بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Netanyahu’s Statements on “Greater Israel” and Their Implications
(Translated)
https://www.al-waie.org/archives/article/19972
Al Waie Magazine Issue No. 470
Thirty-Ninth Year, Rabi’ al-Awwal 1447 AH corresponding to September 2025 CE
Undermining Oslo and a Slap in the Face to the Normalizers
In a striking statement that reveals the expansionist goals of the Jewish entity, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu openly declared his support for the idea of “Greater Israel.” When asked in an interview with the Hebrew channel i24 whether he believed in the “Greater Israel” vision, Netanyahu replied “absolutely,” adding that he was “very attached” to it. This vision, in its expansionist form, calls for the annexation of all the occupied territories in historical Palestine and parts of neighboring Arab countries. The “Greater Israel” plan includes taking control of the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and parts of Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, and Jordan. It’s an old colonialist idea that reflects the Zionist dream of a land stretching “from the Nile to the Euphrates” and disregards all previous agreements and peace deals in favor of historical ambitions.
It places all previous agreements and settlements on the altar of historical ambitions.
Netanyahu’s statements have sparked a storm of “verbal condemnations” even from capitals that have normalized relations and cooperated with the occupation. Thirty-one Arab and Muslim countries, including governments that signed peace agreements with the Jewish entity, considered these statements a “serious and dangerous violation of international law, and a direct threat to the security and stability of Arab countries.”
Cairo argued that, “Netanyahu’s words destabilize the region and show a rejection of the peace process.” As if the Gaza earthquake hadn’t already shaken those hopes, and as if the region were stable with this occupying enemy!
As for Jordan, which signed the Wadi Araba Agreement with the Jewish entity in 1994, it deemed the statements a “dangerous provocation and a threat to the sovereignty of countries,” calling these ambitions “delusions” spread by extremist elements in Netanyahu's government. Jordan warned that such statements fuel the ongoing cycle of violence in Gaza and the West Bank.
It’s truly surprising to see such weak responses that remain within the bounds of condemnation while a logistical bridge is being built to connect the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan with ‘Israel’. This helps the Jewish entity save over 80% of shipping costs through the sea route, and provides the occupying power with resources for survival, even as it continues its attacks on Gaza and the surrounding Blessed Land.
In fact, the finance minister of the Jewish entity entertained an extremist audience in Paris by showing a map of a so-called “Greater Israel” that includes Jordan itself. Amman considered this “a violation of the peace agreement between the two countries.”
A Final Blow to Oslo? Or the End of the Palestinian Authority?
Netanyahu’s statements show a huge gap between the new situation and the old “peace process,” which the Jewish entity has never really cared about unless it serves its own interests. It’s not surprising that he would deal a “final blow” to the Oslo Accords, which were signed in the 1990s with the hope of reaching a two-state solution.
Since the Oslo Accords in 1993, the Jewish occupation has changed from being constantly chased to becoming a secure entity, protected by the Palestinian Authority’s security forces. Oslo gave the Jewish entity official recognition and opened the door for normalization, while the Palestinian Authority became the trusted guardian of the occupying power. Instead of fighting the occupier, the Palestinian Authority set up security forces, of about 80,000 people, to suppress resistance. The number of security coordination agreements grew into many clauses.
Since the 2000 Al-Aqsa Intifada, the Palestinian Authority has worked to prevent a major confrontation, cracking down on protests and confronting armed groups. After the 2007 split, the West Bank became like a big prison, with daily operations against Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and thousands of young people arrested, alongside the Zionist army raids.
In 2014, during the Gaza war, the Palestinian Authority ran operations to stop any uprisings in the West Bank, even attacking protesters who supported the resistance.
In 2021 and 2022, the Palestinian Authority kept coordinating with the Jewish entity during the Al-Aqsa protests, with Jewish soldiers raiding camps to kill resistance fighters, while the Palestine Authority would hunt down the survivors at night. More recently, in 2023 in Jenin, eyewitnesses said that the Palestinian Authority forces withdrew when the Jewish army attacked the camp, but later returned to suppress angry protesters.
