Legitimacy of the State of Israel

Last updated

The Israeli national emblem, showcasing a menorah surrounded by olive branches with "Israel" written in Hebrew below it. Emblem of Israel.svg
The Israeli national emblem, showcasing a menorah surrounded by olive branches with "Israel" written in Hebrew below it.

Since the Israeli Declaration of Independence in 1948, a number of countries and individuals have challenged the country's political legitimacy. Under international law, Israel has always met the standards for recognition as a sovereign state. [1] [ page needed ] However, over the course of the Arab–Israeli conflict, the country's authority has been questioned on a number of fronts. Critics of Israel may be motivated by their opposition to the country's right to exist or, since the 1967 Arab–Israeli War, their disapproval of the established power structure within the Israeli-occupied territories. Some have called for Israel's destruction.

Contents

On 11 May 1949, Israel was admitted to the United Nations (UN) as a full member state. [2] [3] It also has bilateral ties with each of the Permanent Five. As of 2022, 28 of the 193 UN member states do not recognize Israeli sovereignty; the Muslim world accounts for 25 of the 28 non-recognizing countries, with Cuba, North Korea, and Venezuela representing the remainder. Most of the governments opposed to Israel have cited the ongoing Israeli–Palestinian conflict as the basis for their stance.

In the early 1990s, Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin and Palestinian political leader Yasser Arafat exchanged the Letters of Mutual Recognition. Pursuant to this correspondence, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) formally recognized Israel's right to exist as a sovereign state while Israel formally recognized the PLO as a legitimate entity representing the Palestinian people. This development set the stage for negotiations towards achieving a two-state solution (i.e., Israel alongside the State of Palestine) through what would become known as the Oslo Accords, as part of the Israeli–Palestinian peace process.

Diplomatic normalization and legitimacy

From an international relations perspective, Israel meets basic standards for legitimacy as a state. [1] [ page needed ]

As of 2020, 30 United Nations member states do not recognise the State of Israel: 13 of the 21 UN members in the Arab League: Algeria, Comoros, Djibouti, Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Syria, Tunisia, and Yemen; a further nine members of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Brunei, Indonesia, Iran, Malaysia, Mali, Niger, and Pakistan; and Cuba, North Korea and Venezuela. [4] On the other hand, nine members of the Arab League recognise Israel: Bahrain, [5] Egypt, [6] Jordan, [7] Mauritania, [8] Morocco, [9] Oman, [10] Sudan, [11] United Arab Emirates [12] and Palestine; [13] and most of the non-Arab members of Organisation of Islamic Cooperation also recognise Israel.

A handshake between Hussein I of Jordan and Yitzhak Rabin, accompanied by Bill Clinton, during the Israel-Jordan peace negotiations, 25 July 1994 Hussein Clinton Rabin.jpg
A handshake between Hussein I of Jordan and Yitzhak Rabin, accompanied by Bill Clinton, during the Israel-Jordan peace negotiations, 25 July 1994

In the 1990s, Islamic and leftist movements in Jordan attacked the Israel–Jordan Treaty of Peace as legitimization. [14] Significant minorities in Jordan see Israel as an illegitimate state, and reversing the normalization of diplomatic relations was central to Jordanian discourse. [15]

In 2002 the Arab League unanimously adopted the Arab Peace Initiative at their Beirut summit. The comprehensive peace plan called for full normalization of Arab-Israeli relations in return for full Israeli withdrawal from the territories occupied in June 1967. [16] Turki al-Faisal of Saudi Arabia said that in endorsing the initiative every Arab state had "made clear that they will pay the price for peace, not only by recognising Israel as a legitimate state in the area, but also to normalise relations with it and end the state of hostilities that had existed since 1948." [17] [18]

Palestinian Authority and Hamas

Yitzhak Rabin, Bill Clinton, and Yasser Arafat at the Oslo Accords signing ceremony, 13 September 1993 Bill Clinton, Yitzhak Rabin, Yasser Arafat at the White House 1993-09-13.jpg
Yitzhak Rabin, Bill Clinton, and Yasser Arafat at the Oslo Accords signing ceremony, 13 September 1993

Following the Oslo I Accord in 1993, the Palestinian Authority and Israel conditionally recognized each other's right to govern specific areas of the country. This boosted Israel's legal authority and legitimacy on the international stage. [19] Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas said while speaking at the UN regarding Palestinian recognition, "We did not come here seeking to delegitimize a state established years ago, and that is Israel." [20]

Hamas, in contrast, does not recognize Israel as a legitimate government. Furthermore, Hamas denies the legitimacy of the Oslo I Accord. [21]

Rhetoric of delegitimization

Following the Palestinian legislative election of 2006 and Hamas' governance of the Gaza Strip, the term "delegitimisation" has been frequently applied to rhetoric surrounding the Israeli–Palestinian conflict.

