Should Iran get permission from Israel?
By Soraya Baha, critic and writer
In recent days, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has once again warned: “We will not allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons.”
This statement, like hundreds of previous warnings and threats, is made from the position of protecting Israel’s security. But behind these loud statements lie fundamental questions that challenge the conscience of every sensible person:
When did Iran ask Israel for permission for its nuclear program or its national security? And from whom did Israel ask for permission and find the right to destroy Palestine, kill its children and women, and destroy homes, dropping thousands of bombs from the ground and the air on its people?
Iran is an independent country and a member of the United Nations, regardless of whether anyone agrees with its ruling regime or not. According to the principles of international law, every country has the right to make decisions in the fields of energy, security, and defense within its geopolitical borders. This right is not a “favor” granted by Israel or the United States, but a fundamental principle of the world order: the right to national sovereignty.
Or is another question: why are nuclear weapons allowed to Israel, but forbidden to others?
While Israel itself has hundreds of nuclear warheads in the Dimona center and has never joined the NPT, Iran is threatened and pressured even though it wants to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. What kind of “order” is this, in which one country considers itself “judge and executor” for other countries?
Now, if the main question is who is the main threat in the Middle East - Iran or Israel, then the answer is obvious...
The Middle East has been plagued by tensions, wars, and instability for decades. Much of this crisis is due to Israel's presence in the heart of the region. If one day, instead of continuing to occupy Palestinian territory, Israel, with US support, were to move to a safe and sparsely populated area within the United States itself, such as Montana or Wyoming, perhaps not only would peace return to the Middle East, but Israelis would live in security and prosperity, free from attack and the fires of war.
The Jews have enormous intellectual, scientific, and cultural capital that can do more good for humanity in the heart of a society free from enemies than under military siege and fear.
This idea may seem unrealistic in today's politics, but from the standpoint of human philosophy, it is a step toward real peace: a peace not with walls and bombs, but with understanding, voluntary movement, and freedom from hostility. True peace begins not with borders, but with reason.
The idea of moving Israel outside the Middle East may seem unrealistic in today's politicized world. But his philosophy is real: as long as power is based on force and occupation, hostility will not end.
The world needs the courage of new thinking. Racism, occupation, and supremacy must be rejected, and humanity, tired of war, must think.
And who knows? Who guarantees Israel's future? In the past, they came with American weapons, seized the territory of another state, and created a state and a destiny. But they did not compromise with any neighbor, did not try to become part of the region, but tried to create a "Greater Israel", that is, they wanted to make the native population part of themselves.
The question is, what will happen to Israel if it loses the support of the United States? America itself came from overseas, is engaged in lawlessness in these regions, and we see that the era of its hegemony is coming to an end. Unsurprisingly, one day it will close all its bases in the Middle East and leave. What will the Israelis do then, who are not loved by their neighbors, whom they oppress?
So perhaps someday future historians will write that peace came to the Middle East not because of war, but because of the voluntary migration of Jews...