In this way, the Palestinian Authority has become a tool to maintain the occupation, betraying the Ummah’s rights and protecting the enemy, all while its own people suffer. This is similar to the betrayal of Arab countries that have normalized relations with the Jewish entity.
The destruction of Oslo by the Jewish entity
Right-wing Zionist governments have been gradually undermining the foundations of the Oslo Accords by expanding settlements and imposing a “new reality,” while keeping the structure of the Palestinian Authority (PA) in place as a security partner that serves the policy of “managing the conflict” without resolving it. Now, it seems that Netanyahu’s government, the most extreme in Zionist history, has found in the war on Gaza an opportunity for a complete reversal of the Oslo arrangements.
Strategic studies show that Netanyahu’s current government is exploiting the aftermath of October 7, 2023, to implement an agenda announced since its formation: abandoning the status quo established by Oslo, intensifying efforts to weaken the PA financially and politically, and accelerating settlement expansion, and the de facto annexation of West Bank land.
Indeed, only days after Netanyahu's statements, his finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, announced the approval of thousands of new settlement units in the occupied West Bank, confirming that this step “buries the idea of a Palestinian state” once and for all. Similarly, the Knesset had earlier adopted a resolution rejecting the establishment of a Palestinian state, with 68 votes against 9. This was a symbolic move, but it represents an official shift away from the commitments of Oslo.
The Zionist occupation has also escalated its efforts to suffocate and isolate the PA. Netanyahu’s government cut or deducted large amounts from the tax revenues of the PA, pushed for legislation that would allow the PA to be sued financially under the pretext of supporting the families of martyrs, and also prevented thousands of Palestinian workers from entering the Jewish entity to make a living.
The occupation’s aggression has extended to repeated military incursions into areas classified as “A,” according to Oslo, and it has even announced the withdrawal of security powers from the PA in certain “B” areas, claiming to establish “nature reserves” under its direct control. This is, in effect, a unilateral end to the administrative divisions created by Oslo.
Since Oslo (1993-1995), around 75% of the PA’s budget has relied on tax revenues collected by the Jewish entity on its behalf. The Zionist entity controls whether to transfer these funds or withhold them as it chooses. Between 2019 and 2024, the Jewish entity deducted about 3.54 billion shekels (around $1 billion), or about 5% of the Palestinian GDP in 2023, under the pretext of funding the PA’s payments to the families of martyrs and prisoners. These deductions have increased since October 2023, reaching 275 million shekels per month, the equivalent of the entire salaries of PA employees in Gaza.
At the same time, the Jewish entity prevented up to 143,000 Palestinian workers from reaching their jobs inside ‘Israel’ between October and December 2023, severely affecting entire families and pushing the economy to the brink of collapse.
Meanwhile, the Palestinian Authority (PA) has escalated its crackdown on uprisings. In the Jenin refugee camp and Jerusalem (al-Quds), PA security forces have either imprisoned fighters or handed them over to the ‘Israeli’ occupation. The number of checkpoints and roadblocks in the West Bank has risen to nearly 900, making daily movement a battle. In this way, the PA has become a tool for the Zionist occupation, using its security forces to protect Zionist interests and betraying its own people through arrests and security coordination, while its funds are stolen, and its people are starved and suffocated by the blockade. Meanwhile, the youth of Gaza and the West Bank are slaughtered by hunger, siege, and endless bloodshed on a land that cries out in pain and betrayal.
The Future of the Palestinian Authority is at Stake
These developments put the future of the Palestinian Authority (PA) in a critical position, the likes of which has never been seen since its establishment. The PA has become a fragile and constrained entity, losing its role day by day. It has even been prevented by the United States from allowing its delegation to obtain visas to enter the country or attend UN meetings. The PA leadership has described Netanyahu's statements about “Greater Israel” as a “blatant disregard for the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people and a dangerous provocation that threatens the security and stability of the region.” However, it would be more accurate to say that this is a threat to the continuation of the status quo, which has allowed corruption to flourish, and facilitated cheap cooperation with the occupation, rather than a threat to the region’s security or stability. The region has never been secure or stable since the occupation began. Yet, the PA finds itself unable to do more than issue verbal condemnations, while the occupation’s agenda continues to strip it of any real political significance.