Use of pejorative terminology

Since the Islamic Revolution in 1979, Iran's official position has been to not recognize the State of Israel, often employing pejorative terminology in its rhetoric, with Iranian officials and state-controlled media frequently refer to Israel as the "Zionist regime" and "Occupied Palestine". [22] The use of the term "Zionist regime" instead of "State of Israel" in Iranian discourse implies that Israel is not a legitimate sovereign state but rather an oppressive regime. The people of Israel are often labeled not as Israelis but as "Zionists", furthering the narrative of illegitimacy. [22] Such rhetoric has been consistent in Iranian media, especially in English-language publications targeting international audiences. [22]

In contrast, Jordan's linguistic approach towards Israel underwent a significant transformation following the peace treaty signed on October 26, 1994. Prior to the treaty, Jordanian media employed terms like "Filastiin" (Palestine), "al-ardh al-muhtallah" (the occupied land), and "al-kayaan as-suhyuuni" (the Zionist entity), mirroring the state of war and ideological conflict. However, post-peace, there was a noticeable shift to more neutral terms such as "Israel" and "the state of Israel". [23]

Legitimacy rhetoric as antisemitism

Delegitimization is seen by some observers to be a double standard which separates Israel from other legitimate nations which have imperfect government. Natan Sharansky, head of the Jewish Agency, discussed the three Ds for determining new antisemitism. The third of the three Ds is delegitimization. He explains "when Israel's fundamental right to exist is denied – alone among all peoples in the world – this too is anti-Semitism." [24]

Dore Gold, President of the Israeli think tank Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA), believes there is a "campaign to delegitimize Israel" based on three themes: a "denial of Israel's right to security", "portrayal of Israel as a criminal state", and "denial of Jewish history". [25] Elhanan Yakira, professor of philosophy at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, also considers portrayal of Israel as "criminal" and denial of Jewish history, specifically the Holocaust, to be key to a delegitimizing narrative. [26] Alan Dershowitz believes that other standard lines of argument include claims of Israel's "colonial" nature, a belief that statehood was not granted "legally", the apartheid analogy, and the necessity of a one-state solution. [27] According to Irwin Cotler, the lopsided number of anti-Israel resolutions passed by the UN is an example of delegitimization. [28]

Canadian ex-Foreign Minister John Baird has characterized Israel's delegitimization as the new antisemitism. [29]

Legitimacy rhetoric as distraction

M.J. Rosenberg, writing in 2011 in the Los Angeles Times , argued that the term "delegitimization" is a "distraction", whose purpose is to divert attention away from world opposition to the "illegitimate" Israeli occupation of the West Bank and blockade of the Gaza Strip, from the "illegal" Israeli settlements, and from "the ever-louder calls for Israel to grant Palestinians equal rights". He concludes that "It's not the Palestinians who are delegitimizing Israel, but the Israeli government, which maintains the occupation. And the leading delegitimizer is Netanyahu, whose contemptuous rejection of peace is turning Israel into an international pariah." [30]

Dangers of delegitimization to peace

According to Gerald Steinberg writing for JCPA, attacks on Israel's legitimacy are a barrier to the Israeli–Palestinian peace process. [31] Amos Yadlin, former head of Israeli intelligence said that "delegitimization of Israel is a graver threat than war." [32] Thomas Friedman, writing in The New York Times , says "for 100 years, through violence and delegitimization, Israelis and Palestinians have made sure that the other was never allowed to really feel at home in Israel." [33] Delegitimization of the adversary, among all the psychological themes, is said to be "one of the major detrimental forces that turns a conflict to be vicious and violent, while preventing its peaceful resolution." [34]

