He cursed Netanyahu and patted his partners in crime on the shoulder

The recent Security Council resolution is a rare moment when compared to the hysterical Western positions in the first months of the war (Anatolia)

A final ceasefire still faces major obstacles, all of which focus on the Israeli impasse the next day, Netanyahu’s personal dilemma after the war, the extreme right’s last chance at power, and the army’s failure to present its security vision for its position in Gaza after the war. Especially after more rockets were fired on the 171st day of a war that wiped out everything in Gaza, except the resistance.

In these circumstances and in the meantime, the umbrella of Western international support for the Israeli war of annihilation against the Gaza Strip is relatively disintegrating. Despite the continued embrace of crime and its perpetrators, Western positions in general have come to agree on the necessity of ending the war and stopping the bleeding of high costs into the West’s reputation and moral standing.

Add to this the fact that the position on the war became, for the first time in Western political history, an electoral determinant, in one way or another, from the angle of view of the Palestinian issue. At this moment, when the interests of Western political power were isolated, even temporarily, from Israeli behavior, the greatest nightmares of the Zionist project and its settler state became clear. The organic relationship between the West and its disguised colony in the East is the only existential explanation for Israel as a viable and sustainable entity.

Complex dilemmas

Today, Israel faces complex dilemmas that prevent it from responding to stop the war, despite having exhausted all the time granted to it internationally to complete the mission. It cannot continue without Western military and political support, and it cannot stop the war and face the absent answers to the questions of the next day.

While the war leadership continues to continue the crime despite its international exposure, this leadership is betting on its ability, and the ability of the lobby supporting it in the West, to restore this decline in the relationship at a later time. This is quite realistic, given the well-known penetration of this lobby into the structure of the Western political elite.

It is true that one cannot bet too much on the shifting attitudes toward war by Western governments. The Western governments that supported the recent Security Council resolution continue to represent the lifeblood of the war, both militarily and economically. The relationship of these governments with the occupying state has not changed, and these positions are merely self-defense in the face of the deteriorating reputation exposed by the voices of activists, who have taken it upon themselves to spoil every public appearance of Western officials, and to besiege them socially.

The Biden administration wants the Security Council resolution, which calls for a halt to the war during Ramadan, to push Netanyahu and his war council forward in order to conclude a truce whose price would be the liberation of detainees instead of a free ceasefire. At the same time, it needs to present itself as an administration that makes peace and makes war in front of specific segments of American voters.

In this context, Western political discourse is focused against Netanyahu as a person, and not towards Israel or its army, which is committing genocide. Rather, other symbols of genocide, such as Gantz and Gallant, who described them as “human animals,” are being courted and marketed as rational or wise leadership, knowing that both of them are not supporters of stopping the war, of course, and there is no difference between them and Netanyahu with regard to the ceasefire in Gaza.

Netanyahu, despite his corruption and deserving of impeachment, is the appropriate scapegoat to hold him alone responsible for the innocence of the remaining criminals in this war. On the one hand, he is actually responsible for failing to complete the mission despite the time and cover he was given. On the other hand, everyone knows that he is politically finished, and the continuation of the war is his only game to delay the announcement of this.

This shift in the Western position will undoubtedly deepen Netanyahu's hole. The man - who until October 6 was boasting of a single achievement, which was his ability to build international relations and alliances for Israel in impossible spaces - stands completely isolated internationally after the “free” world gave him a blank check to commit the most horrific war of genocide witnessed in the twenty-first century. . However, he failed to invest in that support, and is asking for more of it after six months of war.

Isolated entity

However, the passage of a UN Security Council resolution containing a ceasefire term for the first time cannot be considered an insignificant issue. Although the resolution does not give a final cessation of the war a useful sentence, it is the first position since the beginning of this war in which the occupation stands completely isolated, even from its closest international embrace represented by the United States of America.

Despite the superficiality of the demand, and its human insignificance in relation to the committed and ongoing crime and its repercussions, the recent Security Council resolution is a rare moment if we compare it to the hysterical Western positions in the first months of the war. Israel has lost the military battle, and is on its way to a strategic loss that may pave the way for a new understanding of how to deal with the gains and costs expected from the settlement colony existing only under Western protection.

This stems from a global movement - especially in the United States - that has begun to precisely target the Zionist pressure lobbies that penetrate political decisions, such as the campaigns launched against the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which it considers to be opposition parties with absolute Israeli loyalty, even at the expense of the national interest. American.

This is a remarkable development in the trends of the popular anti-occupation movement. In addition, the war revealed a generational division in the political position in the West, where segments of young people who are remarkably aware of the reality of Israel as an occupation and an apartheid regime are increasing, compared to the generation of adults whose position is still framed by the narrative of the traditional media, which in turn is linked to the penetration of the lobbies and the fear campaigns that they are skilled at creating. In the face of "deviant" narratives from the established path.

you can say; This war may have brought the relationship between the Western international institutions and their eastern colony to a level where the costs are equal to the returns, a level that may require reconsidering the form of this political trade, either by reproducing it in a way that increases the return versus the cost, or by reducing expenses in order to balance the return.

Hinge station

In both cases, the Zionist project is facing a turning point, not only in its relationship with the land it colonized and with its owners, as this is a relationship defined by the nature of its formation as an eternal clash between a colonizer and a liberation movement, but also in its relationship with its international extensions as a project capable of providing more strategic importance to its existence and continuation as a settlement. A colonialism that ignores the existence of facts that continue to repeat themselves every day in some way, the last of which will not be what is happening in Gaza now.

It must be remembered that Western governments, especially the United States, are still obstructing all other international mechanisms available in order to prevent the situation from worsening and to put an end to this war at a certain level. The American veto was one of the memories of the war that many victims and followers of this disaster will never forget.

The Western leaders who came on support visits were standing hundreds of meters away from the Gaza border strip, within earshot of the sound of explosions, in order to cry with one eye and reduce their humanity to the lamentation of one side. All of this will not erase his memory of cursing Netanyahu and patting his partners in crime on the shoulder.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Al Jazeera.