‘New Middle East’: This is Netanyahu’s Real Goal in the Region
Youtube screenshot.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu consistently declares his ambition to “change the face of the Middle East.” Yet, his repeated assertions seem to clash with the unfolding reality on the ground.
Netanyahu’s opportunistic relationship with language is now proving detrimental to his country. The Israeli leader undoubtedly grasps fundamental marketing principles, particularly the power of strong branding and consistent messaging. However, for any product to succeed over time, clever branding alone is insufficient; the product itself must live up to at least a minimum degree of expectation.
Netanyahu’s “product,” however, has proven utterly defective, yet the 75-year-old Israeli Prime Minister stubbornly refuses to abandon his outdated marketing techniques.
But what exactly is Netanyahu selling?
Long before assuming Israel’s leadership, Netanyahu mastered the art of repetition – a technique often employed by politicians to inundate public discourse with specific slogans. Over time, these slogans are intended to become “common sense”.
As a member of the Knesset in 1992, Netanyahu delivered what appeared to be a bombshell: Iran was “within three to five years” from obtaining a nuclear bomb. In 1996, he urged the US Congress to act, declaring that “time is running out.”
While the US pivoted its attention toward Iraq, following the September 2001 attacks, Netanyahu evidently hoped to eliminate two regional foes in one stroke. Following the fall of the Iraqi government in 2003, Netanyahu channeled all his energy into a new discourse: Iran as an existential threat.
Between then and now, Iran has remained his primary focus, even as regional alliances began to form around a discourse of stabilization and renewed diplomatic ties.
However, the Obama administration, especially during its second term, was clearly uninterested in another regional war. As soon as Obama left office, Netanyahu reverted to his old marketing strategy.
It was during Trump’s first term that Netanyahu brought all his marketing techniques to the forefront. He utilized what is known as comparative advertising, where his enemies’ “product” is denigrated with basic terms like ‘barbarism’, ‘dark age’, and so forth, while his own is promoted as representing ‘civilization’, ‘enlightenment’, and ‘progress’.
He also invested heavily in the FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) marketing technique. This entailed spreading negative or misleading information about others while promoting his own as a far superior alternative.
This brings us to “solution framing.” For instance, the so-called “existential threats” faced by Israel can supposedly be resolved through the establishment of a “New Middle East.” For this new reality to materialize, the US, he argues, would have to take action, not only to save Israel but also the “civilized world” as well.
It must be noted that Netanyahu’s “New Middle East” is not his original framing. This notion can be traced to a paper published by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in March 2004. It followed the US war and invasion of Iraq and was part of the intellectual euphoria among US and other Western intellectuals seeking to reshape the Middle East in a way that suited US geopolitical needs.
The Carnegie article sought to expand the definition of the Middle East beyond the traditional Middle East and North Africa, reaching as far as the Caucasus and Central Asia.
American politicians adopted this new concept, tailoring it to suit US interests at the time. It was US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice who largely rebranded “greater” to “new,” thus coining the “New Middle East,” which she announced in June 2006.
Though Netanyahu embraced the term, he improvised it in recent years. Instead of speaking of it as a distant objective, he declared that he was actively in the process of making it a reality. “We are changing the face of the Middle East. We are changing the face of the world,” he triumphantly declared in June 2021.
Even following the events of October 7, 2023, and the Israeli war and genocide that ensued, Netanyahu never ceased using the term. This time, however, his emphasis on “change” rotated between a future possibility and an active reality. “I ask that you stand steadfast because we are going to change the Middle East,” he stated on October 9 of that same year.
And again in September 2024, he proclaimed that Israel was “pursuing” a plan to “assassinate Hezbollah leaders” with the aim of “changing the strategic reality of the Middle East.” And again, in October, December, and January of this year. In every single instance, he contextualized the “change of the Middle East” with bombs and rockets, and nothing else.
In May, coinciding with a major Israeli bombing of Yemen, he declared that Israel’s “mission” exceeds that of “defeating Hamas,” extending to “changing the face of the Middle East.” And finally, on June 16, he assigned the same language to the war with Iran, this time remaining committed to the new tweak of adding the word “face” to his new, envisaged Middle East.
Of course, old branding tactics aside, Netanyahu’s Middle East, much like the US’ old “greater Middle East,” remains a pipe dream aimed at dominating the resource-rich region, with Israel serving the role of regional hegemon. That said, the events of the last two years have demonstrated that, although the Middle East is indeed changing, this transformation is not happening because of Israel. Consequently, the outcome will most likely not be to its liking.
Therefore, Netanyahu may continue repeating, like a broken record, old colonial slogans, but genuine change will only happen because of the peoples of the region and their many capable political players.
The Real Winners: The Strategic Fallout of the Israel-Iran War
On June 24, US President Donald Trump announced a truce between Israel and Iran following nearly two weeks of open warfare.
Israel began the war, launching a surprise offensive on June 13, with airstrikes targeting Iranian nuclear facilities, missile installations, and senior military and scientific personnel, in addition to numerous civilian targets.