US President Barack Obama said in a May 2011 speech "for the Palestinians, efforts to delegitimize Israel will end in failure. Symbolic actions to isolate Israel at the United Nations in September won't create an independent state." [35] In 2012, the president said, "whenever an effort is made to delegitimize the State of Israel, my administration has opposed them." [36] Irwin Cotler, former Canadian Attorney General, said that delegitimization is "masked under the current discourse". It is hidden in the anti-Israel resolutions passed by the UN, universal jurisdiction is "often abused" regarding Israel, it is "laundered under the cover of human rights", and is hidden behind the use of accusations of racism and apartheid. [28]

Delegitimization is seen as a threat to Israel's security. Demands for Israel to not enter into Gaza and defeat Hamas during Operation Pillar of Defense are characterized by David Schwartz as a "delegitimization of Israel's right to defend itself." [37] Tzipi Livni said that "the threat of delegitimization intensifies other threats facing Israel, and limits our ability to protect ourselves." [38]

Legitimacy and Israeli uniqueness

Professor Emanuel Adler of the University of Toronto considers Israel as willing to accept a situation where its legitimacy may be challenged, because it sees itself as occupying a unique place in the world order. [39] Stacie E. Goddard of Wellesley College argues that the legitimacy of Israeli historical narratives is used as a tool to secure territory. [40]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Zionism</span> Movement supporting a Jewish homeland

Zionism is a nationalist movement that emerged in the 19th century to enable the establishment of a homeland for the Jewish people in Palestine, a region roughly corresponding to the Land of Israel in Jewish tradition. Following the establishment of the modern state of Israel, Zionism became an ideology that supports the development and protection of the State of Israel as a Jewish state.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Israeli–Palestinian conflict</span> Ongoing military and political conflict in the Levant

The Israeli–Palestinian conflict, is an ongoing military and political conflict about self-determination within the territory of the former Mandatory Palestine. Key aspects of the conflict include the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, the status of Jerusalem, Israeli settlements, borders, security, water rights, Palestinian freedom of movement, and the Palestinian right of return.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">History of the State of Palestine</span>

The history of the State of Palestine describes the creation and evolution of the State of Palestine in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Palestinian territories</span> Occupied Palestinian territory in the Middle East

The Palestinian territories are the two regions of the former British Mandate for Palestine that have been occupied by Israel since the Six-Day War of 1967, namely the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has referred to the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, as "the Occupied Palestinian Territory", and this term was used as the legal definition by the ICJ in its advisory opinion of July 2004. The term occupied Palestinian territory was used by the United Nations and other international organizations between October 1999 and December 2012 to refer to areas controlled by the Palestinian National Authority, but from 2012, when Palestine was admitted as one of its non-member observer states, the United Nations started using exclusively the name State of Palestine. The European Union (EU) also uses the term "occupied Palestinian territory". The government of Israel and its supporters use the label "disputed territories" instead.

Soviet anti-Zionism is an anti-Zionist and pro-Arab doctrine promulgated in the Soviet Union during the Cold War. While the Soviet Union initially pursued a pro-Zionist policy after World War II due to its perception that the Jewish state would be socialist and pro-Soviet, its outlook on the Arab–Israeli conflict changed as Israel began to develop a close relationship with the United States and aligned itself with the Western Bloc. Anti-Israel Soviet propaganda intensified after Israel's sweeping victory in the 1967 Arab–Israeli War, and it was officially sponsored by the agitation and propaganda media of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union as well as by the KGB. Among other charges, it alleged that Zionism was a form of racism. The Soviets framed their anti-Zionist propaganda in the guise of a study of modern Zionism, dubbed Zionology. The Soviet anti-Israel policy included the regulated denial of permission for Jews in the Soviet Union to emigrate, primarily to Israel, but also to any other country.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">History of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict</span>

The history of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict traces back to the late 19th century when Zionists sought to establish a homeland for the Jewish people in Ottoman-controlled Palestine, a region roughly corresponding to the Land of Israel in Jewish tradition. The Balfour Declaration of 1917, issued by the British government, endorsed the idea of a Jewish homeland in Palestine, which led to an influx of Jewish immigrants to the region. Following World War II and the Holocaust, international pressure mounted for the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine, leading to the creation of Israel in 1948.

