The Greater Israel Project: From Extremist Fantasy to Foreign Policy

Numan Mousa | Middle East Fellow

Image sourced from Diana khwaelid via Unsplash

The annual olive harvest is core to Palestinian identity. Yet, trees were ash after masked settlers, accompanied by Israeli soldiers, set them alight, and attacked the farmers. Against this backdrop, shock spread across the Middle East after United States (US) Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee, speaking on a Tucker Carlson podcast, said it would be fine if Israel “took it all,” considered to be referring to the Middle East.

What connects these moments is not coincidence, but a widening space where religious language is increasingly folded into the political justification of violence and expansion. What was once dismissed as extremist fantasy has become Israeli policy, seeking to expand its territory into nearby nations. This piece traces how, and at what cost.

What Is the Greater Israel Project?

Greater Israel is an interpretation of religious doctrine, which on one view declares that all land from the Nile to the Euphrates belongs to Israel. This doctrine is adopted by far-right Jewish and Evangelical Zionist religious movements.

In 2024, the Greater Israel Project went mainstream on official Israeli diplomatic channels. The Israeli Foreign Ministry published a map on its official X account that included parts of Jordan, drawing strong condemnation from Jordan. Israeli Finance Minister Smotrich went further, holding up a map that erased Jordan as a sovereign nation, encapsulating it within Israel.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has indicated toward the same vision, saying he feels a connection to Greater Israel. His coalition reflects this doctrine, with National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, feeling “proud” of settler expansionist violence. The government’s routine use of “Judea and Samaria”, an ancient biblical term for the West Bank, reflects how religious geography is displacing political reality in official Israeli discourse.

The vision is clear. What has changed, however, is the opportunity to act on it. Israel is currently moving within a geopolitical moment that makes expansion not only possible, but permissive. Arab governments are fractured, international objections are rarely enforced, and US support has been granted in both political and military aspects. Smotrich calls this a historic opportunity to bury the idea of a Palestinian state, while Israeli settler movements are already planning settlements in Southern Lebanon. These are not fringe positions, but transforming to policy.

Violence as a Tool of Expansion

Israel has justified its wars as counterterrorism. Yet, what it has practised has had significant impacts across Palestine and Lebanon, rendering parts of the lands uninhabitable.

Today, over 730,000 Israeli settlers live on Palestinian land in the occupied West Bank. According to Israeli British analyst Daniel Levy, the logic is clear: since the goal is ownership of the land, make the land impossible to return to, and the map draws itself.

Israel’s regional expansion is possible largely because it has been permitted, as unconditional US support has not only shielded Israel from accountability, but also signalled that expansion is tolerable, and eventually, could be spoken about freely. Even former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert denounced what he called “Jewish terrorism” in the West Bank. The fact that Israel’s own former leader is sounding the alarm reveals not a system correcting itself, but one that has drifted so far that even insiders can no longer look away. Every attack, every illegal settlement, and every vetoed ceasefire resolution has empowered Israeli ministers to brandish maps of Greater Israel openly, largely without tangible consequence.

The Regional Impact

The geopolitical consequences in the Middle East from Israel’s expansion are already clear. In neighbouring Jordan, officials have repeatedly warned that the erosion of a viable Palestinian state and the expansion of Israel could trigger a new wave of displacement. Such an event would not only threaten Jordan’s internal balance but also expose it to the kind of cross-border violence seen in Lebanon. King Abdullah II of Jordan has warned against the Greater Israel Project and criticised the violation of sovereignty it entails.

Regionally, the diplomatic architecture is beginning to fracture. The Abraham Accords have collapsed in public legitimacy, with 87% of Arabs now opposing recognition of Israel according to 2025 Arab Opinion Index. This has forced Saudi Arabia to condition normalisation on Palestinian statehood, a condition that Israel continues to render unattainable as it tries to destroy the prospects of a Palestinian state.

Then there is Syria. Following the fall of Assad, Israel moved into the Golan Heights buffer zone and carried out strikes on Syrian military infrastructure. What is framed as containment on an eastern front has, in practice, taken the shape of expanding into Syrian territory, creating direct pressure on the new government in Damascus.

The Land Is Always the Point

The Greater Israel project is no longer a fringe doctrine, but a government policy, backed by American power, advancing through fire and displacement. The olive trees were not collateral damage; they were the point… the land is always the point. The question is no longer whether the world can see it, but whether it will act before the map finishes drawing itself.

Numan Mousa is a multidisciplinary analyst working at the intersection of human rights, diplomacy, and technology governance. He holds both Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees from UNSW and the University of Sydney, where he also served as Vice President (Externals) of the University Diplomats’ Society. Numan has applied his policy research and cyber governance expertise across the public and private sectors, including roles with the Australian Institute of International Affairs, as well as advisory positions with global firms such as Deloitte and EY in the Middle East and Indonesia. He is also an alumnus of the Global Student Fellowship, where he conducted human-rights-focused policy research in Southeast Asia.

Having been raised in Jordan, Numan brings strong regional literacy and grounded lived experience across the Middle East, shaping his understanding of governance, security, and human-impact challenges. He is committed to elevating regional perspectives in global policy discussions, promoting integrity, empathy, and contextual insight, while supporting stronger Australia-Middle East diplomatic engagement.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Young Australians in International Affairs. AI tools were used by this author for grammar checks and idea refinement, but all content is original, and no plagiarism has been used in the preparation of this article.