In response, Iran launched a wave of ballistic missiles and drones deep into Israeli territory, triggering air raid sirens across Tel Aviv, Haifa, and Beersheba and numerous other locations, causing unprecedented destruction in the country.
What began as a bilateral escalation quickly spiraled into something far more consequential: a direct confrontation between the United States and Iran.
On June 22, the United States Air Force and Navy carried out a full-scale assault on three Iranian nuclear sites – Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan – in a coordinated strike dubbed Operation Midnight Hammer. Seven B-2 bombers of the 509th Bomb Wing allegedly flew nonstop from Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri to deliver the strikes.
The following day, Iran retaliated by bombing the Al-Udeid US military base in Qatar and firing a new wave of missiles at Israeli targets.
This marked a turning point. For the first time, Iran and the United States faced each other on the battlefield without intermediaries. And for the first time in recent history, Israel’s long-standing campaign to provoke a US-led war against Iran had succeeded.
Strategic Fallout
Following 12 days of war, Israel achieved two of its goals. First, it pulled Washington directly into its conflict with Tehran, setting a dangerous precedent for future US involvement in Israel’s regional wars. Second, it generated immediate political capital at home and abroad, portraying US military backing as a ‘victory’ for Israel.
However, beyond these short-term gains, the cracks in Israel’s strategy are already showing.
Netanyahu did not achieve regime change in Tehran – the real objective of his years-long campaign. Instead, he faced a resilient and unified Iran that struck back with precision and discipline. Worse still, he may have awakened something even more threatening to Israeli ambitions: a new regional consciousness.
Iran, for its part, emerges from this confrontation significantly stronger. Despite US and Israeli efforts to cripple its nuclear program, Iran has demonstrated that its strategic capabilities remain intact and highly functional.
Tehran established a powerful new deterrence equation – proving that it can strike not only Israeli cities but US bases across the region.
Even more consequentially, Iran waged this fight independently, without leaning on Hezbollah or Ansarallah, or even deploying Iraqi militias. This independence surprised many observers and forced a recalibration of Iran’s regional weight.
Iranian Unity
Perhaps the most significant development of all is one that cannot be measured in missiles or casualties: the surge in national unity within Iran and the widespread support it received across the Arab and Muslim world.
For years, Israel and its allies have sought to isolate Iran, to present it as a pariah even among Muslims. Yet in these past days, we have witnessed the opposite.
From Baghdad to Beirut, and even in politically cautious capitals like Amman and Cairo, support for Iran surged. This unity alone may prove to be Israel’s most formidable challenge yet.
Inside Iran, the war erased, at least for now, the deep divides between reformists and conservatives. Faced with an existential threat, the Iranian people coalesced, not around any one leader or party, but around the defense of their homeland.
The descendants of one of the world’s oldest civilizations reacted with a dignity and pride that no amount of foreign aggression could extinguish.
The Nuclear Question
Despite the battlefield developments, the real outcome of this war may depend on what Iran does next with its nuclear program.
If Tehran decides to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) – even temporarily – and signals that its program remains functional, Israel’s so-called “achievements” will be rendered meaningless.
However, if Iran fails to follow this military confrontation with a bold political repositioning, Netanyahu will be free to claim – falsely or not – that he has succeeded in halting Iran’s nuclear ambitions. The stakes are as high as they’ve ever been.
A Manufactured Farce
Some media outlets are now praising Trump for supposedly “ordering” Netanyahu to halt further strikes on Iran.
This narrative is as insulting as it is false. What we are witnessing is a staged political performance – a carefully orchestrated spat between two partners playing both sides of a dangerous game.
Trump’s Truth post, “Bring your pilots home,” was not a call for peace. It was a calculated move to reclaim credibility after fully surrendering to Netanyahu’s war. It allows Trump to pose as a moderate, distract from Israel’s battlefield losses, and create the illusion of a US administration reining in Israeli aggression.
In truth, this was always a joint US-Israeli war – one planned, executed, and justified under the pretext of defending Western interests while laying the groundwork for deeper intervention and potential invasion.
Return of the People
Amid all the military calculations and geopolitical theater, one truth stands out: the real winners are the Iranian people.
When it mattered most, they stood united. They understood that resisting foreign aggression was more important than internal disputes. They reminded the world – and themselves – that in moments of crisis, people are not peripheral actors in history; they are its authors.
The message from Tehran is unmistakable: We are here. We are proud. And we will not be broken.
That is the message Israel, and perhaps even Washington, did not anticipate. And it is the one that could reshape the region for years to come.
Sumud: The Unyielding Heart of the Palestinian Cause in Gaza
The profound and unrelenting struggles endured by Palestinians should, by any rational expectation, have irrevocably concluded the Palestinian cause. Yet, the struggle for freedom in Palestine is at its zenith. How is one to explain this?
Attempts aimed at the erasure of Palestine, the Palestinian people, and their cause go back well over a century. This encompasses the historical and ongoing impacts of the Balfour Declaration and the subsequent Mandate period, which ushered in an era of extreme violence, systemic suppression, and the imposition of harsh emergency regulations.
The devastating Nakba – the catastrophic destruction of the Palestinian homeland – was followed by the enactment of new emergency laws and the widespread dispersal of several Palestinian generations into the Shattat (diaspora).
