This is not only unlikely, but borders on a deliberate denial of reality. If the situation were so clear-cut, there would be no conflict with the Palestinians, which has been escalating for decades.
The systematic marginalisation, discrimination and, in some cases, deeply inhumane treatment of people by settlers and security forces is not a figment of the imagination, but has been documented by a multitude of international organisations – from the United Nations, the WHO, Amnesty and UNESCO to independent institutions and established European media. These reports have existed for years, are consistent and cannot simply be dismissed or denied.
Anyone who seriously claims that all these actors are lying in unison or pursuing a unified agenda is substituting ideology for analysis.
At the same time, a security narrative is being constructed that automatically interprets any form of criticism or backlash as an existential threat. A historically understandable need for protection has led to a worldview in which practically every action by people in their surroundings is interpreted as hostile.
The result is a closed system:
One assumes threats and hostility, reacts aggressively to them, provokes counter-reactions – and in turn interprets precisely these reactions as proof of the original assumption. This is deliberate schizophrenia; it is no longer security thinking, but a self-stabilising mechanism of justification.
And therein lies the problem: those who act in this way inevitably generate resistance, instability, rejection and anti-Semitism – both regionally and internationally. The growing criticism and rejection is no coincidence, nor is it solely the result of external enemy stereotypes, but a direct consequence of specific political decisions.
Those who ignore this should not point the finger at other states – that would be completely absurd.
I am not claiming that the Arabs and Iranians are entirely blameless in this chaos; through their provocations and attacks, they bear just as much responsibility. But if one were to weigh up both sides, the balance would always tip very, very clearly in Israel’s favour. After all, there have been numerous proposals, reforms, peace initiatives and a two-state solution, all of which you (Israel) have repeatedly rejected.
www.trtworld.com
www.bbc.com
rbt-defense.blogspot.com
