STILLBORN: THE GREATER ISRAEL IS ALREADY DEAD

By Abu Suhaib

10^th August 2025

While mainstream media never cover it, the idea of “The Greater Israel” is discussed within Israeli society like an American might discuss a recent football match or a polite British chap might discuss the weather while waiting for a bus.

The Zionist dream of “Greater Israel” is rooted in biblical references, particularly in the book of Genesis in 15:18, where God promises Abraham’s descendants land "from the river of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates." Although Abraham had two sons – Ismail and Isaac – the Rabbinical hierarchy have, for four thousand years, insisted that this promise refers only to the descendants of Isaac. Modern-day Israelis claim to be part of this bloodline even through DNA tests carried out several years ago would beg to differ.

This apparent divine land-grant has inspired a maximalist vision of Israeli territorial expansion, encompassing not only modern-day Israel but also parts of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt. While mainstream Zionism historically focused on establishing a Jewish homeland in what we call ‘historical Palestine,’ some religious-nationalist groups have embraced the “Greater Israel” concept, believing it to be a divine mandate which transcends current internationals laws and contemporary diplomatic norms.

For the most part, this dream, however, has remained largely symbolic and controversial, especially as it clashes with above-mentioned international law, regional geopolitics, and the practical challenges of ruling over millions of Palestinians who are resisting with the same admirable fervour which they have always been known for. Yet, in recent years, right-wing Israeli politicians such as National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich have reignited elements of this vision. Both are part of the Religious Zionism movement and advocate for Jewish sovereignty across all of Biblical Israel, including the occupied West Bank (referred to Biblically as ‘Judea and Samaria.’)

Smotrich, a Zionist demon in human form, has pushed policies aimed at expanding settlements and increasing Israeli control over Area C of the West Bank, undermining Palestinian autonomy. Ben Gvir, who took his current wife to the grave of mass murderer Baruch Goldstein for their honeymoon, is known for his provocative visits to sensitive religious sites like the Temple Mount. Furthermore, this Zio-terrorist openly supports annexation and the weakening of the Palestinian Authority. Though neither explicitly calls for full realization of “Greater Israel,” their actions reflect a step-by-step approach toward expanding Jewish presence and sovereignty over contested territories at the expense of Muslims and Christians in a land sacred to the three great religions.

Critics argue that these policies entrench occupation, provoke violence, and render a two-state solution impossible. While “Greater Israel” may be unrealistic diplomatically and demographically, the ideology continues to influence Israeli politics through figures like Ben Gvir and Smotrich, who see it as both a biblical right and a political goal. If they were Christians, they might say “God wills it.”

Challenges of Reoccupying Gaza: Hamas’ Resilience Leaves Them Unbowed

Israel’s ongoing conflict with Hamas and the question of reoccupying the Gaza Strip pose deep strategic, moral, and political challenges. Despite Israel's military capabilities, any long-term reoccupation of Gaza would be fraught with risks and unlikely to achieve sustainable peace or security. Two central factors compound the difficulty of reoccupation: the persistent strength and ideological entrenchment of Hamas, and the unrealistic ambitions associated with the so-called “Greater Israel Project.” Together, these elements create a strategic deadlock that undermines Israel's ability to effectively govern or pacify Gaza. They talk about “occupying Gaza or “settling Gaza” while knowing it virtually impossible.

Henry Kissinger famously said: “The conventional army loses if it does not win. The guerrilla wins if he does not lose."

Despite numerous military operations and significant destruction in Gaza, Hamas remains a potent force. The group is deeply embedded in the fabric of Gazan society, not just as a militant organization, but as a political and social actor. It maintains support among parts of the population through social services, patronage networks, and its ideological appeal, particularly in the context of Palestinian nationalism and resistance to occupation. This makes Hamas not only a military adversary but also a political and social movement that cannot be eliminated through force alone.

The stupid decision of what used to be a slick Israeli media machine to release the footage of Yahya Sinwar’s killing backfired badly. The 61-year-old, who we have been told was hiding behind hostages in Gaza’s tunnels, was captured on camera, fighting to his last breath, on the front line against an army equipped by the entire Western alliance. Having lost one arm, he used his remaining arm to hurl at a stick at the IDF drone which had been tracking his movements. Hasbara became “Hamas-bara” as it turned their number one Islamic enemy into an international hero, not just in the Arab world but in Europe and Asia too, quite the achievement for Netanyahu. Over recent months, we have seen Irishmen (Paddy-stinians, they call themselves) have Commander Sinwar tattooed on their backs and Japanese artists portraying the Hamas leader as a Palestinian Samurai.

Israel has, for the first time, in its history, lost the PR war from top to bottom.

Despite the assassination of numerous Hamas leaders, such as the legendary commander Mohammed Deif and the wily Sinwar brothers, the Qassam Brigades, Hamas’ military wing, remain an active and resilient force in Gaza. They continue to engage Israeli troops through guerrilla tactics, ambushes, sniper attacks, and improvised explosive devices (IEDs), leveraging their deep knowledge of Gaza’s terrain, tunnel networks, and urban warfare strategies. The group operates in decentralized units, allowing it to sustain operations even with leadership disruptions. Their resilience is bolstered by local support, smuggled weapons, and battlefield adaptation. Israeli military advances often meet fierce resistance in areas like Khan Younis and Rafah, where Qassam fighters maintain defensive strongholds. The group uses underground bunkers and booby-trapped buildings to slow Israeli movements and inflict casualties. Despite Israel’s significant firepower and intelligence capabilities, the Qassam Brigades continue to pose a serious threat on the ground, illustrating the enduring nature of asymmetric warfare and the challenges of achieving a decisive military victory in such a conflict. While we do not know how many Israeli Occupation Soldiers have been killed, it does seem clear (from Hebrew media) that the number is larger than officially stated by the Netanyahu government. It is in the thousands rather than the hundreds. It is also clear that over 10,000 Israeli soldiers have lost limbs in their attempts to subjugate the warriors of The Resistance. Additionally, over 3,000 Zionist terrorists have been blinded and dozens have taken their own lives after returning from their genocide duties in Gaza.

