3 ms·

> right of self determination of internationally recognized nation states is >pretty much undisputed at the UN. And since Palestine is one (albeit without >cont

by tguvot 3y ago

> right of self determination of internationally recognized nation states is >pretty much undisputed at the UN. And since Palestine is one (albeit without >control of its territory) the question should be answered. respectfully, palestine is not internationally recognized as state. is not recognized as member state by security council. it doesn't control it's territory because it has no territory and it has no borders. i don't see in international law or un charter limits on where or how self determination works. under un chater do jews have right for self determination in territory of judea and samaria ?

runarberg 3y ago
It feels like you are arguing with the UN rather than with me. But as I understand it—and my understanding is very limited—I have already answered that question and the answer is no. The strongest form of self determination is that of the nation state. Judea and Samaria are historic territories which precised the UN by around 2000 years, the Jews that live in the historic territories of Judea and Samaria are certainly a group, but certainly not one which equates a nation state. The strongest degree of self determination among this single ethno-religious group inside this historic territory is carried by the state of Israel, which is an internationally recognized state composed of many different peoples (not just Jews). I have a feeling you are trying to direct this discussion towards the prospects of a Jewish ethno-state in some vague historic territories. But such country does not exist. The Khmer Rouge tried to create something similar in the historic territories of the Khmer empire, and committed a horrible genocide while trying so. Israel is not the Jewish Khmer Cambodia. It is composed of more peoples than just Jews. The Khmer rouge had no rights, nor authority to create such a state, and neither do the ethno-fascists in Israel, no matter high up in government they are. The right of self determination does not extend towards the rights to deny others the right to live.

by tguvot 3y ago

runarberg 3y ago

It feels like you are arguing with the UN rather than with me. But as I understand it—and my understanding is very limited—I have already answered that question and the answer is no. The strongest form of self determination is that of the nation state. Judea and Samaria are historic territories which precised the UN by around 2000 years, the Jews that live in the historic territories of Judea and Samaria are certainly a group, but certainly not one which equates a nation state. The strongest degree of self determination among this single ethno-religious group inside this historic territory is carried by the state of Israel, which is an internationally recognized state composed of many different peoples (not just Jews). I have a feeling you are trying to direct this discussion towards the prospects of a Jewish ethno-state in some vague historic territories. But such country does not exist. The Khmer Rouge tried to create something similar in the historic territories of the Khmer empire, and committed a horrible genocide while trying so. Israel is not the Jewish Khmer Cambodia. It is composed of more peoples than just Jews. The Khmer rouge had no rights, nor authority to create such a state, and neither do the ethno-fascists in Israel, no matter high up in government they are. The right of self determination does not extend towards the rights to deny others the right to live.