Throughout history, the geography of the Middle East has served as a laboratory of cartographic engineering and the primary front of influence struggles for global powers. Located at the heart of this geography, the establishment of the State of Israel and the expansionist policies it pursues represent far more than ordinary nation-state reflexes; they constitute the intersection of global and regional sub-projects. Shaped along the axes of political science, international relations, military strategy, and theology, this multidimensional structure presents itself today as the project output of a “hybrid design” that is not tied to a single center yet serves the same purpose.
Driven into the region in the past as a “geopolitical wedge” for the imperial interests of colonial powers, this project structure has over time generated its own doctrines, transforming into a dynamo of “geographical micro-nationalism and sectarianization” aimed at liquidating regional states and atomizing artificial borders. Indeed, the civil wars experienced today in the Middle East, the state-building processes of proxy actors, and the direct targeting of regional powers are nothing other than the current cartographic operations of this macro plan, the groundwork of which has been laid for a century.
While shifts in the balances of power among global actors and asymmetric alliances directly influence this timeline imposed on our geography, placing Türkiye—the region’s most deeply rooted and powerful nation-state—in the crosshairs is regarded as a strategic necessity for the ultimate success of the project in question. In this context, the assessment and assertion that Israel is part of a grand project has a well-established history in international politics literature and Middle Eastern analyses.
Among the primary structures that have historically raised this argument with different motivations are anti-colonial left-wing thinkers, anti-imperialist analysts, and international relations scholars belonging to the realist school. These circles have defined Israel as a structural “outpost” safeguarding the geopolitical and economic interests of the Western world (particularly the UK and the US) in the Middle East. On the other hand, both eschatological (apocalyptic science) movements in the Islamic world and Christian Zionists (Evangelicals) in the Western world have viewed Israel’s existence and expansion not as secular state-building, but as the physical manifestation of a divine and theological plan. Finally, numerous statesmen and ideologues across Türkiye, Iran, Egypt, and the Arab world also directly characterize every border change, coup, and civil war occurring in the region as the imposition of these macro projects upon the region.
Strategic Aspect: The Anatomy of the Yinon Plan and Micro-Nationalism
In this scope, Oded Yinon’s 1982 strategy is not an ordinary territorial expansion (annexation) plan. The Yinon Plan is a form of cartographic engineering that establishes Israel’s security on the atomization of the geographical and demographic structures of its surrounding states. Yinon argues that the Middle Eastern borders drawn by Britain and France after World War I are artificial and unsustainable due to the ethnic and sectarian fault lines they harbor. Through the “regional atomization process” developed in this direction, it is aimed to divide nation-states into sub-identities, transforming them into micro-markets of globalization and manageable security units.
Yinon’s primary reference point is the civil war model in which Lebanon was divided into Christian, Druze, Sunni, and Shia cantons. In accordance with this “Lebanonization Model,” Syria was designed to be partitioned into at least 3–4 pieces: an “Alawite State” along the coastal strip, two “Sunni States” centered in Aleppo and Damascus, and a “Druze State” in the Druze mountains. Similarly, Iraq was envisioned to be split into 3 ethno-religious provinces: Kurdish in the north, Sunni in the center, and Shia in the south. Egypt, one of the major powers of the region, was positioned as a target to be weakened by collapsing its central authority and enabling Christian Copts to establish an independent state in Upper Egypt.
Theological Aspect: Evangelicalism and Kinetic Theopolitics
Frequently overlooked in the Western media yet possessing an immense lobby in US foreign policy, the Evangelical approach is built entirely upon “Apocalyptic Theology”. According to this theology, which adheres to dispensationalism, God has divided human history into different eras, and prophecies must be fulfilled literally for the transition to the next phase. In line with this, the modern State of Israel is accepted not as a democracy or a political ally, but as a theological instrument that accelerates the return of the Messiah.
The establishment of Israel in 1948 and the occupation of Jerusalem in 1967 are presented as evidence that this eschatological stopwatch is ticking. Forming the most dangerous breaking point of the theology, this process can be explained by the concept of “kinetic theopolitics,” which signifies converting prophecies in religious texts into military reality on the ground through modern military technologies. In this structure, where faith is turned into fuel for geopolitical strategy, it is believed that the destroyed Temple of Solomon (the Third Temple) must be rebuilt on the hill where the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock stand today. Evangelicals support the massive destruction, conflict, and the ultimate battle of Armageddon to be experienced in these holy lands prior to the arrival of the Messiah as an inevitable divine scenario.
