The Rights of Large Nations

There is no prospect for a stable settlement—a “solution”—of the Israel-Arab conflict. It is possible to conceive of a settlement but from a practical standpoint there is no chance that it would be put into effect. For instance, one might conceive that Israel should cease being a Jewish state; should, that is to say, become a secular, pluralist, progressive, one-man one-vote republic in the Western mode, with no second-class citizens and no special relation to any citizens of other nations—a country in which Jews happened to be a majority at the moment, but non-Jews had full rights and might become, through one development or another, a majority.

In relation to a state of that. kind, one might conceive that the Arabs could “forget the past,” “accept Israel’s existence’ and sit down to hard-headed negotiations based on military, political and economic realities. There would no longer be in the situation the supra-secular, supratemporal factors that cannot be resolved by pragmatic bargaining. With those absolutes present, however, it it not persuasive to advise the Arabs ta accept Israel’s existence after nineteen years. The Jews, oriented on the supra-secular, declined to accept Israel’s non-existence for 1900 years. Even without the supra-secular we refuse to accept Communist China’s existence after eighteen years, and East Germany’s after twenty-two. Of course it is conceivable that the Arabs should let bygones be bygones and reconcile themselves to the best deal they can get, even without any change in Israel’s political nature; it is conceivable, but no more likely than that Israel is at present ready to change.

JB

About the Author

James Burnham

Featured Tags

There is no prospect for a stable settlement—a “solution”—of the Israel-Arab conflict. It is possible to conceive of a settlement but from a practical standpoint there is no chance that it would be put into effect. For instance, one might conceive that Israel should cease being a Jewish state; should, that is to say, become a secular, pluralist, progressive, one-man one-vote republic in the Western mode, with no second-class citizens and no special relation to any citizens of other nations—a country in which Jews happened to be a majority at the moment, but non-Jews had full rights and might become, through one development or another, a majority.

In relation to a state of that. kind, one might conceive that the Arabs could “forget the past,” “accept Israel’s existence’ and sit down to hard-headed negotiations based on military, political and economic realities. There would no longer be in the situation the supra-secular, supratemporal factors that cannot be resolved by pragmatic bargaining. With those absolutes present, however, it it not persuasive to advise the Arabs ta accept Israel’s existence after nineteen years. The Jews, oriented on the supra-secular, declined to accept Israel’s non-existence for 1900 years. Even without the supra-secular we refuse to accept Communist China’s existence after eighteen years, and East Germany’s after twenty-two. Of course it is conceivable that the Arabs should let bygones be bygones and reconcile themselves to the best deal they can get, even without any change in Israel’s political nature; it is conceivable, but no more likely than that Israel is at present ready to change.