On the other hand, research centers within the Jewish entity warn that the collapse of the Palestinian Authority, whether from internal explosion or a complete Zionist-led coup, will create a dangerous vacuum with severe consequences for everyone, including the Jewish entity itself. Why? Because the PA’s role, as we know, has been to protect the occupying entity more than the Zionists’ own army does! Without the PA, a popular uprising could break out as Palestinians would lose all hope in the negotiations process. Moreover, tens of thousands of armed PA security personnel might lose their allowances, and could be forced to join the resistance against the occupation, instead of coordinating security with it. The collapse of the PA would mark the end of the “era of agreements” and a loud admission of the failure of the “peace settlement” approach, which could delay the normalization of ties between some Arab states and the Jewish entity.
For the Jewish entity, this would mean taking on the responsibility of directly managing the lives of millions of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, which would come at a high financial and security cost. In other words, Netanyahu’s government’s pursuit of the dream of “Greater Israel” by either marginalizing, or toppling, the PA could open the gates to a dangerous security and regional chaos that would have painful consequences. Yet, Netanyahu deliberately ignores this in order to satisfy the extreme settlers, and secure his own political survival.
Since Oslo, more than one in every six Palestinians in the West Bank has worked in the security forces of the Palestinian Authority (PA), which spends more on security than on education and health combined. Its annual security budget has surpassed one billion dollars, which is 28% of its total budget. In Jenin, in December 2024, some of the fiercest clashes took place during the PA’s campaigns against fighters, resulting in martyrs from Jenin’s fighters. This again highlighted the fragility of the security leadership and its lack of popular support, with accusations that the PA has become an instrument of “security” for the occupation. rather than for the Palestinian people.
No less alarming is the PA’s efforts to suppress its own people: In 2015 alone, more than 1,274 arbitrary arrests and 1,089 summonses were recorded against opponents, including students and human rights defenders, under security pretexts and without real charges, with documented cases of torture inside its prisons. Polling organizations, like the Jerusalem Center for Political Studies (PCPSR), indicate that 79% of Palestinians in the West Bank believed corruption exists within PA institutions, showing a sharp decline in popular trust. This has led to the view that the PA is more of a refuge for corrupt money than a defender of national rights. In the Arab Barometer survey for 2021–2022, 85% of Palestinians confirmed there was corruption “to a large or moderate extent” within the PA. In follow-up data, over 62% of citizens saw the PA as “a burden on the people.” This popular resentment is unsurprising in the context of the PA’s disintegrating institutions and deep-rooted corruption. Since Oslo, the PA has focused only on securing the occupation, suppressing its internal affairs, and silencing dissent. Its treacherous tendencies have gone so far that its security agencies’ primary role has become to deter its own people, rather than protect them.
In contrast, the occupation has benefited greatly from the Palestine Authority (PA) as a bridge to its state, having it bear two contradictory and harmful roles: On one hand, the PA suppresses resistance on behalf of the occupation, and on the other, it protects the Zionist entity, fights its own people, covers up its corruption, while the occupation continues to seize and annex more land. In this toxic triangle, the role of the PA has become functionally an extension of the occupation: a forward security barrier that handles what would otherwise be handled by the occupation’s military and security apparatuses, suppressing resistance, chasing down opponents, and cutting off the sources of intifada and resistance. Its institutions have turned into administrative-security tools in the hands of the occupation, protecting its settlements, and providing a safe environment for its expansion, while leaving its people to face unemployment, hunger, and bullets alone.