New antisemitism is the concept that a new form of antisemitism which developed in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, tends to manifest itself as anti-Zionism. The concept is included in some definitions of antisemitism, such as the working definition of antisemitism and the 3D test of antisemitism. The concept dates to the early 1970s, although the identification of anti-Zionism with antisemitism has "long been de rigueur in Jewish communal and broader pro-Israel circles".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Palestinian identity</span> Shift in implications of "Palestinian" over time

Since 1948, the term "Palestinian" has mainly been used to refer to the contemporary Palestinian people, defined as equivalent to the region's Arabs before 1948. Before the 1948 Palestine war, "Palestinian" referred to any person who was born in or lived in Palestine, regardless of their ethnic, cultural, linguistic, and religious affiliation. However, since the founding of Israel, the term has shifted to denote as a demonym the direct descendants of what was referred to as the region's Arab populace, having developed a distinctly Arab national identity. In contrast, the non-Arab Palestinian Jews became known as Israeli Jews after 1948, having developed a distinctly Jewish national identity.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Arab–Israeli conflict</span> Geopolitical conflict in the Middle East and North Africa

The Arab–Israeli conflict is the phenomenon involving political tension, military conflicts, and other disputes between various Arab countries and Israel, which escalated during the 20th century. The roots of the Arab–Israeli conflict have been attributed to the support by Arab League member countries for the Palestinians, a fellow League member, in the ongoing Israeli–Palestinian conflict; this in turn has been attributed to the simultaneous rise of Zionism and Arab nationalism towards the end of the 19th century, though the two national movements had not clashed until the 1920s.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Borders of Israel</span> Political boundaries between Israel and neighboring states

The modern borders of Israel exist as the result both of past wars and of diplomatic agreements between the State of Israel and its neighbours, as well as an effect of the agreements among colonial powers ruling in the region before Israel's creation. Only two of Israel's five total potential land borders are internationally recognized and uncontested, while the other three remain disputed; the majority of its border disputes are rooted in territorial changes that came about as a result of the 1967 Arab–Israeli War, which saw Israel occupy large swathes of territory from its rivals. Israel's two formally recognized and confirmed borders exist with Egypt and Jordan since the 1979 Egypt–Israel peace treaty and the 1994 Israel–Jordan peace treaty, while its borders with Syria, Lebanon and the Palestinian territories remain internationally defined as contested.

Muslim supporters of Israel refers to both Muslims and cultural Muslims who support the right to self-determination of the Jewish people and the likewise existence of a Jewish homeland in the Southern Levant, traditionally known as the Land of Israel and corresponding to the modern polity known as the State of Israel. Muslim supporters of the Israeli state are widely considered to be a rare phenomenon in light of the ongoing Israeli–Palestinian conflict and the larger Arab–Israeli conflict. Within the Muslim world, the legitimacy of the State of Israel has been challenged since its inception, and support for Israel's right to exist is a minority orientation. Pro-Israel Muslims have faced opposition from both moderate Muslims and Islamists.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Anti-Zionism</span> Opposition to Jewish nationalism

Anti-Zionism is opposition to Zionism. Although anti-Zionism is a heterogeneous phenomenon, all its proponents agree that the creation of the modern State of Israel, and the movement to create a sovereign Jewish state in the region of Palestine—a region partly coinciding with the biblical Land of Israel—was flawed or unjust in some way.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Religious anti-Zionism</span> Opposition to the State of Israel within religious contexts

While anti-Zionism usually utilizes ethnic and political arguments against the existence or policies of the state of Israel, anti-Zionism has also been expressed within religious contexts which have, at times, colluded and collided with the ethnopolitical arguments over Israel's legitimacy. Outside of the liberal and socialist fields of anti-Zionist currents, the religious arguments tend to predominate as the driving ideological power within the incumbent movements and organizations, and usually target the Israeli state's relationship with Judaism.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Racism in the State of Palestine</span> Discussion of racism

Racism in the Palestinian territories encompasses all forms and manifestations of racism experienced in the Palestinian Territories, of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem, irrespective of the religion, colour, creed, or ethnic origin of the perpetrator and victim, or their citizenship, residency, or visitor status. It may refer to Jewish settler attitudes regarding Palestinians as well as Palestinian attitudes to Jews and the settlement enterprise undertaken in their name.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criticism of Israel</span> Disapproval towards the Israeli government

