Affirming IsraelÂ’s right to exist has almost become the diplomatic standard in the Middle East. Why, anyone who would dare challenge this notion is obviously not rational, to say the least.
Yet the fact is, Israel does not have a right to exist. That is, Israel does not have a moral right to exist.
Israel was declared a country in Palestine when that declaration was against the will of the majority of the people living in Palestine at the time. Thus, the right of the people of Palestine to self-determination was denied. It was morally wrong. It is that simple.
Of course, the government of Israel does exist for many reasons. The two most prominent are that many feel sympathy for Jews because of the history of persecution, and therefore support the Jew’s desire for a “homeland” where they would be immune from persecution.
However, the fact that the Jews were persecuted in various times and places in history doesnÂ’t give them the right to persecute someone else. It doesnÂ’t give Jews the right to deny the right to self-determination to the Palestinians. Two moral wrongs donÂ’t make a moral right.
It is also interesting that the claim for a Jewish homeland would presumably mean that Jews would want land that would not be taken away from them by someone else claiming a divine right to their homeland. That is very interesting indeed.
Another reason why Israel exists is the result of support from America, and much of that support is from Christians who believe the Bible affirms the Jew’s claim of “divine right” to the land of Palestine. Of course, there are many Christians who disagree with that conclusion, and believe it is a severe misunderstanding of the Bible.
However, what is interesting is that the Christian debate is irrelevant--Jews believe that they have a divine right to the land. And this claim is the legitimate prerogative of the Jewish faith. In fact, this is a popular claim by many faiths. Many groups of people around the world believe that they have a divine right to various lands. In fact, many in the Arab world believe that Palestine is “Arab Land”.
This raises questions of what is morally right when there is a divine right claim to the land. Is a claim of divine right a legitimate or moral reason to settle competing land claims? And, is it morally right to force one claim of divine right on someone who doesnÂ’t recognize that claim?
The obvious answer is no, it is not morally right to force a claim of divine right on someone that doesnÂ’t recognize that claim. It is not morally right because no one wants to be deprived of their land or property because someone else makes a divine right to their land or property that they donÂ’t recognize. Christians would recognize this principle as the Golden Rule.
Thus, the larger issue in Palestine is not who has a divine right to the land. The issue that should be discussed is who has the moral right, and that issue has been largely absent in the debate over Israel.
Jews and supporters of Israel have been successful in framing the debate in terms of denying the Jews their divine right. But the real issue is morality. Who has the legitimate moral right to the land? And how should that moral right be determined?
And most important, what if the Palestinians donÂ’t recognize the JewÂ’s claim of divine right? Should the Palestinians be murdered and their property taken anyway? Is this the proper moral position of Christians, that if the Palestinians donÂ’t recognize a divine right, they should be murdered?
Most Christians would find that murdering Palestinians in order to impose a divine right is abhorrent to Christianity. It would be morally wrong, and thus Israel does not have a moral right to exist.
If murder or war is not morally correct in arbitrating land disputes, what is the correct moral path? The popular moral tenet in America is that the will of the people should be recognized in settling political disputes. The preamble to the Constitution begins with “We the people, …” Land claims in Palestine should have been settled by the will of all the people of Palestine.
And how should the will of the people be determined? In America, the will of the people is morally determined by voting. Americans viscerally understand that determining the will of the people through majority vote is a legitimate and moral method of settling virtually any dispute.
When the Jews declared Israel a state in 1948, Jews were approximately one-third of the population. Had there been a vote in all of Palestine in 1948 to ascertain if the will of the Palestinian people agreed that Israel had a right to be a state, that right would have been denied. The majority of the people of Palestine did not grant the Jews a right to declare Israel a sovereign state.
Of course, no vote was ever taken. Thus, for the Jews to ignore the will of the Palestinian people and declare Israel a state was morally wrong. The moral right to allow the will of Palestinian people to prevail was denied.
Israel does not have a moral right to exist.
