Hamas in the Era of Settlements: From Post-Islamism to Post-Zionism – The Dialectic of Man and State
The term “Post-Islamism” is used to describe an intellectual and political phase that emerged after the rise and decline of the classical Islamist wave that dominated much of the Muslim world since the 1970s, particularly those associated with movements of political Islam such as the Muslim Brotherhood or the Islamic Revolution in Iran. This phase represents a qualitative shift in contemporary Islamic thought—from the stage of ideological mobilization and political activism to one of critical reflection, social experimentation, and political pragmatism.[1]
The concept of Post-Islamism embodies a profound intellectual and cultural transformation. It is not anti-Islamic, but rather anti-Islamist—that is, it resists the politicization of Islam as a totalizing ideology or as an authoritarian project that seeks to monopolize both religious and political truth. Post-Islamism strives to liberate religion from ideology, restoring it to its ethical and moral domain so that it becomes a source of meaning and individual identity, rather than a tool of political domination. From this perspective, Post-Islamism can be seen as a socio-intellectual and cultural condition reflecting the exhaustion of the Islamist political project and its declining appeal among younger generations who are searching for alternatives grounded in greater freedom and realism.
The key features of Post-Islamism manifest in several interrelated dimensions.[2]
First, there is a shift from ideology to experience: Islam is no longer perceived as an all-encompassing political framework but rather as a moral and cultural reference for human experience.
Second, the shift from community to individuality: belonging to an Islamic movement or party is no longer central to identity; instead, the emphasis is on personal faith and everyday practice.
Third, a shift from totalism to pluralism: recognizing multiple interpretations and ijtihād (independent reasoning) in understanding Islam, rather than confining it to a singular political model.
Fourth, a shift from politicization to civil orientation, emphasizing social and cultural reform over the pursuit of state power.
Finally, a shift from identity to citizenship, which implies strengthening concepts of civic participation, respect for diversity, and the search for a democratic framework compatible with Islamic values without being subordinated to them as a closed ideology.
In this sense, Post-Islamism represents a historical and intellectual endeavor to redefine Islam within the context of modernity, where religion becomes an open, ethical, and personal experience rather than a political project claiming exclusive truth. It expresses the aspiration of Muslim societies to recover the original spirit of Islam—as a set of values rooted in justice, mercy, and freedom—away from the ideological instrumentalization that has long equated religion with the struggle for power.
Post-Islamism represents an effort to redefine Islam within the context of modernity, wherein religion becomes a personal and ethical experience rather than an authoritarian project.
In light of the broader shift from Political Islam to Post-Islamism, the Hamas movement emerges as a case that epitomizes this transition within the Palestinian context, where the movement faces intellectual and political challenges similar to those encountered by other Islamist movements. Hamas, which initially presented itself as a liberation project grounded in an Islamic frame of reference—combining armed resistance, social activism, and political governance, and seeking to integrate religious identity within the Palestinian national project—now finds itself at a decisive intellectual and political crossroads. This can be described as a turbulent transitional phase between classical Islamism and what might be called Post-Islamism.
The current scene in Gaza reveals a gradual erosion of the ideological structure of authority, coupled with mounting international and military pressures that are forcing Hamas to reconsider its position between religious legitimacy and political realism. Among the most prominent manifestations of this tension are the increasing pressures to accept settlement proposals, such as Donald Trump’s plan, which calls for a comprehensive ceasefire and the transfer of Gaza’s administration to a civil transitional authority, in exchange for the release of hostages and the preparation of a new phase of reconstruction. Hamas has expressed a preliminary willingness to accept some of these terms, yet it has not committed to surrendering its weapons or relinquishing power altogether. This ambivalence reflects a state of oscillation between preserving its Islamic identity and engaging with the logic of the modern state.
Within this framework, what is unfolding in Gaza can be interpreted through Asef Bayat’s concept of Post-Islamism, which refers to the transformations experienced by Islamist movements after they have been exhausted by the burdens of governance and organizational experimentation, leading them to confront new questions about the relationship between religion, power, and society. As in the experiences of Iran, Turkey, Sudan, and Egypt, a similar transformation is now visible in Gaza: the decline of the ideological appeal of Political Islam, and the rise of a new social and civic discourse that prioritizes dignity, freedom, and justice over religious or ideological slogans. The Palestinian citizen no longer perceives Islamist rhetoric as a comprehensive solution, but rather demands an end to the blockade, the improvement of public services, and the restoration of normal life—demands that belong to the domain of citizenship rather than that of creed.
