Two years have passed since the events of October 7th, 2023, when Hamas’s surprise attack triggered a war that has transformed Gaza, Israel, and the entire region. What began as a campaign to restore Israeli deterrence has spiralled into something much larger: the devastation of Gaza, the erosion of Israel’s international credibility, unprecedented charges of genocide, and even direct clashes with Iran.
For Israel, the war has been framed as an existential struggle. For Palestinians, it has meant death, famine, and displacement on a scale unseen in decades. For the West, it has been a brutal mirror: exposing hypocrisies, shredding the myth of a rules-based order, and showing how far governments will go to defend a state accused of atrocities. As the conflict enters its third year, the question is no longer simply about Gaza. It is about whether Israel is using this moment to pursue its long-standing dream of a Greater Israel — and whether the region itself is being remade around it.
The Death of the West’s Sacred Cows
For decades, Western governments claimed moral superiority through their “sacred cows”: free speech, human rights, the right to protest, and the sanctity of international law. These were the pillars of the post-Cold War order, invoked against adversaries from Russia to Iran. But Gaza has exposed how hollow these values have become.
Free speech, long celebrated as absolute, now comes with an asterisk. Journalists, academics, and public figures who criticise Israel have lost jobs, contracts, and platforms. Laws once meant to protect expression are being bent into tools of censorship. In the US, even the TikTok ban was justified partly on the grounds that the app gave the world an unfiltered view of Gaza, influenced by pro-Israel lobbying. The right to protest has met a similar fate. In Britain, groups like Palestine Action have been branded terrorist organisations for vandalising military equipment. In France and Germany, demonstrations have been banned outright. In the US, foreign students who protested found themselves facing deportation. Paint-throwing has been equated with terrorism; civil disobedience with extremism.
For Israel, the war has been framed as an existential struggle. For Palestinians, it has meant death, famine, and displacement on a scale unseen in decades
International law, meanwhile, has been stripped of its universal pretence. When the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Israeli leaders, Senator Lindsey Graham bluntly admitted what many already suspected. He let the cat out of the bag, arrogantly proclaiming : “The Rome Statute doesn’t apply to Israel, or the United States, or France, or Germany, or Great Britain, because it wasn’t conceived to come after us.”
If the West is willing to look away as Israel starves a population, bombs maternity wards, and bulldozes homes, why should Russia not claim the right to clear Eastern Ukraine, or China the right to absorb Taiwan? The slogan “never again” now rings hollow — a cruel punchline to a broken promise.
The US is even now becoming a basket case of comedy. In a moment of comic absurdity, US officials in May 2025 announced two contradictory visa policies: one banning foreign nationals who criticise Israel, and the other banning those who censor free speech.
The US Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced in May 2025 a vigorous new visa policy in order to prevent people from entering the US who were critical of Israel. Rubio said that the US will hold “…international organisations and nations accountable for rhetoric against Israel.” by preventing Israeli critics from entering the US.
Then, in a contradictory move and on the same day, Rubio also announced a new policy to prevent foreign nationals who have been involved in censoring the speech of Americans from obtaining visas. Rubio said: “Today, I am announcing a new visa restriction policy that will apply to foreign nationals who are responsible for censorship of protected expression in the United States. It is unacceptable for foreign officials to issue or threaten arrest warrants on US citizens or US residents for social media posts on American platforms.”
So, if you criticise Israel then you do not have free speech. But at the same time if you censure criticism, then you will be penalised. You have free speech to criticise the US in the US, but not Israel. If you criticise Israel you cannot come to the US, but if you criticise the US then you can come as its free speech. The US now legislates in contradiction, speaking liberty while enforcing censorship, promoting democracy while undermining dissent.
The West’s sacred cows were not slain by a rival ideology, nor toppled in a new Cold War, nor overwhelmed by an ascendant civilisation. Ironically, their demise came not from abroad but from within. Despite emerging triumphant from the Cold War and facing no serious ideological contender, the West—led by an increasingly hubristic US—is now drowning in its own contradictions. Its once-vaunted economic model has birthed obscene inequality, concentrating wealth in the hands of a global elite. Its military dominance lies discredited in the wreckage of Iraq and the retreat from Afghanistan. The democratic ideals it once evangelised now ring hollow amid political dysfunction, declining trust, and a cultural landscape consumed by identity fractures and woke culture. In the end, the West did not need an enemy to destroy its sacred cows. It butchered them itself.
