Recently, Tucker Carlson interviewed Amb Mike Huckabee, the United States Ambassador to Israel. During their often contentious conversation, Tucker pressed for a universal definition of a National Right to Exist. Huckabee mentioned the three principles of a national right to exist. Tucker’s schizophrenic questioning style made it difficult to make a clear proclamation of these points, as he kept bobbing between universal points and theology specific to Israel.
While I am not a Dispensationalist, and Huckabee is such, I agree with Huckabee that there is a two-fold defense of Israel’s right to exist. One is theological and concerns Israel’s current Covenantal position. I will cover this in a different post. The other is rooted in secular arguments from history and law and can be applied to any nation. They are (1) historical ties of an existing national identity to an indigenous land, (2) the capability to exercise sovereign control over land in a lawful manner, and (3) modern legal frameworks that confer specific rights.
The right to exist does not mean a nation can never cease to exist, or can never act in a sufficiently heinous manner that either God or man decides the world will only be safe if sovereignty is stripped completely away from them. The right to exist simply means that their presence and their legal authority are not considered inherently illegitimate. This legitimacy is not a blanket endorsement of everything a nation does, but a simple recognition of the presumption of legal legitimacy of its existence and acts. Nations still must give an account for what they do. In the case of the Middle East conflict, the answer to this question is critical. If Israel has a right to exist, it can defend itself against enemies, and allegations against it must be vetted by due process, in which the nation is afforded rights. If Israel does not have the right to exist, then its presence in the land is analogous to a gang of thieves raiding your home. In the interview, Huckabee said that the central question is whether the phrase “drive the Jews from the river to the sea” is a legitimate point of view. Tucker argues this is ambiguous, but I’m going to show in the following paragraphs that Israel clearly has a right to exist
(1) Historical ties of an existing national identity to an indigenous land simply mean that a national identity has a history in the land in question. This history can include genetic, linguistic, religious, political, legal, or social continuity to ancestors who occupied the land. This forms the natural substrate of a nation, which is a civilization with a common ethnic core, a common language, culture, and history in a land. This substrate is the natural definition of a nation
Israel has all of these, except for the political. While the modern forms of Hebrew, Judaism, and Jewish cultural norms have undergone significant changes, they have maintained continuity with their ancient counterparts.
Ashkenazi Jews have their genetic genesis in the Levant, and still carry the Y – Chromosomes of middle eastern origins (aka Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob). Tucker falsely claims there is no evidence that the Jews living in Israel today are the Jews. Multiple studies, of which I have already linked a couple, demonstrate that the Ashkenazi Jews are indeed both descended from a Middle Eastern genesis and more closely related to each other than to adjacent groups with whom they have mixed. Sephardic and Mizrahi. Tucker was equally adamant that there is no evidence that Benjamin Netanyahu has any Jewish ancestry or connection to Israel before 1948. Had Tucker done a modicum of research, he could have spared himself some error.Â
Israel’s current political system, Democratic Socialism, has no parallel in Ancient Israel. This has been the form of government for 76 years. Among the governments of the world, Israel is middle-aged. Very few nations have a form of government that has lasted over 100 years, with the United Kingdom and the United States being the oldest governments on earth. The majority of the nations have governments that have only existed in their current form since World War II. This weakness is only a weakness in theological discussions, not geopolitical discussions, and is mitigated by the fact that ancient traditions shape how the modern framework operates in practice.
Palestine has no continuity except for genetics. The modern Palestinian national identity came into existence in 1962 when Yasser Arafat founded the PLO. Before then, they held several ethnic identities. In the early days of the Zionist movement, they were known as Arabs. Ancestors of modern Palestinians include Edomites, Moabites, and Ammonites. These ancestors practiced paleo-paganism, and not Islam, which is the predominant practice among Palestinians today.
(2) The capability to exercise sovereign control over land in a lawful manner is essential in defining a nation’s right to exist, because you cannot speak meaningfully of a national government existing if it does not have the means of enforcing its sovereign will over a territory. One might speak of a nation as an analogy that lacks this, but any literal application of nationhood or nationality requires that the specified nation be able to enforce its own legal mandates in its own territory and among its people.
Exercising control over a territory or people in a lawful manner simply means that there is an organized legal system designed for the public welfare of the nation as a whole, rather than brute dominance by robbers and criminals. We should never think of pirates, drug cartels, or human trafficking cartels as legitimate nations.
Israel fulfills this criterion easily, with one of the world’s strongest militaries. While its godless Democratic Socialist System leaves much to be desired, it meets the qualification of being able to provide a legal and political system that serves the public interest as defined within a Democratic Socialist framework. Palestine completely and epically fails here, to the point that peace negotiations during the October 7, 2023 war were not conducted with its lawful government (known as the Palestinian Authority), but with the terrorist group Hamas.
(3) Modern international legal frameworks that formally confer specific rights. The beginning of these was simply treaties between nations, which have been occurring for thousands of years. Beginning in the mid 19th century, more advanced constructs began to emerge that led to the current international order, including the establishment of the United Nations and its various organs. Formal diplomatic recognition morphed into more complex international agreements and eventually international bodies.
Israel is recognized as both a nation and the Jewish homeland by multiple legal declarations. About 162 nations recognize Israel, and Israel has membership in the United Nations. Palestine is recognized by 157 nations and has observer status in the United Nations. Modern legal frameworks form the only basis for Palestinian statehood, as the Palestinian national identity has neither a historical claim nor any ability to act sovereign over any territory. Â
Conclusion
Israel has a right to exist under every canon used to evaluate this, having a stronger case than many other nations under this secular standard of evaluation. Critical to the right of a nation to exist, is to form their own mechanisms of governance and defense. Denial of such, after almost 80 years as a sovereign state, is xenophobia; and if employed in a discriminatory manner amounts to Antisemitism.