Israeli military campaigns, such as those in 2008-09, 2014, and the more recent 2023-2024 conflict, have inflicted substantial damage on Hamas infrastructure but have failed to dismantle the group or prevent its resurgence. In fact, Israeli actions often have the unintended effect of bolstering Hamas' legitimacy by portraying it as the primary force resisting Israeli aggression. The cycle of violence only deepens resentment and makes lasting peace more elusive.

Attempting to reoccupy Gaza would likely spark a long-term insurgency, substantially draining Israeli resources and exposing its forces to asymmetric warfare. Even with superior firepower, maintaining control over a densely populated urban environment like Gaza, where hostile actors are indistinguishable from civilians, would require immense manpower, continuous military engagement, and would result in high civilian casualties. This would further isolate Israel diplomatically and exacerbate tensions with regional neighbours.

The Greater Israel Project: The Project Doomed To Fail

Although Netanyahu and his deranged wingmen, Ben-Gvir and Smotrich, are always talking publicly about reoccupying Gaza, this is not realistic and it could be argued, it is a sign of the three men’s complete detachment from reality. The demographics and geopolitical realities render such visions, which the Likud have, as unfeasible at best and counterproductive at worst. The bottom line is that Gaza, whatever devastation has been wreaked, is home to over 2 million Palestinians, the vast majority of whom have no desire to be ruled by Israel and reject any notion of permanent occupation. Bringing Gaza under direct Israeli rule would further tilt the demographic balance between Jews and Palestinians, challenging Israel’s identity as both a Jewish and democratic state. It would also internationalise the conflict even more, drawing condemnation from allies and adversaries alike.

Furthermore, delusional Greater Israel ideology undermines any prospects for a two-state solution the only internationally recognised framework for resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. By promoting annexation and permanent control over Palestinian territories, this vision fuels radicalism on both sides and guarantees perpetual conflict. Reoccupying Gaza, even temporarily, would be interpreted as a move away from negotiation and toward unilateral control, triggering further unrest.

Hiroshima and NaGazaKi: Even A Nuke Will Not Solve The Israeli Problems

The occupation of Gaza, which “officially” ended in 2005 with Israel's unilateral withdrawal, was a costly and violent affair – and despite the international media trying to convince the world that it totally ended, it did not. Although Ariel Sharon physically withdrew soldiers and the so-called “settlers,” the IOF placed a suffocating blockade around the strip which Yahya Sinwar mentioned, as often as possible, was a continuation of the war by different means.  This has been confirmed by several humanitarian organisations.

But when the Israelis were “officially” occupying the Strip, it demanded substantial military presence and security infrastructure to protect a relatively small number of Israeli settlers. Imposing such an occupation now, again, after years of conflict and with a more hostile and embittered population, would be even more difficult. Israel would be forced to engage in continuous counterinsurgency operations, risking the lives of its soldiers and spending vast sums on security with no clear endgame.

Moreover, reoccupation would have serious implications for Israel's international standing. Already facing criticism for its actions in Gaza, a permanent or even prolonged reoccupation would likely provoke international condemnation, potential sanctions, and loss of support from key allies. In the context of a global push for human rights and justice, maintaining control over a besieged and suffering population is a liability, not a strategic asset. Additionally, with Hamas’ tunnel network estimated by the CIA to be at least 50km in total length, the Al-Qassam Brigades, the military wing of Hamas, are able to pop up from the tunnels, pop up from pre-created gaps and send members of the Zionist occupation forces to the morgue or the hospital. Using landlines to avoid Israeli digital surveillance, Israel, after two years, has yet to have the guts to venture into the tunnels. There is no obvious solution to this problem. Even if Netanyahu used a nuclear weapon in Gaza, this would render the land uninhabitable which would mean The Greater Israel would be partially contaminated with nuclear waste and depleted uranium.

The Bottom Line

The idea of reoccupying Gaza, whether to defeat Hamas or as part of a broader territorial ambition, is strategically flawed and politically unsustainable. In layman’s terms, it’s a pipe dream. Hamas remains a resilient actor deeply embedded in Gaza’s social and political life, and military force alone cannot eradicate its influence. Their ability to withstand almost two years of attacks from Israel and its Western allies is nothing short of miraculous. At the same time, expansionist ideologies like the Greater Israel Project are disconnected from demographic, political, and diplomatic realities. Hebrew media are reporting that thousands, rather than hundreds of IOF reservists, are refusing to serve again in Gaza. The orthodox Jewish community has never served in Gaza, or anywhere else. Any concerted attempt to reassert full control over Gaza would not bring peace, but rather plunge the region into deeper conflict and isolation. Israel must confront these hard truths and pursue a different path, one rooted in diplomacy, coexistence, and recognition of Palestinian rights.

The dreams of the war criminal Netanyahu are only leading his countrymen closer to their own destruction.