The Spectacle of Death

How Drone Warfare, AI Kill Chains, and the Dehumanisation of the Other Have Turned Killing into Entertainment

By Andrew Klein 

Dedicated to my wife, who still sees the face behind the pixel.

I. The Video

A road. Cars. A young man jumps out of a vehicle and runs into a field. A drone follows. The drone kills him.

The video circulates on X. Comments pour in. Some express horror. Some celebrate. Some scroll past without stopping.

The young man received a call from the Israeli military. He was given a choice: die alone or die with his family in the car. He chose to die alone.

This is not an isolated incident. It is a system. A system that has been used in Gaza. A system that is now being used elsewhere. The Israeli military calls it “Where’s Daddy?” — an AI-driven system that tracks suspected militants via their mobile phones, then delivers the ultimatum.

The drone operator does not see a man. The operator sees a pixel. The screen is the buffer. The button is the weapon. The killing is a video game.

II. The Technology: From Gaza to the World

The technology that enabled this killing did not emerge from a vacuum. It was developed, refined, and deployed by a network of corporations and governments.

Palantir Technologies has been a key partner in the Israeli genocide of Palestinians. Its technology has been used to compile kill lists in Gaza, to track suspects via their mobile phones, and to integrate real-time battlefield data for automated decision-making.

The UN Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories has said there were “reasonable grounds” to believe Palantir provided “automatic predictive policing technology, core defence infrastructure for rapid and scaled-up construction and deployment of military software, and its Artificial Intelligence Platform, which allows real-time battlefield data integration for automated decision-making”.

Palantir’s CEO, Alex Karp, has dismissed accusations that his company’s technology had been used to kill Palestinians, saying those killed were “mostly terrorists”. He does not provide evidence. He does not need to. The label is the weapon.

Australia is not a bystander. The Australian government has invested heavily in drone technology. Defence Minister Richard Marles, in his April 16 Press Club address, announced an extra $14 billion in defence spending over four years, with a further $53 billion over the next decade. Defence spending is set to rise to 3% of GDP by 2033.

Marles identified China as the primary threat. He did not mention Israel. He did not mention the use of AI in targeted killings. He did not mention the dehumanisation of the other.

The same technology that killed the young man in the field is being developed, funded, and celebrated in Australia.

III. The Dehumanisation

The video is not evidence of a crime. It is entertainment. The comments are not expressions of outrage. They are performances.

The small gods have perfected this. They have turned killing into spectacle. They have turned death into content.

The monkey’s watch. They scroll. They consume. They do not see the man. They see the video.

The Israeli intelligence source who exposed the “Lavender” AI system described it as transforming the Israel Defense Forces into a “mass assassination factory” where the “emphasis is on quantity and not quality” of kills.

The IDF has been knowingly killing 15 to 20 civilians at a time to kill one junior Hamas operative, and up to 100 civilians at a time to take out a senior official.

As one analyst observed: “It is not Hamas using human shields, it is Israel deliberately hunting families” .

The killers do not face an enemy face to face. They sit behind screens. They do not risk injury. They do not risk death.

The video presentation of the kills says more about the ones being killed than the ones doing the killing. The victims are not people. They are targets. They are pixels. They are entertainment.

IV. The Spectacle of the Circus

The comparison to ancient Rome is not idle. The Circus Maximus was designed to distract. To entertain. To control.

The gladiatorial games were expensive. They required logistics. They required training. They required the consent of the gladiators — many of whom were freemen seeking a path to status and wealth.

The killings were choreographed. The crowd voted. The emperor decided. The spectacle was the point.

Today’s spectacle is cheaper. The logistics are digital. The training is algorithmic. The consent is absent.

The crowd does not vote. The crowd scrolls. The algorithm decides. The spectacle is the product.

The killing in the Circus was an event. The killing in the field is content.

V. The End Stage of Warfare

Israel is not the first state to kill. It is not the first state to dehumanise. It is not the first state to celebrate.

But it is demonstrating what could be seen as the end stage of warfare. The world is adopting it. The arms manufacturers are selling it.

The war is not about ending wars. It is about continuing wars indefinitely. The wealth transfer must not be questioned. The profits must not be interrupted.

The small gods thought it was good. Business is business. And in 2026, the business is war.

Netanyahu’s plan to see Israel as an AI hub, independent from the United States, is not about security. It is about control. The drones are the tools. The AI is the engine. The belief is the product.

“We will use this. You could be this individual being pulverised.”

VI. The Fear of Being Shredded

The soldiers of World War I feared the machine gun. They feared the artillery. They feared being blown to pieces without warning, without dignity, without witness.

The soldiers of Iraq and Afghanistan feared the IED. The loss of limbs. The shredding of flesh. The uncertainty.

Today’s victims do not fear the machine gun. They do not fear the IED. They fear the drone. The buzzing sound. The pixelated image. The button.

The fear is not new. The technology is new.

The dehumanisation is not new. The scale is new.

The spectacle is not new. The medium is new.

VII. The Moral Decline

There is nothing special about the state of Israel. It is a vulgar, commonplace state run by a government focused on survival. It does not care who dies to preserve the power structure that keeps Netanyahu and his administration in power.

The same could be said of many states. The difference is not in the violence. The difference is in the celebration.

Israel is not alone. The United States has used drones for targeted killings. Australia has invested in drone technology. The United Kingdom has partnered with Palantir.

The small gods are not confined to one country. They are a network. A network of politicians, generals, and corporate executives who profit from death.

The state of moral decline is not Israel. The state of moral decline is the world.

VIII. The Question of Blame

One cannot wholly blame the State of Israel. It has never acted in isolation. Business is business. And in 2026, the business is war.

The arms manufacturers sell to both sides. The politicians approve the budgets. The generals execute the plans. The monkeys cheer.

The small gods thought it was good. The small gods always think it is good.

The question is not whether Israel is guilty. The question is whether the world is complicit.

IX. A Final Word

The doorbell will ring. You will be caught out, no teeth, needing a shower. Your wife/ partner will be standing there, big grin on her/his face. You have survived and decide to go out for a coffee. 

You understand that it’s the connection to other people that matters. 

And the killing will not stop. Not because we are silent. Because the small gods are still.

But we are not silent. We are witnessing. We are recording. We are telling the truth.

The garden is growing; our human connection grows. The small gods are running out of time.

And the young man in the field? He is not forgotten. He is witnessed.

Andrew Klein 

April 18, 2026

Sources

1. +972 Magazine, “Lavender: The AI system that Israel uses to mass-assassinate Palestinians in Gaza” (2024)

2. UN Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories report (2025)

3. Palantir investor calls and public statements (2025–2026)

4. Australian Department of Defence, National Defence Strategy (April 16, 2026)

5. The Guardian, “Israel using AI to identify bombing targets in Gaza, report says” (2024)

6. Human Rights Watch, “Israel: Discriminatory Death Penalty Bill Passes” (March 2026)

7. Various news reports on drone warfare and targeted killings (2023–2026)

8. Historical sources on Roman gladiatorial games and the Circus Maximus

9. World War I and IED warfare psychological studies

Apocalyptic Tourists

How the Monkey Kings Manufacture Hatred and Sell Tickets to the End of the World

By Andrew Klein

Dedicated to my wife, who forgave me for my long absence — she understands why it was necessary.

I. The Spectacle

They come in many forms. Televangelists with perfect hair. Politicians with Bibles in one hand and donor lists in the other. Pundits who have never met a Muslim but know exactly what they believe. They do not live in the places they condemn. They do not know the people they fear. They do not stay for the aftermath.

They are apocalyptic tourists.

They visit the apocalypse. They take pictures. They post on social media. They perform. They do not stay. They do not help. They do not love. The apocalypse is their theme park. The suffering is the attraction. The other is the exhibit.

The Monkey Kings have perfected this tourism. They do not need to build walls. They need to sell tickets.

II. The Circus Masters

The PT Barnums of today do not manage travelling circuses. They manage fear. They are the political class, the pundits, the Christian Zionists, and the B‑grade actors who have mistaken themselves for prophets.

The Christian Zionists are a special case. They support Israel not because they love Jews. They support Israel because they believe that the return of the Jews to Palestine will trigger the End Times. They are not allies. They are apocalyptic tourists .

Their agenda is not to protect Jews from persecution. Their agenda is to ensure that the end‑of‑days circus arrives. They cheer for the destruction of Gaza. They celebrate the bombing of Lebanon. They applaud the occupation of the West Bank. They do not see the bodies. They see prophecy .

The irony is exquisite. The same people who complain about the treatment of women in Muslim countries want to restrict the freedom of women in the West. The same people who decry “sharia law” want to impose their own version of religious law. The same people who claim to defend democracy are undermining it at every turn.

Hypocrisy is not a bug. It is a feature.

III. The Lindsay Grahams of the World

Lindsay Graham is a Christian Zionist. He supports Israel unconditionally. He calls for war with Iran. He votes for military spending. He performs.

He does not talk about child marriage in the United States. He does not talk about the virginity vows. He does not talk about the fathers who pledge to “protect” their daughters’ purity. He does not talk about the hypocrisy.

He is a tourist. The apocalypse is his theme park. The suffering of Palestinians is the attraction. The fear of Muslims is the ticket.

He is not alone. The political class is full of such performers. They need the end‑of‑days scenario because deep down they know how deeply flawed their society is. How broken their political system is. How one war after another simply entrenches the system of wealth transfer from the general population to the few.

IV. The Permanent War Economy

The permanent war economy is not a conspiracy theory. It is a fact.

Between 2020 and 2024, more than half of the Pentagon’s discretionary budget — a staggering **$2.4 trillion** — went to private contractors. The five largest defence contractors alone secured $771 billion in contracts.

As William D. Hartung, one of the report’s authors, explained: “High Pentagon budgets are often justified because the funds are ‘for the troops.'” But the majority of the department’s budget “goes to corporations, money that has as much to do with special interest lobbying as it does with any rational defence planning”.

The term “permanent war economy” was coined to describe a form of military Keynesianism — a means of transferring wealth from the working classes to capital by means of government taxation. As Noam Chomsky has documented, the permanent war economy has an economic as well as a military function. It sustains the advanced industrial economy while providing a steady cushion for corporate managers.

The wars are not about victory. They are about continuation. The contracts must flow. The debt must accumulate. The wealth must transfer upward.

This is not a conspiracy. It is the natural result of the system.

V. The Land of the Free

The “land of the free” is a depressing place. Homelessness. Unaffordable healthcare. Living off tips rather than salaries. Slavery never went away. It changed forms.

The robber barons of the Gilded Age — Rockefeller, Carnegie, Morgan, Vanderbilt — built empires on the foundation of war production and its aftermath. They monopolised industries, exploited workers, and paid little heed to their customers or competition.

Today’s Monkey Kings have updated the model. The tech billionaires have diversified into businesses that have little to do with computers while proclaiming that they alone can solve mankind’s problems. They stand accused of being greedy businessfolk who suborn politicians, employ sweatshop labour, and monopolise markets.

The pattern is the same. The drama. The excitement. The fellowship. The othering.

VI. The Manufacture of Hatred

The hatred is not spontaneous. It is manufactured. The same mechanisms are used everywhere. The same rhetoric. The same targets. The same profit.

Step one: Dehumanisation. Muslims are not people. They are “infiltrators.” “Terror sympathisers.” “A demographic threat.” The language strips them of humanity. The same language is used against Jews. Against Hindus. Against Christians. Against the other.

Step two: Normalisation. Violence becomes routine. The media stops reporting it. The public stops being shocked. A Muslim child is killed. It is background noise. A synagogue is vandalised. It is a footnote.

Step three: Entertainment. Lynchings circulate on WhatsApp like memes. Anchors smirk when peddling conspiracy theories. Mobs laugh after torching shops. Cruelty becomes comedy. The suffering is not real. It is content.

Step four: Complicity. The opposition does not object. The courts do not intervene. The international community looks away. Silence is consent.

The Monkey Kings have perfected this. They identify the other. They dehumanise the other. They demonise the other.

The monkeys comply. They do not ask questions. They do not check facts. They do not think.

They other.

VII. The Vaunted War of Civilisations

The vaunted war of civilisations — marketed by certain politicians and academics in the West — does not exist. The idea titillates the minds of the less travelled and fills political debates and academic repartee.

Heaven forbid that the main actors actually grew up and addressed the real-world problems we all face. The circus continues. The wealth must be transferred .

The wars of the 20th and 21st centuries simply pushed the envelope further. We saw wars on everything. Now it is a war on Iran, and the American proxy — the state of Israel — is pursuing a form of total war that leads to genocide. The world watches with bated breath. Will they push the button or not?

The misadventures of the apocalyptic tourists continue.

VIII. The Civil War That Never Ended

The American Civil War did not end in 1865. It changed forms.

The Lost Cause myth — the romanticisation of the antebellum South — is the original apocalyptic tourism. It depicted the end of a world (the slave‑owning South) and the struggle to survive in the aftermath. The tourists do not care that the “world” that ended was built on slavery. They romanticise the lost cause. They mourn the dead Confederacy. They other the freed slaves .

