Blood Libel #7 | “Israel is an illegitimate state.”

Anti-Zionist:

Israel is an artificial creation. It’s illegitimate.

Pro-Zionist:

Do you say that about Austria, Hungary, Poland, Finland, Ireland, Saudi Arabia, Ukraine, Turkey, Iraq, Syria, or Lebanon — all created by colonial powers after World War I?¹ And what about India, Pakistan, Indonesia, Nigeria or the Post Soviet States?²

Or is it only the Jewish state you claim is illegitimate?

(They may say Jews don’t belong there.)

Pro-Zionist:

Ironically, in the Middle East, Israel is the only country in the region with ancient roots in the land it governs.

Its legitimacy comes from history, law, self-determination, and democratic consent.

• Historically: Jews have lived in the land of Israel for over 3,000 years. The name Jew comes from Judea.

• Legally: The San Remo Conference (1920), League of Nations Mandate (1922), and UN Partition Plan (1947) all recognized Jewish national rights in the land.

• Politically: Israel declared independence through a vote, absorbed Holocaust survivors, and was recognized by major powers.

And it didn’t erase another country. There was no sovereign Palestine before 1948.

There were opportunities to create one — in 1947, 2000, 2008, and 2020 — and the Arab and Palestinian leadership said no every time.

But here’s something else most critics ignore:

Israel is not a theocracy, not an apartheid regime, and not a colonial outpost. It’s a democracy.

And like all democracies, it is messy, self-critical, and evolving.

• Arab citizens vote, serve in the Knesset, sit on the Supreme Court, and run hospitals.

• Ultra-Orthodox Jews, secular Jews, Druze, Muslims, Christians, and Ethiopians all argue — loudly — about what kind of country Israel should be.

• Protests, journalism, and dissent are not only allowed — they shape Israeli politics.

That’s not illegitimacy. That’s legitimacy earned and renewed every day.

So if Israel’s existence is illegitimate, so is half the modern world map.

But funny how it’s always the Jewish state that people want erased.

---

Beyond the Talking Points

The "Legitimacy" of the Nation State of Israel.

The term “Colonize” is defined by Merriam-Webster as:

a nation or state that takes control of a people or ares as an extension of state power?

So I ask you this question: On behalf of what state was Israel formed?

The fact is no one can name a “mother country” because none ever existed!

Jews are the indigenous people of Israel.

The fact remains that the Zionists that “settled” in Israel over the past 100 years were in fact refugees! Refugees from Russia and Europe and from the Muslim-majority countries throughout Africa and Asia that perpetrated ethnic cleansing of nearly 900,000 jews including more than 650,000 Iranian Jews that resettled in Israel after the Islamic Revolution in 1979.

Why does the media and our “elite” educational institutions who are supposedly committed to Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI), refuse to recognize that Israel is one of the most - if not the most - legitimate nation states on earth?

If you haven’t listened to US District Court Judge Roy Altman discuss the History of Israel, you’ll enjoy this talk. It’s worth the time to listen.

If you don’t want to listen to the entire discussion, at a minimum, to jump to minute 30 where he discusses the 3 ways in which a nation/people become a State. As he explains, you can become a state by:

1. wining statehood in a war (offensive and defensive wars qualify but defensive are more “legitimate”);

2. you can have a long presence in the land; and

3. you can have a legal deed that says you have a right to the land.

He goes on to compare the state of Israel to the United States.

Here’s a chart I created to illustrate his points:

The Legitimacy of the "Palestinian State"

It’s ironic because after you understand what constitutes a “legal” state under international law, I ask you this: What gives the Palestinian people the “right” to the land they call “Palestine?”

On what grounds can a Palestinian person claim that they have a right to live in a single state the runs from the River to the Sea?

There are only 2 legal documents that I can find that create a land that runs from the River to the Sea:

1. The 1920 Mandate for Palestine which was ratified in 1923 which awarded the land to Britain which Britain divided into “Transjordan” and “Palestine.” And in drawing up the terms of the Mandate, Britain drew on the Balfour Declaration and the government’s position, “in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.” Article IV of the Mandate document invited the Zionist Organization to, “take steps in consultation with his Britannic Majesty’s Government to secure the cooperation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home”. It’s also noteworthy that the Arab leaders appealed to the British government in an effort to revers the clauses of the Mandate making Palestine the home of the Jews and they were rejected; and

2. The 1947 UN resolution #181 which partitioned the land called Palestine into two states, one for the jews and one for the Arabs (along with an international zone encompassing Jerusalem and Bethlehem). Of course, we know that the Arabs rejected the partition plan.

So, within the framework of International law, they have NO legal right to a state that runs “from the River to the Sea”.

