Showing posts with label Greater Israel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Greater Israel. Show all posts

Monday, August 11, 2025

"Zionism won’t stop, the Arab world must collapse" by Lorenzo Maria Pacini

  

Click here for Exit the Cuckoo's Nest's posting standards and aims.

Source: Strategic Culture Foundation




Zionism won’t stop, the Arab world must collapse

Lorenzo Maria Pacini
August 10, 2025

In Greater Israel, there can only be Israeli Zionism. Christianity and Islam must first be exploited, then banned, Lorenzo Maria Pacini writes.

Join us on TelegramTwitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

The plan is clear

Four weeks after the signing of the Abraham Accords—signed on September 15, 2020, with U.S. mediation and involving the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain—Israeli urban planning authorities have authorized the construction of 4,948 new homes in the occupied territories of the West Bank. No significant public statements, no troop movements: just bureaucratic approvals marking a further step in the expansion of Israel’s presence. This advance, shrouded in the rhetoric of ‘peace’, took place in silence, reflecting a well-established approach: proceed with normalization when the region is compliant and intensify colonization when international attention wanes.

This logic is rooted in the expansionist model of Zionism: where possible, military force is used; where this is not convenient or feasible, soft penetration is used in the form of security agreements, economic cooperation, and intelligence alliances. This dual strategy—based on physical conquest and hegemonic consolidation—has been in place since 1967 and today extends unchecked from the Jordan River to the Atlantic Ocean.

Let us be clear: the Zionist project, in all its aspects, will not stop. The Arab world represents an obstacle to the construction of Greater Israel and the manifestation of Zionist hegemony.

The “Greater Israel” project manifests itself on two levels: on the one hand, the annexation of Palestinian territories, and on the other, geopolitical control of the region through indirect means. And, if we want to extend our projections, we must consider that Greater Israel is the starting point, not the end point.

This is a vision rooted in Zionist ideology, which envisages Jewish domination over the entire “Biblical Land of Israel.” When direct occupation is not sustainable, Tel Aviv prefers maneuvers of influence and destabilization that undermine the sovereignty of neighboring Arab states. The two dimensions—territorial and imperial—are interdependent.

This strategy has deep roots. Ze’ev Jabotinsky, the father of revisionist Zionism, wanted control over all of Mandatory Palestine and beyond, arguing that colonization should take place even against the will of the local populations. David Ben-Gurion, while publicly accepting the partition in 1937, saw that compromise only as an initial phase towards subsequent expansion, confirming the intention to extend the borders to the whole of Palestine once the Israeli military apparatus had been strengthened, as indeed happened. At first, Israel’s military power was insufficient for large-scale operations, so the “periphery doctrine” was developed, through which Israel cultivated alliances with non-Arab states and marginalized minorities (the Shah’s Iran, Turkey, Iraqi Kurds, Sudanese Christians), indirectly weakening its Arab rivals. This strategy, now adapted, is also visible in recent relations with the Druze communities in southern Syria.

Normalization means influence

Israeli penetration into the Arab world has reached an unprecedented level. The Abraham Accords have opened the door to large-scale economic, military, and technological cooperation. The historic treaties with Egypt and Jordan were only the beginning, with the United Arab Emirates subsequently becoming a prominent trading partner. The same is true in the Maghreb: Morocco, for example, has purchased weapons and signed industrial agreements in the drone sector, becoming a production hub for Israeli UAV systems. All this has created a geopolitical corridor linking Israel to the Gulf and North Africa, expanding its access to strategic routes, intelligence spaces, and crucial markets.

As economic relations intensify, colonization continues. Raze everything to the ground, indiscriminately; drive out the Palestinians, no questions asked; conquer the lands they consider “divine right.” Infrastructure is designed to isolate Palestinian communities in unconnected enclaves, making the formation of an autonomous state impossible.