Politically, Trump’s plan constitutes a practical test of Hamas’s flexibility in dealing with the realities of the Post-Islamist era. Its willingness to negotiate and to delegate certain powers to a transitional body—even under specific conditions—marks a turning point in its political thinking: a movement from revolutionary doctrine to pragmatic realism. This transformation does not imply the complete abandonment of Islam as a reference, but rather the abandonment of the idea of “Islam as a totalizing ideology of governance” and its replacement with the notion of “Islam as an ethical and cultural frame of reference” compatible with pluralistic civic life. It is, in essence, a shift from a closed religious rule to an open religious reference, from the pursuit of an Islamic state project to the construction of a social Islam experience.
Nevertheless, what is occurring with Hamas cannot yet be described as a fully realized form of Post-Islamism; rather, it more closely resembles a phase of crisis Islamism or disguised Islamism, wherein the movement seeks to adapt to external pressures without forfeiting its symbolic identity. It continues to raise the banner of resistance and to draw upon religious legitimacy to justify its existence, yet in everyday practice, it operates as a civil authority grappling with economic and administrative challenges more than leading a coherent ideological project. This contradiction between rhetoric and practice is the defining characteristic of the transitional phase toward Post-Islamism.
At its core, Post-Islamism does not signify the end of religion or the abolition of Islamic reference, but rather a reconfiguration of the relationship between religion and power, and between religion and society. In the case of Hamas, this transformation appears to be taking shape through both internal and external struggles: internally, between a younger generation of Palestinians demanding freedom and dignity; and externally, between Hamas and the international order, which compels it to redefine its political role. Should local and international actors succeed in imposing a settlement that forces the movement to relinquish some of its governing authority and hand over civil administration to a transitional body, Gaza may present a real-world model of Post-Islamism in the Palestinian context—an Islamic organization retaining symbolic legitimacy but gradually relinquishing total control, leaving space for civil institutions and national forces to reshape political life.
Ultimately, the current experience of Hamas exposes the fracturing of the classical model of Political Islam, affirming that the future of Islamist movements does not lie in restoring the Islamic state but in reintegrating religion into public life as a source of values rather than authority. This is an exhausted phase of Islamism searching for a new balance between faith and realism, legitimacy and citizenship, symbol and interest—thereby embodying the essence of the transformation that Bayat described decades ago: that when Political Islam reaches its zenith, it begins to transform into Post-Islamism—a religion that liberates itself from the burden of the state to return to the sphere of humanity.
Gaza: The Struggle of References in the New World Order
At the heart of the Palestinian–Israeli conflict, Hamas today faces an existential test that may redefine its nature as an Islamist political movement. After years of governance in Gaza and since the outbreak of the major confrontation in October 2023, economic, humanitarian, military, and political crises have accumulated. This harsh reality places Hamas at a crossroads: to persist with its old ideological discourse or to accept a reconfiguration of its relationship with power, the public, and the international system.
Hamas has previously expressed a hesitant stance toward Trump’s plan, reflecting its crisis of balance between ideological identity and political reality. This ambivalence reveals that the movement has not yet surrendered intellectually, but is striving to maintain its identity while adapting to external pressures. This does not yet represent a full entry into Post-Islamism; rather, it suggests a stage of “crisis Islamism” or “masked Islamism”—where religion serves as a symbolic cover while political pragmatism dictates behavior.
If this trajectory continues—through partial or gradual acceptance of Trump’s plan or similar frameworks—Gaza may witness a hybrid model of Political Islam, one not abolished but transformed: from total rule to cultural and civic influence, approximating the Post-Islamist condition. Instead of governing the state through ideological authority, Hamas could become a moral and symbolic reference, while daily governance is handled by civil or technocratic institutions.
Regionally, within the broader Middle Eastern landscape, such plans—backed by American regional pressure—may lead to a redrawing of power dynamics: transforming Gaza from a stronghold of armed resistance into a zone of international or Arab administration, and potentially integrating it into regional economic projects under Western supervision. Thus, the Palestinian cause shifts from an ideological struggle to the management of a post-war crisis—from resistance to reconstruction and administration. This pattern could be replicated elsewhere, such as in Lebanon, Iraq, or Syria, where religious movements gradually evolve from political actors into cultural and societal agents.
