Understanding Netanyahu's Plot for 'New Middle East' Through Wars
In his speech to the United Nations on September 22, 2024, preceding the assassination of Hezbollah's Secretary-General Nasrallah, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu presented two maps delineating his plot for the so-called "New Middle East."
He categorized the region into two distinct groups: those he deemed a "curse" for the Israeli Occupation—namely Iran, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and Yemen—labeled in black as part of what he referred to as the "axis of evil."
Conversely, the countries he identified as a "blessing" for the Israeli Occupation, prominently featuring Gulf states such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt, were highlighted in green.
Netanyahu posited that the "blessing of the new Middle East" is intrinsically linked to the “Abraham Accords,” which he characterized as the "axis of good" for the Israeli Occupation.
He tried to support the Israeli Occupation’s narrative, claiming that the region would “flourish through a historic agreement and normalization with Saudi Arabia,” asserting that such a pact would “elevate the region's status to that of a significant global power.”
Notably, his maps conspicuously omitted any mention of the Gaza Strip or the occupied West Bank, prompting scrutiny regarding the underlying implications and objectives of his narrative.
In a subsequent press conference on September 29, 2024, Netanyahu elaborated on his narrative for the "new Middle East," detailing how “Israel” intended to influence its formation, particularly following the assassination of key Hezbollah leaders.
'Torah' a Tool for Hegemony
The terms "Greater Middle East" and subsequently "New Middle East" emerged in the 1990s with the intention of courting Arab and Islamic nations to integrate the Israeli Occupation into the regional fabric.
Just two weeks before Operation Al-Aqsa Flood, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu explained the "New Middle East" term during a United Nations speech on September 23, 2023, presenting a map shaded in green to symbolize plans for normalization with Arab states.
He outlined a diagonal line extending from Dubai along the Gulf states, through the Israeli Occupation, and toward the ports of southern Europe, defining this new landscape to include “Israel,” Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and the Emirates. The map, however, excludes the Gaza Strip and West Bank.
However, in his September 29 speech, Netanyahu's tone exuded an unmistakable arrogance, as he proclaimed the significance of assassinating resistance forces like Hezbollah, asserting that this would pave the way for Israeli dominance in a "new Middle East.”
He emphasized that this transformation hinged on "changing the balance of power" in the region, following military actions against Hezbollah and Hamas, and sought to forge new alliances, particularly with hesitant Arab nations like Saudi Arabia, claiming that such developments would lead “to Israel's victory.”
Netanyahu further invoked the "Torah" as a justification for the aggression the Israeli Occupation is directing toward Gaza, Lebanon, and Yemen, signaling a willingness to alter the existing regional dynamics.
He stated, "As it is written in the Torah, I will pursue my enemies and I will destroy them," emphasizing that "we are working systematically to change the strategic reality across the entire Middle East."
Since the onset of Operation Al-Aqsa Flood in October 2023, Netanyahu has frequently invoked religious language and extreme, genocidal rhetoric while discussing the so-called "New Middle East" and its transformation, excluding Palestinians and their right to self-determination and an independent state.
On September 2, 2024, he proclaimed that "the time of the Messiah" had come to establish the kingdom of the Jews, assuring Israelis of their impending victory.
In a televised address on October 25, 2023, Netanyahu asserted his intention to fulfill the "prophecy of Isaiah" by annihilating Palestinians and Arabs, labeling them as "sons of darkness" while depicting Israelis as "sons of light."
In a threatening address to Iran on September 30, 2024, he asserted that "there is no place in the Middle East that is beyond Israel’s reach."
He elaborated in a three-minute video clip released by his office, declaring that following the "liberation of Iran," after the elimination of its current government, the Jewish and Persian peoples would emerge as “friends.”
Before the Israeli Occupation’s ground invasion of Lebanon, Netanyahu declared, "We are engaged in a fateful war for the survival of the State of Israel and our very existence, so we must unite all our forces and defeat all our enemies."
His military leadership is pursuing a vision of a Middle East in which Israeli Occupation asserts supremacy, focusing first on the elimination of Hezbollah, followed by Iran’s military presence in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen.
This strategy appears designed to provoke Iran into a confrontation, thereby facilitating a broader war that could involve the United States and Western allies, aimed at dismantling Iran's nuclear and military capabilities.
