لحظة ادراك

 "Absurd Wrestling of Hostilities and a Chronic Existential Threat"

It’s enough to tell him he hasn’t completed the mission properly, and he charges like a raging bull, attacking anyone in his path. His opponents have come to know his weak spot, and they deliberately provoke him to unleash everything he holds inside, even what lurks in his dreams. Donald Trump and his ruling entourage declare that the problem lies with the corrupt media—the lethal arm of the deep state—CNN and its ilk. After them come the Democratic members of Congress. Trump sees them all as enemies of his supposed great successes.

From deep beneath the earth, Iran’s Supreme Leader joins the chorus, adding his own "refinements": Iran has defeated America and Israel, he claims, because they failed to achieve any of their objectives. They didn’t eliminate Iran’s nuclear program, nor its missiles, and above all, he is still alive—meaning the regime remains intact.

Trump, flushed with rage, erupts: “You were soundly defeated, and you lie—you, of all people, know that Israel beat you. I knew where you were hiding. I was the one who turned back the Israeli jets midair before they ended your life.”

Trump quickly sends an urgent request to Benjamin Netanyahu to issue a counterstatement. Netanyahu promptly obliges, releasing a statement—attributed to the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission—declaring everything to have been “great” and “amazing.” Trump then instructs his Defense Secretary and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to do the same. The two organize a press conference at 8 a.m.—an unusual hour for Washington—to reinforce the narrative.

Republican and Democratic congressional leaders jump into a heated debate. Some speak of eradicating Iran’s nuclear program entirely, while others say it’s merely been delayed for a few months. Meanwhile, Netanyahu’s Defense Minister orders the Israeli army to prepare for any developments regarding Iran’s nuclear program.

Hezbollah’s Naeem Qassem chimes in, praising Iran’s “victory,” which prompts Netanyahu to respond by targeting Hezbollah military leaders and bases in southern Lebanon.

Following the proverb “he who comes to market must shop,” Hamas joins in: a single fighter from Khan Yunis battalion detonates an explosive inside the cabin of Israel’s best armored vehicle, killing all onboard. They send the message: the war has just begun.

The Houthis in Yemen are not to be left out either. A single missile launched from Yemen renews their vow to keep Israeli sirens wailing.

In the face of this entire spectacle, Trump starts spreading grand promises about negotiations with the Iranians, with a zero-enrichment ceiling on uranium—a deal Tehran has already rejected.

As for Gaza, there’s one “comprehensive” deal Trump dreams of: the end of Hamas’ rule, the exile of its remaining leadership, a new Arab-backed Palestinian administration, disarmament, and the withdrawal of Israeli forces along with the return of 50 hostages—some alive, some dead. If that fails, a partial deal is ready and can be signed now. In either case, the ball remains in Hamas’ court. Gideon’s combat vehicles await the green light.

Meanwhile, the rest of what’s left of Palestine will see large chunks annexed to Israel. Negotiations may begin over the legal status of what remains—perhaps it’ll be called a “state,” or something resembling it, under a fabricated authority that bears no true Palestinian identity.

Away from the chaos in the Middle East—where Trump found himself embroiled before ever entering the White House—and away from his trade wars with the world (like pressuring Spain to raise its defense contributions to 5%, or fruitless negotiations with Canada), he turns his gaze toward a conflict in Africa. A war so exhausted its parties no longer crave bloodshed, allowing Trump to orchestrate a peace deal funded by Qatar’s deep pockets. He then ascends his throne, flanked by world leaders for over an hour, distributing prizes and stirring up every topic imaginable—relevant or not. He listens to praises of his "inspired leadership" and "miraculous abilities," though his eye remains fixed on the natural wealth beneath African soil. He can’t just leave that to those who kill based on identity.

Thus, he adds another “achievement” to the portfolio he will present to the Nobel Committee for the Peace Prize. After all, failures in the major crises—like the Russia-Ukraine war or the multi-front Israeli conflict—can be offset by stacking up minor victories, such as the India-Pakistan feud or the dormant Congo-Rwanda dispute. A little acrobatics, media propaganda, and some obfuscation go a long way—especially when the flock, trained only to clap, not to read, deserves nothing more.

Trump and Netanyahu believe that, in their strategic talks in Washington, the cornerstone of building a “New Middle East” is what they’ve recently accomplished: neutralizing Iran’s existential nuclear and missile threat, and subduing its regional proxies. These moves, they think, restore Israel’s dominance in the region.

Now is the time to translate these military gains into political achievements, relying on the power and influence of the United States—led by a president unfamiliar with true strategic thinking. His adoption of Netanyahu’s narrow worldview—which fails to distinguish between hostility and existential threat—will drag the U.S. into Israel’s endless wars for years to come.

Those who think Iran’s nuclear ambitions pose an existential threat to Israel fundamentally misunderstand strategy. Who still believes Iran would drop a nuclear bomb on a region it shares—just 27,000 square kilometers—between Israelis and Palestinians? Whether peaceful or military in nature, Iran’s nuclear program is its ticket to recognition as a regional power. Iran, 2,000 km from Israel, might be a destabilizing force due to its proxy militias, but this doesn’t justify escalating it to the level of existential threat. Ironically, the recent military campaign may push Iran to pursue nuclear weapons more aggressively—convinced that if they had one already, they wouldn’t have been attacked so fiercely.

Israel, with its current far-right political composition, and Trump's administration—dominated by American right-wing forces—have learned nothing. The so-called Abraham Accords and normalization campaigns, pushed by the U.S. at Israel’s request, were a major factor in Hamas’ October 7 operation, and a warning to others considering similar steps. This is well-known now to both the U.S. and Israel. Yet, they still try to push for normalization with Syria and Lebanon as a way to manage existing hostilities.

Even if such normalization miraculously happens—despite Lebanon’s fragmented politics and Syria’s rigid regime—it would merely suspend current hostilities, not resolve the fundamental existential issue.

That issue lies between the river and the sea—the phrase that Israeli right-wing parties and Netanyahu fail to grasp. After the Egypt-Israel and Jordan-Israel peace deals, the bloodiest confrontations occurred—Lebanon War in 1982 and the Second Intifada, with bus and restaurant bombings across Israeli cities.

Netanyahu believes that Trump’s recognition of the Golan Heights and Jerusalem as Israeli territory—and his current push to recognize vast swaths of the West Bank as annexed—will add strategic value to Israel. Anyone who doubts this logic must answer two crucial questions: What is the Israeli right’s plan for Gaza after all this destruction? And what is its plan for the West Bank after annexing most of it?

A state that refuses to grant equal citizenship to annexed residents, can’t deport them, can’t offer them sovereignty in a neighboring state, and can’t find any neighboring country willing to manage their daily lives—that’s where the true existential threat lies. Not in the latest round of hostility, but in the unresolved issue rooted between the river and the sea.

In conclusion:

The mathematical formula ingrained in the minds of Netanyahu and Trump—that a decisive blow to Iran and its proxies equals readiness for dominance, normalization, and the end of the Palestinian cause—is one even an old woman in Gaza, who lost everything (her home, husband, and child) but not her dream of praying in Al-Aqsa, would never believe. When they can convince her, only then will their equation be valid. Until then, this conversation is far from over.