The Middle Eastern Policy of Israel & the US From the Point of View of an Egyptian Social Democrat

Translated by Captain Ahab


Ahmad Dahshan

Many have said that the ideal situation for Israel is for the Palestinian cause to remain as it is – a cause that is in limbo. A theocratic, military, and racist state (i.e Israel) is pregnant with inner contradictions of many cultures and ethnicities that were brought from around the world to live in this one land, the constant danger or threat is what binds it together. The two state solution ensures that the threat is over and that there is peace with neighboring countries, which in turn ensures that Israel would melt into the vast Arab ocean that surrounds it. The two state solution, regardless of how humiliating and degrading the terms, would be the final nail in the Israeli coffin, it would ensure its ultimate defeat.

The one state solution would ensure that a majority of the population would form a majority government, which would mean that Palestinians rule Israel or in the very least would have a third of the seats and the power to veto any resolution. If Israel accepts the one state solution this would make the ordinary Israeli just another Jew walking the streets of an Arab nation where he does not speak the language nor recognizes the culture.

Neither the two state nor the one state solution could ever satisfy Israel, it will never accept such proposals as it neither would ensure its internal cohesiveness nor the West’s support. If the Arabs resign their fate to the West and agree to a peace treaty, it would turn the Arab world into the biggest consumer of Western goods. Only a stupid Israeli would ever agree to any solution, as it would also undress Israel of her religious garb because they could never claim Jerusalem to be theirs alone. The Jews were offered national homes in Russia, Uganda, and Canada but it had to be Palestine as only that land could ever attract the Jews of the world.

Can Saudi Arabia, Egypt, or any Palestinian authority secede Jerusalem or even to legitimize Israel’s administration of the city? Never, not even in a million years could the Arabs ever give up on Jerusalem. The Palestinian refugees would never be admitted into Israel, Lebanon would also reject them on the grounds of not wanting to change the religious and ethnic demographic. The Hashemite kingdom of Jordan has no political capital to accept large numbers of refugees, and if the King ever does accept such a large figure the Jordanian tribes would overthrow him as they have become a minority of 35%. More than 6 million Palestinian refugees that Israel would never accept, nor can any neighboring Arab country, and so on what basis could a compromise be struck? The only solution that Israel could accept is if Gaza went to Egypt, the Western bank to Jordan, and if the Arabs forgot about Jerusalem and for the Arab states to absorb the Palestinian diaspora.

The other solution that could be accepted by Israel, on a short-term basis is:

No Jerusalem, No refugees, No 1967 border claims, and No to claiming the entire bank. But an exchange of territories in the Negev desert is a possibility. The Negev desert is a barren, lifeless and waterless region, and here the question of water will arise and the role of Ethiopia and its Renaissance dam will come into the equation in order to strike a deal with Egypt to increase Egypt’s share and deliver the water to the desert for the newly settled Palestinians, and also to the Israelis in the second phase of the project. This new water deal would be the deal of the century and would supersede any prior agreements, as Egypt’s share of the Nile water would increase but on two conditions that it supplies the Palestinians and the Israelis.

But all this in exchange for what? Why would Israel engage Iran in a direct and confrontational war that would bring it under attack from its allies in Lebanon, Palestine and Syria simultaneously? In Lebanon the UN forces are stationed to monitor the border between Hezbollah and Israel, and it is impossible that Hezbollah would start a war as they would have to expel the UN forces and lose the element of surprise, it would also bring world-wide condemnation and may also get itself attacked in Lebanon. On the other side why would Israel attack Hezbollah when it has Russia’s guarantee in Syria, while in Lebanon the UN forces patrol the front lines. And in any case the region is engulfed in an Arab (Sunni)-Arab (Shi’a) civil war. Both sides have assurances that the enemy will not ignite a surprise war.

Syria is engulfed in a long and protracting civil war that has destroyed its infrastructure and exhausted its military, and in any case the Russians act as guarantors for Israel’s security. As for Iraq, ever since the downfall of Saddam Hussein’s regime and the country has been pre-occupied internal conflicts between Sunnis, Shi’a, Arabs, Kurds, and Turkmen, as such there is no cause for concern with regards to Israel’s security. Egypt is like a poor and old man who is faced by crisis after crisis and is plagued by an elite that are in awe of their Israeli counterparts.

Iran is too far from Israel and the regional geopolitical balance is intact as long as its pre-occupied by the GCC countries, and so why would Israel involve itself in that conflict? Israel would come to the aid of the GCC countries and other Arab states if it can get recognition from those countries, thus ensuring the incineration of the Sunni-Shi’a war as it looks from afar. Why would the US relieve its “allies” from fighting terrorism and/or Iran, as both ensure the maintenance of its interests and might in the region. The US/Israeli axis would like to see the constant pressuring of Iran and its axis without ever neutralizing it. The same balancing act is required in the fight against terrorism, so that these terrorist groups remain active in the Middle East without ever affecting US, Israeli interests. Amidst the fight against Iran and terrorism the region is being handled in such a way as to ensure the permanent and lasting dominance of the US while Israel lives in eternal spring.

What kind of idiot in Washington or Tel Aviv would ever think to lend a hand and crush terrorism or Iran and all its allies?

Israel exploiting Arab weakness, and decrepitness to secure its freedom of navigation in the Strait of Tiran, knowing that these regimes will not last long.

A buffer zone in Sinai of 20 Kilometers if the central government fell in Cairo. Israel can intervene to protect itself from the emergence of any groups without clashing with the natives. The Strait of Tiran will turn into an international strait, guaranteeing freedom of navigation in it, in case of peace or war whether or not Egypt and Saudi Arabia are there or not.

Say Bye-Bye to the Golan in Syria, there will be no talks while global and regional powers are fighting over her. States capable of threatening Israel, even if peace were signed, simply by their very status and them leading the development of the region and positioned geographically to reap the fruits of the “Asian century”, are Cairo – Damascus – Baghdad, which are lost somewhere out in the wilderness.

The Gulf, with its financial wealth capable of transforming themselves into industrial nations to produce economies that would threaten Israel, is depleted by a conflict with Iran, a conflict that no one will win!

The important question amidst all this data that even a child could answer is: why would Israel sign a peace treaty or go to war against any axis in the region?

Copyright © 2022. All Rights Reserved.