Since the outset of the war Israel launched following Hamas’s attack on October 7, 2023, many observers have been expressing fears of a sweeping victory for Israel. Led by Netanyahu and the far-right government, such an Israeli victory would have catastrophic consequences- not only for Palestine, its people, land, and cause, but for the entire Arab region.
The primary explicit objectives of the war were to forcibly free the hostages, destroy Hamas, and bring an end to its rule in Gaza. However, the far-right government saw these developments as an opportunity to realize ambitions it has long held. These ambitions extend beyond Gaza to “redrawing the regional map.”
Amid the prevailing emotional analyses in the Arab world, numerous perspectives on how to define victory and defeat have emerged. While Israel has failed to liberate the hostages (or captives, or detainees, depending on the differing definitions) by force and has not completely annihilated Hamas (despite the near-total destruction of Gaza during its genocidal war), it would be a stretch to claim that Israel has not achieved objectives that go beyond those that it had initially announced.
In addition to tens of thousands of civilian casualties, the destruction of infrastructure, and the obliteration of all the fundamentals of life in Gaza, Israel also severely weakened adversaries. It also achieved significant gains through its devastating campaign on Lebanon, which deeply hampered Hezbollah and- at least temporarily- curtailed Iran’s influence in the region. These two developments created the power vacuum that ultimately led to the collapse of the Assad regime.
These outcomes have emboldened Israel’s far-right government and its supporters, particularly in the United States. It has fueled their extremist ambitions, as well as silenced and intimidated skeptics of such actions’ long-term repercussions on the stability of the region and the international order.
In light of this shift, we saw the idea of displacing Gaza’s residents, under the pretext of reconstructing what Israel’s war had destroyed, gain traction. Netanyahu first planted the seeds of this idea in his first meeting with Blinken after October 7, suggesting the establishment of a humanitarian corridor to transfer Gazans to Sinai. The idea later resurfaced in a more elaborated form during a discussion at Harvard University, though it was not taken seriously at the time. However, it gradually built steam, so much so that it was endorsed by the US president, who publicly proposed it just two weeks after he took office. This sinister plan cannot be understood in isolation from the infamous map that Netanyahu presented to the UN General Assembly, nor his constant bluster about successfully redrawing the region’s landscape.
The surge of arrogance and hubris has not only promoted the idea of displacing Gazans to Egypt, Jordan, and other countries. It has gone as far as suggesting that if Saudi Arabia seeks a Palestinian state, it should take in the Palestinians and create one on parts of its own territory.
In practice, this extremist government is advocating that we throw out everything that has been said, for decades, about Israel’s desire to live in peace in the region through treaties with neighbors. Moving forward with such initiatives would drag the region back to a time before the Arab-Israeli peace agreements. We would be back to square one.
Sentiments aside, such a coarse approach would open the door to conflict and perilous repercussions that neither the region nor the international community could afford.
These risks and challenges should be enough reason for the development of a collective effort to confront them through joint action by influential Arab states, as standing up to this hubris is far beyond the capacity of any single nation alone.
If Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia are currently the primary targets, it would come as no surprise if this circle of targets expands further. Cooperation among these three countries, with the genuine support of the Gulf states, would be necessary for creating an effective international counterweight. This coalition represents the backbone of stability and moderation in the region. It has economic and political leverage, as well as an extensive network of global allies. These assets could play a decisive role in shaping the world’s stance on this unchecked arrogance and the reckless ambitions it has fueled. The world cannot afford to stand back. Without such a concerted effort, this hubris will morph into a full-scale assault on the entire region.
