As we have previously recognized, Zionism is a setting expansionist movement, and it is firmly forbidden to separate between the movement and its settling characteristic, nor between this settling characteristic and the policy of expansion itself, as properly revealed in the forthcoming 5th Commandment of the 10 Commandment’s list announced by the Zionist movement at the end of the infamous Bazl congress which the Zionists celebrated its 100th anniversary back in May 1997.

In fact, the issue of Palestine’s borders was, still and will remain, a substantial subject deeply rooted in the Zionist thinking and practices; it is on this groundwork that the expansion will thrive by size, place, time, condition and nature means.

The Zionist expansion policy in Palestine is based on an unshakable concept, meant to never accept any concession or debate regarding it, and expressed by the saying that Palestine is only a first step and an initial base toward creating the ultimate Zionist homeland, which should be poised to expand and never decrease, and which border never allowed to move backward, to the inside of the Zionist entity precisely; thus, each discourse about the stability of "Israel’s borders" is a superficial one, only confined to a specific time or era. Moreover, there are no borderlines for "Israel" from the geographic point of view, as this concept is widely accepted by the Zionist movement through practical and de facto means. Hence, time and circumstances are the main elements able to draw these borderlines, to create and manipulate them as well. Borderlines have, accordingly, the capacity dimension, not the spatial one.

From this stage, we totally condemn all those who constantly reiterate the Torah saying that "Israel’s" borders, according to the alleged divine promise given to the prophets of Jewish people, stretch from river Nile to the Euphrates; undoubtedly, many Jewish elements echoed this claim as well, particularly during the first quarter of the current century, most of them traditional religious elements, or even those others who never adhered to the deep religious practices and basis, tending to use these aspects in order to gain the religious elements back to their own camp, especially when the Zionist principles have been lacking the overwhelming support of the world Jewry opinion at that stage of time.

However, those who reiterated this slogan found in it a special attraction, outstandingly relished by the Jewish ordinary man, wherever he might be, and whatever his political orientation might endeavor, because it brought to him the remembrance of a transmitted saying and a prevalent promise (a factitious one), attributed to God of Jewish people only, which bear in its folding the pure explanation of all the other commandments that Jewish people is an exquisite and selected people, a people who possess the divine right of owning the land of Palestine where all the Jews of the world should gather around and establish their presence.

However, it should be noted that the first retraction of the theory mentioning "from the Nile to the Euphrates" took place at the aftermath of World War 1, as the victorious countries began their search deep into the Jewish issue, and therefore in creating a national entity for the Jews in Palestine following the announcement of "Balfour promise", the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the British occupation of Palestine.

The Zionist leadership was opposed at that time to an upheaval problem:  it was compelled within is persistent attempts before the European countries to gain their approval of the mentioned promise and start to establish the foundations of the targeted entity, to reveal its notion regarding the geographic borders of this desired and most acclaimed homeland. In order to achieve this task, the Zionist leadership was forced to deal with many hurdles; from one side, Herzl always reiterated the word "Entity" in an open and general manner, never being able to define it properly, this situation was amply expressed within the list of announcements released at the end of the first Zionist congress (Bazl, August 1897), and afterwards.

On the other side, there was no definitive agreement between all the Zionists (Leadership and parties, as well as proposals) about the quiddity of these borders, as the final outcome of the mentioned congress heavily lacked the strict drawing of the borderlines; moreover, this issue was left stretchable, subject to many different explanations and opinions. While the concrete dream of fulfilling the "From the Nile to the Euphrates" slogan as the proper borderlines of "Israel" was tickling the deep emotions of many Jews, there have been on the opposite side many European reservations unwilling to adhere to the concept of this expanded new entity, as it will symbolize the Judaization of the super powers’ regional interests in the Middle-East area, particularly affecting both Britain and France who supported the Zionists’ claims during the initial stages in Palestine, as both European nations have been contemplating their own strategic interests at the first place, and concluded that the Zionist claims could reveal very positive in order to enhance these interests, not the opposite.

Under the heavy pressures exerted by these operatives, Zionist official memorandums submitted by the "World Zionist Organization" to the victorious nations, collectively and individually, during the "Versailles Convention" (Paris 1919) and afterwards, contented with lesser than the formerly proclaimed slogan of "From the Nile to the Euphrates"; additionally, the Zionist organization adopted a "Theological" study set up by rabbi Isaac’s, which called for the definition of "Biblical Palestine". This study settled for borders’ map stretching from the Lebanese City of Sidon and the riverheads of Litani (North) to the Southern spot of Sinai desert. In contrast, France, having to protect its traditional greedy aspirations in Lebanon following its official agreement with Britain (the famous "Sikes-Picot" accord of May 1916), maintained its upper hand over Southern Lebanon and all the territories of this country, by means of the mentioned accord with its British ally, and sought to reduce the Northern borderlines of the Zionist proclaimed entity, ending up in establishing the map of Palestine, the one we all get familiar with, entering the modern history as the official map of Palestine since 1922; hence, the international approach to any Zionist entity was easily restricted toward this portion of land, forcing all the Zionists to comply reluctantly.

