How can you describe viciousness... maliciousness... villainy? What makes Israel’s reaction to that hateful attack on Israeli occupier-settlers so vicious is probably the political repercussions of the security collapse on that fateful Shabbat night.

On that night, Israeli border guards had fallen asleep, the Iron Dome collapsed and the settlers’ own armed forces proved that they were only effective against the stone-throwing Palestinian kids: so Hamas attacked and took hostages. But also on that night, the mighty image of Israeli Premier Benjamin Netanyahu, the Mossad commander of special forces, had also collapsed.

The ongoing avalanche of media coverage of the unsolved hostage situation in Gaza and new accounts of the atrocities that happened on that accursed night at kibbutz communities along the Gaza border make one thing clear for a politician as seasoned as Netanyahu: The next elections may be the last elections he and his Likud Party participate in. So, he has to do something as unheard of as reducing the number of Palestinians in Gaza and annexing half of it into Israel.

I don’t see an iota of truth in Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant’s empty talk on three planned phases for the war against Hamas, and Israel’s relinquishing responsibility for Gaza! A year from now, he might say that the new security reality should continue indefinitely.

Double standards in Western media

It has been more than two weeks, but the BBC and the United States media keep broadcasting and publishing stories of the recovery teams pulling bodies, with "naked, feet bound with metal wire" from the rubble. Stories carefully adorned with such warnings as "some viewers/readers may find details in this video/article distressing" make you tremble even before you start reading or viewing.

According to the BBC, a rescue worker said the bodies of more than 20 children had been found in the Jewish settlement," but the BBC has not been reporting the 200 children killed in one flop of hospital bombing.

No, I am not going to ask what those kibbutz communities were doing on those stolen lands of Palestinians. Why were they protected by the Israeli Army day and night? And against whom? No, the time to discuss the issues emanating from the gradual expansion of the theft that we call Israel today has passed already. Now is the time for us to be aware of U.S. President Joe Biden’s task: sending yet another $100 billion to help yet another expansion of Israel stealing half of the Gaza Strip. The more dramatic he portrays the situation created by "the Hamas terror attacks that killed more than 1,400 civilians ... scores of innocents from infants to the elderly, grandparents, Israelis ... Americans taken hostage," the better he would "pursue every avenue" to help Israel on what he calls an "inflection point" in the history of the country.

Biden has kept the Bush neocons in his foreign policy and security team without a reason. For them, Israel and Ukraine were "fighting existential struggles" not for themselves but to change the realities of existence for Russia and China.

The U.S. president links Israel and Ukraine conflicts in the argument for America’s global role, The New York Times says. Yes, it's right: Those existential fights would pave the way to Beijing through Moscow. A CNN opinion writer also points out that, "Ukraine and Israel’s wars were not crucial to just their existence but to the security of each and every American."

Not because the Hamas stove-pipe rockets would reach Ohio, but because they could delay the construction of "Greater Israel," or at least a friendly nation reaching from the Mediterranean to Central Asia. British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, who also rushed to Israel, said that his country absolutely supports Israel's right to defend itself and go after Hamas.

Reframing self-defense

For the Bidens and Sunaks of capitalistic imperialism, the concept of "self-defense" has never been applied to the existential fight of the Palestinians. The British did not ask the owners of the land when they published the Balfour Declaration creating a "national home for the Jewish people in Palestine." The Ottoman Empire, to whom those lands legally belonged, was put by the British in such a position that it could not object to its creation but applaud. There is no need to repeat the sorrowful history of the region, which is full of betrayals, treachery and sell-outs. Should the 1947 partition plan of the League of Nations (the precursor of the United Nations), which envisaged the division of Palestine into three parts (a Jewish state, an Arab State and the City of Jerusalem) and similar resolutions of the U.N. in 1967 and 1991 been upheld, peace could have reigned in the area. But the idea was not to let the peace reign in the area. If you have fanatic Zionists in front of the stage covering for the nations that signed the Sykes-Picot Agreement in 1916, you’d eventually end up with an Abrahamic narrative about the Promised Lands. The Sykes-Picot was a secret treaty between the United Kingdom and France that led to the division of Turkish-held Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine into various French- and British-administered areas. In fact, historian Fawwaz Traboulsi details the underlying connection between the Sykes-Picot Agreement and the Balfour Declaration. In his book "Sykes-Picot-Balfour: Beyond the Maps."

