Does Israel Have a Right to Exist?

As folks line up to either love Israel or hate Israel, it's important to understand who created Israel. The modern nation state of Israel was created by the United Nation in 1947.

The UN officially came into existence on October 24, 1945. It was the brainchild of the Rockefellers and other very rich ruling families, the banksters and advocates for fiat central banks, and corporate fascists who only had one goal: concentrate all wealth and power into the hands of the ruling elites and create a globalized economy based on socialist principles. The socialist principles, among other things, negated free markets and were based on the premise of a global industrial feudalism wherein all serfs on the plantations of the elites had subsistence level economic parity. Socialist union power was the guiding principle behind the creation of the United Nations, according to its own website, here.

The name "United Nations", coined by United States President Franklin D. Roosevelt was first used in the Declaration by United Nations of 1 January 1942, during the Second World War, when representatives of 26 nations pledged their Governments to continue fighting together against the Axis Powers.

States first established international organizations to cooperate on specific matters. The International Telecommunication Union was founded in 1865 as the International Telegraph Union, and the Universal Postal Union was established in 1874. Both are now United Nations specialized agencies.

Interestingly, many liberals and progressives view the UN as a shinning star of justice that will militarily impose by force the deliverance of humanity from hunger, want and misery. Little do these folks know or understand that the forces and institutions they claim to despise as totalitarian, predatory and unjust, namely Wall Street, international banksters and multi-national corporations, are the exact same forces that created the UN.

Among other things, the UN also proclaimed dominion over the earth's real estate, regardless of who owned it, lived on it and who occupied it. The UN was committed to creating a New World Order that served the exclusive financial interests of the wealthy at the expense of human liberty.  To achieve their goal, they needed a partner to promote their absolute power and war against human liberty and, accordingly, their natural ally was the socialists who dominated labor union power. Together they forged a blueprint for impoverishment and constant conflict under the banner of UN tyranny.

The motivations of the UN and others to create the modern nation state of Israel are complex but definitely include post WW II guilt over the western extermination of 6 million Jews, extract control of the Jewish Christian Holy Land from a nearly 1,400 year uninterrupted Muslim domination and to flex its global governance muscle.

The nightmare created by the UN continues to this day.  Forcibly taking land away from some folks, giving it to other folks and forcing everybody to become neighbors with folks that they utterly despise is not a formula for peaceful co-existence but rather a recipe for constant war.  That's precisely what happened.

In 2010, foreign policy analyst Jeremy Hammond wrote a piece that obviously spawned some sparks when he questioned the authority of the UN to create Israel. But Hammond went even further and asserted that the UN never really created Israel based on his interpretation of UN Resolution 181.

The Myth of the U.N. Creation of Israel

There is a widely accepted belief that United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181 “created” Israel, based upon an understanding that this resolution partitioned Palestine or otherwise conferred legal authority or legitimacy to the declaration of the existence of the state of Israel....

the General Assembly passed Resolution 181 on November 29, with 33 votes in favor to 13 votes against, and 10 abstentions.[15] The relevant text of the resolution stated:

The General Assembly….

Recommends to the United Kingdom, as the mandatory Power for Palestine, and to all other Members of the United Nations the adoption and implementation, with regard to the future government of Palestine, of the Plan of Partition with Economic Union set out below; Requests that

(a) The Security Council take the necessary measure as provided for in the plan for its implementation;

(b) The Security Council consider, if circumstances during the transitional period require such consideration, whether the situation in Palestine constitutes a threat to the peace. If it decides that such a threat exists, and in order to maintain international peace and security, the Security Council should supplement the authorization of the General Assembly by taking measure, under Articles 39 and 41 of the Charter, to empower the United Nations Commission, as provided in this resolution, to exercise in Palestine the functions which are assigned to it by this resolution; (c) The Security Council determine as a threat to the peace, breach of the peace or act of aggression, in accordance with Article 39 of the Charter, any attempt to alter by force the settlement envisaged by this resolution;

(d) The Trusteeship Council be informed of the responsibilities envisaged for it in this plan;

Calls upon the inhabitants of Palestine to take such steps as may be necessary on their part to put this plan into effect;

Appeals to all Governments and all peoples to refrain from taking action which might hamper or delay the carrying out of these recommendations….[16]

A simple reading of the text is enough to show that the resolution did not partition Palestine or offer any legal basis for doing so. It merely recommended that the partition plan be implemented and requested the Security Council to take up the matter from there. It called upon the inhabitants of Palestine to accept the plan, but they were certainly under no obligation to do so.

Of course, Israel really does exist and has existed since May 14, 1948 when the UN partition became effective. Israel has a functioning government, a legislature, a judicial system, a military, a constitution and 8 million citizens of which 6 million are Jewish, here.

Quite naturally, Hammond's assertion that Israel doesn't or shouldn't legally exist created considerable blowback.  Israelnationalnews.com fired back.

Is UN Creation of Israel a Myth?

The October 26 edition of the Foreign Policy Journal features an article by its founder and editor, Jeremy R. Hammond, in which he claims that:

1. The UN General Assembly had no right to propose the partition plan for Israel and the Arabs (which the Arabs rejected, starting the 1948 Israeli War of Independence, ed.)

