In a shocking revelation, Mike Huckabee, the U.S. Ambassador to Israel, has made audacious claims regarding Israel’s sovereignty over Arab territories. His statements have ignited a firestorm of controversy within Arab circles, reminiscent of Benjamin Netanyahu’s recent rhetoric about the so-called ‘Greater Israel’ project.<\/p>\n
Huckabee, a prominent figure in American politics and media, known for his close ties to Israel, made these remarks during a contentious interview with American journalist Tucker Carlson. Citing interpretations from the Torah, he asserted that a biblical text speaks of a divine promise to Abraham concerning land stretching from the Nile River to the Euphrates, encompassing vast areas of the Middle East, including Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and parts of Saudi Arabia and Iraq.<\/p>\n
In line with the delusional claims of extremist Zionists, Huckabee declared that Israel is “a land given by God to His chosen people.” When Carlson directly asked if Israel has the right to seize these lands, Huckabee replied, “If they take it all, that would be acceptable.” This statement has provoked widespread backlash, particularly among social media users, who argue it reflects the increasing influence of Zionists in U.S. decision-making circles and highlights an ideological approach to American policies in the region, disregarding international laws and geopolitical realities.Users have raised concerns about whether this is the first time a U.S. official has openly endorsed the ‘Greater Israel’ project, a dangerous precedent that raises questions about Washington’s policies and their implications for regional stability, especially among Arab nations.<\/p>\n
Some commentators described Huckabee’s remarks as a reflection of the true face of U.S. policy, arguing that they justify hegemony and expansion under a religious pretext. Others called for Arab and Islamic countries to officially protest, given that these statements come from a U.S. official.<\/p>\n
The most critical moment in the interview was when Carlson asked Huckabee on what basis Benjamin Netanyahu, an Israeli prime minister of European descent, has the right to displace Palestinians who have lived in Palestine for centuries. Huckabee attempted to evade the question, stating he could not understand Carlson’s point.<\/p>\n
Observers emphasize that while many Zionists and Americans have previously discussed the ‘Greater Israel’ project, the danger of Huckabee’s statements lies in their origin from a significant U.S. official at a time when Washington is actively working to disarm all of Israel’s enemies in the region.Huckabee’s comments serve as a blatant justification for the Israeli regime’s excessive use of force and mass killings aimed at dominating Arab lands, under the false pretense that sovereignty over these territories is Israel’s divine right, allowing them to employ any means necessary to achieve it.<\/p>\n
These remarks not only carry dangerous political implications but also represent a direct ideological dictate that undermines concepts of sovereignty and borders. They effectively reiterate the expansionist narrative of Zionism, which implicitly seeks to redraw the regional map based on a flawed and extremist religious doctrine, with the clear goal of subjugating Arab and Islamic countries to Zionist hegemony.<\/p>\n
This U.S. Zionist official has completely abandoned diplomatic language, adopting the tone of an ideological preacher, providing religious and ideological cover for the colonial project of Zionism, diminishing the concept of occupation, and legitimizing Israeli settlement activities in Palestinian territories. Huckabee views Arab nations as mere accidental entities on the map, suggesting they lack identity and have occupied lands intended for Israel by God.The increasing discussions among Zionists and Americans about the ‘Greater Israel’ project evoke memories of the Yinon Plan, which aimed to fragment Syria, Iraq, and other Arab countries as a condition for Israel’s survival. In 1982, Oded Yinon, a diplomat and journalist in the Israeli Foreign Ministry, published an analytical article in the Kivunim magazine, linked to the World Zionist Organization, titled ‘Israel’s Strategy in the 1980s.’ This article gained significant attention and popularity, leading to the emergence of the term ‘Yinon Plan.’<\/p>\n
It provided a strategic vision for Israel’s future in its Arab environment, focusing on the idea of fragmenting neighboring countries into smaller entities based on sectarian and ethnic plans, thereby ensuring Israel’s continued dominance. According to Yinon’s perspective, breaking down the national structures of Arab countries surrounding Israel into smaller tribal, regional, and minority entities would limit their ability to challenge Israel, rendering them submissive and weakened.<\/p>\n
Yinon highlighted the structural fragility and the national and social institutions of Arab countries, suggesting that it would benefit Israel to promote fragmentation in the Arab region, with any internal conflict among Arabs serving as an advantage for Israel in the short term.Yinon regarded Lebanon’s experience with civil wars and internal conflicts as a preventive model that could be replicated in other Arab countries, creating conditions that would shape Israel’s future strategies, both short and long-term. According to this article, Israel’s immediate policy goal should be to weaken the military capabilities of neighboring Arab countries, with a long-term objective of reshaping the regional map through the emergence of separate and autonomous entities that possess distinct religious and ethnic lines, while still being under Israeli oversight and control, thus ensuring Israel’s long-term strategic superiority in the region.<\/p>\n