Granting the Jews only a part of the Palestinian land didn’t came, in fact, to contradict the official Zionist claims; the 4th Commandment called upon for a foothold in Palestine, leaving to the Zionists of the future the task of claiming wider portions of lands, in conjunction with their own possibilities (either militarily, economically or internationally). This was the reason behind the temporary consent of the Zionist leaderships toward these projects, until the chances arise to violate the defined borderlines recommended by these projects, in order to expand to Zionist entity’s sovereignty over new regions surrounding it.

The Zionists, for example, expressed their satisfaction toward the United Nations’ resolutions of
November 1947, but stunned the whole world after less than 2 years, following their acquisition of large territories of Palestinian lands previously granted to the Arab population by these very same resolutions, to add them to their granted territories! In 1956, they also succeeded to convince their great allies, Britain and France, to increase their portion of land in the Sinai peninsula and get close to the Suez Channel, occupying through this step what was referred to as the "Gaza Strip", before establishing their presence in 1967 over every inch of Palestine, the Sinai peninsula, some Jordanian territories located to the South-East of Palestine, and some Syrian territories to the North-East (including the Golan Heights, and reaching Kenitra town).

In 1973, the Zionists consolidated their presence even much deeper, and between 1978 and 1982, spread their direct occupation over Southern Lebanon and the Western parts of the Beqaa valley. Yes, there are no stable and steady borderlines for "Israel": these borders are only poised to expand and never retreat, they are very flexible; this is why "Israel" was one of the fewest countries in the world never having a pure constitution, in order to never being forced to officially draw its borderlines like any normal country; "Israel" is also one of the fewest countries insisting on never announcing its official borders, passing over this issue by talking about "Political borders", "Security borders", "Historical – Biblical borders" or "International borders".

This situation leads us to tackle the issue of "Great Israel", the prevailing expression of the same "Israel" that sought to express itself as the ultimate homeland of the Jews, starting from the current "Israel" within the Palestinian territories and onward; once again, we must not get caught by this idiom; "Great Israel" is not a defined  project propounded by a specific Zionist group (those who we’ve been accustomed to refer to as "Extremists" of "Expansionists" or "Hawkish"). "Great Israel" id definitely the prolongation of a base, and therefore the ultimate dream of each Zionist person; yes, each Zionist person. This is why all of them are one equal terms withregard to this specific issue, being either "Doves" or "Hawkish", "Religious" or "Secular", "Sephardis" or "Ashkenazis", "Rightists" or "Leftists", white-skinned people or black, red and yellow races people. "Israel" is simply a substantial part of "Great Israel", as both of them represent a same path embodied through different phases.

Saying this, it should be mentioned that there is no real difference between "Israel" in a part of Palestine and "Israel" in all of Palestine, and even with "Israel" outside Palestine in the neighboring countries. Metaphorically, "Little Israel" is an undisputed and undivided part of "Great Israel", according to the well-established Zionist concept, and what was restricted in half of Palestine over all territories in 1948 could expand accordingly to reach all the regions of the Arab world, just when the positive prospects
for a future potential Zionist aggression loom on the horizon.

Beginning from the early 90’s of this century, the current formula was subjected to serious international modifications, bringing "Great Israel" to get transformed into "Mighty Israel". As for the mentioned expansion and enlargement, they shouldn’t necessarily get revealed through traditional military or occupational aspects, they could be replaced by a rather political, economic, cultural and psychological hegemony; even this kind of domination could be much beneficial for "Israel", as it achieve the concrete targets of the occupation without being compelled to pay heavy prices in return. Therefore, "Israel" could be able to expropriate anything the Zionists opted for, leaving to the others the task of paying the price.

I wouldn’t permit myself to conclude the discourse about the Zionist Expansion as a permanent clause deeply rooted within the framework of the 10 Commandments list without referring to the issue of Eastern Jordan (or Trans-Jordan) precisely, as this critical subject lies in the third grade of the Arab world’s Judaization scale, following the Judaization of a port Palestine, and all of Palestine, respectively. Therefore, this issue stands before the other stages, either those of Lebanon, Syria, Egypt of any other Arab country threatened by the Zionist aggressive policy of expansion.

It was here also that religious-sentimental, historical, geographic and practical backgrounds and aspects played a central and crucial role in creating out of Eastern Jordan the step that directly followed Palestine in the Zionist greedy file.