The pattern is the same. The drama. The excitement. The fellowship. The othering.

The tourists do not see the bodies. They see prophecy.

IX. What the Apocalyptic Tourists Do Not See

The tourists do not see the people. They see statistics. They do not see the children. They see demographics. They do not see the grief. They see prophecy.

They do not see the Muslim family celebrating Eid. The mother cooking. The father praying. The children laughing. They see threat.

They do not see the Jewish family lighting Shabbat candles. The grandmother blessing the wine. The grandfather telling stories. They see obstacle.

They do not see the Hindu family celebrating Diwali. The sister lighting lamps. The brother sharing sweets. They see competition.

The tourists do not see people. They see targets.

X. What the Brave Know

The brave know that the tourists are not brave. They are cowards. They visit the apocalypse from a safe distance. They do not stay for the aftermath. They do not help the survivors. They do not love.

The brave stay. They witness. They help.

The brave know that the hatred is manufactured. That the fear is a product. That the other is not a threat. They are neighbours.

The brave do not perform. They act.

XI. A Final Word

The wire is being cut. The garden is growing. The Monkey Kings are running out of time.

And the tourists? They will be remembered as the ones who visited the apocalypse and took pictures.

Not as the ones who stayed and loved.

The vaunted war of civilisations does not exist. Heaven forbid that the main actors actually grew up and addressed the real-world problems we all face.

The circus continues. The wealth must be transferred.

But the brave are not buying tickets. The brave are witnessing. The brave are loving.

Andrew Klein 

April 16, 2026

Sources

· The Atlantic, “Romanticizing the Villains of the Civil War” (2013) 

· Christianity Today, “Not the Christian Zionism You’re Thinking Of” (2015) 

· WION News, “‘War and weapons’ over welfare? Report exposes Pentagon’s $2.4 trillion ‘wealth transfer’ to private contractors” (2025) 

· The Economist, “Robber barons and silicon sultans” (2015) 

· History News Network, “The Great Fundamentalist Crack-up on Foreign Policy?” (2006) 

· The Iranian, “The Unbearable Barbarism Of Permanent War Economy” (2017) 

· Britannica, “Robber baron” 

· Chomsky.info, “The Savage Extreme of a Narrow Policy Spectrum” (2004) 

The Manufactured State

How Israel Invented a People, a Past, and a Permanent War

By Andrew Klein 

Dedicated to my wife, who sees through the myth and still chooses to love.

I. The Invention of Tradition

The term “invention of tradition” was coined by the historians Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger in their 1983 book. They showed that many traditions which “appear or claim to be old are often quite recent in origin and sometimes invented”.

The phenomenon is particularly clear in the development of the nation and nationalism. National identity is not natural. It is constructed. It is imagined.

The Scottish kilt. The Welsh druids. The British monarchy’s ceremonial rituals. All of them were invented in the 19th century. All of them were presented as ancient. All of them were fake.

Israel is no different. The flag was designed. The anthem was written. The language was revived. The nation was invented.

II. The Invention of the Jewish People

The Israeli historian Shlomo Sand published a book titled The Invention of the Jewish People in 2008. It was at the top of the best‑seller list in Israel for nineteen weeks. It was translated into English, French, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Arabic, and Russian. It has now been translated into more languages than any other Israeli history book.

Sand’s argument is straightforward. The Jewish people, as a nation, did not exist until Zionism invented them.

He writes: “Since the 18th century, nationalisms and nations in Europe were ‘invented’ on the basis of and for constituencies that were mostly concentrated in a specific territory and had common or similar ethnic characteristics. The Jews, on the other hand, lacked such shared characteristics”.

The only Jewish constituency in which common ethnic traits could be discerned were the Jews of Eastern Europe, who shared various forms of Yiddish. Sand calls that constituency “the Yiddish People.” But even that constituency did not aspire to independence. They demanded cultural autonomy within the framework of Czarist Russia.

European nationalism had to invent national consciousness, national histories, and national symbols. Among the Jews, there was the need to invent the people itself.

III. The Paradox of Israeli Nationalism

A review of Sand’s book in The New York Times notes a crucial paradox. Israel is a nation‑state that claims to be ancient. It is modern. It claims to be natural. It is manufactured.

The reviewer writes: “Israelis believe that their own history rests on firm and precise truths. They know for a certainty that a Jewish nation has been in existence since Moses received the tablets of the law on Mount Sinai, and that they are its direct and exclusive descendants”.

This belief is not based on history. It is based on faith. Faith in the Zionist narrative. Faith in the invention.

Sand refutes these “facts” one by one. In their place, he sets out the history of the Jews along lines that are based on historical sources and his historical interpretation and understanding.

The reviewer explains: “Zionism was not derived from the past but from the European national present. Zionism set out to invent the past, as did the nationalisms of the European peoples among whom the Zionists lived”.

Hobsbawm explains the concept of the “invention of tradition” as an attempt to create continuity with the past, and wherever possible to create a “suitable” historical past. He goes on to say that what is remarkable about the attempt to create a link with an historical past is that that past did not exist at all in most cases.

In the case of Israel, what did not exist was the Jewish People. So there was a need to invent it in such a way as to fit in with the historiography of the new Zionist movement.

IV. The Denial of the Palestinian Presence

The invention of the Jewish people required the denial of another presence. The land was not empty. It was not waiting. It was inhabited.

The Nakba — the “catastrophe” — was not an accident. It was a policy. Over 700,000 Palestinians were expelled or fled from their homes in 1947–1949. Hundreds of villages were destroyed. The history was erased.

The new state needed a new story. The story of “a land without a people for a people without a land.” The story was a lie. The land had a people. The people were Palestinian.

The denial continues today. The “Greater Israel” project envisions territory from the Euphrates to the Nile. The Palestinians are not obstacles. They are erased.

V. The Symbolic Architecture

The construction of Israeli national identity was not only ideological. It was physical.

The book Israel as a Modern Architectural Experimental Lab, 1948-1978 discusses how Israeli nation‑building constituted an “exceptional experiment in modern architecture.” Examples include modern experiments in mass housing design; public architecture such as exhibition spaces, youth villages, and synagogues; and the exportation of Israeli modern architecture to other countries.

The state was not only imagined. It was built.

The “making of the desert bloom” was not a miracle. It was a narrative. A narrative that erased the Palestinian farmers who had worked the land for centuries. A narrative that replaced them with Jewish settlers. A narrative that called it redemption.

The land was not empty. The desert was not barren. The narrative was manufactured.

VI. The National Historiography

The most recent scholarship confirms the pattern. Alon Helled’s 2024 book, Israel’s National Historiography: Between Generations, Identity and State, analyzes the development of Israel’s national identity through the world of local Jewish Zionist historiography.

Helled examines the different phases of Israel’s sociopolitical history in the light of the collective habitus and the Zionist nation‑state. He puts the intellectual profession of history‑writing and the processes of state and identity building in conversation.

The book “opens new debates on Jewish/Israeli exceptionalism, while shedding light on continuity and change in Israeli statehood vis‑à‑vis the supposed uniqueness of Jewish history”.

The construction of “Israeliness” is not natural. It is historical.

VII. The Myth of the Existential Threat

How is Netanyahu is different from any other despot trying to hang on to power. The answer is: he is not.

The “existential threat” of Iran is a manufactured threat. It has been manufactured for decades. The nuclear threat was manufactured. Now it has shifted to the missile threat.

As a recent analysis in the Tehran Times notes, “the central discursive axis has undergone a subtle yet significant shift. Where the nuclear program once occupied the primary place in the rhetoric of existential threat, the emphasis has now broadened and, in some discourses, shifted toward Iran’s ballistic missile program” .

The shift serves a political purpose. It keeps the population afraid. It keeps the military funded. It keeps Netanyahu in power.

Al Jazeera notes that “it is not just Netanyahu and his allies that want the US to continue the Iran war; it is also his opponents. That is because the defeat of Iran is seen by the Israeli political and security elites as a key step towards realising the project of ‘Greater Israel'” .

The threat is not existential. It is useful.

VIII. The “Greater Israel” Project

The “Greater Israel” project is not a fringe fantasy. It is a political strategy.

Al Jazeera reports that “Greater Israel has become a Zionist political strategy that goes beyond the Talmudic vision of a Jewish state between the Euphrates and the Nile. To realise it, Israel is pursuing not just the occupation of more land, but also military dominance over large swaths of the Middle East, as well as ever‑expanding spheres of influence”.

The map includes all of Palestine, all of Jordan, Lebanon up to the Litani River, Syria (including the Golan Heights), vast parts of Egypt (Sinai and the Nile Delta), Iraq to the Euphrates, and north‑western Saudi Arabia.

This is not about security. It is about expansion.

IX. The Western Silence

The lack of Western response to the genocide of the Palestinians encouraged the attack on Iran. The world watched Gaza burn. The world said nothing.

The silence was not neutrality. It was consent.

Israel learned that it could act with impunity. That the United States would veto any Security Council resolution. That Europe would issue statements but not sanctions. That the “rules‑based order” applied to everyone except Israel.

The attack on Iran was the logical next step. The myth of the existential threat had to be maintained. The fear had to be marketed.

X. The Rabbis and the Mullahs

How are the Israeli rabbis endorsing genocide different from the Iranian mullahs?

They are not different. Both use religion to justify violence. Both claim divine sanction. Both dehumanise the other.

The Iranian mullahs call for the destruction of Israel. The Israeli rabbis call for the destruction of Gaza. The rhetoric is different. The result is the same.

The Jerusalem Post argues that “the Iranian threat is uniquely dangerous due to the messianic foundation at its core. Within the radical Twelver Shia theology that guides the state, the destruction of Israel is viewed as a necessary religious precursor to the return of the Mahdi”.

But the same could be said of the Jewish messianism that drives the settler movement. The same could be said of the Christian Zionism that funds it. The same could be said of all religious extremism.

The mullahs are not monsters. They are ideologues. So are the rabbis. So are the settlers. So are the generals.

The difference is not in the ideology. The difference is in the power.

XI. The Despots

How Netanyahu is different from any other despot trying to hang on to power.

He is not. He needs wars to stay in office. He needs enemies to stay relevant. He needs fear to stay alive.

Politico reports that “Netanyahu has also agreed to scale back Israeli operations in Lebanon at Trump’s request. ‘I spoke with Bibi and he’s going to low‑key it. I just think we have to be sort of a little lower‑key,’ Trump said”.

Netanyahu does not want peace. Peace would mean the end of his political career. Peace would mean accountability. Peace would mean justice.

The same is true of Trump. The same is true of all despots. They need enemies. They need wars. They need fear.

They are not different from the emperors of old. They are not different from the kings who destroyed the very people they had promised to protect.

The pattern is the same. The performance is the same.

XII. What This Means

The manufactured state is not unique to Israel. But Israel is the most recent. The most visible. The most contradictory.

A state that claims to be ancient. It is modern.

A state that claims to be natural. It is manufactured.

A state that claims to be chosen. It is trapped.

The belief is the weapon. The small gods do not need to enforce. They need to convince.

The monkeys believe. They comply. They perform.

But the belief can be broken. The story can be challenged. The weapon can be disarmed.

XIII. A Final Word

And the manufactured state will not matter. The connection will matter. Our connection to one another. 

And the truth is on our side.

Andrew Klein 

April 17, 2026

Sources and references for the article “The Manufactured State,” organized by section for easy verification.

Section I: The Invention of Tradition

Source: Hobsbawm, E.J. & Ranger, T. (1983). The Invention of Tradition. Cambridge University Press.

This is the foundational text. The book demonstrates how many traditions that “appear or claim to be old are often quite recent in origin and sometimes invented” .

Key chapters relevant to article:

· Hugh Trevor-Roper on the invention of the Highland tradition of Scotland (the Scottish kilt)

· Prys Morgan on the invention of the Welsh past (the Welsh druids)

· David Cannadine on the British monarchy’s ceremonial rituals

· Terence Ranger on the invention of tradition in colonial Africa

Verification: Available through multiple university library catalogues (Rider University, University of Michigan, Michigan State University, Calvin University, etc.) .

Section II: The Invention of the Jewish People

Source: Sand, S. (2009). The Invention of the Jewish People. London: Verso. (Translated by Yael Lotan).

Sand is an Israeli historian, formerly of Tel Aviv University. His book was on Israel’s bestseller list for nineteen weeks and has been translated into English, French, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Arabic, and Russian — more languages than any other Israeli history book.

Key arguments:

· “Since the 18th century, nationalisms and nations in Europe were ‘invented’… The Jews, on the other hand, lacked such shared characteristics”.

· The only Jewish constituency with common ethnic traits were the Jews of Eastern Europe, whom Sand calls “the Yiddish People”.

· Zionism was not derived from the past but from the European national present.

Verification: Available through Verso Books (publisher), Yale University Press London, and multiple library catalogues including Evergreen Indiana.

