Can Israel Change The Middle East?

By Mohammad Abu Rumman

In the short term, Israel is no longer in a hurry to normalise relations with Saudi Arabia, which it considers the grand prize in the Islamic world. Although its leaders view normalization as necessary, indeed inevitable, over the long run, what Netanyahu and his team currently see is an unprecedented historical opportunity that has not occurred since the founding of the State of Israel. They are thus pushing to implement sweeping and profound changes to the Palestinian situation, through displacement, expulsion, settlement expansion, annexation, and the Judaization of Jerusalem, from Gaza to Jerusalem and the West Bank. For the Israeli right, these policies take precedence over any other strategic interests.

It is not only about the Palestinians. The Israeli right’s ambitions today extend to constructing new and unprecedented spheres of regional influence and redefining Israeli security. This includes striking at any source of potential future threats and establishing Israel as the dominant regional power.

There are three key variables that must be taken into account when analyzing the current geopolitical shifts and the repercussions of Israel’s war on Gaza, not only in terms of the Palestinian issue, but also on a regional and global scale.

The first variable can be described as “Political Netanyahuism.” Today’s Israel is no longer the Israel of the past—this marks the era of Benjamin Netanyahu, especially post-Operation “Al-Aqsa Flood.” This era has unleashed the historical project of the Israeli right-wing in full force, with no intention of reversing course. The key features of this project include, first, a complete abandonment of the peace process, a rejection of the Oslo Accords and their consequences, and the annexation of large parts of the West Bank—effectively nullifying the Palestinian Authority’s political relevance and perhaps returning to a system of disconnected “cantons.” Additionally, this entails the Judaiztion of Jerusalem. Second, Netanyahuism is reflected in a complete structural shift of Israel toward the right, with the near-total erosion of the secular-leftist stream in Israeli politics. Third, it involves the deep penetration of religious ideology into Israel’s security and military institutions, leading to their full domination by religious-nationalist elements.

Even if Netanyahu were to exit the political scene, this would not alter the course of these policies or shift current events. Israel post-Netanyahuism will not be the same as it was before. The historical Zionist dream persists—ideologically, strategically, and religiously—even if tactical approaches differ. This new political reality is not merely shaped by individuals like Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich; rather, they are products of a broader environment and not anomalies within it.

The second variable is the major Arab strategic collapse—a process that began decades ago but reached a far more dangerous stage in the past 15 years, especially after so called “the Arab Spring”. The resulting transformations led to the fragmentation and collapse of numerous Arab states and the weakening of the entire Arab geopolitical map—in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Sudan, and Libya. It now seems as though the Arab geopolitical landscape, shaped after World War I, is disintegrating. This has created a strategic opportunity for Israel to expand, particularly following the recent decline in Iran’s regional influence over the past year in the wake of the war on Gaza.

The third variable is the return of Donald Trump to the White House—this time accompanied by a team that is more Zionist and ideologically aligned with the Israeli right than ever before. The unprecedented genocide unfolding in Gaza, the (implicit) green light granted to settlers and Netanyahu’s government in the West Bank and Jerusalem, and the statements made by Trump’s team concerning Palestine, Iran, Lebanon, and Syria all suggest an unprecedented alliance—perhaps even an organic one—between a hardline right-wing American administration and an extremist Israeli right. Although US policies have historically been biased in favor of Israel, the situation has never reached this level of alignment and support.

These three variables together shape a new political landscape, they significantly impact Jordan’s strategic perspective on national interests and security and necessitate a reevaluation by political elites who previously believed that there were multiple factions within Israel with whom one could engage, or that American influence could constrain the Israeli right, or that an effective Arab strategic space could be mobilized to counter such dangerous transformations.

The writer is a columnist in the Jordan Times

CrossFireArabia

CrossFireArabia

Dr. Marwan Asmar holds a PhD from Leeds University and is a freelance writer specializing on the Middle East. He has worked as a journalist since the early 1990s in Jordan and the Gulf countries, and been widely published, including at Albawaba, Gulf News, Al Ghad, World Press Review and others.

Related Posts

Trump’s War in The Red Sea

Dr Khairi Janbek

The US foreign policy in the Red Sea today is characterized by a robust military response to Houthi threats, aiming to protect critical maritime trade routes and assert influence in a geopolitical strategic area. While these military operations garnered international support, the ongoing conflict underscores the complexities and challenges of Middle East interventions.

The US military’s increased involvement in the Red Sea, including the deployment of two aircraft carriers, signals a commitment to ensuring freedom of navigation and countering the Iranians in the region. However, the present ongoing escalation also risks entangling the US in a prolonged conflict.