Criticism of Israel is a subject of journalistic and scholarly commentary and research within the scope of international relations theory, expressed in terms of political science. Israel has faced international criticism since its declaration of independence in 1948 relating to a variety of issues, many of which are centered around human rights violations in its occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

This timeline of anti-Zionism chronicles the history of anti-Zionism, including events in the history of anti-Zionist thought.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1948 Palestine war</span> First war of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict

The 1948 Palestine war was fought in the territory of what had been, at the start of the war, British-ruled Mandatory Palestine. During the war, the British withdrew from Palestine, Zionist forces conquered territory and established the State of Israel, and over 700,000 Palestinians fled or were expelled. It was the first war of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict and the broader Arab–Israeli conflict.

Arab–Israeli relations refers to relations between Israel and Arab nations. Israel's relations with the Arab world are overshadowed by the Arab–Israeli conflict and the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Israel has been at war with Arab states on several occasions. Furthermore, a large majority of states within the Arab League do not recognize Israel, and Israelis and Jews in general are considered a frequent target of antisemitism in the Arab world. Antisemitism is considered an integral part of everyday culture in many Arab countries. After several Arab-Israeli wars, Egypt was the first Arab state to recognize Israel diplomatically in 1979 with the signing of the Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty. It was followed by Jordan with the Israel-Jordan Peace Treaty (1994). In 2020, four more Arab states normalized relations. There have also been talks of an emerging Arab–Israeli alliance against Iran.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Comparisons between Israel and Nazi Germany</span>

Comparisons between Israel and Nazi Germany occur frequently in some veins of anti-Zionism in relation to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. The legitimacy of these comparisons and their potential antisemitic nature is a matter of debate. Historically, figures like Arnold J. Toynbee have drawn parallels between Zionism and Nazism, a stance he maintained despite criticism. Scholar David Feldman suggests these comparisons are often rhetorical tools without specific antisemitic intent. The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) sees them as diminishing the Holocaust's significance.

