When people begin to die from everything and a sense of helplessness creeps in, it becomes almost instinctive to summon that ancient human phrase, “Something is better than nothing.” And with it begins the struggle to condition oneself into accepting a deep and unchecked descent, gradually dismantling psychological barriers and sacred taboos. In a reality where options and alternatives are artificially nonexistent, and tyranny, oppression, and sadism reign supreme—masters and mistresses of the scene in all its horrific detail—while waiting for a better outcome that no longer seems acceptable to people, you must convince yourself that what once was far below acceptable standards is now the best you can hope for.
And so, day after day, in the name of the elusive better, we arrive at the theater of numbness—where we begin to invent fictional names and labels, drawing from sacred texts, ancient tales, and the spells of charlatans—molding them to fit our new degraded state of consciousness. One of the main symptoms of this condition is the spread and acceptance of mutual deception, where society spins in a hellish loop built on bad, deceitful excuses, only to wake up to even worse and uglier ones. But no matter how bad, they are always stamped with the eternal magical phrase: “Better than nothing,” even if it’s a lie uglier than the sin itself.
On May 21, the Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Minister appeared at the Qatar Economic Forum 2025, saying: “We convinced Hamas to release hostage Aidan Alexander (a dual national) in the hope of opening a window in the wall of deadlock to stop the Gaza war and allow aid in.” Israel responded to this gesture with further escalation.
The question is—one the Qatari Prime Minister may not have an answer to—with whom was this deal struck? On what assumptions was it based? If the answer is that it was coordinated with the Americans or done for their sake, then clearly you have no real diplomatic role. Donald Trump had already agreed with Benjamin Netanyahu that his visit to the Gulf was strictly for collecting money, investment, and zeroing out any political relevance. So if that’s the case, why not criticize the Americans directly?
And if the deal was supposedly with the Israelis in hopes they’d respond to a humanitarian gesture with a reciprocal one, they had already declared beforehand that they made no promises in return. The truth is, this was a gesture made directly to Donald Trump to coincide with his visit to Qatar, in the hopes he would pressure Netanyahu to allow a breakthrough in hostage negotiations. When that failed and the gamble backfired, your statement came across as an invented excuse to fend off a wave of criticism—especially from those starving in Gaza.
Leaks from media outlets close to Donald Trump say he has grown fed up with Netanyahu and instructed his team to tell him to stop the war. This quickly spread in Arab media, analyzed with hopes and delusions—as if Trump needed middlemen to deliver a message to Netanyahu. People forget that Trump gave Netanyahu the latitude to unleash hell on Gaza. He’s also the one who re-shipped heavy bombs to Israel. Isn't he the same man who floated the idea of displacing Palestinians to a Gaza Riviera?
Yet, even after all this, we still invent excuses for Trump, as if he’s helpless in the face of a rogue Netanyahu—when in fact they are aligned on the war’s strategic goals. When Trump returned from the Gulf with bags full of money and deals, his first appearance on Fox News was to provide Netanyahu with all the justification he needed, with the tired phrase: “Let’s not forget October 7.” As if nine months of death, starvation, and destruction haven't already answered October 7 a hundredfold.
As images of near-famine emerge from Gaza, and international reports warn that Gazans are on the edge of starvation, global pressure mounted on Netanyahu’s government. To throw dust in the world’s eyes, Israel allowed in the bare minimum of aid to prevent death by hunger. He justified the move by responding to his closest allies in the U.S. Congress—willing to support him in anything except famine imagery.
To Netanyahu, aid not reaching Hamas was reason enough to starve over two million Palestinians. The world is expected to believe this nonsense. But it’s now clear that international agencies—especially UNRWA—are the primary targets, as delegitimizing them serves the goal of erasing the 1948 Nakba’s victims. Starvation is a tool to break Palestinians psychologically, pushing them to surrender—or better yet, to request departure from Gaza. This insistence on driving people south is a preparatory step toward expelling them altogether.
Official Europe scrambles for a formula to address popular uprisings in their capitals. These protests clearly called out genocide and ethnic cleansing by Israel. The formal European establishment showed unease at the use of starvation as a weapon, prompting the UK to suspend new trade agreements with Israel. The EU hinted at reviewing partnership agreements and even recognizing a Palestinian state.
Netanyahu dismissed it all as meaningless—support for Hamas. He went further by allowing Israeli troops in Jenin to fire on visiting diplomatic delegations. In response, the EU summoned Israeli ambassadors in protest—as if this were an isolated incident, not part of a consistent pattern.
On May 22, Donald Trump welcomed the South African president to the White House. During the visit—and in line with Trump’s transactional logic—he criticized South Africa for filing a case against Israel at the International Criminal Court. He added that the case would go nowhere—meaning the U.S. will block all such efforts and defend Israel’s actions. October 7, again, is justification enough to close our eyes to 20 months of death and destruction. Pursuing this “deal” with South Africa apparently requires dropping the ICC case. U.S. economic interests remain tightly tied to Israel’s—more specifically, to the interests of Israel’s far-right government.
In Israel, generals and former prime ministers race to harshly criticize Netanyahu’s coalition, as if they had nothing to do with the unfolding catastrophe. Every one of them committed similar or worse actions when in power. This is mere political jockeying cloaked in moral awakening. Had they truly opposed the government's treatment of Palestinians, the Israeli political scene would never have allowed these extremists to rise in the first place.
The truth is: their strategic calculations show that the far-right is steering Israel toward a breaking point—abandoning hostages and risking its global image as a “democracy.” The mask has fallen, revealing the true face Israel tried to hide for years. All its economic gains and the prosperity it built may now be sacrificed.
On May 22, Netanyahu was handed a golden opportunity when a U.S. citizen, identified with leftist ideology, shot and killed an Israeli embassy staffer and his wife at the Jewish Museum in Washington. The incident was immediately classified as a hate crime and antisemitism. Such repugnant acts do not serve the Palestinian cause. Standing with a sign at that location protesting the killing in Gaza would have been far more powerful.
Instead of being contextualized properly—linking the act to the horrors of Gaza and the death of children—the event was weaponized and exaggerated. U.S. authorities rushed to conclusions without waiting for the investigation’s results. The suspect is alive. Yet this premature framing shows that something more sinister may be at play.
:In Conclusion
All of the above means little to the Palestinian situation. Palestinians have heard this rhetoric for decades. But if some—especially the de facto rulers in Gaza—still think this circus offers them a sliver of hope to retain power directly or from behind a curtain, they are delusional. All they’re doing is prolonging the suffering of 2.5 million people. Nothing more, nothing less.
تعليقات
إرسال تعليق