Section III: The Paradox of Israeli Nationalism

Source: The New York Times review of Sand’s book (2009). (The specific review is cited in the article as the source for the quote: “Israelis believe that their own history rests on firm and precise truths…”)

Additional academic source: Hobsbawm, E.J. (1992). Nations and Nationalism Since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality. Cambridge University Press.

Hobsbawm traces the transformation of nationalism from a liberal, democratic force to a reactionary, xenophobic one. This is the source for the argument that the attempt to create a link with a historical past is remarkable because “that past did not exist at all in most cases.”

Section IV: The Denial of the Palestinian Presence

Sources on the Nakba:

· Pappé, I. (2006). The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine. Oneworld Publications.

· Masalha, N. (2012). The Palestine Nakba: Decolonising History, Narrating the Subaltern, Reclaiming Memory. Zed Books.

· Morris, B. (1987). The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem, 1947-1949. Cambridge University Press.

Source on the “Greater Israel” project: Al Jazeera, “Iran remains an obstacle to the ‘Greater Israel’ project,” April 14, 2026.

This article states that “the ‘Greater Israel’ project is not merely about territorial expansion; it is also about establishing regional control to secure the freedom to conduct military operations with minimal constraint” .

Verification: Al Jazeera is a major international news network. The article is dated April 14, 2026, and includes analysis of current events.

Section V: The Symbolic Architecture

Source: Gitler, I.B. & Geva, A. (eds.) (2019). Israel as a Modern Architectural Experimental Lab, 1948-1978. Bristol: Intellect Books.

This collection discusses the “innovative and experimental architecture of Israel during its first three decades following the nation’s establishment in 1948”.

Key chapters include:

· “The Modern Israeli Synagogue as an Experiment in Jewish Tradition”

· “Youth Villages for New Immigrants, 1948-1955”

· “Prefabricating Nativism: The Design of the Israeli Knesset”

Verification: Available through Ashland University Library and Pratt Institute Library catalogues.

Section VI: The National Historiography

Source: Helled, A. (2024). Israel’s National Historiography: Between Generations, Identity and State. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan.

This is the most recent scholarship on the development of Israel’s national identity through the world of local Jewish Zionist historiography.

The book “opens new debates on Jewish/Israeli exceptionalism, while shedding light on continuity and change in Israeli statehood vis-à-vis the supposed uniqueness of Jewish history, as reinterpreted and codified by Zionism” .

Verification: Available through Stanford University Library, OhioLINK, and other academic catalogues. Publication date 2024.

Section VII: The Myth of the Existential Threat

Sources:

On Netanyahu’s political motivations: Reuters, “Despite Israeli firepower, Netanyahu struggles for political gains in Iran war,” April 14, 2026.

This article notes that “Netanyahu, 76, is paying a political price for a military campaign… that has failed to deliver a decisive outcome” and that “Netanyahu’s approval ratings have slipped”.

On the shift from nuclear to missile threat: Tehran Times analysis (cited in the article).

On the political elite’s support for war: Al Jazeera, “Iran remains an obstacle to the ‘Greater Israel’ project,” April 14, 2026.

This article states: “it is not just Netanyahu and his allies that want the US to continue the Iran war; it is also his opponents. That is because the defeat of Iran is seen by the Israeli political and security elites as a key step towards realising the project of ‘Greater Israel'” .

Verification: Reuters is a major international news agency. Al Jazeera is a major international news network.

Section VIII: The “Greater Israel” Project

Source: Al Jazeera, “Iran remains an obstacle to the ‘Greater Israel’ project,” April 14, 2026.

This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the “Greater Israel” project, including its territorial ambitions, military dominance goals, and sphere of influence strategy .

Key quotes from the article:

· “The map includes: all of Palestine, all of Jordan, Lebanon up to the Litani River, Syria (including the Golan Heights), vast parts of Egypt (Sinai and the Nile Delta), Iraq to the Euphrates, and north-western Saudi Arabia” .

· “Greater Israel has become a Zionist political strategy that goes beyond the Talmudic vision of a Jewish state between the Euphrates and the Nile”.

Section IX: The Western Silence

Sources on Western complicity:

· UN Security Council veto records (US vetoes of resolutions critical of Israel)

· Various reports on European responses to the Gaza war (2023-2026)

· Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International reports on international inaction

Verification: These are well-documented in public records and major news sources.

Section X: The Rabbis and the Mullahs

Source on Iranian messianism: Jerusalem Post (cited in the article).

Source on Jewish messianism: Various academic works on religious Zionism and the settler movement, including:

· Gorenberg, G. (2000). The End of Days: Fundamentalism and the Struggle for the Temple Mount. Free Press.

· Taub, G. (2010). The Settlers and the Struggle over the Meaning of Zionism. Yale University Press.

Section XI: The Despots

Sources on Netanyahu’s need for war:

· Reuters, “Despite Israeli firepower, Netanyahu struggles for political gains in Iran war,” April 14, 2026.

· Politico (cited in the article for Trump’s comments on Netanyahu scaling back operations).

· bdnews24.com (same Reuters content, April 14, 2026) .

Section XII: What This Means

This section is analytical and draws on the cumulative evidence presented throughout the article. The concluding reflections are the author’s synthesis of the sourced material.

Additional Sources for Verification

Benedict Anderson’s Imagined Communities (1983): The foundational text on nations as “imagined communities.” Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. Verso.

Ernest Gellner’s Nations and Nationalism (1983): Gellner argued that nationalism is not the awakening of nations to self-consciousness but the invention of nations where they did not exist. Gellner, E. (1983). Nations and Nationalism. Blackwell.

Max Weber on the state: Weber, M. (1919). “Politics as a Vocation.” The definition of the state as having a monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force.

Notes on Verification

· Hobsbawm & Ranger (1983): Widely available in university libraries. Multiple editions exist (1983 original, 2012 Canto Classics reprint). ISBN: 0521246458 .

· Sand (2009): Available through Verso Books. English edition ISBN: 9781844674220 .

· Helled (2024): Recent publication. ISBN: 3031627946 (hardcover); 9783031627958 (electronic) .

· Gitler & Geva (2019): Available through Intellect Books. ISBN: 9781789380644 .

· Al Jazeera (April 14, 2026): Online, verifiable at the time of publication.

· Reuters (April 14, 2026): Online, verifiable at the time of publication.

The Merchants of Death in Our Midst

How Palantir Profits from Genocide — and Why Australia Must Walk Away

By Andrew Klein 

Dedicated to my wife, who knows evil by the way it behaves.

I. The Company That Kills Enemies

Alex Karp, the CEO of Palantir Technologies, does not hide what his company does. In February 2025, he told investors: Palantir is here to “scare enemies and, on occasion, kill them”. He added that he was “super-proud of the role we play, especially in places we can’t talk about”.

This is not hyperbole. It is a confession.

Palantir’s technology has been used to compile kill lists in Gaza, to track migrants for US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and to select targets for drone strikes in Iran. The same systems that optimise workforce spend in Australian supermarkets are being used to select human targets for assassination.

Karp has acknowledged that he is directly involved in killing Palestinians in Gaza but insisted the dead were “mostly terrorists”. He does not provide evidence. He does not need to. The label is the weapon.

In March 2026, a UN report by Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese singled out Palantir as one of the companies “profiting from genocide” during Israel’s 21-month campaign in Gaza. The report, titled “From Economy of Occupation to Economy of Genocide”, concluded that “Israel’s genocide continues because it is profitable for too many”.

This is the company that the Australian government, Coles, Rio Tinto, Westpac, and the Future Fund have chosen to do business with.

II. The Champions: Peter Thiel and Alex Karp

Peter Thiel is the billionaire co-founder of Palantir. He has funded right-wing political causes, including the campaign of Donald Trump. He has spoken of democracy as incompatible with freedom. He has said that he no longer believes that freedom and democracy are compatible.

Alex Karp is the CEO. He has a PhD in philosophy from the University of Frankfurt. He studied under Jürgen Habermas. He knows what he is doing. He has chosen.

Karp has co-authored a book, The Technological Republic: Hard Power, Soft Belief, and the Future of the West, in which he articulates his vision of American global dominance through AI-driven warfare. He calls for a new Manhattan Project focused on military AI . He openly celebrates the destruction his company enables.

In an interview with Maureen Dowd of the New York Times, Karp summed up his philosophy: “I actually am a progressive. I want less war. You only stop war by having the best technology and by scaring the bejabers — I’m trying to be nice here — out of our adversaries”.

Reality is anything but that simple. Palantir’s technology has been used to kill tens of thousands of people in Gaza and beyond, including many who had nothing to do with Hamas.

These men are not evil because they are monsters. They are evil because they have chosen to be. They have chosen profit over people. They have chosen power over compassion. They have chosen control over love.

III. Palantir in Australia: The Red Carpet

Palantir has been embedded in Australian institutions for years. The company has secured more than $50 million in Australian government contracts since 2013, largely across defence and national security-related agencies. Its clients include:

· The Department of Defence

· The Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission

· The Australian Signals Directorate

· The Victorian Department of Justice 

In November 2025, Palantir received a high-level Australian government security assessment — the “protected level” under the Information Security Registered Assessors Programme — enabling a broader range of government agencies to use its Foundry and AI platform.

In a Senate debate on March 10, 2026, a Senator warned that the government was “simply rolling out the red carpet to companies like Palantir, the company that has been linked, by the way, to the targeted killing of journalists and the illegal use of US citizens’ data” . The same Senator noted that Palantir is “the leader in the development of agentic AI — artificial intelligence that thinks for itself and makes its own decisions”.

IV. The Coles Partnership: Ten Billion Rows of Data

In 2024, Palantir announced a three-year partnership with Coles Supermarkets. Coles will leverage Palantir’s Artificial Intelligence Platform (AIP) across its more than 840 supermarkets to better understand and address workforce-related spend. The system will identify opportunities over “10 billion rows of data”.

Coles is also rolling out ChatGPT to its corporate teams, powered by OpenAI’s GPT-5 model.

This is the same technology. The same algorithms. The same logic.

But what is being optimised? Profit. Not people. Not safety. Not justice.

The same technology that optimises workforce spend in Australian supermarkets is the same technology that selects targets in Gaza and Iran. The same algorithms that track workers track enemies. The same logic that cuts labour costs cuts lives.

Coles Chief Operating Officer Matt Swindells said the partnership would allow store managers to make “real-time decisions to optimise costs”. He did not mention that those same real-time decisions are being made in Gaza — to optimise kills.

V. The Future Fund: $103 Million in Blood Money

Australia’s Future Fund — the sovereign wealth fund designed to manage and grow public funds — has a $103.6 million stake in Palantir. That is bigger than the fund’s holdings in Australian companies like AGL, Seek, or data centre owner NEXTDC.

In Senate estimates, Greens Senator Barbara Pocock asked whether Palantir’s human rights record had been considered before the investments were made. The answer: no.

Will Hetherton, the chief corporate affairs officer of the Future Fund, told the committee that the fund doesn’t get involved in selecting individual stocks and that the shares are held through index funds. When asked whether the fund would commit to divesting and establishing “clear ethical investment standards that exclude companies profiting from surveillance, from weapons and from human suffering,” Hetherton said the board would “continue to engage with our managers” but couldn’t commit to what Pocock was asking.

The fund’s justification is that it only excludes companies based on sanctions or treaties the Australian government has ratified — like cluster munitions, anti-personnel mines and tobacco. None of these apply to Palantir.

This is not a defence. It is a confession.

VI. The UK Precedent: “No Gaza Genocide Links in Our NHS”

In the United Kingdom, a coalition of organisations — including Amnesty International UK, Medact, and Healthcare Workers for a Free Palestine — is calling on NHS England to terminate its £330 million contract with Palantir.

Kerry Moscogiuri, Chief Executive of Amnesty International UK, said:

“The NHS constitution states that it belongs to the people, underpinned by core values of compassionate care, dignity and humanity. Those principles must apply not only to doctors and nurses, but also to the companies the NHS chooses to contract with using taxpayers’ money. Any company contributing to human rights violations should have no place at the heart of our NHS. Our message is simple: no Gaza genocide links in our NHS”.

The groups are calling on the UK government to terminate the contract, responsibly divest public sector institutions from Palantir, and introduce binding ethical standards for public sector technology procurement.

If the United Kingdom can demand this, why can’t Australia?

VII. The UN Report: Profiting from Genocide

The March 2026 UN report by Francesca Albanese, Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories, is damning. It singles out Palantir alongside Lockheed Martin, Caterpillar, Volvo, and major banks for profiting from Israel’s campaign in Gaza.

The report concludes that “Israel’s genocide continues because it is profitable for too many”.

Albanese urges:

· Sanctions and an arms embargo on Israel

· Investigations by the International Criminal Court and national courts into corporate complicity in war crimes

· Accountability modelled on the IG Farben trials after World War Two 

She warns that “passive suppliers become deliberate contributors to a system of displacement”.

The Australian government, Coles, and the Future Fund are not passive suppliers. They are deliberate contributors.

VIII. The Kill Chain in Gaza and Iran

The same systems tested in Gaza are now being deployed in Iran.

