History As It Happens

Episode: Israel and the Right to Exist

Host: Martin Di Caro
Guest: Ian Lustick, emeritus professor, University of Pennsylvania
Date: September 26, 2025

Overview

This episode of History As It Happens explores the complex and often misunderstood question of "Israel's right to exist." Host Martin Di Caro is joined by political scientist Ian Lustick, who challenges the prevailing discourse and argues that asking whether Israel has a right to exist is a category error. Instead, Lustick suggests we should be questioning the legitimacy of the regime that governs Israel and the future political arrangements for all people living between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. The episode weaves historical context, current political realities, and thoughtful critique, aimed at helping listeners think more historically about contemporary Middle East conflicts.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. The "Right to Exist" Question: A Category Error

• Lustick's Central Thesis: The question "Does Israel have a right to exist?" conflates distinctions between state, regime, and government and betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of political categories.
  • "Whether the state of Israel has a right to exist is a category error." (12:35, Lustick)
  • Rights are not abstract; they are claims that impose duties on others. No state has an intrinsic "right to exist"—Israel exists, is a UN member, and is protected by international law.
• International Law Perspective: As Francesca Albanese, UN Special Rapporteur, argues, "There is not such a thing in international law like a right of a state to exist... What is enshrined in international law is the right of a people to exist." (06:24)

2. State vs. Regime vs. Government

• Key Definitions:
  • State: The continuing legal political entity, recognized internationally.
  • Regime: The legal and ideological order that defines how the state is governed.
  • Government: The current set of officeholders.
  • "We have state, regime, government...kind of nested categories." (14:13, Lustick)
• Change Is Possible: Historical comparison to France and South Africa, both of which maintained continuity as states while changing regimes, underscores that the Israeli state could persist under a different, more democratic regime.

3. The Israeli Regime and Its Crisis of Legitimacy

• Historic and Ongoing Exclusion: Since 1948, Israel’s “Zionist regime” prioritized Jewish supremacy and control over resources while subordinating Palestinians—a project solidified by military occupation post-1967.
  • "The regime may no longer have a right to exist... It is a legal and ideological order based on fronting as a liberal democracy, while dedicated above all to implementing and expanding the presence and success of its Jewish inhabitants." (07:54, paraphrased from Lustick)
• 2018 Basic Law: Cited as an explicit legal move to codify Jewish national rights and prevent political threats from demographically empowered Palestinians.
  • "That’s actually a sign of the weakening of hegemony that that law was passed in 2018." (23:28, Lustick)

4. Historical Roots of the Debate

• Mandate Era to 1948: British partition and the birth of Israel created lasting questions about self-determination and "right to exist".
  • "Arab leaders from surrounding countries argued the partition plan violated the principles of self determination..." (02:18, Di Caro)
• Settler Colonialism and Its Uniqueness: Lustick classifies Israel as a settler colonial state but notes a key difference: unlike settler states such as the US or Australia, Israel did not erase its indigenous population, leaving unresolved questions of coexistence and political rights. (29:41)
• The Iron Wall Strategy: Zionist leaders anticipated and counted on “rejectionist” Arab resistance, with Jabotinsky arguing that "the Arabs will fight for their land, and we would do the same." (33:52)
• Lost Opportunities:
  • The "one shot" at two states was after 1967, which was not taken, locking Israel into an occupation that eroded its democratic and liberal pretensions. (36:01)

5. Labeling and Mislabeling: 'Rejectionism'

• Loaded Terms: "Rejectionism" is a term applied pejoratively to Palestinians, but is simply another word for resistance—French Algerians who resisted French rule now are termed "patriots", not rejectionists. (42:40)
• Internal Israeli Strategy: Right-wing Israeli governments have benefited politically by empowering extremists and marginalizing Palestinian moderates, thus perpetuating the image of a lack of viable negotiating partners. (45:23)

6. Current Political Impasse and Potential Futures

• No Viable Two-State Solution: Physical and political realities now make a two-state solution essentially impossible, according to Lustick.
  • "It's impossible to get a two-state solution... There is no Palestinian regime, no sovereignty, and no government... If you want to ask, which regime is the regime of the Palestinians? It is Israel." (51:23)
• Implications of Political Inclusion: Genuine political participation for Palestinians would transform, but not destroy, the state—just as happened in post-apartheid South Africa, Germany, and the US.

7. Antisemitism and Global Repercussions

• Consequences for Jews Worldwide: The policies of the Israeli state, acting in the name of the Jewish people, fuel a rise in antisemitism globally—a dynamic seen historically with other diasporas and states.
  • "The rise in antisemitism... is almost entirely a function of what a state operating in the name of the Jewish people is doing." (53:45, Lustick)

8. What Now?

• Lustick’s Proposal: Focus on changing the regime, not eradicating the state or demonizing Jewish nationalism. A future with prosperous Jewish and Palestinian communities is possible under a new political arrangement yet to be determined.
  • "My position is that there should be a large, secure, prosperous Jewish community in the land of Israel, in Palestine. What political arrangements...are is an open question now." (53:45, Lustick)

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Category Errors:
  • "If you take a triangle that is not a right triangle and treat it as if it’s a right triangle, I will get the completely wrong answer. That’s a category error." – Ian Lustick (12:35)
• On Hegemonic Regimes:
  • "Every regime tries to make itself look like a state. That means people can’t even imagine anything different." – Ian Lustick (15:59)
• On 2018 Basic Law:
  • "If something is natural and expected to be inevitable and permanent, you don’t need to pass laws to enforce it until 2018." – Ian Lustick (23:28)
• On Antisemitism:
  • "The rise in antisemitism which I think exists, is almost entirely a function of what, what a state operating in the name of the Jewish people is doing." – Ian Lustick (53:45)

Important Timestamps

• [00:49] The modern framing of Israel’s right to exist and the context of current war
• [02:18] UN Partition Plan, Arab opposition, and the origins of the conflict
• [06:24] Francesca Albanese on state vs. people’s right to exist
• [12:35] Ian Lustick explains the "category error" in the right to exist question
• [14:17] Distinctions between state, regime, and government
• [23:28] The 2018 Basic Law and the legal codification of Jewish supremacy
• [29:41] Settler colonialism and the uniqueness of the Israeli case
• [33:52] The origins of "rejectionism" and Zionist expectations
• [42:40] Use and misuse of the term “rejectionism”
• [45:23] Israeli state strategy: empowering extremists, sidelining moderates
• [51:23] Lack of real Palestinian regime/government; Israel as the de facto sovereign
• [53:45] The predictable parallels in history: Germany, South Africa, US, and implications for Israel's future

Conclusion

This episode challenges listeners to reframe the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian debate using historical perspective and political theory. Lustick’s analysis urges us to understand the difference between states and regimes, see the present Israeli crisis as rooted in historical and ideological choices, and to recognize alternatives beyond entrenched categories. The implication is profoundly unsettling but potentially liberating: political arrangements can and do change, and the future in Israel-Palestine will depend on reimagining what coexistence—and the idea of "legitimacy"—really mean.

Next Episode Preview:
Genocide and Kleptocracy in Sudan, with guest Alex de Waal.