And, under international law, having lost their offensive wars against the state of Israel in ’48, ’67 and ’73, they legally forfeited any ancestral claim they might have had to the land. I say “might,” because that is the real hypocrisy of the pro-palestinian narrative.

They claim Israel is a “colonizer state” (of course that doesn’t hold water because the jews were refugees and not colonists on behalf of a “mother state”) when the fact remains that the “Palestinian people” (if such a people exist since there has never been an Arab Palestinian state) are, in fact, the decedents of the actual colonizing Arabs that conquered Judea and Samaria from the jews in the Siege of Jerusalem beginning in the years 636-637 BCE after the jews surrendered to the Muslims in the Rashida Caliphate in 638 BCE.

So, if anything, the narrative of “colonizer” really applies to the Arabs in "Palestine" and NOT the jews living in Israel or the West Bank (Judea and Samaria).

So all the Zionists did in ‘48 was retake their land from the colonizing British who took it from the Ottoman Turks after World War I, who conquered it from the Arab “occupiers” of these historically jewish lands.

An Arab Mandate For Palestine

If the "free world" were truly Israel’s allies, on October 8th, they would have told Israel to fortify their borders. Mourn their dead. Let NATO and a coalition of Arab states go into Gaza and remove Hamas and demilitarize Gaza!

As Bret Stephens has written, "multinational forces needed to stabilize the conflict."

That's what Allies do! That's what George H W Bush did when Iraq invaded Kuwait. Even his son put together a coalition before responding to 9/11. But that will never happen when it comes to Israel or the Jews!

On October 8th 2023, Bret Stephen's wrote his opinion column in the NYT entitled “Hama’s Control of Gaza Must End Now.” I find Bret to be one of the only bright spots at the NYT (I canceled my subscription over a decade ago because of their overt left leaning and antisemitic bias). In his article, Bret smartly states:

The answer is to turn Gaza into a zone of shared interests. Despite its anti-Israel public rhetoric, Saudi Arabia has long distrusted Hamas because of its close military ties to Iran. Egypt sees Hamas as the Palestinian arm of the Muslim Brotherhood, which it ruthlessly suppresses at home. The ailing Palestinian Authority views Hamas as its principal rival for power. And the United States long ago designated Hamas as a terrorist group.

Could Israel finally dislodge Hamas from power and invite Saudi Arabia, Egypt and maybe the United Arab Emirates to deploy a substantial peacekeeping force to the strip? That would serve Israel’s interests in toppling an enemy and the Arab states’ interests in diminishing a rival.

Could the Palestinian Authority resume civil control over the strip, with security furnished by Arab states and economic aid from the gulf states, Washington and Brussels? That would give Ramallah the control over Gaza it has lacked for 16 years, strengthen secular forces in Palestinian politics and free Gazans from extremist tyranny.

Could Israel and Egypt ease their restrictions on Gaza’s economy and the movement of its people in exchange for guarantees that the strip won’t again turn into a haven for havoc? That would give the Saudis the opportunity to show that any agreement they make with Israel would help ordinary Palestinians.

And can the Biden administration make itself a vital partner in the diplomatic effort, bringing to fruition what the Trump administration started with the Abraham Accords, just as the Carter administration brought to fruition what the Nixon and Ford administrations started after the Yom Kippur war? That would be no small victory for a president who dearly needs one.

On March 19, 2024, Bret published "An Arab Mandate for Palestine" wherein he shared his thoughts on a vision for the future in Gaza. If you're not a subscriber, here is the entire article:

Sooner or later, the war in Gaza will end.

Hamas’s leaders hope that when it does, they will emerge from their tunnels to raise their green banners over the rubble — a symbolic victory for “Resistance” in the face of the misery they sowed on Oct. 7.

Israel’s security leaders hope that when it does, Gaza will be temporarily divided into a patchwork of subregions administered by local clans known to Israeli security services. The Israeli military will then operate in the territory for an indefinite period on a counterterrorism mission, assume greater control along the border with Egypt and deradicalize the population.

President Biden hopes that “a revitalized Palestinian Authority” will return to govern the territory from which it was forcibly ejected by Hamas after a brief civil war in 2007, with a view toward a Palestinian state in Gaza and the West Bank.

None of this is likely to happen.

Israel will make very sure Hamas’s leaders don’t emerge from the war alive; any sort of victory parade by the group would almost certainly meet a swift and gory end.

An indefinite Israeli military occupation of Gaza would generate an insurgency, bleed Israel of money and personnel and eventually prove politically and diplomatically unsustainable.

The Palestinian Authority is too weak to govern Gaza; revitalizing it would require not only deposing Mahmoud Abbas, its octogenarian president, but also rooting out its systemic corruption, a goal that has eluded every past effort at reform.

