Rashi hints that we should no longer justify our ownership of the land of Israel[I].
A person might have thought, “The land has not been given to us back“. But the verse says that there were disagreements between the shepherds, due (Rashi explains) to some of them being thieves by presuming that the land was there’s on the basis that one day it would be. And that is why the pasuk says “and the Cnaanim and the Perizi” were in the land, Rashi explains, i.e. the land had not yet been yielded to Avram.
Once the land was inherited by (to-be) Avraham, father of Yitzchak and Yishmael[1], then it became the inheritance of the Jews.
We should resist the temptation to apply the argument, “This land has belonged to some other group,” and instead the reverse is true, “This land has been used by some other group when in fact it belonged to us.”
There are more allusions to this preemptive legal defence in the same parasha: Those shepards who were thieving belonged to Lot, who later is captured by nations including Zuzim etc. When the Jews are freed from 400 years of slavery, they pass by the land of the Zuzim, and Moses the prophet says: This land was annexed, it is now being occupied by Lot‘s descendants. Note, says Moses, that they did not help us when we were being persecuted and slaved, nor when we were freed and hungry.
This connection, which is also highlighted by Rashi, emphasizes the following, “Don’t let conquering tribes make claims about being original settlers,” and “Never forget. Not just what happened. But who watched.”
This is not a statement about intercultural strife or realpolitik. This is only for establishing the founding premise of any discussion of Israel: To whom does it belong in an absolute sense? Any other discussions must devolve from that point.
[1] I add a point for anyone who is distracted: The Koran teaches that the Jews were rejected by Allah. There is a separate claim that Ismael is Ibrahim’s first choice of religious inheritance. But regardless, a question that must be followed with that first teaching: If the Jews were rejected, then did the Creator of earth withdraw his blessing to Avraham and reapply it to Yishmael, and if so, what is one to say of Moses, the millennia of pre-Islamic Judaism, or even (controversially) Jesus qua Jew? And for those that persist, why should one not similarly argue that Allah has withdrawn his contract from Yishmael too? Look how far we have fallen. There is a second lesson in this portion of Moses’ text: family should not argue, “Look”, says Ibrahim, “This Earth is big enough for both of us.”
[I] Rashi on Genesis 1:1: IN THE BEGINNING — “Rabbi Isaac said: The Torah which is the Law book of Israel should have commenced with the verse (Exodus 12:2) “This month shall be unto you the first of the months” which is the first commandment given to Israel. What is the reason, then, that it commences with the account of the Creation? Because of the thought expressed in the text (Psalms 111:6) “He declared to His people the strength of His works (i.e. He gave an account of the work of Creation), in order that He might give them the heritage of the nations.” For should the peoples of the world say to Israel, “You are robbers, because you took by force the lands of the seven nations of Canaan”, Israel may reply to them, “All the earth belongs to the Holy One, blessed be He; He created it and gave it to whom He pleased. When He willed He gave it to them, and when He willed He took it from them and gave it to us” (Yalkut Shimoni on Torah 187)”.