Not only the negotiations before and after the 1947 plan but also the developments after the 1991 U.N. resolution until Sept. 11, 2001, are still shrouded in secrecy. On Sept. 11, when 19 terrorists from al-Qaida hijacked four commercial airplanes and deliberately crashed two of the planes into the World Trade Center complex and a third plane into the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia, Americans watched in horror as the terrorist attacks, which left nearly 3,000 people dead in New York City, Washington, D.C., and Shanksville, Pennsylvania. The 9/11 events changed the course of many global developments; it led to the U.S. invasion and destruction of Afghanistan, Iraq and later Syria. We still don’t know how Africa has become the epicenter of extremist activity, which the U.S. blamed for 9/11.

Pandora's Box opened

But it definitely opened the lid of neocons’ Pandora's Box, and the U.S. and EU started openly supporting the expansion policy of Israeli leader Yitzhak Shamir.

The seventh prime minister of Israel, and before the establishment of the State of Israel, a leader of a Zionist militant group, Shamir took the helm of his country’s Jewish settlements (read: occupation of lands assigned to Muslims) policy. At that time, U.S. Secretary of State James Baker led the Bush administration’s charge to fight with Arab countries that were criticizing the Israeli settlements in occupied Arab territories as a breach of international law.

We still need clear and unbiased accounts of the change of heart of the George Bush administration. Only a couple of months ago, the Bush administration joined other countries and sharply criticized the Israeli expansion of existing settlements in the West Bank and warned that it would not support a requested $400 million loan for housing of new Soviet immigrants without Israeli assurances that they would not be housed in the occupied lands. These efforts of the Bush administration had drawn sharp protests from Israel, which accused the U.S. of supporting Arab efforts to halt the flow of Soviet immigrants into Israel altogether.

Perhaps the movie-like Reagan era was ending; the euphoria created by the rollback of communism, the revolutions in Eastern Europe, the German reunification in 1990, and finally, the dissolution of the Soviet Union was being replaced by the realization that Russian and Chinese embrace of capitalism would make them even deadlier. The victory in the Cold War made the U.S. the world's only superpower had brought new challenges (and opportunities) not only over the former communist regimes in Russia and Eastern Europe but also to the geographies that once ruled by them.

Ali Harb in his Al-Jazeera comment says Biden’s Israel trip displays a "performative" approach to the Gaza war: the "unwavering" U.S. show of support for Israel. This is partially true since Biden is the first Democrat elected by the majority of Jewish votes for many decades. But Biden’s and Sunak’s hastily rushing to a "war zone" despite their own contrary security arrangements is not for the domestic audience only. The emotions and sentiments displayed in not-well-thought-out (Well! Let me be sincere here: not only "not well-thought-out" but at the same time irrational, illogical, unreasonable and downright ridiculous) Hamas action on the night of Oct. 7 (despite all these) has been shared by the people in the region because of the "disproportionate and excessive evil" that has befallen on the people of Palestine.

Millions of people in Muslim countries filled the city centers, mosques, school halls and offices of political parties and parliaments, and asked their government not to release a statement of condemnation and be happy and go home. Not this time. But an armada of the U.S., British and French navies barricaded the natural gas-rich Gazan territorial waters. No nation was able to send ships to aid Palestinians. Biden and Sunak needed to go there and emphasize the message that no interference from other Muslim countries would be tolerated.

This seems to be a plan: No nation can go to help the Palestinians. But as all the believers believe: Man plans, and God laughs. And who laughs last laughs best.