The project of “Greater Israel” doesn't just affect Palestine. It directly threatens neighboring countries like Jordan and Egypt, undermining peace agreements like the Wadi Araba (1994) and Camp David Accords (1979), which recognized international borders. When Netanyahu talks about annexing parts of Jordan and Sinai, he’s implicitly challenging these agreements. Some of his government’s extremists have hinted at the idea of an “alternative homeland” for Palestinians in Jordan, suggesting that the eastern West Bank could be part of a final solution to the Palestinian issue.
This is alarming for Jordan, which views the West Bank as a crucial strategic depth for its security. However, the response from Jordan has been weak, consisting mainly of vague statements instead of concrete actions. Given the direct threat to its existence, Jordan should have taken stronger steps, like expelling the Jewish ambassador from Amman, recalling its ambassador from Tel Aviv, ending diplomatic relations with the Jewish entity, and halting the Wadi Araba Agreement and its security and economic provisions. Additionally, Jordan should have stopped the security coordination that has long secured the borders of the occupation, as well as the gas agreement that has burdened Jordanians.
Jordan should have shown stronger political resolve to prevent Israeli incursions into Al-Masjid Al-Aqsa, which is under Jordanian custodianship. It would have been more fitting for Jordan’s military to take action, demonstrating that the country is not a soft target for the Jewish entity, especially after the military defeat of the Zionist in Gaza on October 7, when groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad humiliated the Jewish entity’s army. Jordan’s military, which defeated the Jewish entity in the 1968 Battle of Karameh and previously prevented the fall of East Jerusalem, should have opened a front against the Jewish entity in solidarity with Gaza.
The Jordanian government should also have allowed its people to freely demonstrate in support of Palestine, showing strength on the streets to pressure the Jewish entity and its American allies. Instead of repressing these movements, Jordan could have turned popular support into a form of deterrence. The least expected from the Jordanian government in response to the idea of “Greater Israel” was a strong stand for national dignity and sovereignty, not just empty diplomatic protests.
In this context, a statement from Jordan’s Foreign Minister, Ayman Safadi, reflected a 2cold diplomatic” approach. He claimed that the occupation’s actions would not harm Jordan or the Arab world and would not affect Palestinian rights. His statement felt more like a routine press release than a serious response to an existential threat.
Egypt, as the first Arab country to sign a peace agreement with the Jewish entity, is also facing a strategic dilemma. When Netanyahu hints at ambitions in Sinai or deliberately ignores Egypt’s regional role, he is dismissing decades of cooperation between Egypt and the Jewish entity. The official Egyptian response is similar to Jordan’s, weak and passive. Egypt's government limits itself to condemnation and calls for more negotiations and the so-called peace process, even though decades of failed talks have already shown the true intentions of the Zionists. Netanyahu’s recent actions show that the Jewish entity doesn’t care about agreements or promises and seeks expansion from the Euphrates to the Nile.
What Egypt truly fears is that the region could slide back into conflict due to the extremism of the Zionists, which could threaten Egypt’s control over its country and people. The anger of the Egyptian street has been growing, partly because of the perceived collaboration between Egypt and the Jewish entity. During the recent Gaza conflict, Cairo faced popular criticism for allegedly cooperating with the Jewish entity by imposing a blockade on Gaza, partly due to Egypt’s priorities with the U.S. and the Jewish entity, aligning with their colonial projects in Gaza. Despite Egypt’s support, the Jewish entity continued to attack Gaza without any regard for Egypt’s efforts.
Then, Netanyahu openly declared his expansionist ambitions, threatening Egypt’s sovereignty over Sinai and challenging its regional role. This is a direct insult to the cooperation Egypt has provided the Jewish entity over the years. For example, Egypt allowed the Jewish entity to impose its vision on the Philadelphi Corridor, a border area between Gaza and Egypt, without any resistance. In May 2024, the Zionist military claimed control over the Philadelphi Corridor, clearly violating the Camp David Agreement, but Egypt only issued a weak protest, without any real action.