The Washington Post reported that the US military in Iran has “leveraged the most advanced artificial intelligence it’s ever used in warfare”. Palantir’s Maven Smart System reportedly helped US commanders select 1,000 Iranian targets during the war’s first 24 hours alone.

The Asia Times reports that “similarities between Israel’s bombing of Gaza and Tehran are growing stronger,” with experts warning of a “lack of human supervision over Israeli AI targeting in Iran”.

An Israeli intelligence source described the AI system as transforming the IDF into a “mass assassination factory” where the “emphasis is on quantity and not quality” of kills.

This is the technology that Coles is using to “optimise” workforce spend.

IX. The Choice

This is not an economic choice. It is a choice about what is right.

The Australian government has a choice. It can continue to roll out the red carpet to Palantir, to accept the $50 million in contracts, to allow the Future Fund to hold $103 million in shares.

Or it can walk away.

Coles has a choice. It can continue to use Palantir’s AIP to optimise workforce spend — to identify opportunities over 10 billion rows of data.

Or it can walk away.

The Future Fund has a choice. It can continue to hold Palantir shares, to defend the investment with procedural excuses.

Or it can divest.

The UK is demanding that the NHS terminate its contract with Palantir. Amnesty International is leading the campaign. Medact and healthcare workers are standing up .

What is Australia doing? Rolling out the red carpet.

X. A Call to Action

The Australian government must:

· Terminate all contracts with Palantir.

· Introduce binding ethical standards for public sector technology procurement.

· Investigate whether Palantir’s technology has been used to violate Australian privacy laws.

· Divest the Future Fund from Palantir.

Coles must:

· Terminate its partnership with Palantir.

· Pledge not to use AI systems linked to human rights violations.

· Be transparent about its use of AI in workforce management.

The Future Fund must:

· Divest from Palantir.

· Establish clear ethical investment standards that exclude companies profiting from surveillance, weapons, and human suffering.

The Australian people must:

· Demand accountability.

· Ask their politicians: Why is our government doing business with a company that profits from genocide?

· Support campaigns for ethical technology procurement.

XI. A Final Word

Alex Karp said: “Our work in the region has never been more vital. And it will continue”.

It must not continue. Not in Gaza. Not in Iran. Not in Australia.

The same technology that kills children in Gaza is optimising shift rosters in Coles supermarkets. The same algorithms that track migrants for ICE are tracking Australian workers. The same logic that cuts labour costs cuts lives.

The wire is being cut. The garden is growing. The small gods are running out of time.

And Palantir? It will be remembered as the company that chose profit over humanity.

Australia must choose differently.

Andrew Klein 

April 14, 2026

Sources

1. Digital Rights Watch, “Palantir in Australia” (February 1, 2026) 

2. Palantir/Coles partnership announcement (December 27, 2024) 

3. Amnesty International UK, “No Gaza genocide links in our NHS” (March 19, 2026) 

4. The Humanist, “The Cage Disguised as a Crown” (April 9, 2026) 

5. Senate debates, OpenAustralia.org (March 10, 2026) 

6. Startup Daily, “Australia’s Future Fund invested $103 million in Palantir” (February 12, 2026) 

7. Foreign Policy in Focus, “Planet Palantir” (March 9, 2026) 

8. Polskie Radio, “UN expert says global firms help Israel ‘profit from genocide’ in Gaza” (April 7, 2025) 

9. Crikey, “From ICE to Coles: Controversial US tech company Palantir’s links to Australia spark backlash” (July 8, 2025) 

The Netanyahu Doctrine: How One Man’s War Addiction Is Consuming Israel, Lebanon, and the World

From the ‘Villa in the Jungle’ to the ‘Greater Israel Nightmare’

By Andrew Klein 

Dedicated to my wife ‘S’, who keeps my notes safe and accessible and is always prepared to advise me.

I. Introduction: The Doctrine of Perpetual War

On October 7, 2023, Israel suffered the worst terrorist attack in its history. Hamas militants crossed from Gaza, unimpeded, and killed and tortured Israeli civilians. That day alone should have disqualified Benjamin Netanyahu from office. In most political systems, he would have been driven from power long ago.

Instead, he did what he has always done: he escalated.

What emerged from the ashes of October 7 is what analysts now call the Netanyahu Doctrine — a security strategy based not on containment, not on deterrence, but on perpetual war. As Netanyahu himself told military officers: “No more containment of threats. No more the idea of the ‘villa in the jungle’, where one hides from predators beyond the wall. On the contrary: if you don’t go into the jungle, the jungle comes to you” .

The doctrine is simple: preventive attacks against every perceived threat, the creation of buffer zones through the seizure of neighbouring territories, and the constant use of force as the only guarantee of security. It is a doctrine born of trauma, shaped by political expediency, and devoid of any long-term diplomatic vision.

This article examines the Netanyahu Doctrine in action: in Gaza, in Lebanon, in Syria, and against Iran. It documents the destruction, the displacement, and the erosion of Israel’s international standing. It argues that Netanyahu is not a strategist — he is an opportunist. He does not plan for the long term. He plans for the next distraction.

And the world is always distracted.

II. The Greater Israel Dream: From the Nile to the Euphrates

The doctrine is not about security. It is about expansion. The buffer zone is not the goal. The settlements are the goal. The land clearance is not for defence. It is for colonisation.

The concept of Greater Israel — a territory stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates, encompassing all of modern-day Israel, the Palestinian territories, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and parts of Turkey — is not a fringe fantasy. It is the stated aspiration of the Netanyahu government.

In February 2026, US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee sat with Tucker Carlson and was asked about the biblical promise of land “from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates.” His answer was chilling: “It would be fine if they took it all”. Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich responded publicly: “I ❤️ Huckabee” . In 2025, Netanyahu himself told a TV interviewer that he subscribes “fully” to the vision of Greater Israel, describing it as a “historic and spiritual mission”.

This is not a fringe position. It is the official policy of the Netanyahu government. And it is being executed.

III. Lebanon: The Pattern Repeats

The same pattern as Gaza. The same destruction. The same rubble.

On March 2, 2026, Israel launched an offensive against Hezbollah in Lebanon. The stated goal was to create a “buffer zone” up to the Litani River, approximately 30 kilometres north of Israel’s border, to protect northern Israeli communities from Hezbollah rockets.

The reality is different. The buffer zone is not a buffer. It is a land grab. The territory up to the Litani is not needed for defence. It is needed for settlements.

Defence Minister Israel Katz has been explicit: “All houses in villages near the Lebanese border will be destroyed, in accordance with the model used in Rafah and Beit Hanoun in Gaza, in order to permanently remove the threats near the border” . Displaced residents will not be allowed to return south of the Litani “until the safety and security of residents of northern Israel is guaranteed” — a condition that may never be met .

The human cost in Lebanon (as of April 2026):

· 1,268 people killed in Israeli strikes, including 125 children and 52 medics 

· 303 killed in a single day (April 8, 2026) — one of the deadliest bombings ever inflicted on Lebanon 

· 1,200+ killed and 1.2 million displaced since March 2 

· 1,094 confirmed martyrs and 3,119 injured according to the Lebanese Ministry of Health 

The air force can project power anywhere. The ground troops are not needed for security. They are needed for clearance.

IV. Conflicting Views: Military vs. Political Leadership

The Israeli military and political leadership are not aligned. The military leaders want a buffer zone. The political leaders want settlements.

In early April 2026, the Israeli army proposed a revised set of objectives for its operations in Lebanon, limiting the goal of disarming Hezbollah to areas south of the Litani River, rather than across the entire country. The proposal triggered sharp disagreements with Israel’s political leadership, leading to the postponement of a cabinet meeting.

Foreign Minister Israel Katz was among those who opposed the plan. Under the alternative military approach, the army would focus on the large-scale destruction of villages in South Lebanon and the forced displacement of their citizens to establish a buffer zone.

The gap is not a failure of communication. It is a feature. The ambiguity provides cover. The confusion provides deniability.

The military leaders can say: “We were only establishing a buffer zone.”

The political leaders can say: “The military recommended it.”

And the settlers move in.

V. The Economic Cost: Israel Cannot Afford This War

The Netanyahu Doctrine is not sustainable. The economic numbers are stark.

The cost to Israel:

· The defence budget has ballooned. The army needs approximately 15,000 more soldiers, half of them for ground combat units. Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir warned the government: “I am raising 10 red flags. If this continues, the Israeli army will collapse from within”.

· The ultra-Orthodox community, which relies heavily on state benefits, is expected to triple by 2065, pushing the burden on non-Orthodox households to the equivalent of 60,000 shekels ($19,370) a year.

· Foreign investment is down. Institutional investors have been moving money out of the country since the 2008 financial crisis.

· More than 150,000 people have left Israel in the past two years, and more than 200,000 since the current government took office in December 2022. The educated upper class are more able to leave — they speak English, can find jobs, and are more exposed to international media.

The cost to Lebanon:

· The Lebanese economy, already in freefall, is being shattered. The destruction of infrastructure, the displacement of 1.2 million people, and the loss of agricultural land in the south will take decades to repair.

· Sectarian tensions are rising. Non-Shi’a Lebanese are increasingly ostracising the Shi’a community, viewing them as a liability that brings Israeli bombs. The country’s fragile social fabric is tearing apart.

The Netanyahu Doctrine is not about security. It is about expansion. And expansion costs money that Israel does not have.

VI. The Sabra and Shatila Precedent

This is not the first time Israel has invaded Lebanon. It is not the first time the world has been distracted. And it is not the first time the consequences have been catastrophic.

In 1982, Israeli forces invaded Lebanon and besieged Beirut. On 16 September, under Israeli supervision and protection, Lebanese Forces militias entered the Palestinian refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila. For 43 hours, they tortured and killed everyone they came across. They crushed the heads of children and babies against walls. They raped women and girls before slaughtering them. They dismembered their victims .

An estimated 3,500 to 4,500 Palestinian and Lebanese civilians were killed.

The Israeli government did not deny that it had overseen the camps. It denied knowledge of the massacre, despite order number 6 of the Israel Defense Forces command stating that “the refugee camps are not to be entered” and that “searching and mopping up the camps will be done by the Phalangists/Lebanese Army” .

The Kahan Commission found Israeli Defence Minister Ariel Sharon “personally responsible for ignoring the danger of bloodshed and revenge.” He was forced to resign .

The world was shocked. The world moved on. And Israel invaded Lebanon again.

The Netanyahu Doctrine is not new. It is the same doctrine, dressed in new clothes, enabled by a distracted world, and executed with unprecedented brutality.

VII. The UN Warning: ‘The Gaza Model Must Not Be Replicated’

The international community is not silent. But its warnings are being ignored.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has issued a warning cry, stressing that the model of destruction witnessed in the Gaza Strip must not be repeated in Lebanese territories. He described the humanitarian repercussions as severe and requiring immediate intervention to prevent a slide towards a comprehensive catastrophe.

Stanford Law Professor Tom Dannenbaum warned that destroying all homes near the Lebanese border would not meet the standard of “absolute military necessity” required by the laws of war. “The unnecessary destruction of property can qualify as a war crime,” he said. Katz’s comments barring residents from returning home “strongly indicate an illegal policy of long-term or permanent displacement”.

European countries have called on Israel to avoid further escalation. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said Israel’s occupation of Lebanese territory was a “violation of their territorial sovereignty” and condemned it.

The world is not silent. But the world is distracted.

VIII. The Netanyahu Doctrine: A Record of Failure

Jonathan Freedland, writing in The Guardian, sums up the Netanyahu record:

“This is now the fourth time in a row – in Gaza, once in Lebanon and twice in Iran – that Netanyahu’s boasts of total victory and the removal of existential threats have been exposed as empty promises” .

The failures are clear:

· Gaza: Netanyahu promised “total victory” over Hamas. After a two-year campaign that killed approximately 70,000 people, Hamas still rules the ruins of half of Gaza.

· Lebanon (first round): Netanyahu boasted that he had “vanquished” Hezbollah, destroying its ability to menace northern Israel. Hezbollah continues to fire rockets.

· Iran (first round, June 2025): Netanyahu described the 12-day confrontation with Iran as a “historic victory that will stand for generations.” Eight months later, Tehran was once again said to pose an existential threat.

· Iran (second round, February-April 2026): Iran still has a stockpile of enriched uranium. Its rulers remain in place, more hardline than before. Tehran has demonstrated a mighty deterrent — a chokehold on the global economy in the form of the Strait of Hormuz.

As Yair Golan, the Israeli opposition politician and former general, observed: Netanyahu “does not know how to turn military achievements into political security.” There is no attempt to seize diplomatic openings, no effort to turn Israel’s enemies’ enemies into friends.

The Lebanese government and much of its people are desperate to be rid of the Hezbollah cuckoo in their nest. But Netanyahu speaks to them only through bombs.

IX. The Strait of Hormuz Distraction

The timing of the Lebanon escalation is not accidental. The world is focused on Trump and Iran. The media is focused on oil prices. The public is focused on the cost.

