One, is Kant's essay on Perpetual Peace that most Europeans and Lefties accept.... that nationhood is an evil that must be avoided or eliminated. Europeans now believe they have achieved that with the European Union. This thesis demands that Israel should disappear as a state. States are anathema to peace.
Two, is Thomas Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolution, in which Kuhn shows that major concepts and paradigms such as Kant's anti-nationhood, only lose power when its supporters die off.
Therefore Israel needs to train a new generation in a new concept/paradigm and wait for the current generation of Israel-Jew-haters to die off.
I would argue directly against the Kant thesis.
I would argue that Kant's view of the nation-state is based on an immature historic view. In the idea forming period of his life there were no modern nation states, only empires old and new. The United States was an experiment late in his life. The same is true for Marxism; historically immature ideas based on a nearly non-existent world of modern commerce that was yet to arrive.If Kant is a serious problem and belief in the European Union is also a serious problem, then arguments in support of the nation-state are necessary.
The most powerful argument in favor of the nation-state becomes Israel itself, as a bastion of self-defense. Other examples are Tibet, which had no effective defense or alliances. South Korea, which has alliances now. Singapore. Sri Lanka. Even Kuwait.
It is important to distinguish the value of the nation-state for self defense purposes from other organizational alliances. The EU has been a failure at ending the nation-state.
There are needs for defensive alliances such as NATO and there is a need for economic alliances such as WTO, NAFTA and the EU. These are all built on the underlying nation-states.
Europeans need to be reminded that the European denial of the right of Israel to self-defense is part of a thousand year long tradition of denying the right of self-defense to Jews.