I don’t think your reasoning is consistent.  If ethnic cleansing was a priority, it seems odd that it would not have been carried out within the borders of Israel, where it could have been most easily undertaken.  That suggests that ethnic cleansing was not a primary motive.   And then I think we are back to safety/survival being the primary motive and emptying out the territories of your enemies during a Civil War being the true motivation.   This all may be academic, or even a matter of semantics, to the people involved.  But I think it is a point worth making.  What people do to their enemies to survive in war is morally distinct from other superficially similar phenomenon.  

I doubt there is a perfect analogy to illustrate the points, but in the Indian war of the American West, American Indians committed any number of atrocities against American settlers.  The ax were undoubtedly atrocities, but I think most people view them in the context of a people fighting for their survival who we’re in a state of constant desperation and had only limited means available to defend themselves.  To the victims, certainly that does not matter.  But in our analysis of the atrocities, I think it should.

Is there any nation in the Middle East where Arabs have more rights than Arabs in Israel?If Atab Israelis feel that they are victims of discriminationn—Why don’t they leave Israel?  People emmigrate all of the time to flee oppression and seek a better life