The Rafah Border Crossing between Egypt and Gaza has become a tool of suffocation, as only a small number of trucks are allowed through daily, while hundreds more are left to rot. Egypt often closes the Rafah Border Crossing for days or even weeks under weak excuses, leaving thousands of sick and starving people trapped. In ceasefire talks, Egypt even manipulated a deal that the Jewish entity had agreed to by changing the terms and sending them to Hamas, causing the agreement to collapse. This shows how Egypt has played a role in blocking solutions and easing Zionist goals.
In short, Egypt has chosen to be a partner in the blockade on Gaza rather than a protector of the people there. This has turned its policies into a burden on the Palestinian people and the entire Muslim World, while benefiting Israel strategically.
The situation is not much different for Syria, although it temporarily remains outside the realm of official normalization with the Jewish entity. The “Greater Israel” project, in some of its forms, targets the occupied Golan Heights and parts of southern Syria as part of Israel’s expansionist ambitions. It’s no longer a secret that the Syrian regime presents a clear example of double weakness, while Zionist airstrikes continue to target the Syrian capital and its airports, and the Jewish entity supports separatist forces in eastern Syria, the regime sees no problem in engaging in direct negotiations with its enemy under American sponsorship.
There are no missiles fired in retaliation, no actions to stop Israeli incursions, just silence; something that encourages Netanyahu, having failed in Gaza, to look for a victory in Syria to present himself as strong. This Syrian regime has become accustomed to bowing its head in the face of the storm, until its head reaches a humiliating submission to the enemy. Its only excuse is that “the balance of power doesn’t allow,” but that same excuse has facilitated occupation and granted the Jewish entity free rein in Syria’s skies and land. The regime’s stance towards the Jewish entity is limited to restoring the 1974 disengagement agreement in the Golan and ensuring stability at the borders.
Normalizing Regimes: Weak Condemnation and Ongoing Submission
These developments reveal the distorted relationship between the occupying Zionist regime and its Arab allies who have normalized relations, or cooperated with the Jewish entity in security matters. It’s clear that the Jewish entity does not value the services and guarantees these regimes have provided over the years. On the contrary, Netanyahu and his partners see these rulers’ submission as a green light to push forward with more aggressive projects. How could it be otherwise, when we saw during the Gaza conflict (2023-2025) that some Arab governments directly or indirectly supported the Jewish entity? Some suppressed the angry voices of their people, preventing their armies from taking action, and stopped any real movement to support Gaza. Even the Palestinian Authority continued its security coordination with the ‘Israeli’ occupation in the West Bank, suppressing any solidarity uprisings, while the Jewish army was committing daily massacres in Gaza. These regimes believed that their services would earn them favor with the leaders in Tel Aviv or Washington, or that they would protect their narrow interests. However, Netanyahu’s response came quickly: they are moving forward with their colonialist project, disregarding any extended hand.
The scene of betrayal repeats itself: years ago, the United Arab Emirate (UAE) and Bahrain traded the betrayal of the Palestinian cause for full normalization with the Jewish entity, hoping to curb its settlement ambitions. However, those conditions were merely a smokescreen, as Netanyahu’s government continued to expand settlements relentlessly and legalized illegal outposts. In fact, in 2023, the Jewish entity nearly annexed large parts of the West Bank, only delaying it temporarily to secure the Abraham Accords. The Jewish entity didn’t show any respect for those agreements except as far as they served its immediate interests. One of the Zionist ministers, Bezalel Smotrich, openly declared that there was no such thing as a Palestinian people, all while sitting in front of a map that included both Jordan and Palestine as part of “Greater Israel,” provocatively insulting even its closest normalization partners.