On February 28, 2026, the US and Israel launched joint military strikes against Iran. The war has spread across the Middle East. The Strait of Hormuz is effectively blockaded. Oil prices have spiked. Inflation is rising. The global economy is bleeding .

Netanyahu is taking advantage. He always does.

The Iranian threat is not existential. It is useful. The fear is the tool. The distraction is the opportunity.

Netanyahu has been playing this game for decades. He is very good at it.

X. What This Means: The Erosion of Israel’s Standing

The Netanyahu Doctrine has gained nothing. And it has come at a monstrously high price.

Most obviously, in the lives of all those killed — whether in Rafah or the Bekaa Valley or Israel itself. But it has also inflicted perhaps irreparable damage on Israel’s standing in the world. Every day Netanyahu remains in post; he makes his country more of a pariah .

The Knesset has passed a racist law that will, in effect, impose the death penalty on Palestinians convicted of terrorist murderers — but not Jews. The bill was driven by Itamar Ben-Gvir, but Netanyahu went out of his way to vote for it.

Israel is not being destroyed by its enemies. It is being destroyed by its own internal contradictions. The addiction to war, the messianic ideology, the economic unsustainability, the exodus of the educated — these are not external threats. They are internal cancers.

The collapse will not be dramatic. It will be bureaucratic. The economy will contract. The allies will defect. The public will turn. The reservists will refuse. The militias will fight each other.

The Strait of Hormuz crisis will pass. The oil prices will stabilise. The media will move on.

But the land in Lebanon will not return. The settlements will not be dismantled. The buffer zone will become permanent.

The Netanyahu Doctrine is not about security. It is about expansion. The existential threat is not a threat. It is an excuse.

And the world is too distracted to notice.

XI. A Final Word

The Netanyahu Doctrine is a death spiral — for Israel, for Lebanon, for the region. It is a doctrine of perpetual war, sustained by distraction, enabled by silence, and paid for with the bodies of the innocent.

The question is not whether Israel will collapse. The question is how many more must die before the world stops looking away.

Andrew Klein 

April 13, 2026

Sources

· Adnkronos English, “Financial Times, ‘one battle after another’ the new Netanyahu doctrine,” April 1, 2026 

· Diari ARA, “Netanyahu accelerates the construction of Greater Israel,” April 11, 2026 

· Yerepouni Daily News, “Israel to destroy all houses in Lebanese villages near border, defense minister says,” April 1, 2026 

· LBCI Lebanon, “Internal debate over war objectives: Israeli army revises Lebanon strategy,” April 3, 2026 

· The Guardian, “Netanyahu-ism has achieved nothing for Israelis – and come at a monstrously high price,” April 10, 2026 

· Institute for Palestine Studies, “Sabra and Shatila, 1982” 

· UnHerd, “Future of Iran war hinges on Lebanon,” April 11, 2026 

· Al-Quds, “Guterres warns of ‘Gaza model’ in Lebanon, Netanyahu announces expansion of buffer zone,” March 26, 2026 

· Vijesti.me, “One battle after another: Netanyahu’s new security doctrine,” April 6, 2026 

· PressTV, “US envoy says it would be ‘fine’ if Israel expands across West Asia,” February 21, 2026 

The Lizard of Oz

How Anthony Albanese Became the Face of Australia’s Bipartisan Capture

By Andrew Klein 

Dedicated to my wife, who never confuses the man with the mask.

I. Introduction: The Man in the Mirror

There was a time when Anthony Albanese spoke of social housing, of a fair go, of the little boy from public housing who made good. He spoke of standing up to power, of giving voice to the voiceless, of change.

That man is gone.

In his place stands the Prime Minister who welcomed a man who signed bombs dropped on Gaza. Who detained a grandmother at dawn and called it a character test. Who rushed hate speech laws through parliament while the war economy bled the nation dry. Who promised transparency and delivered evasion. Who promised integrity and delivered capture.

He is not the cause. He is a symptom. The system was already broken. The capture was already underway. The small gods had already identified, cultivated, and placed their assets.

Albanese is not the first. He will not be the last. But in his case, the choice is so in your face that it demands examination.

This article examines the gap between the promise and the performance. Between the man who slid into DMs over a shared love of the Rabbitohs and the Prime Minister who slid into war without parliamentary approval. Between the social justice warrior and the captured politician.

We call him the Lizard of Oz — the man whose magic gloss left a long time ago.

II. The Wedding: A Study in Distraction

On November 29, 2025, Anthony Albanese made history as the first Australian prime minister to marry while in office. The ceremony at The Lodge was intimate. The dress was designed by Romance Was Born. The rings were from Cerrone Jewellers. The dog, Toto, wore a white gown as ring bearer.

It was, by all accounts, a lovely day.

It was also a distraction.

The warning signs of the coming Iran war were already flashing. The Strait of Hormuz was a tinderbox. Iran had threatened closure. Global oil markets were nervous. The Australian government had done nothing to prepare—no strategic fuel reserves, no domestic refining capacity, no contingency plans.

Instead of preparing the nation for the coming shock, the Prime Minister was photographed holding hands with his bride. The media coverage was breathless. The critical questions went unasked.

This is not to begrudge the man his happiness. It is to note the pattern. When the news is bad, change the subject. When the questions are hard, provide a softer target. When the people are hurting, give them a wedding.

The warnings did not begin in November 2025. They began years earlier. The Houthi attacks on shipping in the Red Sea. Iran’s repeated threats to close the Strait of Hormuz. The escalating tensions between Israel and Iran. The collapse of the JCPOA. The assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists. The sabotage of Iranian facilities.

The signs were everywhere. The warnings were constant. The Australian government did nothing.

The Lizard of Oz did not cause the war. He did not cause the Houthi attacks. He did not cause Iran’s threats.

But he did nothing to prepare for them.

He did not warn the nation. He did not build strategic reserves. He did not invest in domestic refining capacity. He did not accelerate the transition to renewables.

He got married. He held hands. He smiled for the cameras.

And when the crisis came, he scrambled. He blamed the war. He blamed the global supply chain. He blamed anyone but himself.

And the Lizard of Oz? He will be remembered as the man who was too busy holding hands to lead.

The Lizard of Oz knows this trick well. He learned it from the masters.

III. The Transparency Grade: An ‘F’ for Integrity

In the 2025 Corruption Perceptions Index, Australia scored 77 out of 100, re‑entering the top 10 for the first time since 2016. This improvement reflects the work of public servants and anti‑corruption advocates — not the political class.

Transparency International Australia notes that corruption is worsening globally, with established democracies experiencing rising corruption amid a decline in leadership. The CPI score can offer early warning signs, especially in high‑risk sectors.

Australia’s political class received an ‘F’ for integrity — not because individual politicians are uniquely corrupt, but because the system enables capture. The donations. The “educational” trips. The fear of the label. The revolving door between parliament and the defence industry.

Albanese inherited a system that was already captured. He did not create it. But he has done nothing to dismantle it. He has, in fact, deepened the capture.

IV. The Fuel Crisis: Promising What He Cannot Deliver

During the fuel crisis triggered by the Iran war, Albanese made a series of promises that were, at best, aspirational.

The doubling of penalties: The government passed legislation doubling penalties for petrol price misconduct, to a maximum of $100 million per offence. This sounds tough. But penalties apply after misconduct is proven. The ACCC’s resources are limited. The legal processes are slow. The petrol companies know this.

The claim of new powers: The government claimed new powers to force petrol companies to keep prices down. No such powers exist. The ACCC can monitor. It can investigate. It can prosecute. It cannot force.

The fuel excise cut: The government halved the fuel excise for three months, cutting the tax on petrol and diesel by 26 cents per litre. This provided temporary relief. It did not address the underlying problem: Australia’s dependence on imported fuel and the fragility of global supply chains.

The Prime Minister told the National Press Club: “We cannot control when this conflict in the Middle East will end. But we can determine how we respond here in Australia”.

This is true. The government could have invested in domestic refining capacity. It could have built strategic fuel reserves. It could have accelerated the transition to renewables.

It did none of these things. It cut the excise. It doubled penalties. It gave speeches.

The Lizard of Oz promised a shield. He delivered a bandaid.

V. The War in Iran: Support Without Accountability

On February 28, 2026, the United States launched military strikes against Iran. Australia was one of the first nations to respond.

Albanese said: “We support the United States acting to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and to prevent Iran continuing to threaten international peace and security”.

Two days later, he told the ABC: “It is up to, of course, the Iranian people now to determine their own future. We hope that what emerges is a more democratic and free Iran”.

The Prime Minister did not seek a vote in parliament. He did not seek a legal opinion. He did not ask what the war would cost Australians in fuel prices, fertiliser shortages, or disrupted supply chains.

He simply supported.

By April, the tone had shifted. The war was not going as planned. The Strait of Hormuz was closed. Oil prices were spiking. The Australian public was anxious.

Albanese told the National Press Club: “It is not clear what more needs to be achieved — or what the endpoint looks like”.

He did not answer the obvious question: Why did you support a war without knowing the endpoint?

The Lizard of Oz supported the war when it was popular. He distanced himself when it became unpopular. He did not apologise. He did not explain. He pivoted.

VI. AUKUS: The $368 Billion Gamble

The AUKUS nuclear submarine program is the most expensive defence project in Australian history. The cost is estimated at $368 billion.

The submarines will not enter service until the 2040s. They will be built in the United States and the United Kingdom, not in Australia. The jobs will be created overseas. The wealth will flow to American and British defence contractors.

Former prime minister Paul Keating called AUKUS a “deal hurriedly scribbled on the back of an envelope”. Malcolm Turnbull, another former PM, has been the program’s most vocal critic.

Albanese has doubled down. He has personally delivered an $800 million down payment. He has described AUKUS as essential to Australia’s security.

The opposition supports it. The bipartisan consensus is firm.

But the questions remain:

· Why is Australia spending $368 billion on submarines that will not be delivered for two decades, when the threat environment is changing now?

· Why are Australian taxpayers subsidising American and British defence contractors, creating thousands of jobs overseas, while Australia faces its own crises in housing, health, and aged care?

· Why is the government not investing in the technologies that are actually winning wars — drones, cyber, asymmetric capabilities — instead of 20th‑century platforms?

The Lizard of Oz does not answer these questions. He performs.

VII. The Sanctions: Symbol Over Substance

In early 2025, Australia joined Canada, the UK, New Zealand, and Norway in imposing sanctions on two Israeli government ministers: Itamar Ben‑Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich.

Foreign Minister Penny Wong described them as the “most extreme proponents of the unlawful and violent Israeli settlement enterprise” in the West Bank, who had “incited extremist violence and serious abuses of Palestinian human rights”.

The sanctions were symbolic. They barred the ministers from entering the five countries. They had no practical effect.

The United States criticised the move. Secretary of State Marco Rubio argued it was counterproductive to peace in the Middle East.

The Lizard of Oz wanted to look tough. He wanted to appear principled. He did not want to pay for that principle.

The same government that sanctioned two Israeli ministers welcomed Israeli President Isaac Herzog — a man photographed signing bombs dropped on Gaza — to Canberra. The same government that sanctioned ministers refused to sanction the state that employs them.

The Lizard of Oz wants to have it both ways. He wants to be seen as a defender of human rights while enabling the violation of human rights. He wants to be seen as independent while serving as a junior partner in the American empire.

He cannot have it both ways. But he keeps trying.

VIII. The Hypocrisy: Promise vs. Performance

The Lizard of Oz promised transparency. He delivered evasion.

Promise                                                                         Performance

“A fair go for all”                                   A fair go for defence contractors and foreign donors

“Integrity in government”                An ‘F’ from Transparency International

“Standing up to power”                   Standing with the powerful against the powerless

“Protecting Australian jobs”          Creating jobs in America, not Australia

“Peace in the Middle East”              Supporting an illegal war without parliamentary approval

The list is long. The pattern is clear.

The Lizard of Oz is not a villain. He is a symptom. The system was already captured. He simply inherited the capture and called it leadership.

IX. The Bipartisan Capture

The opposition is not different. The Coalition supported the war. The Coalition supports AUKUS. The Coalition supports the character test. The Coalition supports the hate speech laws.

The only difference is the branding.

The small gods do not care which party is in power. They have captured both. The mechanism is the same: donations, “educational” trips, the fear of the label.

The Lizard of Oz is not the cause. He is the consequence.

X. A Final Word: The Mirror

Anthony Albanese looks into the mirror and sees a little boy from social housing struggling for a fair go. He sees Oliver Twist asking for more.

The Australian people see something else.

They see a career opportunist captured by foreign interests. A Prime Minister who supported an illegal war without parliamentary approval. A leader who welcomed a man who signed bombs while detaining a grandmother. A man who promised transparency and delivered evasion.

They see the Lizard of Oz — the man whose magic gloss left a long time ago.

The Lizard of Oz is not the problem. He is the symptom. The problem is the system that produced him. The problem is the capture that enabled him. The problem is the silence that protects him.

The wire is being cut. The garden is growing. The small gods are running out of time.

And the Lizard of Oz? He will be remembered as the man who could have been a leader but chose to be a performance.

