And then the bits after the “but”: it must give Palestinians land and justice. Or, it must stop oppressing Palestinians. Or, it has to stop being an apartheid state. Or, it has to stop illegal land occupations. And so on.
Now, it’s no longer a given than Israel has a right to exist.
That’s clear from the demonstrations around the world. “Palestine shall be free, from the river to the sea” means expelling Israel.
Which gets me thinking.
Israel was established by the United Nations in 1947, by Resolution 181. All the Israel haters of today are very keen to quote the United Nations when it comes to resolutions that have criticised Israel (which number an absurdly high number, indicating a priori an anti-Semitic bias, or at least Israelophobia), but ignore the resolution that establishes a separate and independent country. As was the case for many others in the wake of WW2 and post colonialism.
There are 57 countries, members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. Fifty-seven Islam majority countries. Yet somehow it’s too much to have ONE country as the Jewish state.
Arab Muslim states in the Middle East are 99.6% of the land. Israel is 0.4% of the land. It somehow that’s too much for Muslims and the world.
Other religions have countries that recognise them as the majority religion: Christians 21 countries, Buddhist seven countries, Muslims 57 countries. But the Jews? None apart from Israel. If Israel were to be liquidated, as Hamas aims, there would be zero places for Jews, one of the three “great Abrahamic religions”, and the very first. How can that be right?
The “new history” movement of the likes of Ilan Pape say that at the very beginning, in 1937/8 with the Peel commission or 1947/48 with the UN resolution on two states, the “Palestinians” never agreed to the land split. But they weren’t “Palestinians” then. They were Arabs, mostly but not all, Muslim and they had no country. They inhabited the land, as did Jews, in somewhat smaller number. I don’t buy the proportion that they had some kind of veto power over the splits of land in a post colonial middle east. Similar splits happened around the region and while often bloody (think Pakistan), they resolved and are now accepted in the international community. Why is it only Israel that has a long running problem, with refugees that are now five times the number of what they started of as (some “genocide”!).
What does it matter what I think, sitting here in Hong Kong. With no dog in the fight. Save to say that there is a moral, practical and international legal (the United Nations) reasons for Israel to exist.
And that to call for “Palestine free from the river to the sea” is simply the call to wipe out a nation recognised by 168 countries in the world. Just not by genocidal, jew-hating, misogynist, homophobic Hamas, to which the western left has chosen to ally itself with.
All unconscionable, IMO.
I stand against Hamas.
I stand for the rights of Israel’s IDF to pursue the war against Hamas.
Down with Hamas! Long live Israel!