A Palestinian state in Gaza and the West Bank may be appealing in theory, but Israelis have reason to fear that, in practice, it could quickly devolve into a larger version of Hamastan. No plausible Israeli government, even one led by centrists, will allow it to come into being anytime soon.

So what could work? I would propose an Arab Mandate for Palestine. The (very) long-term ambition would be to turn Gaza into a Mediterranean version of Dubai, offering a proof of concept that, in 10 or 15 years, would allow a Palestinian state to emerge on the model of the United Arab Emirates — future-oriented, federated, allergic to extremism, open to the world and committed to lasting peace.

I first suggested a version of this idea in my column on Oct. 7, by transforming Gaza from a locus of conflict to a “zone of shared interests” between Israel and friendly Arab states. More recently, a long and useful report by the Vandenberg Coalition and the Jewish Institute for National Security for America makes the case for an International Trust for Gaza Relief and Reconstruction, with a “realistic pathway to an eventual two-state solution.”

The key lies in persuading moderate Arab states that they have the biggest stakes of all in achieving a better outcome for Gaza: first, because a Hamas-controlled Gaza is another outpost (along with Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen) of Iranian-backed militancy in the heart of the Arab world and, second, because a long-running crisis in Gaza will become a rallying cry for religious extremism in their own populations.

There’s worse: An unresolved crisis in Gaza will ultimately harden Israel, shift it further to the right and put an eventual Palestinian state permanently out of reach. It will also divide the Arab world, strengthen Iran and undermine the modernizing course that the best Arab leaders have embarked on. Those leaders shouldn’t pretend that the burden of a solution in Gaza lies entirely with Jerusalem or Washington.

The good news is that those leaders don’t just have the most to lose. They also have the most to give. They have a measure of legitimacy with Gazans that non-Arab actors will never have and that Palestinians in Hamas and the Palestinian Authority have forsaken. They have political credibility with Israel, the United States and the European Union.

And they have financial, diplomatic, intelligence and military resources for an extended relief and reconstruction effort, provided it is extensively supplemented by help from the West. No U.S. administration is going to want to involve itself in another nation-building exercise in the Middle East, above all if it involves American forces. But we can be part of a solution that helps Israel, hurts Iran, defangs Islamists and offers Palestinians a visible avenue toward peace, prosperity and independence.

There will need to be confidence-building measures, commitments and deadlines — not just for Gaza’s demilitarization and reconstruction but also for Israel to deliver on its end. That would begin with a halt to new settlement construction. In doing so, Israel would be fulfilling the ultimate purpose of Zionism, which is Jewish self-rule — neither rule by others nor rule over others. That’s a point the current government of Israel refuses to accept, which is one of the many reasons Benjamin Netanyahu must not remain in office.

There are many who will object to an Arab Mandate for Palestine — those who want a Palestinian state now, those who want a Palestinian state never and those who think we can somehow return to the formulas of the Oslo Accords and other failed peace efforts. In the last analysis, such a mandate is the only plausible way forward.

Footnotes:

1. WWI redrew the map of Europe and the Middle East dramatically, leading to:

• The collapse of 4 empires

• The creation or restoration of over 15 sovereign states in Europe

• The mandate system in the Middle East that delayed full independence but planted the seeds for later states

• After World War I (1914–1918), the collapse of empires—the Austro-Hungarian, Ottoman, Russian, and German Empires—led to a dramatic redrawing of borders and the creation or re-creation of many nation-states.

  Here’s a breakdown of the new or restored countries formed in the aftermath of WWI (primarily between 1917 and the early 1920s):

  ---

  🌍 Europe

  From the Austro-Hungarian Empire

  1. Austria – 1918 (became a republic after the fall of the Habsburg monarchy)

  2. Hungary – 1918 (also a republic, later a kingdom without a king)

  3. Czechoslovakia – 1918 (merged Czechs and Slovaks; split into Czech Republic and Slovakia in 1993)

  4. Yugoslavia – 1918 (initially the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes)

  5. Poland – 1918 (restored independence after being partitioned for over a century)

  From the Russian Empire (due to Bolshevik Revolution and civil war)