Eastern Jordan has long been, throughout most of historical ancient times, a part of Palestine, or at least along with Palestine as a genuine part of a wider reign, be it a Syrian, Arabic, Islamic or foreign occupation one; both River Jordan’s banks have been politically, economically and administratively integrated in full during those periods of ancient times. The interlacement between the areas on the Eastern and Western flanks of River Jordan was so deeply that ancient explorers, either Arabs or foreigners, rarely separated one region from its counterpart. Transportation roads, trading convoys, emigration activities, pilgrimage and war conquests frequently crossed this river through both its banks, as a natural watercourse based in a single country. Even a small town like Teberiya located in NorthEastern Palestine was the capital or the base of Jordan’s district during many long periods of time.

And even if the Biblcal versions narrating the Hebrew exit from Egypt to Palestine were genuinely true, it should be insisted on the fact that this exodus forged its path through Eastern Jordan (or Trans-Jordan) precisely; Hebrew tribes occupied parts of the river’s Eastern territories, while the other joint tribes gained the upper hand over the Western side of the river and its entourage. According to the Biblical versions, both river’s banks are referred to as the "Promised Land" for the Jews, and it was Herzl himself who made use of this precise pretext to revive the dream in order to win the Jews’ position within the Zionist movement’s settling policies in Palestine and later establish on its soil the Jewish national homeland.

However, the international circumstances and colonial greedy aspirations were not in a position favoring the Jewish settling activities in the Easter parts of River Jordan, nor to annex these regions directly to the desired Zionist country, beginning from the Balfour Promise, through the mandate period and the partition resolutions of 1947, and until the present time. This is why the Zionists postponed the Jordanian issue to a later undefined stage.

We have already seen that the Zionist leadership always took into account the international political circumstances during the set up of its settling plans; we should also remember, in this context, that the British authorities during the 20’s of the current century have been the main sponsoring side of the Zionist claims and interests, having also been very active in their pursuit to detach Eastern Jordan from Palestine during the international negotiations that took place between 1919 and 1923, and later to establish an independent principality on its soil (separated from Palestine, not from the mandate reign, and there fore independent from the British program to practically implement the Balfour Promise in order to pave the way for creating a Zionist entity in Palestine).

On the other hand, the British authorities exerted heavy pressures to prevent the Jews from buying lands in Eastern Jordan and to settle on the soil already purchased, before forcing the selling side (some of Jordanian tribes Sheikhs) and the buying side (the World Zionist Organization) to abrogate all the relevant contracts and abolish the agreements.

Finally, it was the British authorities who carried out the inclusion program of the "Arab section" of Palestine within the planning framework of the partition project in 1947 and annex it to Eastern Jordan, to establish later on a single country under the name of Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, which directly meant creating an upheaval hurdle in order to deny the Zionist movement from occupying this Arab section and then conquer Eastern Jordan. The British successfully achieved the second goal in preventing the Zionists from conquering Jordan, but the first goal vanished in less than 20 Years: the Zionists forced their occupation over a cast portion of this Arab section (1948-1949), and later seized the remaining part of it during the six-day war in 1976 (later known as the West Bank).

All these mentioned efforts didn’t succeed to prevent the Zionists from dreaming of acquiring Eastern Jordan in an undefined date; but if this dream was a general and ingrained Zionist claim, it should be stated that the most vocational side announcing its commitment toward fulfilling it was the widespread Zionist group which decided in the 20’s its withdrawal from the World Zionist Organization, and dubbed itself with the term "New Zionists Movement" and later on the "Revisionist Zionism".

However, the remaining Zionists referred to the latters as the "Revisionists". This group was extremely active during 20 years, before rejoining the ranks of the World Zionist Organization midway through the 40’s, once again following the approximation of all various orientations of the Zionists to their supreme goal in creating the Zionist homeland in Palestine.

Vladimir Jabotensky, the man who created the "Revisionist Zionism" and led it until his death, announced tat Easter Jordan is a substantial part of the fist stage, or the first step, and that the issue of occupying this region cannot be delayed for a later period of time; he also defined it as a prime part of the starting base to achieve his goal, and not just a portion of the forthcoming Zionist empire. Hence, his official emblem referred to a map that included both Palestine and Eastern Jordan, with a sword placed between them.

We will tackle the issue of this man and his terrorist organizations in a coming chapter, contenting here to indicate that the breakaway organization he created was the springboard upon which the extremist right-wing "Herut" party was launched, giving the birth later on to the "Likud" coalition comprising 5 parties, the same political bloc governing "Israel" right now. Jabotensky was accordingly the spiritual father of Menachem Begin who devised the leadership to Isaac Shamir, who, in his turn, handed over the leadership of Likud to Benjamin Netenyahu.