By Ayman Odeh: This time the enemy is Iran. Yesterday it was Gaza. The day before it was Lebanon. Tomorrow it may be Turkey. In Israel, there is always another threat waiting to be named, another front waiting to be opened, another enemy to justify the next round of fear.
More than a week has passed with people living in shelters — not all of them, of course. Many citizens cannot even reach shelter at all, and by coincidence, most of them are socially vulnerable. But the leadership is safe in its fortified bunker.
Inside those shelters, neighbors sit together and hear once again that “there is no choice.” Once again, they are told that this time is different, that this is a war of the “sons of light” against the “sons of darkness.” And naturally, the government of Benjamin Netanyahu, Itamar Ben‑Gvir, and Bezalel Smotrich casts itself as the embodiment of that light.
Meanwhile, children cry, parents are exhausted, sleep is impossible, and yet the public is told — again — that war is a historic necessity, almost a natural condition. And it is not only the government.
Much of the opposition has lined up behind Netanyahu’s “victory war.” One opposition leader has effectively become a spokesperson for the regime. It is not critics who say this — Yair Lapid himself declared that he speaks on behalf of Netanyahu’s government and even took pride in it.
The script is familiar: today Iran, yesterday Gaza, before that Lebanon. There will always be a threat. There will always be an enemy. History is full of moments when entire populations were told that war was justified, unavoidable, even noble.
In 2003, the United States invaded Iraq under the promise that the war was essential for global security, that it would remove an imminent danger and bring “stability and democracy” to the region. Instead, it unleashed regional chaos, gave rise to new extremist groups, and deepened violence and repression.
A year earlier, in 2002, Netanyahu appeared before a U.S. congressional committee and did what he does best: advocate for war. “If you take out Saddam,” he said, “I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region.” He warned that if Saddam obtained nuclear weapons, “the history of the world will change immediately.”
History did change — but not in the way he promised. The war brought neither security nor democracy, just as most U.S. interventions fail to deliver the outcomes they claim.
We are not living in 1984, yet Orwell’s words feel more relevant than ever: “War is not meant to be won. It is meant to be continuous.”
He understood something fundamental: perpetual war is not only a tool against an external enemy — it is a mechanism for shaping internal consciousness.
In a permanent state of emergency, obedience becomes easier to demand. Dissent becomes easier to brand as treason. It becomes easier to stand “together” against anyone who dares to oppose.
It is easier to grant political pardons, easier to carry out ethnic cleansing in the West Bank, easier to kill Palestinians, Easier to push through a regime overhaul, Easier to transform Israel into a fully authoritarian, fascistic state.
During war, we are told there is no “opposition” and no “coalition.” There is only one united people — united for war. Anyone who refuses to fall in line is labeled a traitor. Yet there has never been a moment when a “united people” demanded peace.
Television screens flood homes with “news” that is, in reality, relentless propaganda. The same slogans repeat endlessly because there is no real alternative vision being offered. Permanent war has become the default solution. There is no strategy — only one disaster after another.
And once again, as people run to shelters, the same formula is repeated: another round, another operation, more blood. Each time, leaders promise that this time will bring security. Each time, reality proves the opposite. This endless bleeding will not bring safety to anyone — not Israelis, not Iranians, and certainly not Palestinians.
Perpetual war is dangerous for all of us — and even more dangerous when led by politicians who rely on war for their own survival.
Israel’s government has decided that we will live by the sword forever. I refuse to accept that. I will oppose this policy for as long as it continues. And I know I am not alone. If they want to normalize endless war, we will normalize resistance to endless war. If they insist war is destiny, we will insist it is not.
The alternative is not a secret. It has been on the table for more than twenty years. In 2002, Arab and Islamic states proposed a comprehensive regional settlement: full recognition of Israel and normalization with the Arab world in exchange for ending the occupation and establishing a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders. This was not utopian — it was practical.
Recognizing the State of Palestine and ending the occupation would not weaken Israel. On the contrary, it could open the door to a broad regional alliance. Instead of perpetual war and bombardment, it is possible to choose just peace and real security.
The question is not whether another path exists. It is whether we have the courage to take it.
This piece, written by Ayman Odeh, was published in Hebrew on Haaretz, and he also posted it on his Facebook page in Arabic.
Ayman Odeh is an Israeli Arab politician, lawyer, and current Member of Knesset. A leading figure in Hadash—a Jewish‑Arab left‑wing party rooted in socialist, anti‑racist, and anti‑occupation principles—he has served in the 20th, 21st, 22nd, 23rd, 24th, and 25th Knesset, representing Hadash and later the Joint List, which he led to become the third‑largest faction in Israel’s parliament.
Born in Haifa and trained as a lawyer, Odeh previously served on the Haifa City Council and later as Secretary‑General of Hadash before entering national politics.
Throughout his parliamentary career, he has been a prominent advocate for civil equality, workers’ rights, and a political resolution based on ending the occupation and establishing a Palestinian state.
Although frequently targeted by political opponents with attempts to disqualify or expel him, none succeeded, and he continues to serve in the Knesset. He is widely recognized as one of the most influential Arab political leaders.