Christian Zionism: The Other Face of Political Theology
Following the decline of the classical Islamist wave and the onset of introspection among Islamic movements, an opposing religious–political trajectory has emerged in the Western world—Christian Zionism. This contrast exposes a striking paradox in the evolving relationship between religion and politics: while contemporary Islamic thought tends to depoliticize religion and return it to its ethical and moral sphere, Western religious thought has moved toward repoliticizing Christian faith and instrumentalizing it in the service of the geopolitical project of Western hegemony. Here, the two crises—the crisis of Islamism and the crisis of Western modernity—intersect in a single tableau that redistributes the roles between religion and the state, faith and power.
If Post-Islamism represents the retreat of Islam into its ethical and spiritual domain, then Christian Zionism signifies the expansion of Christianity into the political realm. In this context, Christian Zionism emerges as a powerful theological current providing the Zionist project with religious legitimacy. It does not merely offer political support for Israel; rather, it sanctifies its existence through Evangelical interpretations of biblical prophecy.[3]
The Middle East today witnesses a dual and complex transformation in its intellectual and political architecture: on the one hand, the decline of Political Islam and the advent of Post-Islamism; on the other, the rise of Christian Zionism as an ideological driver of Western—particularly American—foreign policy. This asymmetrical parallel between the two trajectories reveals an implicit intellectual confrontation between two religious visions, each seeking, in its own way, to reinterpret the role of religion in international politics—one in critical retreat, the other in strategic expansion.
Should Trump’s plan—or its successors—succeed in imposing a new reality, Christian Zionism may evolve from a supportive force into a mechanism for reorganizing cultural and religious influence in the Middle East, endowing normalization and settlement projects with theological legitimacy. In this scenario, the conflict ceases to be merely “Islamic–Israeli,” transforming instead into a confrontation between political theologies—each advancing a national project intertwined with sacred narratives and geopolitical interests.
The paradox, then, is that Post-Islamism and Christian Zionism represent two opposing trajectories in the interplay between religion and politics:
-The former seeks to depoliticize Islam, returning it to its ethical and social space.
– The latter seeks to repoliticize Christianity, turning it into a strategic instrument of global order.
In this sense, the world is witnessing the decline of Islamic politics and the rise of Christian politics. While Islamist movements retreat inward for critical reassessment, Evangelical movements expand outward into the public sphere, exerting direct influence over major policy decisions in Washington and Tel Aviv.
Christian Zionism grants Israel a theological dimension that legitimizes its expansionist policies, whereas Post-Islamism propels Muslims toward a form of religious pragmatism devoid of a unifying project.
This contradiction places the Middle East at the heart of a struggle of metaphysical references no less perilous than its geopolitical conflicts. Christian Zionism endows Israel with a theological dimension that legitimizes its expansionist policies, while Post-Islamism drives Muslims toward a form of religious pragmatism devoid of a unifying project, thereby creating an imbalance in the region’s symbolic and spiritual equilibrium. If the former sacralizes power, the latter strips resistance of its metaphysical depth, confining it to the realm of sheer political realism.
Ultimately, the confrontation between Post-Islamism and Christian Zionism is not a clash between Islam and Christianity, but rather between two visions of the relationship between religion and politics in the twenty-first century: one that regards religion as an instrument for legitimizing power, and another that seeks to humanize faith and detach it from conflict.
Yet the danger of this confrontation lies in the fact that the retreat of Islamic thought parallels the expansion of Christian-Zionist ideology, a development that may reshape global religious consciousness according to an unequal balance of power, wherein prophecy becomes a weapon and religion a tool for re-engineering the new Middle East.
The essential transformation in contemporary Western politico-religious thought lies in the conversion of “peace” from a moral value into a political instrument serving the Christian-Zionist project, which links peace to the fulfillment of the biblical prophecy of Christ’s return following the gathering of the Jews in Palestine. Within this discourse, Israel is presented as a divine instrument rather than a colonial power, and opposition to its policies becomes tantamount to defying the will of God. Thus, Israeli peace transforms into a spiritual hegemony that justifies material domination.
