By Zuhair Hamdani

Benjamin Netanyahu was nothing but a prominent figure in the complex crisis that Israel is experiencing. The predicament of the Israeli war on Gaza, which he and his government are led by extremists, has revealed the deep and most dangerous rifts of their kind in which Israeli society and the establishment are experiencing. These cracks strike the foundations of the fragile project that was based on the temptation of the “nation-state” with its settler-colonial, religious, and racist character.

All the arrows inside Israel and abroad are directed towards the Israeli Prime Minister as a factor that broke unity during the war, and who failed to achieve any political or military gains, while Netanyahu is merely an element that expresses the exposure of the political confusion, the societal gap, and the many rifts that caused a defeat that did not befall him personally, but rather With the project of Israel itself.

In promoting itself, Israel has always relied on the narrative of the only democratic state in an environment of tyranny (hostile to it) that is economically and technologically superior, and that has been able to fuse various components into a stable, pluralistic, liberal democratic project, and as a result, it is militarily superior. But the pillars of that narrative have become subject to many doubts.

Other than the factors of internal corrosion, this project was not subjected to an existential test. The lightning and decisive wars waged by Israel as an essential part of the security theory had reinforced all of these statements internally and externally, but the shock of the “Al-Aqsa Flood” and the collapse of the lightning war theory that concealed the factors of weakness for a long time, and the continuation of the war on Gaza for more than 3 months without achieving any goals, it revealed the weakness of all these narratives.

"Al-Aqsa Flood"... The revealing war

The "Al-Aqsa Flood" operation came at a time when the Israeli entity was in a state of extreme fragility, as the crisis deepened and the gap between its components increased. The statements of the resistance leaders in Gaza indicate that they were deeply aware and accurately knowledgeable of the Israeli internal scene and the apparent disintegration and confusion.

The Israeli aggression against Gaza represented a turning point in the future of the Israeli project itself. It proved that the Israeli military and political establishment and societal structure were no longer prepared for the lightning wars that used to strengthen the foundations of the project, and the losses since October 7 violently shook the foundations of this project at the strategic level. The issue of prisoners and detainees put severe pressure on the structure of Israeli society.

The war on Gaza, which has continued for the fourth month, has deepened the cracks in the Israeli project with the confusion and weakness that the Israeli army has shown, and the moral deviation it has shown in its operations, and the strength and determination that the resistance has shown, and the disintegration of the entire Israeli institution that has been revealed, and what it has provoked. The pessimism and doubts regarding the notion of stability on the ground based on brute military force, and the global rejection of its crimes that Israel received increased over time.

In this context, the Israeli historian Ilan Pappé points out that what is happening in Israel confirms “the beginning of the end of the Zionist project,” which he considers “a long and dangerous phase, and we will not talk about the near future, unfortunately, but rather about the distant future, but we must be prepared for that.”

The indicators of the end of this project, according to Pappe, were evident in “the Jewish civil war that we witnessed before last October 7, between the secular camp and the religious camp in the Jewish community in Israel,” indicating that this war will be repeated, considering that “the cement that unites the two camps, which is the security threat, "It doesn't seem like it's going to work anymore."

Ilan Pappé builds his theory of the end of the Zionist project primarily on the factors of internal disintegration between the secular and religious camps, which will increase and deepen with the test of power that was not in Israel’s favor this time, economic and social pressures, and the loss of certainty in the continuity of the project itself. There are clear indicators of the failure of this project, including:

The collapse of the Israeli army’s ability to protect the Jewish community in the south (Gaza) and the north (south Lebanon), the collapse of the “people’s army” theory, and the fall of the option of lightning and pre-emptive war, and the war necessarily became inside the Israeli depths, with the losses that this represents.

The war has put severe pressure on Israeli society, and a state of pessimism, fear of the future, and existential anxiety has spread. The Israeli project is no longer attractive to new immigrants, and the rates of reverse migration have increased.

The new generations of young Jews in Israel and the United States (the largest supporter of Israel) are no longer as convinced of the Zionist project as their parents. Criticism of the legitimacy of Zionism and the justifications for its continuation has increased, given that Zionism has achieved its main goal, which is the establishment of a national homeland for the Jews in Palestine.

The brutal racist nature of the Israeli entity, its transgression of international norms and laws, and the unprecedented support for the Palestinian cause in the world have been exposed, and the transition to “a new phase with the shift of pressure from societies to governments.”