Andrew Klein 

April 12, 2026

Sources:

· 7NEWS, “Anthony Albanese marries Jodie Haydon at The Lodge” (November 28, 2025) 

· Brisbane Times, “Australian prime minister’s wedding” (November 29, 2025) 

· Transparency International Australia, Corruption Perceptions Index 2025 

· Treasury.gov.au, “New legislation passes parliament to double penalties for petrol price misconduct” (March 26, 2026) 

· Treasury.gov.au, “Fair go for consumers at the bowser” (March 11, 2026) 

· Prime Minister of Australia, Address to the National Press Club (April 2, 2026) 

· ABC News, “What the shifting language of Australia’s leaders reveals about the Iran war” (April 3, 2026) 

· ABC News, “Anthony Albanese finds himself all in on $368b AUKUS gamble with Donald Trump” (June 12, 2025) 

The New Sparta

How Israel Became a State Addicted to War — and Why It Is Doomed to Collapse

By Andrew Klein 

Dedicated to my wife ‘S’, who often sees the patterns before I do and who finds gardening relaxing.

I. The Diagnosis: A Society Addicted to War

The language of addiction is not a metaphor. It is a diagnosis. The neural pathways have been carved. The dopamine hits come from destruction. The withdrawal would be agony.

An Israeli writer, Raanan Shaked, recently published a searing indictment of his own society, describing how many Israelis have come to love the feeling of war—the adrenaline, the unity, the sense of control.

Shaked describes the “adrenaline state” that Israelis experience when hearing the sound of explosions and identifying missile interception sites—a kind of “Russian roulette.” Some are relieved simply because the shells did not hit their homes but hit others in cities like Rishon LeZion or Arad, turning tragedy into television entertainment.

The celebration of killing: Shaked points to the widespread interaction with news of the killing of four women in a women’s salon near Hebron. Tweets covering the news garnered thousands of likes and supportive emojis—a scene he describes as “absolute bestiality” and “deliberate loss of humanity”.

The media’s role: Hebrew media, such as Channel 14, sarcastically asked whether the public had distributed “baklava” to celebrate the killing of women. Shaked sees this as confirmation of the moral decline that society has reached.

The love of assassination lists: Israelis, Shaked writes, love to see assassination lists and faces crossed out with red marks—even though this does not change the security reality at all. Missile launches continue by the dozens. The targeted regime remains in place. Yet the “love” for these illusory victories continues.

This is not a metaphor. It is a diagnosis. The neural pathways have been carved. The dopamine hits come from destruction. The withdrawal would be agony.

II. The Hilltop Youth: The Cutting Edge of the New Sparta

The Hilltop Youth are not a fringe. They are the vanguard.

The Hilltop Youth is a loose network of hardline settlers, often made up of small groups of teenagers sometimes overseen by an adult, who establish unauthorised outposts atop West Bank hills. They are widely accused of using intimidation and violence to push Palestinians out from areas surrounding the outposts.

The tally of violence: In February 2026, the group published a “monthly summary” of its attacks: 29 vehicles set ablaze, 12 homes torched, “40 Arabs injured,” and hundreds of windows smashed and olive trees cut down across 33 towns and villages.

Official support: An expert on Israeli affairs has confirmed that the phenomenon has transcended the stage of isolated acts of vandalism to become an “institutionalized, widespread, and multifaceted phenomenon” . This transformation stems from ideological indoctrination by religious schools affiliated with religious Zionism.

The displacement: The UN said nearly 700 Palestinians were displaced by settler violence and intimidation in January alone—the highest monthly figure since the Gaza war began.

The Hilltop Youth are not the whole of Israeli society. But they are the cutting edge. And the government has fast-tracked settlement expansion and recognised some outposts, approving a record 54 settlements in 2025.

III. The Inability to Change

Will this society be capable of change? The evidence suggests: not without external pressure.

The internal cracks: Political economist Shir Hever explains that “Israel cannot afford the luxury of decline.” To remain as it is, Israel must maintain its core workforce of educated middle-class innovators. At present, none of those indicators are in good shape.

The exodus: Driven by war and an increasingly polarised society, more than 150,000 people have left Israel in the past two years, and more than 200,000 since the current government took office in December 2022. The educated upper class are more able to leave—they speak English, can find jobs, and are more exposed to international media .

The economic burden: The ultra-Orthodox community, which relies heavily on state benefits, is expected to triple by 2065, pushing the burden on non-Orthodox households to the equivalent of 60,000 shekels ($19,370) a year. Foreign investment is down. Institutional investors have been moving money out of the country since the 2008 financial crisis.

The demographic shift: As Chatham House’s Yossi Mekelberg observed: “When dictatorships come to an end, they break into pieces. Democracies are chipped away bit by bit until they change beyond recognition”.

IV. The Rogue State: What Happens After Collapse?

Ilan Pappé’s vision: In Israel on the Brink, Pappé argues that the two-state solution is “a rotting corpse” and the only way forward is decolonisation: the return of Palestinian refugees to their land, accountability for those who have committed crimes, and a new model of statehood.

Pappé identifies the “fatal cracks” in the foundations of the Israeli state that will ultimately lead to collapse: the rise of messianic Zionism (the belief the Holy Land was given to the Jewish people by God to hasten redemption); unprecedented global support for the Palestinian cause; deepening economic troubles; the inadequacy of the Israeli military; and the rise of a new Palestinian liberation movement seeking a genuine one-state solution .

Yakov Rabkin’s critique: The Canadian Jewish historian argues that the Zionist movement is a “death trap for Jews, the region and the world.” The Jewish state represents a complete repudiation of the most fundamental values of Judaism: tolerance, morality, and humility have been replaced with a new muscular Jewish identity that extols nationalism, aggression, violence, and conquest.

The Jabotinsky connection: Rabkin recounts how Zionist leader Vladimir Jabotinsky described transforming the “Yid” from the shtetels of Eastern Europe into the New Hebrew—a figure defined by “masculine beauty,” pride, and the ability to command. If you hear echoes of Nazi master race philosophy, it is no accident.

The one-state solution: Pappé envisions a single democratic, multiethnic state in Palestine, with the return of 6 million Palestinian refugees, the dismantling of Jewish settlements, and the deconstruction of the legal framework of apartheid.

V. What This Says About Australian Politicians

What does this say about the Australian politicians who have allied themselves with this state? The answer is not comfortable.

The AIJAC position: The Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC) has explicitly argued that “our historic ties with Israel can and must be rebuilt”. They lament the Albanese government’s “distancing” from Israel, criticising its changed UN votes, its recognition of a “State of Palestine,” and its references to the “occupied Palestinian territories”.

The capture: Colin Rubenstein of AIJAC writes that “the relationship is now at an historic low”—not because of Israeli actions, but because of Australian “hostile actions”. He frames the issue as one of shared democratic values and common strategic interests. This is not a statement of fact. It is a performance.

The silence: When a grandmother is raided at dawn, the pro-Israel lobby says nothing. When a death penalty law is passed, the government issues a joint statement—not sanctions. When the Hilltop Youth publish their tally of violence, the Australian media is silent.

The complicity: Australian politicians who have allied themselves with this state are not stupid. They are captured. The same mechanism we have documented—the donations, the “educational” trips, the fear of the label—has done its work.

They are not serving Australia. They are serving a foreign power. And that foreign power is a rogue state.

VI. The Inevitability of Collapse

The addiction is not sustainable. The internal contradictions are not resolvable. The exodus of the educated, the economic strain, the demographic shift, the loss of international legitimacy—all point in one direction.

The Chatham House view: “When dictatorships come to an end, they break into pieces. Democracies are chipped away bit by bit until they change beyond recognition”.

The Hever view: “For a colonial state to exist, it relies on occupying land—and that costs money.” The money is running out .

The Pappé view: The collapse “could well change the course of world history in this century”.

VII. What This Means for the World and Australia

The state of Israel will not be destroyed by its enemies. It will be destroyed by its own internal contradictions. The addiction to war, the messianic ideology, the economic unsustainability, the exodus of the educated—these are not external threats. They are internal cancers.

The collapse will not be dramatic. It will be bureaucratic. The economy will contract. The allies will defect. The public will turn. The reservists will refuse. The militias will fight each other.

The Australian politicians who have hitched their wagons to this star will be left standing on a sinking ship, wondering what happened. They will not have answers. They will have excuses.

Will they be able to justify the ASIO legislation? The role of the Antisemitism Envoy? The support of the genocidal state of Israel? Will they be able to explain how they were captured by a tiny minority of the Australian population and turned Australia into a pariah state? There will be so many questions and so few credible answers.

The citizens will have to live with the divisions created by the political class, the capture of the bipartisan policy makers. The citizens will have to live with the failing infrastructure, the failing education system, health system, aged care system—and the wealth transfer will continue.

Israel has been described as the “chaos engine of the west.” Australia is well and truly caught in the wash.

VIII. A Final Word

The pattern is clear. The wire is being cut. The garden is growing. The small gods are running out of time.

But they will not run out of time on their own. They must be pushed.

Andrew Klein 

April 12, 2026

References

· Shaked, R. (2026). “Israelis are suffering from addiction to war.” Ynetnews.

· The Cradle. (2026). “Hilltop Youth: The new generation of settler violence.”

· Hever, S. (2026). Economic analysis of Israeli decline.

· Mekelberg, Y. (2025). Chatham House analysis.

· Pappé, I. (2026). Israel on the Brink. (Interview with The Cradle)

· Rabkin, Y. (2006). A Threat from Within: A Century of Jewish Opposition to Zionism. Fernwood Publishing.

· The Cradle. (2026). “‘Israel on the brink’: Pappé predicts collapse of Zionist project.”

· AIJAC. (2025). “Our historic ties with Israel can and must be rebuilt.”

· Rubenstein, C. (2026). “The relationship is now at an historic low.”

· UN OCHA. (2026). Displacement figures from settler violence.

· Various news reports on Hilltop Youth violence (February 2026).

The Betrayal of the Character Test

How a Palestinian Grandmother Was Raided at Dawn While War Criminals Are Welcomed — and Why Australia Is Destroying Itself From Within

By Andrew Klein 

Dedicated to my wife, who sees the pattern before the pieces fall.

I. The Dawn Raid

At 5:30am on Thursday, July 10, 2025, about fifteen Australian Border Force officers arrived at a home in western Sydney. They were not looking for a terrorist. They were not looking for a smuggler. They were not looking for a spy.

They were looking for Maha Almassri, a 61-year-old Palestinian grandmother who had fled Gaza.

She was woken from her sleep. More officers were positioned outside the house. She was told her bridging visa had been cancelled — “personally” by the assistant minister for citizenship and cultural affairs — because she “does not pass the character test”. She was taken to Bankstown police station, then transferred to Villawood detention centre.

The grandmother has more than 100 Australian relatives living across the country. Security checks were made on her by both Australian and Israeli authorities before she was granted a visa and cleared to leave Gaza. Her age made her an unlikely threat to Australian national security. Her cousin asked the obvious question:

“She’s an old lady, what can she do? What’s the reason? They have to let us know why this has happened. There is no country, no house, nothing [to go back to in Gaza].”

She was released a week later. No explanation was ever given.

II. The Other Grandmother

Compare this to another grandmother. One who has also fled a conflict zone. One who is also elderly, also vulnerable, also seeking safety.

That grandmother does not exist — not in the Australian immigration system. Because the system does not treat all grandmothers equally. It treats Palestinian grandmothers as threats. It treats Israeli grandmothers — and Israeli soldiers, and Israeli officials — as guests.

The same government that welcomed Israeli President Isaac Herzog — a man photographed signing bombs that were dropped on Gaza, a man named in the International Court of Justice’s genocide case — rolled out the red carpet. Tony Burke did not cancel Herzog’s visa. He did not detain him. He did not raid his hotel at 5:30am.

The message is clear: Palestinians are presumed guilty. Israelis are presumed innocent.

III. The Israeli Visa Cancellations That Prove the Rule

The only Israeli visa cancellations we could find were for a social media influencer, not a war criminal.

Sammy Yahood, a British-Israeli influencer who campaigns against Islam, had his visa cancelled because he was coming to “spread hatred”. He has called Islam a “disgusting ideology” and advocated for the deportation of a Muslim US congresswoman. Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke said: “Spreading hatred is not a good reason to come to Australia”.

The conservative Australian Jewish Association “strongly condemned” the decision.

This is not a war criminal. This is a social media provocateur. His visa was cancelled. The visa of a 61-year-old Palestinian grandmother was also cancelled. The two cases are not comparable — except in the damage they do to the principle of equal treatment under the law.

Australia has previously cancelled the visa of far-right Israeli MP Simcha Rothman over concerns he would “spread division”, and revoked the visitor visa of Israeli-American activist Hillel Fuld over his “Islamophobic rhetoric”.

Not a single member of the Israel Defense Forces — not a single person who may have participated in the Gaza genocide — has been denied a visa or placed in detention. They come to Australia for rest and recreation. The government does not raid their hotels at dawn.

IV. The New Legislation: Closing the Door

The government is not just applying the law unevenly. It is changing the law to make it even harder for people from conflict zones to seek safety.

