Does any Nation Have the "Right" to Exist?

Not if it impinges on the rights of others to exist

This post is in reaction to Bobby Kennedy, Jr and his now infamous tweet that Israel has the “right to exist, secure in its borders.” While I vehemently disagree with this statement because A). I will show that no nation, not even the mightily awful USA, has a legal right to exist, and because Israel is existing on Palestinian land and has displaced, or is displacing millions of people who have a HUMAN right to exist; and B) Israel uses brutal tactics of oppression and pushes undue influence on other governments, especially, the US, as it claims “special victimhood status.” In my opinion, there is no logical way that a vibrant economy that has nukes can claim “victimhood.” Israel makes victims, as well its psychotic big brother, the USA.

My next post will delve into the other part of Kennedy’s tweet: that he supports the “legitimate claims of the Palestinian people.” How magnanimous. After these tweets, he was seen marching in a pro-Israel parade carrying an Israeli flag. What’s wrong with people. I don’t even carry an American flag, why are the establishment so enamored of flag waving, it’s disgusting.

Does any nation have the legal "right" to exist? It's quite a hotly debated topic that raises many questions about international law and rights. Typically, there are various opinions about this issue, and each side presents different arguments and counter-arguments. In this blog post, I'll examine the arguments for and against the legal "right" of nations to exist and provide a clear answer to this long-debated question. Brace yourself because, as usual, we're diving into controversial topics.

Let's start by understanding the legal notion of the right of nations to exist. First, it should be noted that the right of existence is not identical to the recognition of a state's independence. In international law, state recognition is an acknowledgment that a territorial entity is an independent state and has the right to conduct international relations. The recognition of states is a political act rather than a legal one. Regarding the legal right to exist, it is the right of a nation-state to continue its existence without significant external interference.

So, to answer the question - does any nation have the legal right to exist? The answer is yes and no. Yes, every nation has the right to existence as long as they don't interfere with the existence of other nations legally. This fact seems to call into question the legitimate right to existence of two brutal states: the U.S. and Israel. But the legality of this isn't explicitly agreed upon for two primary reasons. One, there is no specific and definitive international law that guarantees the right of nations to exist. Two, the existing international law on the subject, and the interpretation of these laws can vary. Some states (US/Israel) may use their bigger military power to intimidate smaller states, violating the principle of the right of nations to exist.

When it comes to the idea of self-determination, which is often thrown around in discussions related to the right of nations to exist, there are cases where groups within a country can exercise their right to self-determination but not necessarily declare independence (like the Donbass and Crimea regions in Ukraine). Self-determination is a collective right to decide political status and create a government, which means that every individual is entitled to participate in decisions that affect their lives. Thus, even under international law, there is no guarantee that self-determination will lead to independence.

However, the idea of national self-determination has a more complex and ambitious interpretation by some states that exercise international law. For example, some nations believe that because they have historically established claims over territories where minorities live, they can rule that territory without obtaining the consent of the minority community. These nations argue that the minority population is part of their nation and that the authority over that territory rests with them. A clear example of this argument was demonstrated in the Israeli West Bank settlements.

Ultimately, the legal right of nations to exist should not be separated from the right of self-determination, which allows nations to choose their political destiny and exist without external interference. This idea is still debated and discussed, though, and many countries base their philosophy on this fundamental principle.

To conclude, the answer to the question that started this entire blog post is still murky, through our discussion: Does any nation have the legal "right" to exist? Yes, and no! International law doesn't have a clear, definitive answer to this question, primarily due to differing interpretations of laws. However, in general, every nation has a right to exist without interfering with the existence of other nations. It's crucial to have a framework of laws that protect this right and ensure that nations can continue to thrive and grow.

What do you think about murky existential rights of nations?

Share with your friends, enemies and frenemies:

---

---

Thanks for being a loyal reader of Cindy Sheehan’s Soapbox, we need your financial help if you are able.

We have different tiers of support: $5/month; $50/year, or $100 as a founding member.

Subscribed

Checks/money/orders/cash/etc can be snail-mailed to:

Cindy Sheehan’s Soapbox, LLC
PO BOX 6264, VACAVILLE, CA 95696

PayPal: cindysheehanssoapbox@gmail.com