References

  1. 1 2 Edward M. Siegel, ed., Israel's Legitimacy in Law and History (New York: Center for Near East Policy), 1993
  2. ↑ "un.org/en/members/ 3 July 2006".
  3. ↑ "Two Hundred and Seventh Plenary Meeting". The United Nations. 11 May 1949. Archived from the original on 12 September 2007. Retrieved 13 July 2007.{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  4. ↑ United States Congress (5 June 2008). "H. RES. 1249" (PDF). Since the publication of this document, Maldives has recognized Israel.
  5. ↑ "Bahrain becomes latest Arab nation to recognize Israel". AP NEWS. 11 September 2020. Retrieved 11 September 2020.
  6. ↑ Berenji, Shahin (1 July 2020). "Sadat and the Road to Jerusalem: Bold Gestures and Risk Acceptance in the Search for Peace". International Security. 45 (1): 127–163. doi: 10.1162/isec_a_00381 . S2CID   220633972.
  7. ↑ "Israel-Jordan Peace Treaty".
  8. ↑ "Israel and Mauritania to Establish Diplomatic Relations". Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs. 27 October 1999. Retrieved 5 August 2011.
  9. ↑ "Morocco latest country to normalise ties with Israel in US-brokered deal". BBC News . 10 December 2020. Retrieved 13 December 2020.
  10. ↑ "Israel's Diplomatic Missions Abroad: Status of relations" . Retrieved 5 August 2011.
  11. ↑ Schwartz, Felicia (23 October 2020). "Israel, Sudan Agree to Normalize Ties in U.S.-Brokered Deal". The Wall Street Journal . Retrieved 12 December 2020.
  12. ↑ "'Historic Diplomatic Breakthrough': Read the Full Statement on Israel-UAE Agreement". Haaretz. 13 August 2020.
  13. ↑ Khartoum Resolution (1 September 1967), League of Arab States.
  14. ↑ Paul L. Scham and Russell E. Lucas. "'Normalization' and 'Anti-Normalization' in Jordan: The Public Debate [ permanent dead link ]" Middle East Review of International Affairs, Vol. 5, No. 3 (September 2001)
  15. ↑ Mustafa Hamarneh, Rosemary Hollis, Khalil Shikaki. Jordanian-Palestinian Relations – Where to? Four Scenarios for the Future. Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1997. p. 8
  16. ↑ Robertson, L (2003). Security and Environment in the Mediterranean: Conceptualising Security and Environmental Conflicts. Springer. p. 340. ISBN   3540401075.
  17. ↑ Black, Ian (18 October 2008). "Time to resurrect the Arab peace plan" . Retrieved 1 April 2013.
  18. ↑ "About ORG". Oxford Research group. Retrieved 1 April 2013.
  19. ↑ Burhan Dajani. "The September 1993 Israeli-PLO Documents: A Textual Analysis". Journal of Palestine Studies Vol. 23, No. 3 (Spring, 1994), pp. 5–23
  20. ↑ David Ariosto and Michael Pearson (30 November 2012). "U.N. approves Palestinian 'observer state' bid". CNN. Retrieved 30 March 2013.
  21. ↑ "Haniyeh calls for formation of Palestinian state on 1967 lines". Haaretz. Associated Press. 19 December 2006. Retrieved 16 April 2014.
  22. 1 2 3 Jaspal, Rusi (2014). "Representing the 'Zionist Regime': Mass Communication of Anti-Zionism in the English-Language Iranian Press". British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies. 41 (3): 287–305. doi:10.1080/13530194.2014.888261. hdl: 2086/8826 . S2CID   144331371.
  23. ↑ Darwish, Ibrahim (December 2010). "Pre-Peace and Post-Peace Referring in Jordanian Journalistic Arabic". Names a Journal of Onomastics. 58 (4): 191–196. doi: 10.1179/002777310X12852321500149 .
  24. ↑ Natan Sharansky (Fall 2004). "3D Test of Anti-Semitism: Demonization, Double Standards, Delegitimization". Jewish Political Studies Review. Retrieved 28 March 2013.
  25. ↑ "The Challenge to Israel's Legitimacy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 1 April 2013.
  26. ↑ Elhanan Yakira. Post-Zionism, Post-Holocaust: Three Essays on Denial, Forgetting, and the Delegitimation of Israel. Cambridge University Press, 2009. ISBN   0521127866. pp. 36–46
  27. ↑ Alan Dershowitz. "Countering Challenges to Israel's Legitimacy". Israel's Rights as a Nation-State in International Diplomacy. Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, 2011.
  28. 1 2 Harkov, Lahav (20 March 2012). "Delegitimization of Israel masked as good vs. evil". Jerusalem Post. Retrieved 30 March 2013.
  29. ↑ Keinon, Herb (31 January 2012). "Delegitimization of Israel is new anti-Semitism". The Jerusalem Post. Retrieved 28 March 2013.
  30. ↑ Rosenberg, M.J. (17 July 2011). "Israel: 'Delegitimization' is just a distraction". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 26 March 2013.
  31. ↑ Gerald M. Steinberg (22 August 2002). "Starting Over After Oslo". Jerusalem Center for Public Policy. Retrieved 30 March 2013.
  32. ↑ Podolsky, Philip (26 December 2012). "'Delegitimization' of Israel a graver threat than war, former intelligence chief says". Times of Israel. Retrieved 30 March 2013.
  33. ↑ Thomas L. Friedman (5 September 1993). "Promised Land; Israel and the Palestinians See a Way to Co-Exist". The New York Times. Retrieved 28 March 2013.
  34. ↑ Daniel Bar-Tal (September 2004). "Delegitimization". Beyondintractability.org. Retrieved 30 March 2013.
  35. ↑ "Obama Speech, Full Text". Globaltoronto.com. Retrieved 30 March 2013.
  36. ↑ "President Obama 2012 AIPAC policy conference transcript". whitehouse.gov . 4 March 2012. Retrieved 30 March 2013– via National Archives.
  37. ↑ David A. Schwartz (20 November 2012). "Israel conflict draws reaction". Sun-Sentinel. Retrieved 30 March 2013.
  38. ↑ Lis, Jonathan (24 August 2010). "Livni: Delegitimization of Israel exacerbates other threats". Haaretz . Retrieved 30 March 2013.
  39. ↑ Emanuel Adler. Israel in the World: Legitimacy and Exceptionalism. Routledge, 2012. ISBN   0415624150 p. 1
  40. ↑ Stacie E. Goddard. Indivisible Territory and the Politics of Legitimacy. Cambridge University Press, 2009. pp. 18–20
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.