Israel’s Credibility Crisis
On the two-year anniversary of October 7th, Israel’s narrative that the Zionist entity faces an existential struggle and it is trying to secure its security to ensure another October 7th never occurs again has lost all credibility. Despite pushing this narrative for two years, Israel is today facing the biggest credibility crisis in its history
Israel’s problems began soon after October 7th, when one-by-one its claims about the October 7th atrocities were debunked and discredited. Israeli officials one after the other fell over themselves to spell out what they planned to do to the Palestinians. Politicians made use of biblical prophecies, they openly proclaimed cutting water, electricity and food to the Palestinians and mentioned dropping a nuclear bomb on the people. When Israel began to deliver on these promises and images and videos circulated on social media, many in the western world looked on in shock and horror.
Israel’s propaganda machine went into 5th gear. We were constantly told by Israeli officials and its supporters in western governments and in the media that Israel is acting in self-defence in Gaza. Its objective was to free hostages held by Hamas, and to re-establish order and security by destroying Hamas’ military capabilities. But many saw through this and only saw the complete destruction of Gaza. One-by-one Israeli officials and its supporters took to the media struggling in the face of news reporters questioning their motives and explanations. Zionists cried antisemitism and abused the concept, but the relentless onslaught for Israel to defend itself has seen Israel lose what credibility it had left. When the United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said, “It is important to also recognise the attacks by Hamas did not happen in a vacuum…” and “The Palestinian people have been subjected to 56 years of suffocating occupation,” Israel lost the very institution that created it.
Put simply, what Israeli propagandists told the world, was just not what the world was seeing. Many around the world saw the large discrepancy between what they were hearing and seeing. What everyone saw was the complete destruction and collective punishment of Gaza. The fundamental issue for Israel has been the fact that it’s trying to defend the indefensible and it doesn’t help when Israeli officials keep making genocidal calls and then try to deny that was what they meant.
Put simply, what Israeli propagandists told the world, was just not what the world was seeing. Many around the world saw the large discrepancy between what they were hearing and seeing
Israel’s Man-Made Famine
In the immediate aftermath of the October 7th attacks, Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant declared a complete siege of Gaza, stating, “…there will be no electricity, no food, no fuel.” This marked a shift from blockade to comprehensive deprivation. Israeli ministers expressed similar sentiments, advocating total restriction until hostages were released. Although Gaza has long endured constrained access to aid, the images of starvation and famine conditions triggered global concern, even among some of Israel’s traditional allies.
Israel’s propaganda machine continues to blame the UN and aid agencies for not doing their job and distributing food and aid inefficiently. Israel has also resorted to the trope of blaming Hamas for stealing aid and being the sole cause of the man-made famine in Gaza. Israeli officials have constantly denied the existence of mass starvation and blame Hamas, but the evidence has stacked up against Israel.
Israel’s policies in Gaza constitute a multi-pronged strategy in which starvation and deprivation are used as tools of war. By combining aid obstruction, collusion with criminal gangs, the dismantling of aid infrastructure, and the creation of a militarised proxy relief operation, the Israeli government has built what can only be described as an “architecture of starvation.” As international criticism mounts and humanitarian needs reach catastrophic levels, public opinion has turned against Israel and its supporters as many call for urgent intervention and the restoration of neutral aid distribution and the safeguarding of civilian lives.
Starvation as a war strategy has been a tactic used since ancient times, this was why when the shocking images came out of Gaza the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defence minister Yoav Gallant due to ‘reasonable grounds’ that they bear criminal responsibility for ‘the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare.’ The evidence against Israel is that by publicly declaring Israel’s intention to impose a total siege of Gaza and then enforcing measures that deprive Gazans of food and other goods that are indispensable to civilians’ survival, Israeli leaders Netanyahu and Gallant have committed the war crime of starvation. The ICCs charge is the first time in history that a major court has centred a war crimes prosecution on mass starvation.
When Genocide Victims Become Offenders
Israel was created in the name of those who survived the genocide committed by the Nazis. But two years since the events of October 7th all the institutions created to monitor and document genocides, all the human rights organisations who monitor atrocities and numerous historians and experts now assert that Israel is committing a genocide.