On the economic level, the gap has become large in Israel between those who have and those who do not have, and there is a disparity between the rich and the poor, and without the continued American support, the Israeli economy would not have survived, according to Ilan Pappé.

Increasing American doubts about viewing Israel as a project in the region to serve its interests and the growing disagreement with Benjamin Netanyahu in his vision of war and solution.

Israeli writer Gideon Levy summarized in Haaretz newspaper the most important indicators of Israel’s failure vis-à-vis the Palestinians by saying: “We are facing the most difficult people in history, and the process of self-destruction and the Israeli cancerous disease have reached their final stages, and there is no way to cure them with iron domes, fences, or nuclear bombs.”

Transformations of a hybrid society

Israel was not formed naturally, like all countries, based on a social development based on the interaction of the population with the land. Rather, it was founded from a hybrid society of multiple races, nationalities, and cultures, contrary to the fact that it came within the framework of an imperial project to play a functional role in the region, and thus it lacks a civilizational dimension. Humanitarian, Israeli society remained heterogeneous and divided horizontally and vertically. The state continued to protect its survival by brute force in the face of the people who were robbed of their land.

The process of forming the Israeli entity was built on the idea of a replacement colonial settlement whose goal was to abolish the civilization and culture of the Palestinian people and liquidate their existence in various ways, but the Palestinian resistance remained a wedge embedded in the heart of the Israeli project.

David Ben-Gurion, the first Israeli prime minister, was not unaware of the danger of mixing this hybrid formula into a unified state, so he spoke about what he called the “melting furnace” by saying: “With the end of the battles. This great people of different colours, we must melt them again into A new crucible from which to create a new nation.”

The temptation of the project was reflected in its beginnings in mobilizing Jews from various parts of the world, and the Zionist movement and the Jewish Agency succeeded in bringing Jewish immigrants to the land of Palestine, but failed to melt them into one crucible, as Ben-Gurion wanted. The elements and components were discordant in such a way that the smelting process was not suitable for producing a solid component, and cracks gradually appeared.

In a speech considered a warning, former Israeli President Reuven Rivlin spoke since 2015 about the danger of division in Israeli society - about what he called “four clans” - secular, religious nationalist, and extremist, in addition to the Arabs, noting that “they do not live side by side, and their children do not live side by side.” "They don't go to the same schools, and they don't even read the same newspapers."

Rivlin believed that these disparate groups have different visions of what the State of Israel should be, while "mutual ignorance and the absence of a common language increase tension, fear, hostility and competition between them."

“Judicial reform” projects, strikes, demonstrations, and manifestations of racism and extremism were nothing but an expression of the state of structural disagreement that was expanding between those “four clans,” and the military and security establishment were drawn to it by the refusal of large sectors of reserve soldiers to join the service, and the refusal of Air Force officers to do so with their tasks.

Former Mossad chief Tamir Pardo expresses the seriousness of this by saying that the greatest threat to Israel is the Israelis themselves as a result of the self-destruction that has been underway in recent years, and he stressed the importance of "stopping this disastrous path before the point of no return, because Israel is self-collapsing." There are doubts about the possibility of managing and resolving these differences democratically.

Israel is the only country that has not drawn up a constitution, and this resulted mainly from the failure to resolve the existing contradictions and the inability of the different groups in Israeli society to agree on the nature of the state, its identity, its borders, and its political system. Therefore, it is a state that still cannot define itself internally and externally except as a “state.” "For the Jews."

For its part, the Center for National Security Research at Tel Aviv University (INSS) indicates that the political conflict poses a strategic threat to Israeli national security, and that there is a serious decline in social and national immunity that has reached the point of threatening social disintegration with the escalation of security threats and damage to relations with the United States. And the economic crisis.

The ethnic problem and the state of social conflict between European Jews (Ashkenazi) and Eastern Jews (Sephardic) clearly emerge, which has taken on a class and cultural character, as the Ashkenazi continue to occupy the center position in society and the state.

The Jews of the East, as well as the Jews of the Falasha and the Arabs, remain at the bottom of the social and economic ladder in terms of income, employment, and opportunities, and the level of racism among Jews increases, and what the former Mossad chief called “free hatred” that constitutes the real existential threat to the future of Israel.