The regimes that have normalized relations with the Jewish entity or cooperated with it on security matters now find themselves in a position of humiliation and manipulation. While Netanyahu proudly boasts of a “historic and spiritual mission” to fulfill the Zionist dream, expanding “Israel” at the expense of Arab sovereignty, these Arab capitals merely issue empty condemnations, which are powerless and ineffective. We haven’t seen a single Zionist ambassador expelled, no treaties suspended, no intelligence cooperation frozen, nor any vital logistical bridges cut, to stop Israel from continuing its existence. This complete silence is what encourages the Jewish entity to further disregard these governments. For example, the Zionist extremist National Security Minister, Itamar Ben Gvir, repeatedly stormed Al-Masjid Al-Aqsa, six times since taking office, under Zionist police protection, completely disregarding Jordan’s historical guardianship of the sacred sanctities. Jordan’s foreign ministry has called these incursions a “deliberate provocation” and a violation of the historical and legal status quo of Al-Masjid Al-Aqsa, yet the Zionist entity continues to impose its will with force, without any real consequences from Jordan.
It has become clear that the Jewish entity no longer values any commitments, when they conflict with its expansionist ambitions. It is even willing to trample on the interests of its closest Arab allies if it hinders its settler-colonialist project. What is most unfortunate is that the response from these regimes falls far short of the insult. It remains limited to media condemnations and pleas to the international community, rather than firm stances worthy of nations claiming sovereignty and national dignity.
American and Western Positions: Protecting Interests or Covering Up?
On the international front, the “Greater Israel” project has placed Western allies in an awkward position. On the one hand, the U.S. and European countries continue to offer political and military support to the Jewish entity, as well as diplomatic cover in international forums. On the other hand, they can’t deny the dangerous implications of Zionist expansionist rhetoric for regional stability. We’ve seen unusual statements from Washington following the actions of Netanyahu’s ministers: The U.S. State Department described the comments of the Zionist Minister Bezalel Smotrich, calling for the erasure of the Palestinian town of Huwara, as “repugnant” and “disgusting” and labeled his calls for demolishing an entire village as incitement to violence. The U.S. also condemned Smotrich's denial of the Palestinian people’s existence, calling it “inaccurate” and “dangerous.” The U.S. administration even criticized recent Knesset legislation that would allow settlers to return to four evacuated outposts in 2005, calling it a "provocative step" that undermines the Zionist commitments to Washington and further distances the two-state solution.
This rhetoric, although relatively firm, reflects real concern from the U.S. about Netanyahu’s government’s reckless approach. Washington has invested decades in building a regional security structure, ostensibly based on the two-state solution, to safeguard its interests. Now, Netanyahu is dismantling this structure with unilateral actions that threaten a full-scale explosion. Even the American elite media, which has traditionally supported Zionist, is now sounding alarms.
Renowned journalist Thomas Friedman, writing in The New York Times on 29 July 2025, in an article entitled, “How Netanyahu Played Trump for a Fool in Gaza,” argued that “his Israeli government is behaving in ways that threaten hard-core U.S. interests in the region.” Friedman went further, telling the President that “Netanyahu is not our friend.” He pointed out that Netanyahu’s true agenda is clear: annexing the West Bank, expelling Gaza’s residents, and reintroducing settlements, actions that directly contradict the foundation of U.S. strategy in the region for decades, which was built on the theoretical possibility of a two-state solution. Friedman warned that Netanyahu’s plan for Gaza, aiming for permanent occupation to force Palestinians into mass migration, was “is a prescription for a permanent insurgency — Vietnam on the Mediterranean.” He further cautioned that the Zionist’s continuation of this approach would lead to accusations of war crimes, and destabilize U.S. allies, like Jordan and Egypt, a significant and worrying observation. Even the American elites recognize that the Camp David and Wadi Araba agreements are under threat from Netanyahu’s policies. Friedman’s stark warning to Washington was clear: If Netanyahu is not stopped, there is a future were “the Jewish state is a pariah state.”