Israel has also consolidated its presence in Syria (in the Quneitra region, near Damascus and Deraa), taking advantage of the chaos following the fall of Assad and the seizure of power by the jihadist group HTS led by Ahmad al-Sharaa (formerly known as al-Julani). In Lebanon, it maintains control of key areas such as the Shebaa Farms and the Kfar Shuba hills, as well as military positions along the Blue Line.

Expansion is masked by integration. Today, the Israeli occupation is no longer manifested solely through weapons, but is supported and fueled by diplomatic agreements and trade flows. “Normalization” has not stopped the occupation: it has made it more effective. Each new agreement with Arab countries increases Israel’s ability to extend colonization and strengthen military control. Plans are already underway to double the number of settlers in the Golan Heights and increase the military presence along sensitive areas. The consequences are being felt: Egypt is building a wall on the border with Gaza to manage possible flows of displaced persons; Jordan sees its water resources threatened; Syria and Lebanon are under increasing pressure to normalize relations with Israel.

The Greater Israel project is advancing: on the one hand, it is swallowing up territories; on the other, it is influencing the sovereign choices of Arab states. Together, they represent two sides of the same strategy: annexation and subordination.

And all this, let’s be clear, will not stop at Palestine.

Zionism is viscerally anti-Christian and anti-Islamic. Anything that does not adhere to Zionist Judaism must be eliminated.

From an Islamic perspective, criticism of Zionism is based on several levels. First of all, Zionism, in its state form, has led to the confiscation and occupation of Muslim holy sites—primarily Al-Aqsa in Jerusalem—with a progressive erosion of access to and management of sacred places. This is not only a political violation, but also a spiritual one, as Islamic sovereignty over Jerusalem is considered a religious duty, rooted in the Quran and prophetic tradition. The Zionist rejection of Arab sovereignty – expressed in the marginalization of Islamic religious institutions in the occupied territories – is a denial of the Umma, the unity of the community of believers, and of its legitimacy to safeguard the places of Islam.

Similarly, Christianity, especially in its Eastern expressions, has also suffered from an exclusionary Zionist approach. The Zionist theological imagination, which demands a Jewish “territorial redemption” of Palestine, excludes the historical and cultural presence of indigenous Christian communities, reducing them to tolerated or suspect minorities. Talmudic hatred of Christians is well known. For many Palestinian and Middle Eastern Christians, Zionism represents a form of nationalist secularization that empties the Holy Land of its universal value, transforming it into an exclusive ethnic-religious property.

In its quest to create an exclusive Jewish state, Zionism has promoted dynamics of exclusion and delegitimization of the other Abrahamic religions historically present in Palestine. This makes it ideologically antithetical to any pluralistic and shared vision of the holy places and communities that have coexisted there for centuries.

We should not be surprised if we soon see conflicts arise between the powers of the Arab world or, by extension, in other Islamic countries, such as in Asia, precisely because of their geopolitical and geoeconomic relations with the Zionist entity.

Because, ultimately, this is the plan: in Greater Israel, there can only be Israeli Zionism. Christianity and Islam must first be exploited, then banned. At any cost.

Tuesday, December 10, 2024

"Regime Change in Syria: Another Step Towards 'Greater Israel'" by Alan Sabrosky

 

Click here for Exit the Cuckoo's Nest's posting standards and aims.

Source: The Unz Review


Regime Change in Syria: Another Step Towards "Greater Israel"

“For they have sown the wind,
and they shall reap the whirlwind.”
-Hosea 8:7

The collapse of the Assad government in Syria is certain to be greeted with considerable satisfaction in Jerusalem and Washington. Both capitals of the Zionist Co-Dominium have long seen the Assads much as they did Iraq’s Saddam Hussein and Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi. All were obstacles to Israel’s designs in the region.

All three were also targets of that nefarious policy of “regime change” highlighted by in the US after 9/11, as were four other countries in the region. Now the last of the three has fallen, albeit much later than the mostly Jewish neoconservative “chicken hawks” (so called because all advocated war but very few ever served in uniform) had anticipated back in 2001.

