According to consequentialist thinking, where existence is justified by virtue of what is achieved when a particular institution is in place, Israel has the most justifiable government in the region. Within the scope of consequentialism, the desirability of an institution is based solely on whether or not the results of its existence can be viewed positively. That being said, Israel has a more legitimate claim to existence than any of its bordering nations or fiercest enemies. Furthermore, this is also true of Israel’s Arab community. If we compare quality of life of Arab countries neighboring Israel to that of Israeli Arabs, it is strikingly clear that with regard to aggregate benefit produced, Israel has more of a right to exist than Egypt, Jordan, Syria or Lebanon. That is to say, quality of life for Arabs citizens of Israel has improved, compared to their cousins living in Egypt, Jordan, Syria or Lebanon.
The following statistics substantiate the above claim:
Life expectancy for Arab Israeli’s is 74.5 for men; compared to Egypt, 69.82; Syria, 72.1; and Lebanon, 73.28 (UN).
Access to Israeli universal health care by Israeli Arabs ranks their care 28th in the world, compared to Egypt, 68th; Jordan, 83rd; Syria, 108th; and Lebanon, 91st. (WHO)
For Israeli Arab men, unemployment is equal to that of Israeli men, around 6%, compared to Egypt, 10.5%; Jordan, 12.9%; Syria, 8.5%; and Lebanon, 9.2%. (UN, Cambridge Journal Online, CIA)
70% of the 200,000 Palestinians living would choose to remain under Israeli sovereignty, rather than PLO. (The Washington Post)
This is not to say that Israel is without social injustices, it means only that compared to Arabs living in countries surrounding Israel to Arabs living within Israel, Israel has produced more net human benefit. Accordingly, within the parameters defined by consequentalist thought, Israel has the best claim to existence compared to its neighbors.