This is reminiscent of past Middle East engagements which the Americans should be well-aware of, and may put additional strain on the US military resources amid other pressing global priorities if faces.

That said, the present military strikes on Yemen are not just about the Houthis. They are also widely seen as demonstration of US strength towards the group’s main backer: Iran.

The Washington administration is currently locked in a series of negotiations regarding Iran’s nuclear programme and Trump has not ruled out military action if those talks fail, yet, it is possible still, that the US, and judging by recent history, the Americans may change their mind and everything is put on hold yet again.

But we need to wait and see! The US has already moved its patriot and THAAD missiles from Asia to the Middle East, and only in the first month of the preparedness campaign, $200 million of ammunition has been used and this is making military officials greatly concerned about the impact on stocks the US Navy might use in the event of a Chinese attack on Taiwan.

At the same time, there are various Yemeni groups opposed to the Houthis with regional backing, and dare one say with some international backing, reportedly considering taking advantage of the situation to launch a ground campaign to oust the Houthis once and for all, but Washington is yet to make a decision on whether to back such operations or not.

Most analysts and officials say that, American troops participating in any ground operations in Yemen is highly unlikely, moreover, even more limited support for ground operations would still be another case of the US backing armed groups in a messy middle Eastern war; exactly the sort of situation Trump blasted previous administrations for falling into.

Dr Janbek is a Jordanian analyst based in Paris, France.

Continue reading
‘Zionism a Mistake’ – Israeli Historian Tom Segev

Tom Segev, one of Israel’s most renowned historians, has broken a decades-long silence. On his 80th birthday, he declared that Zionism—Israel’s founding ideology—was a mistake.

In a deeply personal interview with Haaretz, Segev said, “Zionism is not such a great success story. It also doesn’t provide security to Jews. It’s safer for Jews to live outside Israel.” He added that Zionism created myths instead of solutions.

Born in Jerusalem in 1945 to Jewish German parents who fled the Nazis, Segev has spent more than 50 years researching Israel’s history. His books include 1967, The Seventh Million, and Soldiers of Evil, all known for challenging Israeli narratives.

In the interview, Segev shared a painful truth about his father’s death. He grew up believing his father was killed by an Arab sniper during the 1948 war. “I was able to say that he was killed during the War of Independence and that I was a war orphan.”

But later, Segev’s sister revealed a different story. Their father had actually died in a freak accident—falling from a drainpipe while trying to deliver coffee to guards. He stated that he was brought up on a lie.

This moment of reckoning made him question everything—including the stories Israel tells about itself.

Segev now says the Zionist project was never meant for people like his parents. “My parents started to plan their return to Germany”, he revealed. “They were never Zionists and they wanted to go home. A month after the last letter my father wrote to a friend about how much he wanted to go back – he was killed.”

Despite growing up in Israel, Segev never fully embraced Zionist ideals. He stressed that much of what Israelis were told was myth.

In his academic work, Segev often turns to documents rather than oral testimonies. He famously challenged former Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion in a 1968 interview, questioning the idea that Ben-Gurion became Zionist at age three.

Segev believes the Holocaust has been politically weaponized. In The Seventh Million, he argued that instead of teaching democracy and human rights, Israel used the Holocaust to fuel fear and justify wars.

He also criticized internal discrimination within Israeli society. In his book 1949: The First Israelis, Segev exposed how Jewish colonial settlers from Arab countries were pushed into camps, while Europeans were given hotels.

Segev insists he isn’t ideological. “People have also said I am anti-Zionist, but I am not an ideologue and not a philosopher, and I don’t think in terms of ideologies,” he says. “It was said that I want to shatter myths. But that’s not true, either. I was not part of the ‘New Historians’ but rather of the ‘First Historians.’ With respect to the state’s establishment there was no history here – just mythology and a great deal of indoctrination. In the 1980s we opened documents in the archives and said, ‘Wow, this isn’t what we were taught in school.’”

“We need to remember that the majority of the Holocaust survivors did not come to live in Israel and that the majority of Jews in the world are not coming to Israel”, he stressed. “They can, but they don’t want to live in this country. So Zionism is not such a great success story. It also doesn’t provide security to Jews. It’s safer for Jews to live outside Israel,” as reported in the Quds News Network.

Continue reading

You Missed

Bernie Sanders Says Israel is Despicable

Bernie Sanders Says Israel is Despicable

Israeli Sadism

Israeli Sadism

Israel Starves Babies to Death

Israel Starves Babies to Death

Fires Continue to Rage in Israel

Fires Continue to Rage in Israel