Similarly, the European Parliament and the United Nations have raised their tone of criticism. In late 2023, the U.N. General Assembly overwhelmingly adopted a resolution calling for “Israel” to end its occupation within a specified time frame and referred the matter to the International Court of Justice. The court’s advisory opinion concluded that “Israel’s” presence in Palestinian territories is illegal and that continued settlement expansion could amount to apartheid or genocide.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, despite its limited boldness, has issued arrest warrants against Netanyahu and his defense minister, Gallant, over war crimes in Gaza. While these international positions are important legally and ethically, they collide with the Jewish entity’s usual arrogance and the ever-ready American veto. Netanyahu exploits the traditional Western bias and the lack of real will to impose sanctions, moving forward with his project as though these criticisms are mere storms in a teacup for media consumption. Perhaps the weak official Arab response encourages Washington and European capitals to settle for mere condemnation statements without applying real pressure. These capitals know that the “direct targets” of Zionist expansion, including Arab regimes and others, will not act sufficiently to protect themselves. Hence, the Western position implicitly becomes complicit: they criticize with words while arming with deeds, safeguarding their immediate interests, such as the alliance with the Jewish entity and appeasing domestic audiences sympathetic to Palestinians, without rising to the historical challenge posed by the vision of a “Greater Israel” and its destabilizing effects on regional and global stability.
Conclusion:
There is no doubt that Netanyahu's statements about “Greater Israel” have stripped away the last fig leaf covering the true policies of the Zionist entity. These statements have confirmed beyond a shadow of a doubt that this entity knows no limits to its ambitions and shows no respect for any agreement or covenant, when they conflict with its settler-colonial and expulsion projects. This is a pivotal moment that exposes the aggressive nature of this entity without masks or embellishments. It considers itself on a “sacred historical mission” to fulfill the dream of its Zionist ancestors, even if it comes at the expense of the regimes that have long been shields for “Israel,” providing it with the means of survival, security, and life, in spite of peoples who reject all of this.
At the same time, this crisis has highlighted the humiliation and degradation that the Arab regimes cooperating with the enemy have descended into. Despite all that these regimes have done, both secretly and openly, to serve the security of the occupation and the stability of its governments, they have reaped nothing but contempt. Netanyahu disregarded their outstretched hands during the Gaza massacres, and kicked aside their promises and reassurances, unconcerned with their fate before their own people. Events have proven that the bet of normalizers on the “good intentions” of the occupier is a losing and destructive wager. This occupier understands only the language of power and interest. It respects those who force it to respect them and despises those who voluntarily humble themselves before it. Arab rulers who rushed to normalize relations with the Zionist entity thought that their embrace of the Jewish entity and the U.S. would preserve their thrones and bring them prosperity, only to discover, too late, and perhaps without publicly acknowledging it, that they are mere temporary tools, to be discarded by the Zionists once they have served their purpose.
Netanyahu bringing back the idea of a “Greater Israel” now, after he failed to defeat brave Gaza by military force, shows he is trying to cover his military failure with a fake political‑ideological win at the expense of weak, submissive Arab regimes.
His army could not crush a few thousand fighters in Gaza, so he is showing off his power against governments he knows will not dare stop him. This is the bitter truth people in our region need to understand. The occupying Jewish state is an existential enemy that does not care about alliances if they get in the way of its ambitions. Relying on the collaborating regimes to protect our causes is an illusion. Egypt, Jordan, Syria and the Palestinian Authority could not move to stop the Zionist advance. They abandoned Gaza to its fate and were powerless as the West Bank was swallowed and Al-Quds was Judaized. So how can we expect them to stop the “Greater Israel” project as it spreads across the region?
History shows, more each day, that the rights of the Islamic Ummah will only be protected if the Ummah rises by itself and establishes a Khilafah Rashidah (Rightly‑Guided Caliphate) on the Method of Prophethood, which will make the occupying entity forget the whispers of Shaytan.
The regimes that bow to the enemy have put themselves in the trash heap of history. They will only earn more humiliation from the very power they once thought was their friend and protector. Netanyahu has deeply humiliated them. Will they realize this before it’s too late? Or will they keep groveling until the enemy tosses them aside when they’re no longer useful?
There is no doubt, even for a moment, that they will keep bowing down, because that’s all they know, unless the people rise up, remove them, and choose a path of dignity, honor, and Iman. One thing is certain now: “Greater Israel” will only be built on the ruins of whatever dignity these normalizing regimes still have left. And the future will show this soon enough.