The United States, especially during the administrations of George W. Bush and Donald Trump, instrumentalized this theology to market settlement plans and impose normalization under a redemptive religious rhetoric, promoted by major Evangelical networks such as Christians United for Israel. Consequently, the concept of peace was emptied of its original Qur’anic and Evangelical meanings rooted in justice and mercy, and redefined as a “victor’s peace” that sanctifies injustice and criminalizes resistance.
While the Christian-Zionist discourse has successfully mobilized religious symbols to justify domination, Islamic and Arab thought, following the decline of Political Islam and the emergence of Post-Islamism, has struggled to produce a normative alternative—a vision of peace grounded in justice rather than submission. As a result, Zionist peace has become the dominant narrative in an age shaped by political theology and post-truth.
The Conflict Between Western Political Theology and Islamic Reformist Reason: From Post-Islamism to Post-Zionism
The world today is entering a new phase of intellectual struggle that redefines the relationship between religion and politics on a global scale. The conflict is no longer limited to “Islam versus the West” or “resistance versus colonialism,” but has become a deeper confrontation between a revitalized Western political theology—seeking to impose religious-symbolic hegemony over the world—and an emerging Islamic reformist reason striving to find a new path after the decline of classical Islamism. It is a contest between two projects: one that believes in the sacrality of power, and another that seeks to restore the humanity of faith.
Contemporary Western political theology, embodied today in Christian Zionism and the Evangelical-Jewish alliance, openly aspires to transform religion into a strategic instrument of global governance. It rests on a redemptive narrative that views history as moving toward the realization of divine prophecies in the Middle East, where the establishment and expansion of Israel are seen as part of a “divine plan.” In this sense, Zionism is no longer merely a Jewish national project, but a global creed grounded in a Christian reinterpretation of the Torah and the Gospel, elevated to a universal doctrine that places it beyond political or moral critique. This worldview grants the West a “divine mandate” to reshape geography and power in the Middle East under the banners of “spreading peace” and “defending divine values.”
In contrast, the Islamic reformist mind stands today at a moment of existential reflection after the collapse of classical Islamism. The Islamic thought that, during the twentieth century, was bound to the ideal of an “Islamic state” now faces the necessity of reconstructing the concepts of freedom, justice, and citizenship within the realities of postmodernity. Hence, Post-Islamism emerged as a critical framework aiming to liberate religion from ideology and restore it to its ethical and individual domain. Yet despite its intellectual value, it has not yet succeeded in articulating a comprehensive civilizational project to match the symbolic force of Western political theology. It remains in a defensive rather than proactive position, more oriented toward critique than construction.
The real challenge before Islamic thought today is the movement from Post-Islamism to Post-Zionism—from the stage of religious self-critique to that of critiquing the theological foundations of Western hegemony itself. What is required is not merely to re-evaluate the relationship between Islam and politics, but also to de-sacralize Western power, exposing the contradictions of Christian-Zionist discourse, which justifies oppression in the name of prophecy.
Post-Zionism, in this sense, does not deny the right of Jews to exist, but seeks to liberate global consciousness from the theological premise that turns occupation into divine destiny.
Between the inward retreat of Islamic faith and the outward expansion of Zionist theology across geography, a global crisis unfolds over the very meaning of the sacred.
It appears that the future of the conflict will not be decided by arms or economics, but by meaning. The coming battle is one of grand narratives: Who holds the right to interpret the sacred, and to orient it toward humanity rather than the state? Who can redefine peace as justice rather than submission, and religion as liberation rather than subjugation?
As long as the world remains captive to the Christian-Zionist theology of power, the cycle of sacred violence will persist. Yet if Islamic reformist reason succeeds in transforming religion into a humanist-civil project, it would mark the birth of a new phase of spiritual balance in the international order.
Post-Islamism does not signify the end of religion; rather, it marks the beginning of rediscovering faith beyond the logic of conflict. Likewise, Post-Zionism does not imply the end of Israel, but the end of its monopoly over sacredness. Between these two horizons, a new global consciousness may emerge—one that liberates religion from ideology and politics from metaphysics, establishing a Middle East where moral value replaces political prophecy, and human justice replaces the illusion of redemption.