  6. Finland – 1917 (declared independence from Russia)

  7. Estonia – 1918 (declared independence, recognized in 1920)

  8. Latvia – 1918

  9. Lithuania – 1918

  10. Poland – again, from both Austro-Hungarian and Russian lands

  11. Ukraine – briefly independent 1918–1921 (absorbed into the USSR)

  12. Belarus – briefly declared independence (1918–1919), became Soviet Republic

  13. Georgia – 1918–1921 (then annexed by USSR)

  14. Armenia – 1918–1920 (then annexed by USSR)

  15. Azerbaijan – 1918–1920 (then annexed by USSR)

  From the German Empire

  16. Poland – again (gained lands from Germany in the west, including the “Polish Corridor”)

  17. Free City of Danzig (Gdańsk) – 1920 (semi-independent under League of Nations)

  18. Saar Basin – 1920 (administered by the League of Nations; returned to Germany in 1935)

  19. Memel Territory – 1920 (taken from Germany, later annexed by Lithuania)

  ---

  🌍. Middle East (from the Ottoman Empire)

  Although most former Ottoman territories were carved into mandates under French and British control, some national identities began to form:

  20. Turkey – 1923 (from the ashes of the Ottoman Empire, following the War of Independence)

  21. Hejaz – 1916–1925 (briefly independent, later merged into Saudi Arabia)

  22. Iraq – 1921 (British Mandate, became formally independent in 1932)

  23. Transjordan – 1921 (British protectorate, later became Jordan in 1946)

  24. Palestine – British Mandate established in 1920 (not a sovereign state, but the beginning of modern conflict and claims)

  25. Lebanon – French Mandate (established 1920, became independent in 1943)

  26. Syria – French Mandate (established 1920, became independent in 1946)

  ---

  🗺️ Other Key Transformations

  • Ireland – The Irish Free State was established in 1922 after the Anglo-Irish Treaty, following the Irish War of Independence.

  • Saudi Arabia – Unified in 1932, but roots of unification began with conquests in the early 1920s.

2. After World War II (post-1945), many new nation-states emerged due to decolonization, the collapse of empires, partitions, and the reorganization of borders. Below is a list of notable newly created or newly independent nation-states from 1945 onward, organized by region:

---

🌍 Europe

1. Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany) – 1949

2. German Democratic Republic (East Germany) – 1949

3. Austria – 1955 (restored full sovereignty after Allied occupation)

4. Cyprus – 1960 (from British control)

5. Malta – 1964

6. Slovenia – 1991 (from Yugoslavia)

7. Croatia – 1991

8. North Macedonia – 1991

9. Bosnia and Herzegovina – 1992

10. Czech Republic and Slovakia – 1993 (from peaceful split of Czechoslovakia)

11. Montenegro – 2006 (from union with Serbia)

12. Kosovo – 2008 (declared independence from Serbia, partially recognized)

---

🌍 Middle East & North Africa

1. Israel – 1948

2. Jordan – 1946 (from British Mandate)

3. Syria – 1946 (from French Mandate)

4. Lebanon – 1946 (full independence from France)

5. Libya – 1951

6. Sudan – 1956

7. Algeria – 1962

8. Yemen Arab Republic (North Yemen) – 1962

9. People’s Democratic Republic of Yemen (South Yemen) – 1967

10. United Arab Emirates – 1971

11. Bahrain – 1971

12. Qatar – 1971

13. Oman – 1971 (sovereignty reaffirmed)

---

🌍 Sub-Saharan Africa

Mostly through decolonization (1950s–1970s):

1. Ghana – 1957 (first Sub-Saharan African nation to gain independence)

2. Nigeria – 1960

3. Congo (Kinshasa / DRC) – 1960

4. Kenya – 1963

5. Zambia – 1964

6. Botswana – 1966

7. Angola – 1975

8. Mozambique – 1975

9. Zimbabwe – 1980 (formerly Rhodesia)

10. Namibia – 1990

11. Eritrea – 1993 (after war with Ethiopia)

    … and many more (more than 40 in total during this wave)

---

🌏 Asia

1. India and Pakistan – 1947 (Partition of British India)

2. Sri Lanka (Ceylon) – 1948

3. Indonesia – 1949 (from Dutch rule)

4. Vietnam – North Vietnam in 1954 (from France), unified in 1975

5. Laos and Cambodia – 1953

6. Bangladesh – 1971 (from Pakistan after war)

7. Timor-Leste (East Timor) – 2002 (from Indonesia)

---

🌎 Americas

1. Suriname – 1975 (from Netherlands)

2. Antigua and Barbuda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Belize, etc. – Various dates in the 1960s–1980s (from British rule)

3. Barbados – 1966

4. Bahamas – 1973

5. Trinidad and Tobago – 1962

6. Jamaica – 1962

7. Guyana – 1966

---

🌐 Post-Soviet States (1991)

15 states emerged after the Soviet Union dissolved:

• Russia

• Ukraine

• Belarus

• Estonia

• Latvia

• Lithuania

• Moldova

• Georgia

• Armenia

• Azerbaijan

• Kazakhstan

• Uzbekistan

• Turkmenistan

• Kyrgyzstan

• Tajikistan