One of the clauses in the American proposal presented to the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) — during the meeting in Doha that was bombed while the delegation was discussing the terms — was the “redefinition of Hamas.”
Yet ironically, what has actually been unfolding is not a redefinition of Hamas, but rather of Israel itself.
Following Hamas’s political and field performance, and its presentation of a new model of resistance and negotiation — culminating in the latest round in Sharm el-Sheikh — it seems that Hamas continues to cement its political presence in the regional equation. Meanwhile, Israel finds itself in a continuous process of redefinition, regardless of whether the war halts under the latest ceasefire proposal or resumes later.
The History of Israel’s Redefinition
Throughout its existence, the Zionist entity has repeatedly faced — and resisted — calls for redefinition.
From the Palestinian and Arab perspective, this redefinition meant recognising Israel as a colonial project that must end.
From within Israel and the Zionist movement, others sought to redefine Israel in ways that legitimised its expansion and colonial entrenchment.
Writers and intellectuals such as Ghassan Kanafani, Edward Said, and Abdelwahab El-Messiri — alongside numerous Palestinian historians — have consistently defined Israel as a functional colonial entity.
Leaders of the Palestinian struggle — including Haj Amin al-Husseini, Yasser Arafat, Khalil al-Wazir (Abu Jihad), George Habash, Ahmad Yassin, and Abdul Aziz al-Rantisi — reaffirmed in their speeches that Israel is an occupying settler state, not a normal political entity.
Despite such framing, Israel appeared to rise politically towards the end of the 20th century.
The 1991 UN resolution that revoked the designation of Zionism as a form of racism, followed by the Oslo Accords (1993), created a climate that favoured Israel’s narrative. This process reached its zenith with the Abraham Accords (2020), when Israel appeared globally integrated and unassailable.
However, the Gaza War marked a historic rupture. The process of redefinition that once elevated Israel has now reversed course — replaced by a global redefinition that exposes its decay rather than dominance.
Since the Al-Aqsa Flood operation (7 October 2023), the world has witnessed Israel’s image collapse from “a democratic state” to a regime associated with genocide, apartheid, and terrorism.
The Shift: From “Democracy” to “Rogue State”
In just weeks following 7 October, the name “Israel” became synonymous with massacres and brutality.
After the bombing in Doha, countries including Qatar and Pakistan began referring to Israel as a “rogue state.”
Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani publicly used the term, and Pakistan’s UN envoy, Asim Iftikhar Ahmad, declared:
“Israel is a rogue and irresponsible state committing the worst forms of terrorism in Gaza and the occupied Palestinian territories.”
This label — once reserved by Washington for states like Iran, North Korea, or the Soviet Union — is now applied to America’s closest ally.
Similarly, the term “pariah state” has become increasingly attached to Israel in 2024–2025, denoting a country morally shunned and diplomatically isolated for its systematic war crimes and violations of international law.
The speed of this transformation is unprecedented. Normally, the international reclassification of a state as rogue or pariah takes years; in Israel’s case, it has happened in months — faster than its ability to manage or reverse the process.
Understanding the Process of Redefinition
To redefine a political entity means to strip and replace its defining attributes — to alter its perceived legitimacy, identity, and moral foundation.
This involves internal divisions, external pressure, and a re-evaluation of international legitimacy, sovereignty, and membership within the global order.
Today, Israel’s systematic defiance of international law and its ongoing genocide in Gaza have triggered this very process.
Calls to suspend or expel Israel from the United Nations under Article 6 of the UN Charter — on grounds of violating the Charter and committing crimes in Gaza — are growing rapidly. These appeals, supported by numerous states and civil movements, signify not just condemnation but an active redefinition of Israel’s legitimacy.
When a state’s very existence becomes morally and legally contested, the shift is profound. Gaza’s steadfastness has forced the world to question Israel’s founding myths, exposing the colonial and racial underpinnings of its creation.
The global spread of the slogan “Palestine from the River to the Sea” across Western capitals symbolises this ideological awakening and the collapse of Israel’s manufactured narrative.
If the redefinition process moves from moral delegitimisation to legal isolation and sanctions, the next stage — historically — is the dismantling of power structures.
Indeed, Israel is already witnessing diplomatic, cultural, and social disintegration, with deepening internal fractures and eroding social cohesion.
Israel’s Resistance to Redefinition
Despite the accelerating pace of its delegitimisation, Israel is fighting back on two fronts:
- Propaganda and Influence Operations:
Tel Aviv invests heavily in media manipulation and influencer campaigns, as seen in Netanyahu’s appeals for online influencers on TikTok and X (Twitter) to “defend Israel’s image.” - Dependence on Powerful Allies:
Israel seeks to slow its isolation by leaning on Washington.
Netanyahu recently claimed, following his meeting with President Donald Trump, that he had succeeded in “isolating Hamas” and rallying the world — even the Arab and Islamic states — to pressure Hamas into accepting Israeli conditions for a ceasefire.
His statement, however, revealed the fragility of Israel’s position. Trump himself later remarked that “Israel cannot fight the whole world,” signalling the limits of American backing and the erosion of bipartisan support within the US.
Dual Redefinition Paths
It is worth noting that Israel was already undergoing a self-driven redefinition before the Gaza war.
Through the 2018 Nation-State Law, it declared itself the “state of the Jewish people,” further entrenching ethnic exclusivity and annexation ambitions.
Its expansionist policies — annexing Jerusalem, deepening West Bank settlements, and violating neighbouring borders — reflected a self-perceived redefinition toward regional hegemony.
But Gaza shattered that illusion. In its frantic pursuit of deterrence, Israel opened multiple fronts — Lebanon, Syria, Iran, Yemen, and Gaza — yet this overreach exposed its strategic vulnerability rather than strength.
As military strategist Carl von Clausewitz noted, transitions are moments of maximum weakness — and Israel, mid-transition, is in precisely that state.
Thus, while Israel insists on a redefinition toward dominance, the world is collectively engaged in a counter-redefinition toward its moral and political decline.
This dynamic, unleashed by the Gaza war, is unlikely to reverse — regardless of Israel’s next moves.