From Amnesty International to Human Rights Watch (HRW), from Israeli human-rights organisations to the world’s leading association of genocide scholars the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) have all stated that Israel’s conduct meets the legal definition as laid out in the UN convention on genocide.
In March 2025 the UN concluded Israel targeted fertility clinics and embryo facilities in Gaza in its assault. In its 49-page report on sexual and gender-based violence drawn up by the UN’s Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Including East Jerusalem, it detailed attacks on maternity wards and other healthcare facilities for women, the destruction of an IVF clinic and controls on the entry of food and medical supplies into Gaza that together “…destroyed in part the reproductive capacity of Palestinians in Gaza as a group”. Carrying out actions to affect the birth rate of a people is one of the five acts that constitute a genocide.
The evidence all these organisations and many others relied upon is the support among Israeli leaders for the forced expulsion of all Palestinians from Gaza, alongside Israel’s near-total demolition of housing in the territory. The statements by Israeli leaders dehumanising Palestinians in Gaza, characterising them all as the enemy, alongside promises to ‘flatten Gaza’ and turn it into ‘hell’ are all indicators of intent. 
Israel broke another record on the 15th of March 2025 when it sabotaged the ceasefire agreement and refused to negotiate the second phase. Israel cut electricity and food into Gaza, and then on the day the ceasefire ended on 18th of March 2025, Israel pounded Gaza and added another record to its genocidal credentials. Israel carried out the largest massacre of children in 24 hours in modern history. Haaretz called it the day when “Israel … committed the largest child massacre in its history. Two hundred children and 100 women were killed in one day.”[1]
The genocide label is no longer fringe. It is mainstream.
Israel’s Occupation Consensus
Protests in Israel regularly take place including at Benjamin Netenyahu’s residence. Many Israelis want a deal so Israeli hostages can come home. There has for long been a perception that Israel has been hijacked by a fanatical religious far-right minority—one that has gained extraordinary leverage and influence by helping Netanyahu cling to power despite his legal predicaments. Polls have consistently found that, if new elections were held today, Israelis would oust the current leadership. If only the government were more aligned with public opinion, the country would be taken in a decidedly different direction.
But the assumption that a post-Netanyahu Israel can chart a new course misses the extent to which Israelis concur with the government on many deeper, longer-term issues. Based on a number of surveys over the years and throughout the current war, both the anti-Netanyahu public and the main opposition parties differ little from the current leadership on the future status of Palestinians, the inevitability of ongoing Israeli occupation in general, and the acceptability of denying self-determination, or civil rights to Palestinians in the territories, among other issues. Polls show that, like their current leaders, the large majority of Israeli Jews do not empathize with the suffering of Palestinians in Gaza, which Israeli television and mainstream newspapers barely cover. Many believe civilian deaths and harms are the fault of Hamas and are exaggerated or even fabricated, as government and Israeli commentators constantly claim.
What all the surveys of Israeli public opinion have confirmed is no matter how much politicians and commentators focus on Netanyahu, the fact is that when it comes to Israeli intransigence regarding Palestinians, the prime minister alone is not the problem. The problem is Israeli society, politics, and culture as it has evolved over decades.
What all the surveys of Israeli public opinion have confirmed is no matter how much politicians and commentators focus on Netanyahu, the fact is that when it comes to Israeli intransigence regarding Palestinians, the prime minister alone is not the problem. The problem is Israeli society, politics, and culture as it has evolved over decades
When Netanyahu opposes the two-state solution he is reflecting the attitudes of a firm majority of Jewish voters. Hardly any of Israel’s mainstream opposition leaders risk contradicting him. Israeli security hawks such as Benny Gantz, the Israeli general who was considered a moderate member of Netanyahu’s “war cabinet” during the first eight months of the war, are highly agnostic about Palestinian statehood; leaders of the secular right, such as Avigdor Lieberman, openly oppose it. Former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, who polls show as a front-runner among opposition candidates, has in the past been to the right of Netanyahu and has always opposed a two-state solution. Israel’s centrist parties are little different. Even Israel’s consolidated Zionist left-wing party, the Democrats, led by Yair Golan, a major general and a former IDF deputy chief of staff, mostly avoid discussing a Palestinian state or the two-state solution. Yair Lapid, the official head of Israel’s opposition and leader of the centrist Yesh Atid party, has similarly mostly avoided the issue since the war started, although he was the last Israeli prime minister to support a two-state solution publicly during his brief term in late 2022. Only the leaders of Arab parties speak freely in support of Palestinian statehood.