2. The Arab population was not given the right to self determination because the UN wanted to create the Jewish State

Hebrew University’s Middle East Studies noted lecturer, Dr. Mordecai Nisan, was asked by INN to respond to the article. Here is his response:

It is conventional to accept, at least theoretically, the authority of international law and its institutions as the definitive mechanisms for defining political situations and offering solutions to political conflicts. The alternative is force and violence as the benchmark of history. Certainly that has been a mighty and decisive benchmark considering that the map of the world and the delineation of borders predominantly were decided by war and its results.

In his essay on “The Myth of the U.N. creation of Israel,” Jeremy R. Hammond has offered a sophist-style scholarly refutation of the international foundation for Israel’s establishment in 1948. Basing himself on the intrinsic right of the Arabs of Palestine to the Land, any other claim criterion is nullified: the League of Nations, the United Nations, and Great Britain as the mandatory power of Palestine, are all excluded from legitimately determining the fate of Palestine in the political turmoil of 1947.

As a result of Arab refusal to partition Palestine, and the Jewish determination to secure a state in at least part of Palestine, war was the inevitable reality. At a certain point in early 1948, while fearing war with the Arabs within the country and Arabs from the surrounding Arab countries, Ben-Gurion understood that war was the only scenario on the horizon.

Of course it is a myth to assert or believe that the U.N. created Israel, because it was the Zionist military victory buoyed by an iron-will national tenacity which created a Jewish state in the teeth of Arab hostility and belligerency. It could not have been otherwise. Once Hammond denies authority to law and legally sanctioned international institutions to decide, he – like the Arabs - has pointed to force as the only alternative. The Arabs vitiated the view of the U.N., but to their great loss.

The idea that a minority population, as was the Jewish population in Palestine in 1948, has a right to affirm its national claim is not unknown in the thorny instances of intra-state conflicts. A minority like a majority may also have a rigorous claim to self-determination. It was after all this kind of demographic and ethnic situation which gave birth to Pakistan as a Muslim state in 1947, separate from Hindu-majority India; or, if you like, to Catholic Ireland seceding from the United Kingdom in 1922. Perhaps African Christian/animist southern Sudan will take this momentous step in 2011. In such instances, pluralistic countries dissolve into their distinctive parts, for better or worse.

In Eretz Israel in 1948 and even before, the irreconcilable Jewish-Arab confrontation led to the breakdown of political order and the founding of an independent Jewish state, with Arab–populated areas of Palestine coming under the rule of Jordan and Egypt. Wanting all, in breach of the international decision for partition, the majority Arabs of Palestine ended up with nothing.

Hammond’s line of argument leads to the dissolution of the conflict-management or resolution-capacity of the U.N. And that is probably for the better, considering its endless meddling and globalist interventions in futile ways (read Lebanon), and its contrasting negligence to effectively intervene when the situation demands it (read Rwanda and Darfur).

Obviating its right to deny the Arabs all of Palestine means that the U.N. Partition Resolution 181 is, for Hammond, invalid. That being the case, there is no reason to accept the authority of U.N. Resolution 194 that calls for Palestinian refugee return. An emasculated U.N. cannot be manipulated to be only good for the Arabs and bad for the Jews when that is politically convenient. Hammond argues that the U.N. did not have a right to create Israel, so then it does not have a right to dissolve its existence under the guise of sanctifying resolution 194 from 62 years ago.

It is transparently true that Israel’s founding came through the sword, but one exercised on behalf of the transcending right of an ancient and integral people, the likes of whose special claim to the Land of Israel no other human collectivity can equal whatsoever. To continually hound Israel by raising the question of its legitimacy will only assure, may I suggest, future wars whose results will likely approximate in bold colors the results of 1948.

Israel is no different than any other nation. It affirms international law and its organizations when it benefits Israel but rejects it when things don't go their way.

The UN would never have been created had it not been for WW II which was really just a continuation of WW I. WW I would never have happened had it not been for the creation of the Federal Reserve. It's no accident that the Federal Reserve was created in 1913 and that WW I broke out in 1914. Without the Federal Reserve, there would have been no US intervention in Europe's chronic wars and feuding empires, and the escalation of violence would have been restricted to financial resources that were extremely weak in Europe. The Federal Reserve and its fiat money printing machine facilitated the US funding of WW I and WW II and it also spawned the monster known as the military industrial complex (MIC) that now rules with absolute power in the District of Crime (DC).  The MIC is a voracious monster that is consuming American liberty and prosperity.

When we think about Israel, how it came to be and the insidious and evil forces that created the Federal Reserve, WW I, WW II, the United Nations and Israel, it becomes clearly evident that big government, central banks and supra-national bodies like the UN are directly responsible for untold human misery, violence and carnage.

Moreover, Biblical Israel is and always has been the most explosive patch of dirt in human history because it's where Judaism, Christianity and Islam have always collided. The religious factor will not go away and the Jews in Israel are not going away.

Israel is here. It can't be undone. Well, it can be undone but only if Israel is militarily defeated and the Jewish people are annihilated.

Should the Arab Muslims just give up the fight over Israel? Israel only occupies about 1/2 of 1% of the Arab land mass. It's got no oil or natural resources worth warring over.

Unfortunately, there is just something about Israel that will propel folks to fight over it for all eternity as the Jews, Christians and Muslims all claim title to Biblical Israel.