So What Caused the Collapse?

Internal dynamics within Syria that played their part, to be sure, but I will focus here on the external factors. A major reason was the unrelenting pressure and considerable resources poured into the assorted militias and jihadists trying to overthrow Syria’s regime. Money talks, and it talked very loudly here. So did the frequent Israeli air and artillery strikes into Syria. Shielded by the US, Russian forces in Syria could do little for their ally.

Then, too, the numerically small but politically significant, open-ended US military presence on the ground in Syria had their own impact, So did the limited but strategically significant direct military attacks by the US and other NATO countries on Syrian government forces and installations. Image matters, and here it mattered greatly.

Syria’s Assad could never match that. Only Russia (to a very limited extent) and Iran (to a even lesser one) really did much of anything. But Russia is caught up with the Ukrainian “tar baby” and Iran is hedging its bets in anticipation of America’s own “regime change.” A scarcity of strong, reasonably reliable allies also counts, and it counted here, but not in a good way.

Second, Syria lost the information and propaganda war, in a very big and very decisive way. The Jewish-dominated media in the US and most of Europe made sure that virtually every claim, no matter how ludicrous, of the jihadists and other anti-government elements in Syria was treated as Gospel truth. Few in the legacy media disputed their assertions, although many did in the alternative media and on social media platforms.

It wasn’t enough. Israel can rip Gaza apart and kill tens of thousands of civilians, but any criticism of its very real war crimes is almost universally denounced in the media and Western capitals as “vicious antisemitism” that needs to be suppressed and punished. That criticism was nothing of the sort, but it demonstrates the exceptional degree of Jewish influence throughout the West. It also underscores the accuracy of the axiom that “truth is the first casualty of war,” at least whenever Israel or its interests are involved.

Third, it is worth noting that this event saw insurgent militias and local jihadists do to the Syrian government forces what the US-backed mujaheddin did to the Afghan government and their Soviet allies, and later the Taliban (the lineal operational descendants of the original mujaheddin) did to another Afghan government and its American patron. It seems that local governments have very great difficulty holding out against insurgents who have an external sanctuary, external assistance, or both.

In all three cases cited above, the insurgents had both. In Syria, the government forces had also to contend with direct military attacks by Israel, the US and other NATO countries. What made it harder for them was that they essentially fought these external forces with one hand firmly tied behind their backs.

Other than in defense, Syrian government forces could only engage in occasional artillery duels with the Israelis, but not respond to air attacks in kind. Nor could the Russians assist them, other than defensively. Any attempt to respond directly to US, Israeli or other attacks meant a direct confrontation with the US, Israel covered by its American puppet, or NATO. The Syrians could not do this alone, and Syria simply was not worth enough to Russia to risk that kind of engagement.

Reflections

It will take some time for the implications of all this to become clearer (perhaps “less murky” would be more accurate). I expect the current Syrian government officials and senior military commanders are wondering if they will still be alive next week. I am not a specialist on Syrian affairs, but the historical track record in these situations would not reassuring to them.

I expect, however, a major consideration on the part of the winners will be the role intended for them by their foreign patrons .Do we want the new Syrian government to be another Egypt, at least insofar as Israel is concerned? Or is it something else?

Whatever it is, insurgent forces – even heavily infiltrated ones – have shown themselves to be exceptionally difficult to predict or to control, or even to influence, once they are in power.. Recall that the people the US armed to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan morphed into a Taliban which employed some of those weapons and techniques to force yet another humiliating American debacle.

The Israeli experience with these things is even more problematic. I was told back in the 1980s by a senior Israeli officer that they had successfully infiltrated every single Arab government and movement, relying principally on Sephardic Jews. So when Israel set up Hamas in the 1980s as a counter-weight to the PLO, I expect they thought they had made a good bargain. Yet it, too, changed over the years. Infiltrated or not, it has given Israel a more “interesting” time than it anticipated.

