A report said: The Contradiction of Peace and Dominance: Is Washington after Stability or Geopolitical Engineering in West Asia!!

These remarks were made in an ideological context that attempts to redefine political Zionism in the form of a religious reading. Such an approach, by selectively citing religious texts, seeks to legitimize territorial expansionism.

While a range of Jews in the world do not necessarily consider the existence of the Zionist regime to be equivalent to religious teachings, such positions turn Judaism into a tool for justifying war and occupation. The consequence of such a reading is the transfer of the conflict from the political level to the level of identity and civilization; which expands the scope of the crisis and reduces the possibility of reconciliation.

Peace Council; Human Initiative or Security Engineering?

Simultaneously with these statements, Trump unveiled a plan titled Peace Council for the Reconstruction of Gaza; A plan that was accompanied by the promise of extensive financial assistance. But the simultaneity of these two approaches raises strategic questions: How can one talk about peace and at the same time legitimize maximal expansionism?

More than a humanitarian project, the Peace Council can be a tool for achieving goals that have not been achieved in the military field; including disarming the resistance and changing the security balance in Gaza. In this context, economic reconstruction can become a lever for rearranging the political and security structure of Palestine. Therefore, Huckabee’s statements are not considered a diplomatic slip, but rather a premature admission of the geopolitical nature of this council.

The New Middle East; Reproducing a Dependent Order

The claim to the right to regional hegemony is in line with the same project that has been discussed for years under the title of “the New Middle East”; an order in which Israel’s security superiority and American interests are the center of regulating regional equations. Signs of this approach can be seen in the pressure to disarm resistance actors, changing the military configuration in Syria, applying political pressure on Iraq, and intensifying measures against Iran.

This framework is based on three pillars: continuous crisis-making, weakening the defense capabilities of countries, and fragmenting national structures. In such a model, security is defined not as the product of regional cooperation, but as the result of containment and dependency. The US ambassador’s words can be seen as a clear revelation of this strategy; a strategy that turns the region into an arena of erosive competition.

The risk of miscalculation and the necessity of regional convergence

Alongside Huckabee, figures such as Lindsey Graham are also known as supporters of Zionist policies; people who influence Trump’s decision-making. The existence of such currents around the US President increases the likelihood of miscalculation, especially towards Iran.

Any conflict will endanger not only the region but also America’s interests and its global standing. Therefore, in the face of the project of de-defense of the region under the guise of security, the strategic option for West Asian countries is convergence around Palestine and the design of a regional order; an order that is based on independence, deterrence, and endogenous cooperation. Only through such an approach can the region be prevented from becoming the scene of the realization of the “American Middle East.”