Coverage in many Israeli newspapers celebrated the assassination of Nasrallah, portraying it as a pivotal moment in shaping the "new Middle East" that the Israeli Occupation seeks to delineate and impose on the Arab region.
Israeli analyst Amos Yadlin articulated on the Hebrew Channel 12 website on September 28, 2024, that in the wake of recent events, “Israel is Creating a New Middle East.”
He argued that “Tel Aviv” has reestablished itself as a significant regional power, attributing this resurgence to the assassination of key leaders from Hezbollah and Hamas, as well as military actions in Syria and the raid on the port of Hodeidah in Yemen.
Yadlin posited that these developments signify Israel's return to a status of “superpower,” one capable of negotiating terms for the return of Israeli prisoners from Hamas.
Khalil al-Anani, a professor of political science and international relations in the United States, offered insights in an interview with al-Jazeera channel on September 29, 2024, suggesting that the notion of a "new Middle East" is predicated on Israel's ascendance as a dominant regional player.
He emphasized that Netanyahu's current actions reflect a moment of euphoria akin to the pride and victory felt in the Israeli Occupation after the 1976 war. He noted that this strategy also aligns with America's repositioning within the Arab world.
Expansionist Ambitions via War
Israeli analysts suggest that following the assassination of Nasrallah and several leaders of Hezbollah, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has adopted a posture of hubris, now perceiving war as the primary avenue to realize the objectives of the Israeli Occupation’s government, rather than pursuing political negotiations or agreements.
In an analysis published in Haaretz on September 30, 2024, analyst Amos Harel noted that Netanyahu has entirely lost interest in negotiating a prisoner exchange or a ceasefire in Gaza, shifting his focus instead toward escalating regional conflicts with Hezbollah and Iran.
This indicates a strategic pivot aimed at redefining the balance of power in the Middle East, envisioning a new order in which the Israeli Occupation asserts dominance.
Oraib al-Rantawi, director of the Jerusalem Center for Political Studies, elaborated on Netanyahu’s overarching strategy, characterizing it as an attempt to “turn the Middle East upside down.”
He argues that Netanyahu seeks to establish a Jewish state from the river to the sea, displacing Palestinians into Jordan while simultaneously targeting Iran.
In a recent statement via his account on X, al-Rantawi articulated that Netanyahu’s ultimate ambition is to “subordinate and enslave the region,” revive the paths of “Abrahamic normalization,” dismantle the axis of resistance, and rejuvenate what Netanyahu terms the “axis of grace.”
Within Netanyahu's aggressive vision for reshaping the balance of power in the Middle East, he is capitalizing on the momentum gained from recent military successes to target all factions of the resistance axis.
Political analyst Liqaa Makki posits that Netanyahu's expectation—that Iran will refrain from supporting its allied forces, having seemingly abandoned its primary arm, Hezbollah—fuels the Israeli Occupation’s desire to perpetuate conflict against Iran's supporters.
This conflict is anticipated to extend beyond Lebanon, encompassing all components of the resistance axis, including factions in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen, unchecked by any regional or international deterrents.
Makki further argues that Israel ought to redirect its focus toward its historical threats, particularly from central Arab nations such as Iraq and Syria, especially after neutralizing Egypt through the peace treaty.
He suggests that a proposed division of Iraq and Syria could facilitate a new geopolitical landscape where normalization becomes a seamless process, devoid of restrictions or deterrents.
In this envisioned scenario, the Israeli Occupation aspires to emerge as the dominant power in the new Middle East, prompting previously adversarial nations to seek alliances with it in their quest for protection and security.
Julian Barnes-Dacey, a researcher at the European Council on Foreign Relations, issued a cautionary statement to Politico on September 30, 2024, regarding the potential for further Israeli escalation.
He characterized the notion of establishing a new regional order as a dangerous illusion.
While acknowledging that the Israeli assault in Lebanon represents a significant tactical success, he emphasized that this success does not equate to a viable strategic framework for sustainably addressing the Israeli Occupation’s security needs or resolving the series of interconnected regional conflicts.
Redrawing the Region
The concept of the "Greater Middle East" initially emerged under the auspices of American administrations, aimed at redrawing the region to facilitate the Israeli Occupation’s integration.
However, in the wake of a series of aggressive attacks on Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iran, and Yemen, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu now appears to be taking the lead in redrawing the region’s map, asserting Israeli dominance.