Hamas at the Crossroads Between Ideology and Reality
Since the outbreak of the major confrontation in October 2023, Hamas has been engaged in an existential struggle—not only with Israel and the regional environment, but also with its own intellectual self. After more than fifteen years of governing the Gaza Strip, its domestic legitimacy has eroded due to political division, humanitarian crises, and recurring public protests demanding an end to unilateral rule.
Its partial acceptance of the U.S. proposal, albeit with conditions, reveals a profound transformation in the movement’s nature. While Hamas still theoretically refuses to relinquish its weapons, in practice it has begun to act according to the logic of defensive realism rather than totalizing ideology. This paradox signifies Hamas’s entry into a phase of crisis Islamism—continuing to use Islamic rhetoric while behaving outside the revolutionary Islamist paradigm, gradually moving toward what Asef Bayat describes as Post-Islamism: the shift from the project of Islamic authority to that of religious-civil agency.
Post-Islamism thus represents a historic moment of introspection for Islamic movements after their failure to fulfill ideological promises. Religion ceases to be a state project and becomes instead a moral framework for public life. Within this context, Hamas embodies a living model of this forced transformation—from ideological resistance to pragmatic resistance, from comprehensive Islamic governance to humanitarian crisis management, from the legitimacy of jihad to the legitimacy of social and political survival.
War, siege, and internal division have compelled Hamas to reconsider the notion of the “political sacred”, as it has become impossible to reconcile transcendent religious discourse with exhausted civic reality. Consciously or not, Hamas has entered a gradual secularization of Islamic discourse, where resistance is no longer a theological creed but a national demand for survival—placing it midway between traditional Islamism and emergent secularism, within the Post-Islamist zone that seeks to reconcile faith with political realism.
What is unfolding in Gaza today is not merely another war or negotiation round, but a historical laboratory for the transformation of the religion–politics nexus in the Arab and Islamic worlds. Gaza now represents a meeting point between the end of classical Islamism and the apogee of Christian Zionism, where the crisis of faith in resistance intersects with the ecstasy of faith in power.
In this configuration, Hamas occupies a complex and paradoxical position: on one hand, it embodies the heritage of resistant political Islam; on the other, it confronts a new reality that forces it to redefine the place of religion within the state and society.
Despite its impasse, Hamas represents the first gateway for Islamic thought’s transition from a theology of power to a theology of humanity—from Islam as an instrument of rule to Islam as a system of values and meaning. Conversely, Christian Zionism stands as the mirror image of this global transformation, turning faith into a transcontinental geopolitical strategy that seeks to sanctify power and reshape the Middle East on the basis of a biblical prophecy intertwining religion and politics.
Here lies the great paradox: while Political Islam struggles to divest itself of its theological and authoritarian burdens, the West insists on the sacralization of power, legitimizing it under the banners of “divine peace” and “sacred promise.”
The Three Possible Paths for Hamas
Within this contradiction, Hamas now experiences what might be called a phase of crisis Islamism. It has not yet abandoned its Islamic frame of reference, but it now practices it defensively rather than offensively, striving to preserve its symbolic identity amid internal and external siege and a visible decline in popular support.
Ideology no longer constitutes the movement’s primary source of strength; instead, it has become a burden that Hamas seeks to redefine under mounting political and humanitarian pressures. This ideological retreat parallels a structural transformation in the relationship between religion and power within the Hamas experience.
The movement may soon be compelled to transfer Gaza’s civil administration to a transitional or national authority, while retaining a symbolic or resistance role—a qualitative shift from Islam as an ideology of governance to Islam as a cultural and moral reference, that is, into the Post-Islamist sphere.
Given these dynamics, three possible trajectories can be envisioned for Hamas’s future:
Radical Transformation – the Post-Islamist Scenario: Hamas accepts power-sharing or transfers authority to a civil body while remaining an influential cultural-national current. It thus transitions from a movement of rule to a movement of influence, becoming a practical model of Post-Islamism in the Palestinian context.
Ideological Stagnation – the Islamist Hard-Line Scenario: Hamas clings to its full Islamic discourse and rejects substantial concessions. This path would likely lead to greater isolation and possible internal fragmentation between pragmatic and hardline factions.
Masked Islamism – the Hybrid Scenario (Most Likely in the Short Term): Hamas maintains its traditional religious rhetoric outwardly while engaging in pragmatic political arrangements that allow its reintegration into the Palestinian system. In this hybrid form, Post-Islamism becomes a lived practice within an Islamic symbolic framework.
