Again, it is not the simple fact of a dominant majority that make a country an ethnostate; it is this plus legally codified structures of dominance. The articl

Again, it is not the simple fact of a dominant majority that make a country an ethnostate; it is this plus legally codified structures of dominance. The article on the subject is under 'ethnocracy' not 'ethnostate': https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnocracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnocracy There may be other countries in the region which satisfy this definition also, or fall on the spectrum; I do not single out Israel for criticism in this regard. The topic only came up in regard to the events 1947-1948, specifically the UNPPP -- and why the indigenous populace were not exactly celebrating this proposal or its likely consequences (which are of course now their day-to-day reality). In regard to those consequences, specifically: the creation of an ethnostate on a large portion of their ancestral homeland; dominated by foreigners, and intrinsically and permanently hostile to their well-being and their right of self-determination. Which they naturally opposed, as any self-respecting people would.