His audacious efforts to redefine the Middle East through both militaries might and religious justification have drawn implicit mockery from NBC News, which on September 29 suggested that Netanyahu's presumption of regional leadership reflects a shift in power dynamics, with “Israel” now seemingly at the helm rather than the United States.
The report highlighted a perceived decline in American influence, noting that Netanyahu disregarded President Joe Biden’s calls for a ceasefire in Lebanon, continuing instead with his campaign of aggression, including the assassination of Hezbollah leader Nasrallah.
The news outlet raised alarms about the implications of “Israel's” unilateral actions without American oversight, warning that this could potentially escalate into a comprehensive regional war involving the United States.
Nevertheless, the Biden administration has indicated its commitment to support “Israel” in any large-scale conflict, even as it cautions against extending the hostilities to include multiple fronts, particularly concerning Iran.
On September 29, 2024, the U.S. Department of Defense issued a statement emphasizing that should Iran or its affiliates exploit the current situation to target American personnel or interests in the region, the United States would take all necessary measures to defend its people.
A U.S. official expressed concern to CNN that Iran may be planning to retaliate for the assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, prompting the Biden administration to collaborate with “Israel” in developing "joint defense" strategies to counter any potential attacks.
The United States has cautioned Iran that any direct assault on Israel in the immediate future would provoke a more severe and extensive response than in April, as reported by Haaretz on September 30.
Meanwhile, a Politico report highlighted a dissonance between the ambitious rhetoric of Israeli leaders and the more measured assessments from American officials regarding Israel's true objectives in the region.
While Israeli officials articulate grand aspirations, American dialogue tends to focus on the more limited goal of compelling Hezbollah to cease its prolonged cross-border rocket attacks in support of Gaza, thereby allowing the 80,000 displaced Israeli settlers to return.
Dmitry Brezhnev, director of the Russian Studies Unit at the Center for Arab-Eurasian Studies, noted that the term "New Middle East" has gained traction in Western media and international forums in the wake of the violent Israeli war on Gaza and elsewhere.
He underscored that this term transcends mere geographical or political descriptions; it signifies a transformative era in international relations characterized by a realignment of power dynamics and the emergence of new alliances that could redefine the map of influence and authority within the Middle East.
'New Middle East' vs. ‘Greater Middle East’
The term "New Middle East," as promoted by Netanyahu, represents a significant evolution from the "Greater Middle East" concept that emerged following the Israeli Occupation’s peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan.
While the "Greater Middle East" aimed to facilitate the Occupation’s integration into the Arab region—addressing its status as an outcast—the "New Middle East" signifies the Occupation’s ambition to assert dominance over the region, reshaping it in alignment with its interests and those of the West, all while actively countering any resistance to the Zionist colonial project.
Discussions surrounding both the "Greater" and "New" Middle East began in the 1990s, with a notable divergence in perspective: American discourse leaned toward the term "Greater," whereas Israeli Occupation’s narratives gravitated toward "New."
Shimon Peres, who served as Foreign Minister and later as President of Israel, was an early proponent of this vision, publishing a book titled The New Middle East in 1996.
In contrast, former U.S. President George W. Bush introduced the "Greater Middle East" initiative in 2002, illustrating the differing frameworks through which the two nations approached regional integration and influence.
In 2004, the United States adopted the term "Greater Middle East" in response to European pressure, yet over time, a convergence emerged with the Israeli Occupation in favor of the term "New Middle East."
This concept first gained traction in March 2004 with a report from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, which framed the "Greater Middle East" as an expansive, vaguely defined region encompassing all Arab nations, along with Turkey, Palestine, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.
The vision extended to include other Muslim-majority countries such as Indonesia and Bangladesh, as well as Central Asian nations like Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, while recognizing the impracticality of a unilateral American redrawing of the regional map to solely reflect its interests.
Former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice articulated the Bush administration's vision for this "New Middle East" during her second term, suggesting that it would be realized through a strategy of "creative chaos," a phrase she reiterated during a joint press conference with former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert amid the 2006 Lebanon War.
A subsequent report from the Carnegie Endowment in August 2009 reaffirmed the term "New Middle East," emphasizing that U.S. policy aimed at establishing this vision—while neglecting the region's complex realities—had resulted in unforeseen consequences, ultimately urging the U.S. administration to reassess its strategic approach.