By Richard Martin | The Strategic Code

The refrain that Israel was “built on land theft” is a slogan, not an argument. It erases history, international law, and the repeated pattern of rejectionism that has defined Palestinian politics for over a century.

Israel was established in 1948 by the same international process that created dozens of other postwar states. The UN partition plan offered two states, one Jewish and one Arab. The Jews accepted it. The Arab side rejected it and launched a war to annihilate the nascent state. Israel survived, against overwhelming odds, and has been forced to defend its existence in war after war since then.

At every stage—from Camp David in 2000, to Olmert’s offer in 2008, to the Trump plan in 2020—the Palestinian leadership has refused statehood if it comes with the recognition of Israel. The issue has never been about borders, settlements, or “land theft.” The issue is the refusal to accept a Jewish state in any borders. That is rejectionism.

Hamas makes this explicit in its charter and in every public statement: from the river to the sea, no Israel, no Jews. Hezbollah, the Islamic Republic of Iran, and others say the same openly. To claim Israel is the aggressor while these groups call for its eradication is not just disingenuous, it is projection, pure and simple.

Israel’s critics in the West recycle the “stolen land” accusation because it fits neatly into a moral narrative they prefer: colonizer versus colonized. But this framing is false. Israel is not a colonial implant but a people restored to their historic homeland, recognized in international law, and defended through the hard reality of survival in a hostile region.

The obstacle to peace is not Israeli “land theft.” It is Palestinian rejectionism: the refusal to accept Israel’s existence, the addiction to victimhood, and the political culture that glorifies violence over compromise. Until that changes, peace will remain impossible, no matter how many times Israel makes concessions.

I guide leaders and thinkers through the terrain of sovereignty, power, and the individual—illuminating parasovereign technologies and systems that enable human action and cooperation beyond the reach of the state and sovereign-dependent institutions and corporations.

© 2025 Richard Martin