The greater wager in this phase extends beyond Hamas itself: it concerns the future of Islamic reformist thought—its capacity to move beyond organizational and partisan confines to redefine religion outside the logic of state and domination.
Should this intellectual current succeed in articulating a humanist religious vision capable of confronting the coercive sacrality of Christian Zionism, a new Middle Eastern consciousness may emerge—one that dismantles the theological myth that has rendered Israel a “sacred destiny beyond critique.”
Only then might the era of Post-Islamism and Post-Zionism truly begin: an era of a new Middle East—human rather than holy, just rather than redemptive, civic rather than theocratic.
Between Two Trajectories: The Global Crisis of the Sacred
At the core of the current scene, Post-Islamism and Post-Zionism appear as opposing trajectories of a single global crisis—the crisis of religion in the age of the state and hegemony. The former seeks to liberate faith from the burden of power and return it to its ethical and human realm, while the latter clothes power in sanctity, turning prophecy into a political project.
Between the inward retreat of Islamic faith and the outward expansion of Zionist theology across geography, a global impasse unfolds over the very meaning of the sacred: Will religion remain a source of meaning and liberation, or will it become an instrument of control and justification? In this profound tension, two worldviews confront one another—one that humanizes faith, and another that deifies power.
References
Abu Rumman, Mohammad. The Islamists after a Decade of the Arab Spring: The Questions of Revolution and the Test of Power. Amman: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES), 2021.
Bayat, Asef. Post-Islamism: The Changing Faces of Political Islam. Oxford University Press, 2013.
Ben Lazreg, Houssem. “Post-Islamism in Tunisia and Egypt: Contradictory Trajectories.” Religions 12, no. 6 (2021).
Gerry Shih and Karen DeYoung, “Hamas accepts Trump’s plan to end the war in Gaza, but with conditions,” The Washington Post, October 3, 2025.
Halah Ahmad, Kirk, Mimi. “Christian Zionism and the Danger of Its Exceptionalism.” Al-Shabaka – The Palestinian Policy Network, October 3, 2023.
Luck, Taylor. “Hamas at Crossroads: Pragmatism, Isolation, and the Uncertain Path Ahead.” Wilson Center, January 22, 2025.
Makdisi, Saree. Tolerance Is a Wasteland: Palestine and the Culture of Denial. University of California Press, 2022.
Orabi, Sari. “Shadows of History and Ghosts of the Future: Hamas and Jihad after the Al-Aqsa Flood.” Journal of Palestinian Studies 141 (Winter 2025).
Weber, Timothy P. On the Road to Armageddon: How Evangelicals Became Israel’s Best Friend. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008.
Weller, Marc. “Can the Trump Peace Plan for Gaza Succeed?” Chatham House – International Affairs Think Tank. October 2, 2025.
[1] The term “Post-Islamism” emerged in the 1990s, closely associated with the works of Iranian scholar Asef Bayat, who employed it to describe the social, intellectual, and political transformations that Muslim societies experienced following the failure of Islamist experiments to fulfill their ideological promises. The political, economic, and social realities in countries such as Iran, Sudan, Afghanistan, Turkey, and Egypt revealed deep contradictions between the proclaimed Islamic discourse and the practical requirements of the modern state. This failure generated within Islamic movements a critical revisionist tendency, prompting a rethinking of the relationships between religion and politics, faith and citizenship, and religion and modernity.
[2] At this stage, the focus shifts from “Islamic identity” to the “Muslim individual”—that is, from the collective project aimed at establishing an Islamic state to the personal experience of faith, individual moral values, and personal freedom. Religion is thus reintegrated into everyday life not as a political authority or ideological framework, but as an ethical and cultural reference guiding individual and social behavior. Likewise, Post-Islamism seeks to reconcile Islam with modernity, democracy, and human rights, striving to transcend the traditional dichotomy between authenticity and modernity.
[3] Core Theological Feature: It regards the establishment of Israel as the fulfillment of a divine promise mentioned in the sacred texts; views the return of the Jews to Palestine as a step toward the realization of the prophecy of the Second Coming of Christ; and presents Israel as a divine instrument rather than a political entity, thereby placing it beyond moral and political critique. This theological vision is employed to justify expansionist policies and to sustain American support for Israel..