A relentless cycle of constant war, new occupations, and persistent ethnic cleansing has been further compounded by a pervasive lack of international action and sustained Arab solidarity, exacerbated by the presence of corrupt Palestinian elites.
This litany of suffering extends to countless Israeli massacres, escalating violence, the relentless expansion of settlements, widespread destruction, and the recurring demolition of homes.
The protracted Gaza siege, marked by war after war, has now culminated in the ongoing genocide.
Yet, despite this comprehensive and overwhelming accumulation of adversities, the Palestinian cause not only endures but persists with an unwavering spirit. This remarkable and enduring resilience is most profoundly understood through the concept of sumud.
The Indomitable Spirit of Sumud
Sumud transcends mere steadfastness; it represents a profound and deeply ingrained cultural phenomenon rooted in defiance, historical consciousness, unwavering faith, spirituality, the strength of family bonds, and the cohesion of community.
The language of sumud is remarkably pervasive and rich, manifesting eloquently in poetry, intricate storytelling, Quranic verses, and the compelling terminology of revolution. Words such as sumud itself, Muqawama (resistance), Hurriyya (freedom), Thawra (revolution), Hatta Akher Nuqtat Dum (to the last drop of blood), and even the very word Falasteen (Palestine) are imbued with profound and multifaceted significance.
For countless children growing up in Gaza, like myself, the simple, yet powerful, act of writing the word Falasteen on sand, in every text book, or on one’s own hand serves as a foundational and deeply personal experience.
Therefore, any truly genuine comprehension of Palestine must be meticulously shaped by the authentic language and the lived experiences of Palestinians themselves, with particular emphasis on those residing in Gaza.
This imperative necessitates a deliberate shift in focus, moving away from historical documents like the Balfour Declaration or the Nation-State Law. Instead, understanding must authentically emerge from the narratives of pivotal figures such as Izz al-Din al-Qassam, Abdul Qader al-Husseini, Akram Zeiter, and Ghassan Kanafani, extending all the way to the fighting Palestinians in Gaza, their innocent children, their courageous journalists, their dedicated doctors, and their ordinary people.
Gaza: The Unyielding Heart of the Palestinian Story
One might be inclined to perceive this perspective as sentimental. However, it stands as a clear articulation of a long-held conviction that Gaza occupies the indisputable core of the Palestinian story, its historical trajectory, and its future destiny.
This is not an emotional plea but a profound recognition of a harsh and unyielding living reality: Gaza has borne the brunt of the most severe manifestations of Israeli occupation, apartheid, siege, war, violence, ethnic cleansing, and genocide.
Crucially, it is also the place where resistance has never ceased, not for a single moment. This fact alone is sufficient to establish Gaza as the most critical and undeniable component in the entire intricate history of the so-called conflict.
The Israeli genocide unfolding in Gaza is not merely an act of collective punishment. Rather, it originates from a deeply distorted and chilling Israeli perception of reality: that the Palestinian people themselves, and not a specific ideology, a particular group of individuals, or a defined organization, constitute the very heart and soul of the Palestinian cause.
Consequently, the perceived sole method for thoroughly decimating the resistance is through the mass killing of the people and the subsequent ethnic cleansing of the survivors. If Israel, in its twisted and profoundly criminal way, has managed to grasp this horrifying understanding, then it becomes equally imperative that we, too, fully comprehend this fundamental concept.
Forging a New Understanding of Palestine
Therefore, a new and transformative understanding of Palestine is not just desirable but absolutely imperative. This understanding must unequivocally center Palestinian voices that genuinely reflect the sentiments, wishes, feelings, aspirations, and the authentic popular politics of ordinary people.
It is crucial that not just any Palestinian voice will suffice, nor will any narrative do. This deliberate and focused approach will also help to liberate the word sumud, and all adjacent terminology, from being dismissed as merely fleeting sentimental language, thereby elevating it to the very heart of our collective discourse.
Palestinians, like all native populations engaged in a just struggle for freedom, should be unequivocally entrusted with the custodianship of their own discourse. They are not a liability to that discourse; they are not marginal actors within it; they are, in fact, the undeniable main characters.
Within an astonishing 600 days, Palestinians in Gaza, largely cut off, isolated, and targeted for extermination, have managed to expose Zionism more comprehensively and effectively than all the cumulative work undertaken over the course of an entire century.
This monumental achievement, too, is a direct byproduct of their profound sumud.
It is now time to critically revisit our language of solidarity with Palestine, consciously liberating it from our own ideological, political, and often personal priorities, and decisively reshaping it based solely on the authentic priorities of the Palestinians themselves.
(Delivered by Ramzy Baroud at the Gaza Tribunal, Sarajevo, Bosnia, May 27, 2025)
Dr. Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of six books. His latest book, co-edited with Ilan Pappé, is Our Vision for Liberation: Engaged Palestinian Leaders and Intellectuals Speak Out. His other books include My Father was a Freedom Fighter and The Last Earth. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA). His website is www.ramzybaroud.net.
No comments:
Post a Comment