The hardening of views about Palestinians reflects longer-term trends in Israeli society. As a matter of political orientation, a decisive majority—60 percent—of Jewish Israelis now identify as right wing, compared with 12 percent who consider themselves left and just over 25 percent who say they are in the center, according to a June 2025 survey by the Israel Democracy Institute. But these trends did not begin with October 7. Already in the run-up to the 2022 election, hardly anyone—candidates or most of the Jewish Israeli public—would talk about the Palestinians or about Israel’s nearly six-decade occupation regime.
Who Really Cares About the Hostages?
Around 251 hostages were taken on October 7th and 148 were subsequently released as part of peace deals and hostage swaps. 8 hostages were rescued by Israel whilst up to 49 bodies have been returned to Israel. Today somewhere up to around 60 hostages are believed still to be in Gaza, with Israel believing half are likely already dead.
Israeli leaders from the day October 7th took place made it clear that until the capture of all its hostages, its war with Hamas will continue. Israeli leaders went to great pains from the earliest days to make its invasion and occupation of Gaza all about the hostages. However, the actions that ensued raise numerous questions on where the hostages really sit with the regime in Tel Aviv amongst its list of priorities.
Israeli families who have hostages in Gaza now carry out regular protests and consensus has grown amongst Israeli society that a deal should be made with Hamas to release the remaining hostages, despite Tel Aviv starting a new operation to invade Gaza in September 2025.
Israel’s strategy to rescue its hostages has largely rested on military pressure. Israel launched an extensive aerial bombardment and then ground invasion. Part of the stated aim was to weaken Hamas militarily, disrupt its control, and create pressure to force hostage releases. The IDF also carried out special operations deep inside Gaza to locate and attempt rescues of hostages held in tunnels or civilian areas. These missions were high-risk and sometimes resulted in both hostage and soldier casualties. A major part of Israel’s military focus has been on destroying Hamas’ tunnel network — since many hostages are believed to have been held underground.
Israel’s Shin Bet and IDF used a mix of surveillance, interrogation of captured Hamas fighters, intercepted communications, and technology (drones, AI-assisted analysis) to track hostages’ possible movements. There was also coordination with allies with close intelligence cooperation with the US and the UK, who provided satellite imagery, signals intelligence, negotiators and aerial flights.
Despite the military pressure, Israel was forced into negotiations to release the majority of its hostages. These were undertaken indirectly with Egypt, Qatar and the US acting as mediators. In the November 2023 truce, over 100 Israeli hostages were freed in exchange for Palestinian prisoners. But despite this, Israeli officials insisted on continuing its military strategy, despite its limited success. Hamas has only put one condition to releasing all the hostages, that the release of all the hostages should be tied to a permanent ceasefire, something Israel refuses to do. In fact, Israel insists on continuing its military strategy which has led to the deaths of its hostages!
Despite Israeli public opinion supporting a ceasefire that frees the hostages, Israeli officials have other plans. Israel’s Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich made clear in April 2025 that bringing the hostages back from Gaza was “...not the most important…” goal of the government. Speaking to Radio Galey Israel, the far-right minister said: “We have to say the truth, returning the hostages is not the most important thing. It is obviously a very important goal, but if you want to destroy Hamas so that there can’t be another October 7, you need to understand that there can’t be a situation where Hamas remains in Gaza.”[2]
“We have to say the truth, returning the hostages is not the most important thing. It is obviously a very important goal, but if you want to destroy Hamas so that there can’t be another October 7, you need to understand that there can’t be a situation where Hamas remains in Gaza.” Bezalel Smotrich, April 2025
As the families of the hostages carry out ever larger protests, Israeli officials regularly demean, vilify and insult their families. Netanyahu has repeatedly said he is not willing to end the war until Hamas is completely overthrown. Israel’s far-right heritage minister said the hostages – most of whom are civilians, snatched from their beds or from the Nova music festival – should be considered prisoners of war, whose return should only come after the war in Gaza ends, even if that takes many more months.[3]
Despite polls showing that most Israelis support ending the war in exchange for the hostages,’ Israeli officials see the hostages not as a priority but as a problem – an inconvenience to larger ambitions like building settlements in Gaza and expelling Palestinians.
