Is Netanyahu really trying to implicate America?!!

(Netanyahu seeks to implicate America), a saying that has become a necessity in political analysis, via satellite channels and media outlets, to the point that it has become an axiom that must be repeated whenever there is talk about the relationship between the state of extermination and the American administration in the current war of extermination against our people. However, the requirements of political precision in the use of language and terminology require examining the extent of its correctness, so that the relationship between the two parties is positioned on real, not imaginary, foundations.

Perhaps from the perspective of political incitement against the American and Israeli positions, it is possible to strike a chord with Netanyahu’s arrogance, insolence, and lies towards Biden and his administration, and say that he is “implicating them,” but the facts do not support this statement, especially if we seek not political incitement, but rather to situate the relationship in its true form between the state of extermination and American imperialism.

In fact, what comes to mind when hearing the term “implication” is a relationship between a strong party, Netanyahu, his government and his state, and a weak party that does not have its own decision-making power and could submit to the strong party and “get involved” in a comprehensive war in the region that it does not want in the first place, not to mention the assumption, as a result of this relationship, that American imperialism is only “resisting” in order to prevent its involvement, because it is “politically rational” and poor, so it tries not to fall into the political traps set for it by Netanyahu. Consequently, it can be assumed that American imperialism, with its mighty army, international political weight, dominant economy, intelligence and security institutions, media and research centers, the deep state in its entirety, has no concern other than preventing Netanyahu from “implicating” it. This is what the use of this term suggests.

The facts are completely different. First, the state of extermination, after October 7 and until today, after the limited clash last April with Iran, and the participation of 5 countries in defending it, and after the mobilization of warships and warplanes, also to defend it against an expected response from Hezbollah and Iran, and after its position on the international popular level was shaken, after all of that, it has become clear that it has transformed from a striking arm of imperialism to a fragile, disintegrated, weak and defeated state, whose army is not trustworthy, and whose settlers and society are living moments of waiting for a response from Hezbollah and Iran, moments full of terror, tension and uncertainty, a state that seeks the help of the world's imperialisms to protect it, that state is far from being in a position of someone who can involve others in ill-considered adventures. It is the relationship of the follower to the followed, not the relationship of someone who (involves) the followed in a war he does not want.

In the midst of this relationship, one can sense differences in visions, perceptions and calculations, not disagreements, and there is a huge gap between the differences and disagreements. The two parties, without camouflage, agree on striving to completely eliminate the resistance and impose political arrangements that will practically end the national cause and pave the way for integrating the state of extermination into the region, through comprehensive follow-up and normalization, which embodies, without ambiguity, and without false and pretentious rhetoric, the transition of the official Arab regime to the position of the reliable and final ally of the state of extermination.

As for their disagreement over achieving these goals, this is understandable. Netanyahu’s fascism and his bloody decisions often do not take into account American calculations in the region, especially its calculations with the Palestinian Authority and the Arab regimes. His decisions seem to distort these calculations. However, when it comes to seriousness, these differences are of no value. Imperialism provides him with international political cover, continues to support him militarily, and mobilizes all its capabilities to protect his state, and most importantly, his participation in the war of extermination.

The differences in this case do not rise to the level of Netanyahu’s quest to “implicate” imperialism in a comprehensive war. If that imperialism felt that a comprehensive war would mean breaking the axis of resistance once and for all, and achieving its goals set for the national cause and the region, it would not hesitate for a second to seek to destroy the entire region, and exterminate its peoples if it could. No one imagines that there is any political or moral deterrent that prevents imperialism from doing so, as it originally arose through the extermination of peoples and the colonization and enslavement of the world.

So, American imperialism, in this case, in its unwillingness to go to a comprehensive war, seems to be protecting Netanyahu from his political decisions that, according to imperialism’s calculations, might harm the state itself and its arrangements in the region. But the question that arises is: Are Netanyahu and his state really interested in a comprehensive war in the region?

Netanyahu and his army and intelligence agencies are making a million calculations to wage a comprehensive war in the region. Since October 8 until today, he, his Minister of War and his army generals have been threatening to turn Beirut into Gaza, but they have not launched a large-scale war to turn Beirut into Gaza, despite the destruction of nearly 30% of the northern settlements, the displacement of more than 150,000 settlers, and Hezbollah’s involvement in a war of attrition that they do not want. And when Iran launched its strike last April, the genocidal state did not exploit that strike/opportunity to launch a war that Netanyahu has long sought against Iran.

It is clear that in both cases, there are not only military calculations by the generals and politicians of the genocidal state warning it of a real danger to its existence if it launches a comprehensive war, but also submission to the desire of imperialism not to launch it, because it is a loser, and this fundamentally refutes the saying of (implicate) from its foundation. He who needs protection and defense to stay alive submits to those who protect him, and does not impose his conditions on those who protect him.

Finally, American imperialism has the political, military and financial ability, within just one day, to stop the war of extermination and curb the state of extermination, but it does not do so because it does not want to, not because it cannot. This confirms the fact that it is not in the position of someone who “resists involvement,” but rather in the position of the actual partner of the state of extermination and the one who makes its decision at some point.

American imperialism, in its unwillingness to go to a comprehensive war, seems to be protecting Netanyahu from his political decisions, which, according to imperialism’s calculations, may harm the state itself and its arrangements in the region.