"We are dealing with treachery and threats, which accompanied the establishment of Israel"
About this Quote
Assad’s phrasing is built to do three jobs at once: widen the target, sanctify the grievance, and immunize the speaker from scrutiny. “We are dealing with” adopts the bureaucratic calm of a security briefing, as if history itself were an ongoing operation requiring vigilance. Then comes the payload: “treachery and threats.” The pairing is deliberate. “Threats” covers the obvious - military risk, coercion, instability. “Treachery” is the more potent word because it implies betrayal from within: collaborators, compromised elites, neighbors who “sold out.” It’s a politics of suspicion that doesn’t just point outward at Israel, but inward at anyone in the region who normalizes relations, negotiates, or even questions the governing narrative.
The clause “which accompanied the establishment of Israel” is where the rhetoric turns from commentary into frame-setting. By anchoring present-day conflict to 1948, Assad collapses decades of shifting realities into a single origin story: Israel’s creation as an event inseparable from deceit and danger. That move matters because it casts the problem as structural, not situational - not a border dispute or policy disagreement, but an ongoing condition. If the “establishment” was born with “treachery,” then compromise looks less like diplomacy and more like surrender to an original sin.
Contextually, this is classic Baathist-era messaging: invoke Palestine as a regional litmus test while reinforcing the security-state logic at home. External menace becomes a tool for internal discipline, and “treachery” becomes a convenient category for rivals, reformers, and inconvenient facts.
The clause “which accompanied the establishment of Israel” is where the rhetoric turns from commentary into frame-setting. By anchoring present-day conflict to 1948, Assad collapses decades of shifting realities into a single origin story: Israel’s creation as an event inseparable from deceit and danger. That move matters because it casts the problem as structural, not situational - not a border dispute or policy disagreement, but an ongoing condition. If the “establishment” was born with “treachery,” then compromise looks less like diplomacy and more like surrender to an original sin.
Contextually, this is classic Baathist-era messaging: invoke Palestine as a regional litmus test while reinforcing the security-state logic at home. External menace becomes a tool for internal discipline, and “treachery” becomes a convenient category for rivals, reformers, and inconvenient facts.
Quote Details
| Topic | War |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Bashar
Add to List