Notably, the Yinon Plan did not remain a standalone analytical text; its ideas were adopted and developed in a policy document titled ‘A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm,’ published in 1996 by the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies in Washington. The document’s drafting team, led by Richard Perle, later became known as one of the foremost architects of the strategy to attack Iraq during George W. Bush’s presidency in 2003.The reflection of the Yinon Plan in Netanyahu’s policies and his fascist cabinet, supported openly by the U.S., is evident. Netanyahu’s policies extend beyond the borders of the occupied Palestinian territories, as he seeks to further expand Israeli occupation into Arab lands. In September 2019, before Israeli elections, Netanyahu promised that if re-elected, he would annex the Jordan Valley and northern Dead Sea to the territories occupied by Israel and accelerate settlement expansion.<\/p>\n
Moreover, figures like Itamar Ben Gvir, the fascist Minister of National Security, and Bezalel Smotrich, the fascist Minister of Finance, have called for the displacement of Gaza residents to Egypt or other countries, continuing military attacks on Gaza despite ceasefires, aiming to achieve their goal of displacing Palestinians to other Arab countries, thereby creating turmoil in those nations.Recently, Shlomo Karhi, the Israeli Minister of Communications, claimed that both banks of the Jordan River are part of the land of ‘Israel.’ Thus, it appears that the Yinon Plan is currently supported by a wide array of Zionists both within and outside the occupied territories, garnering significant backing from far-right Zionist movements. This raises alarm bells for Arab nations, including those that have normalized relations, especially following the recent overt attack by the Israeli regime on Qatari territory, the closest Arab ally of the U.S.<\/p>\n
However, the reaction of Arab countries to Huckabee’s brazen remarks has been surprisingly weak, limited to issuing condemnation statements without directly criticizing the U.S. Instead, they resorted to phrases like requesting official clarification from the U.S. government. The Arab nations’ stance towards Huckabee’s comments, which directly target their sovereignty, suggests they perceive his words as ambiguous or misunderstood, as if a regular American citizen had made such statements on social media.For instance, Saudi Arabia, a direct target of the American-Zionist project known as ‘Greater Israel,’ which holds significant political and religious weight among Arab nations, requested clarification from the U.S. government in response to Huckabee’s remarks. This illustrates Riyadh’s attempt to avoid a direct verbal confrontation with the U.S., even when their sovereignty has been insulted.<\/p>\n
Egypt’s position was equally concerning for its citizens, as the Foreign Ministry issued only a superficial condemnation paragraph on its Facebook page, concluding the matter. This is particularly alarming since the U.S. Ambassador directly referenced the land from the Nile to the Euphrates, categorizing it as part of ‘Israel,’ while the Nile is Egypt’s lifeblood and a geographic and historical symbol.Other Arab statements followed a similar pattern: condemnation warnings about destabilizing the region and violations of international laws. The language of all these statements was repetitive and devoid of any indication of taking practical action. The most natural course of action for Arab nations would have been to summon the U.S. Ambassador or the ambassadors of the Israeli regime stationed in normalization countries yet these nations chose to continue with their weak and disheartening stances.<\/p>\n
This strange and dangerous passivity of Arab regimes paves the way for the implementation of American and Israeli projects against these countries creating the impression that the Arab ceiling is even lower than what the U.S. and Israel had anticipated or that there is no ceiling at all leading them to merely issue condemnations in the face of blatant conspiracies even when their sovereignty is at stake.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The U.S. Ambassador’s support for Israel’s occupation of Arab nations contrasts sharply with the passive stance of those nations.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":617,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[64],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-22025","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-palestine"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ghodsnama.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22025","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ghodsnama.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ghodsnama.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ghodsnama.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/users\/617"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ghodsnama.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=22025"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/ghodsnama.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22025\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ghodsnama.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=22025"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ghodsnama.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=22025"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ghodsnama.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=22025"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}