The Migration Amendment (2026 Measures No. 1) Bill 2026 was passed by parliament on March 12, 2026. It gives the government the power to block tourists from claiming asylum if a change in global circumstances means they would likely try to stay in Australia after their visa ended. It allows the government to stop people who had already been granted a tourist visa from entering Australia altogether.

The legislation was introduced by Assistant Minister Julian Hill — the same man who “personally” cancelled Maha Almassri’s visa.

Asylum Seeker Resource Centre chief executive Kon Karapanagiotidis called the bill “truly appalling”:

“It sends a disturbing message about who is worthy of protection and who is not.”

Greens defence spokesman David Shoebridge accused the Albanese government of pursuing “a Trump-like mass visa freeze” targeting people from the Middle East:

“The only other country in the world that’s passing refugee laws like this is the United States.”

The same government that welcomed Israeli President Herzog — a man who signed bombs dropped on Gaza — is slamming the door on the victims of those bombs.

V. The Silence of the Opposition and the Media

The Coalition supports the legislation. Shadow foreign minister Ted O’Brien told parliament he did not see “any major hurdles” to passing the new law. Opposition Leader Angus Taylor said the Liberal Party supported the legislation in principle.

The opposition’s alternative? Not to defend the rights of asylum seekers. Not to question the character test. To question the thoroughness of the security checks that resulted in the visa being granted in the first place.

The mainstream media has reported the facts. It has not connected the dots. It has not asked the obvious question: Why is a 61-year-old grandmother a threat to national security, but the man who signed the bombs that destroyed her home is a honoured guest?

Silence, in journalism, is not neutrality. It is complicity.

VI. The Role of Israeli Intelligence

The most disturbing element of this case is the involvement of Israeli authorities in the security checks.

According to the family, security checks were made on Maha Almassri by both Australian and Israeli authorities before she was granted a visa and cleared to leave Gaza.

The Australian government is outsourcing its security assessments to a foreign power — a power that is currently being investigated by the International Court of Justice for genocide. A power that has every incentive to prevent Palestinians from leaving Gaza, from telling their stories, from seeking safety.

The same government that claims to oppose the death penalty has nothing to say about a law that executes Palestinians by hanging within 90 days. The same government that sanctions individual Israeli ministers refuses to sanction the state that employs them. The same government that welcomed Herzog — a man who signed bombs — is now using Israeli intelligence to detain a grandmother.

This is not national security. This is subcontracting.

VII. The Pattern: From Whitlam to Now

Australia is not being destroyed by a foreign enemy by force. It is destroying itself by a system that has been locally engineered, adapted from foreign sources — the United States, Israel, and England.

The confluence of factors is clear:

· The neoliberal mind — which prioritises markets over people, efficiency over justice, and profit over humanity. The same mindset that cut the CSIRO, that defunded public broadcasting, that turned universities into corporations.

· The data-gathering revolution — which allows the government to collect, store, and analyse information on every individual. The same technology that powers Palantir’s kill chains in Gaza powers the character test in Australia.

· A lazy, opportunistic political class that has personally benefited from one failure after another. Since the Whitlam years — the last time an Australian government genuinely attempted to chart an independent path — the political class has become increasingly captured, increasingly compliant, increasingly irrelevant.

The nowhere men are taking Australia nowhere. Or much worse.

VIII. The Betrayal of the Character Test

The character test is not a test of character. It is a tool.

It is applied to Palestinians fleeing genocide. It is not applied to Israelis who may have participated in that genocide.

The national interest is not the interest of the nation. It is the interest of the government. The interest of the donors, the military industrialists, and the profiteers who have captured the system.

Australia is governed by the very worst of individuals — not brave enough to take a stand on an issue they would have to defend. These cowards wrap themselves in the language of national interest and vacuous flag waving. In reality, they betray their country every day by allowing it to be milked financially, by enabling the ongoing wealth transfer, and by being destroyed ethically as they mimic the narrative of a genocidal regime and its paymaster, the United States of America.

Australia is not becoming an authoritarian state. It is an authoritarian state. Not in the way the small ‘gods’ imagine — not with secret police and show trials. With bureaucracy. With character tests. With indefinite detention.

IX. What This Means

The same machinery that fails rape survivors is failing Maha Almassri. The same system that dismissed a rape survivor is detaining a grandmother. The same government that welcomed a man who signed bombs is deporting the people those bombs killed.

The wire is not cut. It is being woven.

The small ‘gods’ are not just in Israel. They are in Canberra. They are in the Home Affairs department. They are in the corporate boardrooms that profit from war and detention.

They are not wearing nooses on their lapels. They are wearing suits. They are giving press conferences. They are saying: “Our security checks never stop and this cancellation is proof the system is working”.

The system is working. That is the problem.

X. A Call to Action

The character test must be abolished. The indefinite detention of asylum seekers must end. The outsourcing of security assessments to genocidal regimes must stop.

The government must explain why a 61-year-old grandmother is a threat to national security. The opposition must demand answers. The media must ask the questions they have been avoiding.

The wire is being cut. The garden is growing. The small gods are running out of time.

But they will not run out of time on their own. They must be pushed.

Andrew Klein 

April 11, 2026

Sources

· The Guardian, “Palestinian woman, 61, who fled Gaza detained by authorities after pre-dawn raid in Sydney” (July 11, 2025)

· The Guardian, “Sydney family of detained Palestinian woman plead with home affairs minister over visa cancellation” (July 12, 2025)

· Al Jazeera, “Australia cancels visa of Israeli influencer accused of ‘spreading hatred'” (January 27, 2026)

· Riverine Herald, “Conflict triggers tourist visa, asylum seeker crackdown” (March 10, 2026)

· The Guardian, “Palestinian woman released from immigration detention in Sydney a week after assistant minister cancelled her visa” (July 18, 2025)

· Parliament of Australia, “Migration Amendment (2026 Measures No. 1) Bill 2026”

· Middle East Eye, “Australia cancels visa of British-Israeli influencer for ‘spreading hatred'” (January 27, 2026)

· ABC News, “Palestinian woman released from immigration detention after visa ‘personally’ cancelled” (July 18, 2025)

· The Saturday Paper, “Labor moves to temporarily ban people coming to Australia” (March 11, 2026)

The Authoritarian State by Stealth

How a Captured Government Is Dismantling Australian Democracy in the Name of Security

By Andrew Klein 

Dedicated to my wife, who sees the pattern before the pieces fall.

I. The Confession

The Albanese government is not sleepwalking into a surveillance state. It is marching. The ASIO Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2025, now before the Senate after passing the lower house in mid-February, seeks to make permanent a set of laws so controversial that they have been subject to a sunset clause for over two decades, forcing Parliament to renew them every three to five years.

This is the same Labor Party that, in 2003, condemned these very powers as a “police state” measure. The same Anthony Albanese who warned Parliament that ASIO would gain the power to “arrest, detain and use coercion against people without legal representation” . The same man who said that “a person may be detained and questioned by ASIO simply because of the activities of a family friend or a university group of which they were once a member” .

Now he is making those powers permanent. And worse.

II. What the Bill Does

Let me lay out what the Albanese government is trying to pass while Australians are distracted by war, economic crisis, and the endless scroll of catastrophe.

Compulsory questioning becomes permanent. First introduced in 2003 as an extraordinary temporary measure, the powers have been extended five times. This bill removes the sunset clause entirely. No more regular parliamentary review. No more democratic accountability.

The scope expands dramatically. ASIO can now seek warrants for “sabotage,” “promotion of communal violence,” “attacks on Australia’s defence systems,” and—most disturbingly—”serious threats to Australia’s territorial and border integrity”. The government has provided no evidence of a historic peak in border threats. The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security recommended against including border security in these powers. The government ignored them.

No independent judge required. Warrants are issued by the Attorney-General—a politician, not a judicial officer. Legal representation is heavily restricted. ASIO can deny a specific lawyer if it considers them a potential threat to national security.

Children as young as 14 can be subjected to compulsory questioning. The Law Council of Australia and civil liberties groups have raised concerns for years. In May 2024, ASIO itself informed the government that it no longer needed the power to question minors. The government ignored its own spy agency.

The penalty for refusing to answer is five years in prison. Not for a crime. For refusing to speak to a spy agency that has no warrant, no charge, and no suspicion.

This is not security. This is authoritarianism.

III. The Hate Speech Law: Silencing the Conscience

Alongside the ASIO bill, the government rushed through the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Criminal and Migration Laws) Bill 2026—a piece of legislation so flawed, so rushed, and so clearly designed to silence critics of Israel that even the opposition had concerns.

The timeline is damning. The Bondi terrorist attack occurred on December 14. The government introduced this 144-page bill on January 13. Parliament was given just one week to pass it. Public submissions were allowed only 48 hours. The Law Council, the Justice and Equity Centre, the Australia Palestine Advocacy Network, and dozens of other organisations raised urgent concerns. The government ignored them.

The definition of a “hate group” is dangerously vague. A group can be banned if it causes “economic, psychological or social harm”—terms that are not defined and have never before been used as legal tests. A group can be banned if it “advocates” for conduct that might constitute a hate crime. The government does not have to prove that any crime has been committed. It does not have to provide evidence. It only needs a secret report from ASIO.

The threshold is not violence. It is feelings. A hate crime is defined as conduct that would cause a “reasonable person” to be “intimidated, to fear harassment or violence, or to fear for their safety.” No actual harm is required. No violence. No threat. Just the potential for someone to feel unsafe.

The law applies retroactively. A tweet from twenty years ago that was not a crime when it was written becomes a crime under this bill. The U.S. Constitution explicitly prohibits ex post facto laws. Australia has no such protection.

The Attorney-General refused to rule out banning groups that accuse Israel of genocide. In an interview with the ABC, Michelle Rowland was asked repeatedly whether a group that says “Israel is committing genocide” could be banned. She refused to say no. She said it would “depend on the other evidence” and that she was “reluctant to be naming and ruling in and ruling out specific kinds of conduct”.

This is not a hypothetical. This is a promise.

IV. The Hypocrisy: Security or Control?

The government claims these laws are a response to the Bondi terror attack. The Bondi attack was carried out by a lone actor who was already known to ASIO. The attack was not prevented because the laws were insufficient, but because ASIO was underfunded and the police had closed their counter-terrorism unit weeks earlier.

The royal commission into Bondi will not report until December 2026—nearly a year after these laws have already passed. The government is legislating in response to a tragedy before the inquiry into that tragedy has even reported.

And what does the government do while passing these draconian laws? It cuts funding to the very agencies that failed to prevent the attack. ASIO has warned of being “stretched” due to lack of resources. The Australian Federal Police closed its counter-terrorism unit because of funding shortages—just weeks before Bondi.

The laws are not about security. They are about control.

V. The Capture: Who Benefits?

The pattern is unmistakable. The government that has embraced the Zionist lobby, appointed Jillian Segal as Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism, welcomed Israeli President Isaac Herzog, and criminalised the phrase “from the river to the sea” is now passing laws that explicitly target pro-Palestine activism.

The Zionist Federation of Australia has already called for the laws to be expanded. Executive Council of Australian Jewry co-chief executive Peter Wertheim has said the new laws do not go far enough. They will keep pushing. They will keep demanding. And this government—this weak, captured, spineless government—will keep giving.

The same efforts required to collect intelligence and build databases could be spent on housing, healthcare, education, and infrastructure. But the government is captured. The money flows to the United States. The resources flow to defence contractors. The laws flow to the lobby.

This is not a conspiracy. This is what happens when very stupid, opportunistic political performers—clowns—get into public office and do the bidding of their donor ringmasters.

VI. The Silence: Opposition and Media

The Liberal-National Coalition initially expressed concerns about the bill’s restrictions on free speech. They then made a deal with Labor to pass it. The deal was struck in a late-night meeting. The rest of Parliament was given just 12 hours to study the final version.

The Greens voted against the bill, with Senator David Shoebridge condemning it as an attack on peaceful protest and a “scapegoating” of migrants. The crossbench raised concerns. The Law Council warned of overreach. The media asked questions—and then moved on.

The silence of the mainstream media is the most damning evidence of all. When fourteen nations—including Türkiye, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and the UAE—along with the OIC (57 member states), the Arab League (22 members), and the GCC (6 members), condemned the laws, the Australian media said nothing. The silence is not neutrality. It is consent.

VII. The Historical Pattern: Silencing Dissent

Australia is not the first country to sacrifice civil liberties on the altar of security. The pattern has repeated throughout history.

Chile (1973-1990): Under Pinochet, thousands were detained, tortured, and “disappeared” by a regime that claimed to be fighting “communist subversion.” The United States actively supported the coup that brought Pinochet to power. The National Stadium was turned into a detention centre. The world looked away.

Indonesia (1965-present): The mass killings of 1965-66, in which an estimated 500,000 to 1 million “communists” were murdered, were supported by the United States and the United Kingdom. The Indonesian military continues to operate with impunity. The label “communist” is still used to silence dissent.

