The Battle of Al-Aqsa Flood overthrows Jabotinsky’s theory and ideology..

The war on Gaza and the West Bank differs from its predecessors. It is a war of existence, as extremists in Israel describe it, and the reason for it being different is not only due to the large and scale of the unprecedented operation carried out by Hamas on October 7, and the subsequent “mighty revenge” carried out by Israel, as described by its Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, which led to the killing of thousands of Palestinian civilians and the destruction of all aspects of life in Gaza.

This war is different from other wars because it comes at a time when the fault lines dividing the Middle East are crumbling. For at least two decades, the most dangerous rift in the region's fractured geopolitical landscape has been between Iran's friends and allies, and the United States' friends and allies.

Extremist right-wing ministers in Israel are pressing to thwart any international efforts to cease fire in Gaza in exchange for the release of the Israeli hostages, considering this a defeat for the Hebrew state against Hamas and demanding the continuation of the ground war until the movement is eliminated.

On Tuesday, the extremist Israeli Minister of National Security, Itamar Ben Gvir, threatened to dissolve the Israeli government if the war in the Gaza Strip stopped, in a brief blog post on his account on the “X” platform, coinciding with talk about a possible new agreement for a long-term humanitarian truce in the Gaza Strip and ending the ongoing war between the Hamas movement and the Israeli army. 

Ben Gvir said, “Stopping the war equals dissolving the government,” which refers to the pressures facing Benjamin Netanyahu’s government from the extreme right.

Earlier Tuesday, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said that stopping the war in exchange for the release of all detainees in Gaza is a “plan to eliminate Israel,” in a blog post on the “X” platform, in response to the Arab affairs commentator on Israeli Army Radio, Jackie Hogi.

“A proposal will soon be put forward to the Israeli government and Israeli society: the release of all kidnapped, including soldiers, in exchange for an end to the war,” Hoji wrote.

The war on Gaza and the West Bank, in its dimensions represented by the Palestinian-Israeli, regional and international conflict, gained the legitimacy of all parties in Israel with all their components, loyalists and opponents, and all the Zionist parties are united by a firm position on Greater Israel, which is based on expansion and settlement because they are all governed by Jabotinsky’s ideology and reference, and its reference is the “iron wall theory” launched and developed by the revisionist Zionist Ze’ev Jabotinsky. By the iron wall, Jabotinsky means building the Zionist military force that forms a wall of iron, in which there are no cracks or fissures, so that whenever the Arab and the Palestinian try to resist the Zionist enemy, his head will hit this wall and he will get tired and despair, and at this very moment it is possible to reach a settlement with this Arab, according to Zionism view. According to this Zionist theory, they are all working for what they call Greater Israel against the Palestinian people and all Arabs, without distinguishing between normalized and unnormalized.

The Al-Aqsa Flood operation on October 7, 2023 destroyed the theory of Israeli security. It was considered the biggest blow to “Israel” in its history, and it constituted a severe blow to the concept of Zionist national security, which raises a question mark over the viability of this entity. However, despite this, the rules of political science on which political entities are based do not apply to “Israel” because it is not an existing entity in itself to the extent that it constitutes an extension of American hegemony on the one hand and of Zionist global capitalism on the other hand.

In the view of the extreme extremists in Israel, the Al-Aqsa Flood Battle constituted a strong blow to the ideology and theory of Vladimir Zeev Japotensky, the founder of the Revisionist movement in the Zionist movement, the Irgun terrorist group, and the founding father of Likud and the Zionist right in general. Whoever has not read his article “The Iron Wall (We and the Arabs)” will not know how Netanyahu, his party, and the Zionist and extremist right think about the Palestinians, the negotiations, and the peace process.

His central idea: There is no possibility of an understanding with the Arabs (the Palestinians), and the only way to reach an understanding with them is through weapons, and uprooting the Arabs by force is a moral matter as long as it is for the sake of a noble project (the Zionist project and its foundations, settlement and displacement). This is the essence of the war on Gaza and the West Bank, and its goal is total destruction. Destroying all necessities of life and leading to forced annexation and deportation.

Jabotinsky says: “There cannot be a voluntary agreement between us and the Arabs of Palestine, neither today nor in the foreseeable future. I do not say that because I want to harm the moderate Zionists, and I do not think that they will be harmed except for those who were born blind, as they realized long ago that it is impossible for the Arabs of Palestine to voluntarily accept the transformation of “Palestine” from an Arab state to a state with a Jewish majority.

My readers have a general idea of the history of colonization in other countries, and I suggest that they consider all the precedents they know, and see if there is a single case of colonization that was accomplished with the consent of the indigenous people, if there is no such precedent.

Indigenous peoples, whether civilized or uncivilized, stubbornly resisted the colonizers, regardless of whether they were civilized or savage. Whether the colonists dealt fairly or not would not have made any difference (to the indigenous peoples).

According to all of this, anyone who thinks that there are differences between Netanyahu, Bennett, Lapid, Gantz, Lieberman, and even Smotrich and Ben Gvir are all mistaken. They are all governed by Jabotinsky's ideology and thought, and the difference relates to them and not to us.

According to this concept, the war falls on Gaza and the West Bank, especially the Palestinian camps. The goal is to subjugate the Palestinian people and break the backbone of resistance so that the replacement settlement project can be consolidated in the West Bank and Jerusalem and the forced deportation and displacement of Palestinians in Gaza after the massive destruction and lack of life there.

The Al-Aqsa Flood operation struck the foundations of the Israeli security theory and killed Jabotinsky's ideology, and the Palestinians succeeded in controlling large areas of the occupied territories for the first time. This collapse has once again awakened concerns about the possibility of the collapse of the occupying state in light of the steadfastness of the Palestinians despite the oppression and siege. It also undermined the sense of security and stability that allowed for more immigration and settlement operations in recent decades.

Regardless of the repercussions of the current brutal Israeli war on Gaza, the Israeli security theory has collapsed, the theories of “cauterizing consciousness” and “mowing the lawn” have collapsed, and the “battle between wars” approach has proven its failure in undermining the capabilities of the resistance or deterring it from carrying out a massive attack like the one it carried out on the morning of October 7. And so; the statements of the occupation leaders reflect the impact of shock, and the impact of a crisis of confidence shaking the Israeli army and intelligence services, that the previous security and strategic model has ended, which means that they are searching for imposing a “new model” and building a new security theory that will restore the attractiveness of “Israel” and its collapsed reputation as a safe haven  for Jews from around the world. But this is a task that does not seem simple or within reach, regardless of the outcome of the destruction taking place in the Gaza Strip. The shortest path to achieving security and stability remains the achievement of peace based on international legitimacy resolutions and recognition of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, the right to self-determination, and the establishment of their independent state with Jerusalem as its capital.

Source: Sama News