Post-War Gaza: Plans Without Palestinians
The day after the Gaza war ends has seen a number of proposals. What has emerged over the past two years is Hamas will play no role, and the Palestinians will also not be part of the discussion, but merely subjects.
When Israel launched and focused on its invasion and slaughter of Gaza, many in the west became critical of Israel for not having a day after plan. The first plan that emerged was the Egyptian plan that proposed a five-year reconstruction plan with phases: early recovery (6 months), then multi-year rebuilding. Then the clearing of debris would take place which would allow the building of permanent infrastructure. The Israelis and then the US criticised the proposal as it didn’t go far enough in dealing with the security situation.
Benjamin Netanyahu then came up with his day-after plan. The plan emphasised demilitarising Gaza, the removal of military-terrorist capabilities beyond what’s needed for internal public order. It proposed permanent Israeli control over security and would place restrictions on border crossings. It saw Palestinian local officials with no links to groups hostile to Israel to run the enclave day-to-day, under Israeli oversight. But the plan received major pushback from Gazans against and the Arab leaders.
The most recent proposal has been Trump’s Riviera plan. This consists of large-scale urban development, with Gazans relocated for the duration, multilateral trusteeship and external oversight of Gaza, as well as the disarmament of Hamas. Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair has been involved in coming up with the details of this plan. But everyone sees this plan as the expulsion of the people.
The only considerations for post-War Gaza are Israel’s security concerns. Israel continues to obstruct every ceasefire and agreement as it wants to depopulate Gaza. The needs of the Palestinians and the broader region remain secondary for the West and Israel. Most of the post-war plans envisaged the relocation of the population.
The only considerations for post-War Gaza are Israel’s security concerns. The needs of the Palestinians and the broader region remain secondary for the West and Israel
The Greater Israel Agenda
At the two-year anniversary of October 7th Israeli officials have been unable to hide their agenda and the prospects for greater Israel. They have in fact been very open and arrogant about the plans for expansion that they are openly proclaiming Gaza is just the beginning.
Israel has always been against the two state solution, as they do not want to give up any territory but want to conquer, annex and expel the Palestinians. Netanyahu in an interview publicly alluded to saying he was “very” connected to the idea of greater Israel. This means Netanyahu is saying to the surrounding Arab rulers that Israel has eyes on their countries and wants to conquer them in order for Israel to have security.
Greater Israel has always been the Zionist aim; it envisions Israel’s borders going from the Nile in Egypt to the Euphrates. When Israel carried out its initial expulsion in 1948 – which they like to call their war of liberation, Israel’s future survival was still in doubt so Israeli leaders focused on taking territory from historic Palestine. Then they focused on dealing with the threats on their periphery and subsequently Israel went to war with Egypt, Jordan and Syria. From the 1980s, Israel saw its position in the region secure, especially as Egypt has signed a peace treaty. 
The events of October 7th have seen Israel win over many US policy makers for Israel to expand in order for it to achieve the security it desires. This began with the onslaught in Gaza and then expanded into Lebanon and then Syria. In Lebanon, Israel has established military bases (which it calls observation posts) and has used the cover of ‘security’ to maintain its position there. Now Israeli officials admit they have no intention of ever leaving. In Syria, Israel has been working with the Allawis who lost power when the al-Assad regime fell and the Druze minority in the South of Syria to interfere in the country. Israel has now annexed the Golan heights and is arguing the whole South of Syria should be demilitarised. Israel now regularly conducts air strikes and ground assaults into greater Damascus.
Greater Israel will require the expulsion of the Palestinians in both Gaza and the West Bank and Israel is doing this by making the West bank and Gaza uninhabitable. This will force the Palestinians into Jordan and the Sinai, and Israel will use ‘security’ as a cover to interfere in these areas.
Israel is today altering the security and strategic landscape in the region. It has decimated Hezbollah and Hamas. It has cut Iran’s supply lines that went through Syria into Lebanon. Israel has convinced the US of this agenda and proven to her that this is in the best interests of the US too. The attack on Qatar was confirmation of this strategy. The Middle East that was crafted after WW2 is now finished and Israel, with US support is creating a new region, with Israel at the centre.