Leftists, secularists, and younger generations fear the dominance of the religious right and the transformation of Israel into a state that lives on religious identity and historical myths. Religious people (or Haredim) take a radical stance against Zionism and the state, boycotting its schools, most of its institutions, the army, and its media, and they even adopt their own time.

Premonitions of ancient prophecies

Under the weight of defeat in the first days of the October 1973 War, Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir spoke of the “destruction of the Third Temple,” which was echoed by many Israelis before and after the October 7 invasion based on an ancient prophecy, known as the decade of eighty, in which the Jewish state would end.

In his book “The Third House,” writer Aryeh Shavit points out that this “destruction” will be in the hands of the Israelis because they have become their own biggest enemy, noting that “security challenges can be addressed, but the disintegration of identity cannot be overcome.”

For his part, former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak himself pointed this out, saying in an article in Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper: “Throughout Jewish history, the Jews have not had a state for more than 80 years except in two periods: the period of King David and the Hasmonean period, and both periods marked the beginning of its disintegration in the eighth decade. Lessons must be drawn from the fragmentation and division that afflicted the former Jewish kingdoms, which began to disappear on the threshold of the eighth decade.”

The emergence of these prophecies of demise was linked to the escalation of internal disputes wrapped in ethnic, religious and class dimensions, and also to the pressures of war and the shock of the invasion on October 7 and the refuge of tens of thousands of Israelis from the settlements of the south and north towards the interior, the pressures of the issue of prisoners and detainees and the failure of the Israeli army to achieve any goals.

These prophecies also appear as a psychological reaction, since the idea of stability on the land (as one of the most important pillars of the state) is considered questionable by the Israelis because they live on someone else’s land, realize that they are in the middle of a hostile environment, and know that the owner of the land is still resisting.

Countercurrent migration

In conclusion, the army no longer protects the people, there is no longer a sense of security, there is no longer economic prosperity with declining income and high unemployment rates, there is no longer political stability, there is no longer international support as before, and there is no longer complete American cover. All of this pushes the Israelis to abandon the “Israel Project”, so that the option of reverse immigration becomes strongly present, as the Israeli statistics themselves prove, and it is the most dangerous thing that the leaders of the Zionist project were warning about.

The demographic factor associated with the immigration of Jews to Israel was a major concern for David Ben-Gurion, who said: “Israel’s final victory will be achieved through massive Jewish immigration, and its survival depends only on the availability of one factor, which is widespread immigration to Israel.”

Estimates indicate a significant decline in immigration to Israel in the last two years, and it stopped after the “Al-Aqsa Flood.” Zaman Israel newspaper quoted the Israeli Population and Immigration Authority as saying that about 370,000 Israelis left the country from October 7 until the end of November, in addition to 600,000 who traveled abroad during the holidays and remained there.

According to an opinion poll conducted by the official Israeli radio station Kan last March, more than 25% of adult Jews (over 18 years of age) are seriously considering emigrating from Israel. Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper also reported last April that 47% of those who immigrated or left do not intend to return again.

In light of the imminent strategic defeat, and the collapse of Israel’s image militarily, socially, politically, and economically, many Israelis have resorted to their original nationalities and passports. It is expected that the percentage of those wishing to leave the “Israeli project” will increase, and that reverse immigration will escalate, which will lead to a demographic crisis, the erosion of Israeli society, and the outnumbering of the population. The Arab population gradually increased due to their high population increase.

Researchers liken Israel to be merely a multinational enterprise with shareholders of various stripes, including investors abroad. The beginnings of establishment and the first successes overshadowed the weaknesses and areas of disagreement, and external support postponed the bankruptcy of the project, whose failure was gradually revealed in the face of the many pressures, challenges, and mismanagement, which Netanyahu represented for nearly 16 years.

Netanyahu - who is currently running this project - is not much different from other Israeli politicians in his extremism and denial of Palestinian rights, and they do not differ from him in the brutality of what he is committing in Gaza. His problem is that he returned to power again with higher doses of extremism, and in a moment of extreme confusion for the Israeli project in which he was an active party.

He had to suffer the greatest military shock to Israel in its history, to receive blows from the Palestinian resistance that was managing the battle intelligently and competently, and to accumulate mistakes on the back of losses that undermined his personal future and created more cracks in the structure of Israeli society and the state.

Source: Al Jazeera