[News] 'New Middle East’: This is Netanyahu’s real goal in the region

[Anti-Imperialist News]

 'New Middle East’: This is Netanyahu’s real goal in the region
By Ramzy Baroud <https://english.palinfo.com/?p=250012>

Sunday 29-June-2025 -
https://english.palinfo.com/opinion_articles/new-middle-east-this-is-netanyahus-real-goal-in-the-region/
<https://english.palinfo.com/opinion_articles/new-middle-east-this-is-netanyahus-real-goal-in-the-region/#>
<https://english.palinfo.com/opinion_articles/new-middle-east-this-is-netanyahus-real-goal-in-the-region/#>
<https://english.palinfo.com/opinion_articles/new-middle-east-this-is-netanyahus-real-goal-in-the-region/#>
<https://english.palinfo.com/opinion_articles/new-middle-east-this-is-netanyahus-real-goal-in-the-region/#>

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu persistently declares his
ambition to “change the face of the Middle East”. Yet, his repeated
assertions seem to clash with the unfolding reality on the ground.

Netanyahu’s opportunistic relationship with language is now proving
detrimental to his country. The Israeli leader undoubtedly grasps
fundamental marketing principles, particularly the power of strong branding
and consistent messaging. However, for any product to succeed over time,
clever branding alone is insufficient; the product itself must live up to
at least a minimum degree of expectation.

Netanyahu’s “product,” however, has proven utterly defective, yet the
75-year-old Israeli Prime Minister stubbornly refuses to abandon his
outdated marketing techniques.

But what exactly is Netanyahu selling?

Long before assuming Israel’s leadership, Netanyahu mastered the art of
repetition – a technique often employed by politicians to inundate public
discourse with specific slogans. Over time, these slogans are intended to
become “common sense”.

As a member of the Knesset in 1992, Netanyahu delivered what appeared to be
a bombshell: Iran was “within three to five years” from obtaining a nuclear
bomb. In 1996, he urged the US Congress to act, declaring that “time is
running out.”

While the US pivoted its attention toward Iraq, following the September
2001 attacks, Netanyahu evidently hoped to eliminate two regional foes in
one stroke. Following the fall of the Iraqi government in 2003, Netanyahu
channeled all his energy into a new discourse: Iran as an existential
threat.

Between then and now, Iran has remained his primary focus, even as regional
alliances began to form around a discourse of stabilization and renewed
diplomatic ties.

However, the Obama administration, especially during its second term, was
clearly uninterested in another regional war. As soon as Obama left office,
Netanyahu reverted to his old marketing strategy.

It was during Trump’s first term that Netanyahu brought all his marketing
techniques to the forefront. He utilized what is known as comparative
advertising, where his enemies’ “product” is denigrated with basic terms
like ‘barbarism’, ‘dark age’, and so forth, while his own is promoted as
representing ‘civilization’, ‘enlightenment’, and ‘progress’.

He also invested heavily in the FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) marketing
technique. This entailed spreading negative or misleading information about
others while promoting his own as a far superior alternative.

This brings us to “solution framing.” For instance, the so-called
“existential threats” faced by Israel can supposedly be resolved through
the establishment of a “New Middle East.” For this new reality to
materialize, the US, he argues, would have to take action, not only to save
Israel but also the “civilized world” as well.

It must be noted that Netanyahu’s “New Middle East” is not his original
framing. This notion can be traced to a paper published by the Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace in March 2004. It followed the US war and
invasion of Iraq and was part of the intellectual euphoria among US and
other Western intellectuals seeking to reshape the Middle East in a way
that suited US geopolitical needs.

The Carnegie article sought to expand the definition of the Middle East
beyond the traditional Middle East and North Africa, reaching as far as the
Caucasus and Central Asia.

American politicians adopted this new concept, tailoring it to suit US
interests at the time. It was US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice who
largely rebranded “greater” to “new,” thus coining the “New Middle East,”
which she announced in June 2006.

Though Netanyahu embraced the term, he improvised it in recent years.
Instead of speaking of it as a distant objective, he declared that he was
actively in the process of making it a reality. “We are changing the face
of the Middle East. We are changing the face of the world,” he triumphantly
declared in June 2021.

Even following the events of 7 October 2023, and the Israeli war and
genocide that ensued, Netanyahu never ceased using the term. This time,
however, his emphasis on “change” rotated between a future possibility and
an active reality. “I ask that you stand steadfast because we are going to
change the Middle East,” he stated on 9 October of that same year.

And again in September 2024, he proclaimed that Israel was “pursuing” a
plan to “assassinate Hezbollah leaders” with the aim of “changing the
strategic reality of the Middle East.” And again, in October, December, and
January of this year. In every single instance, he contextualized the
“change of the Middle East” with bombs and rockets, and nothing else.

In May, coinciding with a major Israeli bombing of Yemen, he declared that
Israel’s “mission” exceeds that of “defeating Hamas,” extending to
“changing the face of the Middle East.” And finally, on 16 June, he
assigned the same language to the war with Iran, this time remaining
committed to the new tweak of adding the word “face” to his new, envisaged
Middle East.

Of course, old branding tactics aside, Netanyahu’s Middle East, much like
the US’ old “greater Middle East,” remains a pipe dream aimed at dominating
the resource-rich region, with Israel serving the role of regional hegemon.
That said, the events of the last two years have demonstrated that,
although the Middle East is indeed changing, this transformation is not
happening because of Israel. Consequently, the outcome will most likely not
be to its liking.

Therefore, Netanyahu may continue repeating, like a broken record, old
colonial slogans, but genuine change will only happen because of the
peoples of the region and their many capable political players.

*-Ramzy Baroud is a journalist and the Editor of the Palestine Chronicle.
He is the author of five books. His latest is ‘These Chains Will Be Broken:
Palestinian Stories of Struggle and Defiance in Israeli Prisons’. Baroud is
a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global
Affairs (CIGA) and also at the Afro-Middle East Center (AMEC).*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20250629/cd633258/attachment.htm>