationalism, is a varied tissue.

By accepting that a country that exercises power on all lands between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River will have the right to exist, we can focus on the real challenges facing those who aspire to a future future to live there. The deep changes needed for such a system of defeat in the war, social revolution, and internal revolution, or, especially when a global community is supported by ready to reduce its relations with the rogue system, through slow but transformational mobilization for the masses of people within it.

This last path to a better, long future, but it is possible, in this case, more logical than others. He will only travel when the different groups that compete for Israel feel that they are forced to find allies as they saw only enemies.