According to Benny Morris, who at one time described himself as one of the “New Historians” that had arisen in Israel in the 1980s, one’s perceived needs are justifications for the injustices one might commit trying to fulfil them.
Speaking in a 2005 interview with Haaretz, Morris presents his justification for the establishment – some might say imposition – of Israel in the region and the resulting ethnic cleansing of Palestinians:
“Arab people gained a large slice of the planet. […They] have 22 states. The Jewish people did not have even one state. There was no reason in the world why it should not have one state. Therefore, from my point of view, the need to establish this state in this place overcame the injustice that was done to the Palestinians by uprooting them.”
Remarkably, Morris constructs his justification through conflating need with right. Because he needs something, Morris is saying, he gives himself the right to take it from others. This is more clearly seen if we substitute car for state; family to describe for both Arabs and the Jews; and neighbourhood for planet:
“The families around me own a large number of the cars in the neighbourhood. […They] have 22 cars. My family did not have even one car. There was no reason in the world why we should not have one car. Therefore, from my point of view, the need to own a car overcame the injustice that was done to the other families by stealing one of their cars.”
The items and scale are different, but the moral argument is the same: because he needed a car, Morris is saying, he had a right to steal one. He justifies this declared right, which he recognises constitutes an injustice when exercised, by saying that around him are plenty of cars, so stealing one won’t make much difference to the owners.
If we base society and international order on Morris’s relativistic accounting, which more broadly rests on Zionist morality as articulated by Zev Jabotinsky, then there is no society and no order other than the rule of might in the service of what one wants.
If Morris can have an entire country because he feels he needs one, then what is to stop him stealing other things when he feels he needs them? Such as more land, water and other resources, as indeed Israel has been doing in the remainder of Palestine that Morris’s “family” has not yet completely taken from the Palestinians.
I urge anyone who supports Morris’s argument not to follow his example. His moral relativism, which rests on the fulfilment of one’s own needs at the expense of others, will get you into a lot of trouble.