On Israel's 70th Anniversary

April 18^th was the 70^th anniversary of Israel’s independence, and it was celebrated throughout the country. Israel, of course, is perennially on the watch of world opinion, and its history and policies elicit all sorts of moral comments.

            The basic ethical questions about Israel are from settled. Does it have a moral right to exist? Can Zionism be moral? Theodor Herzl, legitimately concerned about the plight of the Jews in Europe after centuries of intense persecution, established Zionism as a modern movement. He hoped Jews would get a State of their own, to ensure that they would be safe from the abuses of the past.

            This seemed like a reasonable request, given that, under the banner of nationalism and in the context of decolonization, many other nations also requested a State of their own. The problem, however, was that unlike other nationalist movements, Zionism claimed lands that were already occupied by other nations. And thus, the very false conception of a “land without people for a people without land” was born.

            Predictably, this false conception eventually led to conflicts between local Arab communities and Jewish immigrants. It became clear that, once the British withdrew imperial rule, the two communities would not be able to coexist in one single country, and a partition (not unlike that of Pakistan and India) would be necessary.

            Alas, the United Nations approved a partition plan (thus giving rise to Israel as a nation in 1948), but the Arab nations did not accept it, and attempted to invade Israel in a war that turned out to be humiliating for the Arabs. Although this partition plan was not entirely fair to the Arabs (they were the majority population, but received a smaller proportion of the territory), it can still be safely argued that the Arab nations were the aggressors and Israel was the victim.

            However, ever since, Israel seems to have lost its moral ground. During that very same war of 1948, Israel seized the opportunity to expel the remaining Arab communities from the territories it had been granted, and to further expand its territories beyond the original partition plan. In 1967, Israel preemptively occupied the Palestinian territories, and to this day, it is still an occupying force in the West Bank, and it enforces a brutal blockade on Gaza.

            Israel takes moral pride in two particular aspects: it treats its Arab citizens with respect, and it follows proper moral guidelines during military operations. Both claims should be moderated. It is for the most part true that Arabs in Israel have more rights than in any other country in the Middle East. But, although formally they are equal under the law, the truth is that Arab citizens of Israel are still treated as second-class, when it comes to basic things such as housing, healthcare, education, etc.

            Furthermore, equality under the law only applies to Arab citizens within Israel. Arabs living in the occupied territories do not have rights as Israeli citizens, and in fact, they are daily humiliated by the occupying Israeli forces. Ever since 1967, Israel has claimed that the occupation is a necessary action in order to defend itself against the threat of annihilation by its Arab neighbors. That certainly may have been the case at first, but no scenario can ever justify fifty years of illegal occupation, especially when that occupation is complemented with illegal settlements that keep pushing Arab communities away.

            As for the moral behavior of the Israeli army, this also requires some clarification. It is true that, as opposed to some of the organizations that pretend its annihilation (such as Hamas), Israel tries not to directly target civilians whenever hostilities break out, and this is an important moral difference between terrorists and legitimate military forces. But, Israel does frequently engage in disproportional responses to attacks from its enemies.

              Zionism can be a moral movement. After all, Israel does have a right to exist, and it does have a right to maintain a particular national character, as haven for persecuted Jews all over the world. However, in order to keep the ethical high ground, in the celebration of its 70^th anniversary, Israel needs to do some soul-searching and question the moral worth of some of its policies.