The case of ISIS and the Syrian jihadists is even more interesting. Now, “false flags” (attacking someone but making people believe someone else is doing it) is something of an Israeli specialty. The motto of Mossad, the best-known Israeli intelligence organization, is aptly “By Deception, Shall You Wage War.

Mossad it and its sister organizations have lived up to that motto since the founding of Israel. They have been aided worldwide by dual Israeli citizens, or Jews without Israeli citizenship, some Christian Zionists, and outright mercenaries.

Examples abound. Three of particular relevance to the US, for example, are the Lavon Affair in Egypt (1954), the attack on the USS Liberty (1967) and the 9/11 attacks (2001). Worth looking them up (do NOT trust either Wikipedia or Google search engine!), but here is a start on the last-named one.

The case of ISIS is even more intriguing. Supposedly a militant Islamic organization, it seems to have exceptionally great difficulty hitting Israeli or American targets anywhere in the world. This was a problem Osama bin Laden’s Al-Qaeda, with fewer assets, obviously did not share.

Despite the resources to field fleets of white Toyota pick-up trucks with heavy weapons in their beds and other paraphernalia, they found it an “almost” insurmountable challenge to strike what should be their own principal enemies. Curious, is it not? I wonder how many ISIS leaders have shared drinks with their Mossad and CIA contacts.

Last are the Syrian jihadists, easily the most fascinating facet of the Syrian puzzle. We are told constantly that these people are Islamic fanatics who spend their nights dreaming of how to kill non-believers, and their days trying to do it (or is that backwards?). But apparently there are “good” jihadists and “bad” jihadists. The former are those who do the bidding of Western governments (including Israel) and attack Muslim countries. The latter are those that apparently do not.

Peering Ahead

It is hazardous at best to anticipate what will emerge in the aftermath of the Syrian government’s defeat. At a minimum, I would expect the new rulers to order the Russians out. Of course, the Russians may not go, just as the US ignored the demands of many weaker governments to leave. Imperial powers, even if weakening and in a chaotic world, are often like that.

We may learn a bit more about ISIS and these “good” jihadists in Syria. Precisely what will they do in power? Will they be like the Taliban in Afghanistan? If not, what would that say about their actual character and hat of their leaders? Thought-provoking times, at best.

What is clearer is that what happened in Syria will embolden the Israelis to deal with the Palestinians within and Lebanon and Hezbollah without, especially once Trump is President and recognizes Israeli sovereignty over East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Trump is even more beholden to Israel than most US presidents, and Israel will capitalize on it.

Moreover, with Assad’s Syria removed from the game, Iran will move to the regional front burner. No person in the US can now even be a serious candidate for President without being in Israel’s pocket, much less be elected to that office, but the two American political factions have different priorities.

What this means is that the Neo-conservatives stacking up in Trump’s administration are an odds-on certainty to see this as a golden opportunity to complete their 2001 agenda and neutralize Iran. Knowing them, they and Jewish money will push (perhaps I should say “nudge”) Trump to do one of three things: (1) support Israel in attacking Iran, (2) join Israel in doing that, or (3) attacking Iran without Israel.

The net effect is a far more dangerous 2025 than recent years have seen, and they have not been exactly a joy. We face civil upheaval at home and more war abroad, if Trump actually puts his agenda into effect. For Israel, Syria’s defeat and Trump’s presidency augur well on its march to a “Greater Israel.” For Palestinians. Lebanese and so many others in the reason, things have gone from bad to an almost unimaginably worse. For Americans, challenging times, indeed.

Alan Ned Sabrosky (PhD, University of Michigan) is a ten-year US Marine Corps veteran. He served in Vietnam with the 1st Marine Division and is a graduate of the US Army War College. Dr. Sabrosky can be contacted at docbrosk@comcast.net

Disqus