The Israeli newspaper Israel Hayom reported that the recent decision taken by the United Nations at the end of this week—seen as paving a one-way path toward the establishment of a Palestinian state—has filled the tank with fuel, ready to ignite the Palestinian struggle for yet another two generations.
According to the paper, 142 countries voted in favour of the resolution, led primarily by the Global South. The report accused these nations of “controlling the institutions of the UN with the clear goal of fighting Israel and erasing it from the map.”
Israel Hayom recalled a similar UN decision in late November 1974, when Yasser Arafat was invited to deliver a speech at the General Assembly while, as the paper provocatively described, “carrying his gun.” That year, the Assembly voted in favour of the Palestinians’ right to “national independence and sovereignty,” with 89 countries in support, 8 opposed, and Western European states abstaining.
A Changed Reality
The newspaper argued that today’s conflict is different, citing authors Rob Malley and Hussein Agha in their book Tomorrow Is Yesterday, who wrote: “The war crushed what remained of the Palestinian national movement.”
It claimed that current diplomatic efforts—led by figures such as French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, with Saudi backing—aim to bolster the so-called “peace option.” Yet, according to the Israeli narrative, this “peace camp” refuses to acknowledge that the two-state solution era has long ended.
On the ground, Israel Hayom pointed to the Ramot attack, in which six Israelis were killed, portraying it as the spark of a potential third intifada. The Israeli strike on Qatar, it added, was framed as a rapid reaction to that event, seen inside Israel as the opening signal of renewed Palestinian uprising.
Hamas Strategy and Accusations Against Qatar
The paper asserted that this is part of Hamas’s broader strategy after realising Israel is determined to occupy Gaza. While much of Hamas’s senior leadership is now based outside the Strip, Israel Hayom accused the movement’s leaders in Qatar of directly ordering the attack, describing Doha as “deeply involved” in the Gaza battle and in attempts to ignite a third intifada.
According to this framing, Hamas seeks to divide Israeli forces—forcing them to shift focus from Gaza to the West Bank by stoking a new uprising.
In response, the Israeli military launched what it called a pre-emptive strike on Qatar, learning what the paper called “hard lessons.” Former Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi was quoted saying: “Israel cannot allow terrorist elements to entrench themselves on the other side of the fence.”
Qatar, Netanyahu, and Regional Power Plays
The report added that the move toward Doha represented a departure from Israel’s strategic path, though many security analysts chose to overlook this. Some analysts even floated conspiracy theories suggesting that Netanyahu himself had personal motives—linked to the “Qatar scandal”—in escalating attacks against Doha.
Dr. Yoel Guzansky argued that the strike on Qatar was partly aimed at showcasing Israel’s aspiration for regional dominance, regardless of whether it achieved “100% success or only 10%.”
This came as Prime Minister Netanyahu and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich announced plans to construct 3,500 new settlement units in the E-1 area near Ma’ale Adumim, a project that would physically divide Palestinian geography between north and south.
Trump, Netanyahu, and Unusual Closeness
The Israeli attack on Qatar also triggered an angry reaction from U.S. President Donald Trump. Yet, according to the report, the shouting match between Trump and Netanyahu reflected not estrangement but rather an unusual level of intimacy—rare in U.S.–Israeli relations.
Israel Hayom suggested that Netanyahu deliberately embraced the “Qatar file” to create an opening for Trump to meet with the Qatari Prime Minister. Leaders like Trump, it argued, prefer dealing with counterparts who act independently and make hard decisions.
A Historical Dimension with Europe
The newspaper concluded with a historical detour, linking Netanyahu’s clashes with Europe to the legacy of his late father, Professor Benzion Netanyahu.
According to the paper, European scholars—particularly Spaniards—had long pursued the elder Netanyahu, who reshaped the understanding of Spanish history. He advanced the idea that the Spanish Inquisition pre-dated Nazi racial ideology by 400 years, persecuting even faithful Christians whose ancestors had converted from Judaism generations earlier.
The report claimed that, in his final years, Spanish institutions attempted to recruit Professor Netanyahu to a commission investigating Queen Isabella’s role in the expulsion of Jews. While at times he considered it an intellectual challenge, he ultimately rejected the invitation—recognising that his presence was being used to legitimise questionable political goals.
Analysis
This Israel Hayom narrative once again underscores Israel’s strategy of deflecting international pressure by framing Palestinian resistance and global solidarity as existential threats. While the UN decision reflects overwhelming global support for Palestinian statehood, Tel Aviv continues to escalate settlement expansion, military aggression, and even attacks on Gulf states like Qatar—moves that risk igniting the very third intifada it claims to fear.
One Ummah. One platform. One mission.
Your support keeps it alive.
Click here to Donate & Fund your Islamic Independent Platform