Israel has Been Provoking Iran for a Regional War
Israel, even before the events of October 7th was in a shadow war with Iran. This was where both nations avoided direct confrontation but, in the shadows, they carried out assassinations, cyber-attacks and supported proxy groups. Israel has for long viewed Iran as a hostile regional actor, a state sponsor of terrorism who wishes to wipe Israel off the map. After 7th October, Israel has been trying to provoke Iran into a regionwide war, safe in the hope that the events of October 7th and the support of the US would allow Israel to once and for all cripple the clerical regime in Tehran.
Israel began with carrying out a strike in Syria in April 2024 targeting the Iranian consulate in Damascus. In response Iran spent a week telegraphing its plan to respond to Israel. Iran provided daily commentary running up to the attack of its intention to do so. At the same time Iran and the US entered into dialogue. Iran’s Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian at that time summoned the Swiss diplomat who represents US interests in Iran. He said at the time that through the backdoor channel: “…an important message was sent to the American government as a supporter of the Zionist regime.” The New York Times confirmed that among informed defence analysts the dominant view became that Iran would strike Israel in a way that would allow it to save face, but measured enough to not arouse an even fiercer counterstrike. The US and Iran communicated and ensured Iran’s response was measured and didn’t lead to a regional war, something Israel wanted, but not something both the US and Iran wanted.
Then on 31st July 2024 Israel assassinated Ismail Haniyeh who was in Tehran attending the inauguration of Iran’s new president Masoud Pezeshkian. He was killed in his guesthouse/residence. Iran offered lots of rhetoric but did not respond militarily to Israel.
In June 2025, what is now called the 12-day war took place. Israel launched major strikes on Iranian territory that hit multiple sites reported to include Natanz, research/nuclear-adjacent sites, missile infrastructure and senior commanders. This took place when Iran was in direct talks with the US, Steve Witkoff, Trump’s real Secretary of State and Iran’s foreign minister were in face-to-face meetings to come to a nuclear agreement.
Iran responded with ballistic missiles and drones in a multi-day exchange that caused casualties and disrupted regional air traffic. After a week of tit-for-tat attacks and missiles raining upon Tel Aviv, the US intervened. A high-ranking Iranian confirmed in an Amwaj report that the Trump administration conveyed that it did not seek an all-out confrontation. The senior source also confirmed that the targeted sites were evacuated, with ‘most’ of Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium kept in secure locations.
When US B-2 bombers crossed into Iranian airspace, Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff in a phone call with Abbas Araghchi, Iran’s foreign minister, made clear that the operation was a one-off and limited strictly to Iran’s nuclear program. Witkoff emphasised to Araghchi that the US still seeks a diplomatic resolution. Witkof informed the Iranians in advance of the coming attack.
Then, Iran launched missiles at Al Udeid US air base in Qatar in retaliation for the attack. Before the missiles were launched Iran gave the US advance warning such that any casualties could be avoided. US President Trump thanked Iran for giving the United States notice prior to shooting missiles at its military base in Qatar, which he said made it possible for no lives to be lost. “I want to thank Iran for giving us early notice, which made it possible for no lives to be lost, and nobody to be injured.”
A leaked DIA report confirmed that some components of Iran’s nuclear program could be restarted in months. US experts confirmed much was moved or buried under damaged sites. What has become clear is the attack did not cripple Iran’s nuclear programme, and the communication between the US and Iran ensured this would not be the case. What the US did was, take over Israel’s bombing campaign and make out its cripped Iran’s nuclear program, so Israel now has no reason to attempt this again.
The US and Iran collaborated, by sending each other messages to ensure Israel’s bellicose behaviour didn’t spiral out of control into a regional war. Despite Israel’s provocations, Iran has restrained itself from responding in a way that could cripple Israel or lead to a broader regional war.
Conclusions — A Region Reshaped
Two years after October 7, Gaza lies in ruins. Famine has been weaponised, genocide charged, and Israel’s credibility shattered. Yet Israel is stronger militarily, more unapologetic politically, and more ambitious regionally. The West, meanwhile, has seen its values gutted by its own contradictions. Free speech, protest, and international law were not defeated by rival ideologies — they were sacrificed to defend an ally at any cost. A new Middle East is emerging, built on expansion, occupation, and survival of the fittest. Israel, with American cover, stands at its centre. The sacred cows of the old order are dead. The question now is what, if anything, will rise in their place.
[1] Ignoring Massacres in Gaza City While Protesting for Democracy in Tel Aviv, Haaretz, 21 March 2025, https://archive.ph/G6bCY