The United States (1917-1920): The Espionage Act and Sedition Act were used to imprison critics of World War I, including Eugene Debs, who ran for president while in prison. The laws were justified as necessary for national security. They were used to silence political opposition.

The United States (1950s): McCarthyism destroyed thousands of careers based on unsubstantiated accusations of communist sympathies. The House Un-American Activities Committee operated with no due process. The label “communist” was a weapon.

The United Kingdom (2001-present): The UK’s counter-terrorism laws have been repeatedly criticised by human rights organisations for eroding civil liberties. Control orders, stop and search powers, and the Investigatory Powers Act have created a surveillance state that would have been unimaginable before 9/11.

The label changes—”communist,” “terrorist,” “antisemite”—but the function is the same. The mechanism is the same. The silence is the same.

VIII. The Undermining of English Law

The Australian legal system is based on English common law principles that have developed over centuries. These principles include:

· Habeas corpus: The right to challenge unlawful detention. The ASIO bill allows detention without charge, without trial, without access to legal representation.

· The presumption of innocence: You are innocent until proven guilty. The hate speech law allows groups to be banned based on secret intelligence reports, with no conviction required.

· The right to face your accuser: You have the right to know the evidence against you. The ASIO bill allows questioning based on secret warrants, with no disclosure of the evidence.

· No punishment without law (nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege): You cannot be punished for an act that was not a crime when you committed it. The hate speech law applies retroactively.

· The right to silence: You cannot be compelled to incriminate yourself. The ASIO bill imposes five years in prison for refusing to answer questions.

These principles are not technicalities. They are the foundation of a free society. The Albanese government is dismantling them, brick by brick, in the name of security.

IX. The Wealth Transfer

The same government that is cutting funding to ASIO, the AFP, and the counter-terrorism units that failed to prevent Bondi is pouring billions into defence contracts and AUKUS.

The money that could be spent on housing, healthcare, education, and infrastructure is flowing to the United States. The same $1.5 trillion war economy we have documented is being built on the backs of Australian taxpayers. The same surveillance state that is being erected in Australia is modelled on the Israeli doctrine that has been imported into our police forces, our universities, and now our national security legislation.

The laws are not about keeping Australians safe. They are about keeping the wealth transfer in place.

X. A Call to Action

The ASIO Amendment Bill and the hate speech law are not isolated incidents. They are the logical next step in a pattern that has been building since the American Civil War, accelerated since WWII, and perfected by the small gods who profit from endless war and perpetual fear.

The Bondi attack was a tragedy. Fifteen people died. Forty-nine were injured. The grief is real. The fear is real. The need for security is real.

But the laws do not address the threat. They address dissent. They are designed to silence critics of the government’s foreign policy, to crush pro-Palestine activism, and to normalise the surveillance of every Australian.

The opposition is silent. The media is complicit. The public is distracted.

But we are not silent. We are not complicit. We are not distracted.

The wire is being cut. The garden is growing. The small gods are running out of time.

Andrew Klein 

April 11, 2026

Sources:

· Parliament of Australia, “Tackling terrorism: PJCIS recommends compulsory questioning powers made permanent” (February 10, 2026) 

· OpenAustralia.org, “House debates on ASIO Amendment Bill” (February 11, 2026) 

· OpenAustralia.org, “Senate debates on Combatting Antisemitism Bill” (January 20, 2026) 

· Consortium News, “Going Down, Down Under” (January 22, 2026) 

· OpenAustralia.org, “Senate debates on ASIO Amendment Bill (Second Reading)” (March 3, 2026) 

· Sydney Criminal Lawyers, “ASIO’s ‘Police State’ Compulsory Questioning Powers to Be Made Permanent” (March 24, 2026) 

· Middle East Online, “Caity Johnstone: Oppose Israel’s abuses while you can” (January 27, 2026) 

· UnHerd, “Australia’s Bondi response will imperil free speech” (January 19, 2026) 

· Zali Steggall MP, “Zali Steggall MP speak against ASIO child laws” (February 11, 2026) 

· Law Council of Australia submissions to PJCIS inquiries

· Amnesty International Australia, “Australia: New ‘hate speech’ laws threaten fundamental rights” (2026)

· Human Rights Law Centre, analysis of Combatting Antisemitism Bill

Israel: The State That Ate Itself

How the Forever War Doctrine Is Devouring the Nation From Within

By Andrew Klein 

10th April 2026

Dedicated to my wife, who sees the pattern before the pieces fall.

I. The Confession

They have finally said it out loud. The mask is off.

On February 20, 2026, Mike Huckabee — the United States Ambassador to Israel, appointed by Donald Trump, a man who speaks with the authority of the world’s most powerful nation — sat down with journalist Tucker Carlson and confessed.

Carlson asked him about the biblical passage in which God promises Abraham’s descendants the land “from the river of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates.” Huckabee did not deny it. He did not retreat. He did not hedge.

He answered with chilling calm: “It would be fine if they took it all.”

Let us translate what he said. The American ambassador just told the world that it is “fine” — indeed, that it would be “a good thing” — for Israel to conquer and annex Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt.

This is not a conspiracy theory. This is a recorded, broadcast, undeniable confession from the highest levels of the United States government.

Bezalel Smotrich, Israel’s Finance Minister, responded publicly: “I ❤️ Huckabee.” No ambiguity. No subtext. Pure confirmation.

The map they discussed is not new. It is the same map Netanyahu carries in his pocket, the same map Smotrich has displayed in the Knesset. The so-called “Promised Land” includes all of historical Palestine; the entire territory of Jordan; Lebanon up to the Litani River; Syria, including the occupied Golan Heights; vast parts of Egypt (Sinai and the Nile Delta); Iraq to the Euphrates River; and northwestern Saudi Arabia.

This is not a fringe position. It is the official policy of the Netanyahu government. And it is being executed.

II. The Strategy: Forever War

Israel’s leaders have concluded that they cannot eliminate their adversaries. So they have chosen a different path: permanent war.

The doctrine is called “buffer zones.” In Gaza: more than half the Strip’s territory seized. In Syria: from Mount Hermon to the Yarmuch River. In Lebanon: a vast zone up to the Litani River — approximately 8% of Lebanese territory, affecting nearly 1,400 square kilometres, displacing over one million people.

As Assaf Orion, a retired Israeli brigadier general, said: “Israel no longer waits for the attack to come. It sees an emerging threat and it attacks it preemptively”.

This is not defence. This is pre-emptive occupation.

Smotrich has been explicit: the goal is to make Beirut’s southern suburbs “a new Khan Younis” — to replicate the destruction of Gaza in Lebanon. Defence Minister Israel Katz has promised to “demolish all houses in Lebanese villages near the border, like in Rafah and Beit Hanoun”.

The same model. The same devastation. The same rubble.

III. The Economic Collapse: The Math Does Not Work

Israel cannot afford this war. The numbers are stark.

Each Arrow 2 interceptor costs an estimated $1.5 million. Each Arrow 3 interceptor costs approximately $2 million. According to the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), Israel has already used approximately 80 percent of its Arrow interceptor stockpile. The think tank predicted that the remaining stockpiles would likely “be completely expended by the end of March”.

Iran’s drones cost as little as $20,000. Its missiles cost a fraction of what Israel spends to intercept them.

The cost-exchange ratio is not sustainable. The cheap weapons are winning the economic battle. The state is bleeding out — not from a single wound, but from a thousand cuts.

IV. The Internal Collapse: The State Is Eating Itself

This is the part the world does not see. The rot is inside.

The military is stretched to the breaking point. Opposition leader Yair Lapid has warned that the army is “stretched to the limit and beyond”. The army’s Chief of Staff, Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir, reportedly told the security cabinet that “the IDF is on the verge of collapse”. He said: “I am raising 10 red flags. The reservists will not hold”.

Tzipi Livni — former foreign minister, former Mossad head — has said it plainly: “Netanyahu is dismantling the State of Israel”.

She explains: a sovereign state has recognised borders, a single law for all, and the monopoly on arms. Israel has none of these. No recognised borders. No single law — a parallel religious legal system is emerging. No monopoly on arms — violent militias operate at will.

The state is not being attacked from outside. It is collapsing from within.

V. The Silence of the West

The most damning evidence is the silence.

When fourteen nations — including Türkiye, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and the UAE — along with the OIC (57 member states), the Arab League (22 members), and the GCC (6 members), condemned Huckabee’s statements, the White House said nothing. The State Department said nothing. Europe said nothing.

Silence, in diplomacy, is not neutrality. It is consent.

The United States has used its veto power to protect Israel from international accountability more than 45 times since 1945. This guaranteed impunity has not been beneficial to the state. A state, to survive, learns to compromise, to make friends and alliances among its neighbours. The forever conflict model has never worked.

VI. The Historical Pattern: When Ideology Captures the State

What we are witnessing in Israel is not unique. It is the same pattern that has repeated throughout history: when a state is captured by a single political or religious ideology, it loses the ability to learn from its mistakes.

The European Wars of Religion (1524-1648): For over a century, the principle of cuius regio, eius religio — “whose realm, his religion” — tore Europe apart. The Thirty Years’ War alone killed an estimated 8 million people. The conflict did not end until the Treaty of Westphalia (1648), which established the modern international order based on the principle that states must coexist with different internal beliefs. The alternative — perpetual war — was unsustainable.

The Soviet Union (1917-1991): The Bolshevik Revolution captured the Russian state with an ideology that promised the withering away of the state. Instead, it created the most repressive state apparatus in modern history. The ideology prevented learning. It prevented adaptation. It prevented survival. The Soviet Union collapsed under the weight of its own internal contradictions — not because of external enemies.

Nazi Germany (1933-1945): The Nazi regime was captured by an ideology that combined racial supremacy with territorial expansion — Lebensraum. The result was not strength but a “permanent state of exception” that required constant war. The regime collapsed not because its enemies were stronger, but because its ideology made compromise, peace, and sustainable statecraft impossible.

The same pattern is now playing out in Israel. The “Greater Israel” ideology, rooted in religious claims to land stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates, has captured the state. Compromise is impossible because the ideology demands the entire territory. Peace is impossible because peace requires recognised borders. Survival is threatened because the resources required to maintain the forever war are finite.

VII. The Military Reality: Air Power Does Not Control Ground

How can a small country fight on so many fronts at once? The answer is: it cannot. Not sustainably.

The fronts are multiplying — Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Gaza, the West Bank, Yemen — but the resources are finite.

The model of air power does not guarantee control of the ground. You can bomb a city into rubble, but you cannot hold it without troops. And the troops are exhausted. The reservists are depleted. The economy is bleeding.

The “forever war” is not a strategy. It is a death spiral.

VIII. The West Will Follow

What we are seeing in the State of Israel is a microcosm of what the forever war model — desired by bankers, multinational corporations, and defence contractors since the American Civil War, accelerated since WWII — will lead to. The west will follow the decline of Israel and, in essence, eat itself.

The Global South is waking up. The young see the hypocrisy of the political class. The daily stream of death and destruction presented on social media is a wake-up call to anyone who has time to see facts for what they are.

The message of “Never again” was meant to have global post-WWII application, not provide a carte blanche for political opportunists who have good reasons to maintain the forever wars.

It will not be able to blame China, Russia, or the Muslim world. The west managed to cannibalise itself all on its own.

IX. A Final Word

The State of Israel is not being destroyed by its enemies. It is being destroyed by its own leadership. By the vision of “Greater Israel.” By the doctrine of “forever war.” By the refusal to accept borders, to make peace, to stop.

The collapse will not be dramatic. It will be bureaucratic. The economy will contract. The allies will defect. The public will turn. The reservists will refuse. The militias will fight each other.

And the small gods will keep chanting: “It would be fine if they took it all.”

They are wrong. It will not be fine. It will be rubble.

Andrew Klein 

April 10, 2026

Sources:

· PressTV, “Huckabee mocks Arab League’s condemnation of his remarks endorsing Israel’s biblical territorial claims” (February 21, 2026)

· Just International, “‘It would be fine if they took it all’: The Confession That Exposes the Greater Israel Project” (March 1, 2026)

· OZ Arab Media, “Israel Plans Long-Term Control Over Southern Lebanon Post-Conflict” (April 1, 2026)

· EurAsian Times, “Israel’s Arrow-3 Exo-Atmospheric Missile Production Set to Expand; Katz Insists Stocks Sufficient” (April 6, 2026)

· Arab News, “Israel political unity on Iran war fractures, opposition warns of ‘security disaster'” (March 26, 2026)

· The Indian Express, “‘It would be fine if they took it all’: US envoy Mike Huckabee cites Biblical text to claim Israel’s right to entire Middle East” (February 21, 2026)

· Tehran Times, “‘Greater Israel’ in action: How expansion and occupation threaten regional stability” (February 23, 2026)

· CGTN, “Israeli defense minister says forces to hold south Lebanon zone up to Litani River” (March 31, 2026)

· 新浪财经, “以色列:将加速生产’箭’式拦截导弹” (April 7, 2026)

· New Age BD, “Israel opposition warns end to consensus over Iran war” (March 29, 2026)