You misread the article. His major premise is that people have the right to exist, but not “states.” And I agree entirely.
States are artifacts of history, and any piece of land on the planet has been successively occupied by different tribes through time. As such, they are virtual realities, defined by some arbitrary combination of geography, ethnicity, religion, warfare, and treaties. Their “right to exist” was only instituted by the United Nations after WWII, as part of a broader commitment to HUMAN rights and to international peace. But a state that denies basic human rights to any population within its borders forfeits its “right to exist” until it remedies the injustices (as with South Africa).
But people’s right to exist is non-negotiable, since the major premise of all human rights is that “all men are created equal.”