my colleague abdulrahman al-rashed recently wrote an article in which he asked us to be pragmatic. he stated that arab countries with ties to israel will not sever those relations, nor will countries hosting american military bases shut them down. egypt and jordan will not withdraw from their peace agreements, and mahmoud abbas (abu mazen) will not step down from power.

al-rashed justified this stance by highlighting the high costs of such actions, suggesting that even if they were taken, neither the concerned countries nor the palestinians would gain any concessions or victories.

he urged us to base our expectations on what is politically achievable, emphasizing the importance of focusing on the “two-state solution,” which is supported by the international community, including israel’s allies and friends.

al-rashed, as well as his followers in kuwait, praised the outcomes of peace agreements that returned the suez canal and sinai to egypt, and allowed thousands of palestinians to return from exile in tunisia and yemen to the west bank.

he also praised israel’s overwhelming military superiority, noting that it is still capable of even more.

al-rashed said iran, despite its possession of powerful missiles, has refrained from firing in response to issuing official statements.

he further claimed that israel, even with its arsenal, fears continued hostile confrontations. even with backing from the west, israel cannot continue its current trajectory without international support, but instead must seek balanced diplomatic engagement.

al-rashed concluded by stating that political solutions, particularly the “two-state solution,” are likely to gain acceptance from some segments of the israeli public and will gradually win more support over time. this issue is the solution promises long-term stability in the region, as it helps prevent a repeat of events like those of october 7, unlike the wars pursued by netanyahu.

the region is going through an unprecedented phase. all arab countries, particularly the gulf states, find themselves in one boat, facing similar threats. israel too, with all its immense capabilities, faces internal and regional threats. recent stability compared to current risks appears fragile and unsustainable.

more important than what has been said is how israel of the past, given western support, tried to expand from the nile to the euphrates. although this dream seemed unlikely, it suggests a shift is now at hand.

the long-held dream of a “greater israel” could inch closer to reality within a few years. this opportunity might vanish with a shift in leadership in influential global powers.

the 12-day war proved that israel’s relatively small geographic size is a strategic vulnerability, even with its nuclear arsenal. israel now appears eager to expand its territory and is unlikely to limit those ambitions, risking greater land and long-term safety.

it is clear that we are being subjected to a calculated political and psychological campaign designed to instill despair, spread frustration, and prepare us to surrender to whatever fate awaits us. if israel expands southward tomorrow, the same narratives will resurface. we will be urged to accept the status quo, normalize ongoing expansion, and continue living in submission and fear.

i am not calling for war, nor am i advocating for the cancellation of treaties or the removal of military bases. what i am calling for is awareness of u.s. military bases, international respect and solidarity, and the face of a ruthless military and political machine whose leaders openly believe, as they interpret from the torah, that we are destined for nothing less than annihilation.

this is a war between the people of heaven and the people of hell. the feared day when we will find ourselves saying, “it was eaten on the day the white bull was eaten.”