December 09, 2006 ... History and allies are insufficient defence.

It is beyond dispute that the Holocaust did happen and had a catastrophic impact on the Jews involved. And it is beyond dispute that nothing changes as much as history with respect to details and interpretations of motives. Thus, there may not have been the number of gas-ovens cited, or not quite as many Jews died because of those that did exist. Nonetheless, it is agreed by Germany and many other countries that at least six-million Jews--two-thirds of European Jews--were directly and indirectly murdered by the Nazis. A number which could have been substantially less had those--currently allies--who knew what was happening had offered better, or any help. Which raises another aspect of history: The ally of today is often not the ally of tomorrow.

Whilst President Ahmadinejad's attack on Israel's legitimacy to exist by refuting the generally accepted historical record is emotionally painful and downright dangerous to Israeli's, it must be looked on as a spur to Israel's self-awareness and how important it is for the state of Israel to defend itself, so that another Holocaust cannot come to pass. In other words, it is altogether sufficient that Israeli's know the reality of history so that the reason for Israel to exist is not contingent-by-proxy.

This is especially so in these times when too much of the American leadership and the majority of western European leadership cannot decide if the virtues of western culture in the face of terrorism from radical-Islam are worth defending. So how can Israel--always in the firing line of radical-Islam--hope to be secure when these are its proxies. The answer is, of course, it cannot. Nor can Israel be their proxies' proxy, continually beating out the flames of radical-Islam on the Mediterranean-rim, the heart of the middle east.

To be fundamentally secure as a Jewish state, Israel is faced with two fundamental issues: What is a Jew? And how can Israel avoid the destructive influence of philosophy-of-faith fundamentalism endemic to radical-Islamic regimes, chiefly Iran?

Because Israel has no constitution and its politics are hopelessly undermined by factional infighting and coalitions of expedient necessity, there is no moral certitude or consistency to defence policy or to what land actually constitutes a viable Israel, making it an interminable necessity to invoke history with its claims to land and past wrongs.

As to what constitutes Jewishness is hugely debatable. But to massively improve Israeli politics is less problematic given the will and application of rational thinking towards a constitution and the purpose of the subsequent democracy.

With rational political fundamentals in place it would then be possible for Israel to act in its own self-interest without recourse to history with its claims to land and past wrongs or have its reason to exist be contingent-by-proxy.