The Current Implementation of Cartographic Engineering
The borders drawn by Oded Yinon on paper in 1982 have today turned into de facto realities in the Levant and Mesopotamian basins. In Lebanon, central authority has been rendered dysfunctional through economic collapse and military operations, while in Syria, with the breaking of Damascus’ power, the country has practically been brought to the brink of cantonization into east of the Euphrates, Idlib, and the southern line. Iraq, with the ethno-sectarian quota system established after the 2003 US invasion, has been condemned to a fragmented structure where Baghdad cannot exercise full authority.
Through the process, former proxy forces have been worn down and replaced with new artificial structures based on “garrison sovereignty”. Distinct from classical colonialism, in this “hybrid colonialism” model where states are collapsed from within and sovereignty is transferred to proxy militias, a process of building “Garrison Mini-States” has been carried out in northern Syria and northern Iraq.
Global Power Balance and the Project’s Timeline
The pace of progress and timeline of the grand project are directly influenced by multipolarity tendencies in the global system and the internal dynamics of superpowers. For instance, China’s Belt and Road vision demanding stability and uninterrupted trade in the region, along with its mediation in the Saudi Arabia–Iran rapprochement within this framework, played a decelerating role against the West’s conflict-oriented plans. The “October 7 Event,” which largely disrupted this process/concern and shifted the direction of the wind to a great extent, is therefore far from being explained by the concept of coincidence. Indeed, as the influence of neoconservative cadres and Evangelical Zionist lobbies over the White House increased in US politics, it is observed that the timeline of the project accelerated radically with steps such as the recognition of Jerusalem as the capital and the annexation of the Golan Heights.
The Türkiye Aspect of The Project
As I have highlighted in my analyses titled “Israel’s Quest for a Great Reset, BOP-BIP Conflict, and the Strategy of Clashing Türkiye with the West” and “Israel’s Geopolitical Blindness: The Limits of Strategic Arrogance on the Axis of The Jerusalem Post and Istanbul,” the phase of expanding, deepening, and making the grand project permanent inevitably places the Republic of Türkiye into the strategic crosshairs. The fundamental reasons why Türkiye has become the primary target of this project can be explained as follows:
- Being the Last Stronghold of Regional Nation-State Resistance: The success of the Yinon Plan depends on collapsing all powerful and well-established nation-state structures in the Middle East. Following the paralysis of the central authorities of Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon, Türkiye is the only major actor in the region possessing historical depth and conventional military power capable of resisting this wave of cantonization. Establishing a permanent order of micro-states in the Middle East is impossible without bringing down or destabilizing Türkiye.
- The Geographical Obstacle in Front of the Garrison State Project: The “Garrison Mini-State” intended to be established in northern Syria and Iraq for Israel’s security and the flow of energy lines is planned right on Türkiye’s southern borders. Türkiye’s in-depth cross-border military operations and the “Terror-Free Türkiye” initiative, which also encompasses Türkiye’s near abroad, geographically divide this artificial satellite state project and shut off its logistical access to the Mediterranean. This situation renders Türkiye an absolute military barrier that must be overcome for the architects of the project.
- Eastern Mediterranean and Blue Homeland Energy Blockade: Israel-centric Eastern Mediterranean natural gas routes and the Ben Gurion Canal vision, which form the economic backbone of the project, have been interrupted legally and militarily by Türkiye’s declared Blue Homeland (Mavi Vatan) strategy and the Maritime Boundary Delimitation Agreement signed with Libya. Because Türkiye blocks all energy corridors excluding itself with this maritime shield established in the middle of the Mediterranean, it stands as a direct economic target of global financiers and Israel.
- Pursuit of Asymmetric and Geopolitical Encirclement: Israel’s strikes on Syrian military installations close to the Turkish border and its efforts to prevent stability from being established in the region are part of a strategy to encircle Türkiye asymmetrically from its south. While Türkiye is pressured internally through economic and demographic (migration waves) fault lines, it is directly targeted externally in order to sabotage its regional game-maker role.
Conclusion
“Transcending the boundaries of conspiracy theories, the “Grand Project” emerges as a global cartographic engineering substantiated by military, economic, and theological operations on the ground. Israel’s role within this structure is to act as a central lever in the process of dissolving regional nation-state structures and liquidating focal points of resistance. As the region’s largest actor possessing ancient state wisdom, Türkiye is in the ultimate crosshairs of this global encirclement strategy due to the military blows it has dealt to cantonization projects on land and the strategic blockade it has produced at sea through the Blue Homeland. The move to redraw borders in the Middle East is a historical turning point that will directly determine the security architecture not only of the Levant basin, but also of the Anatolian geography. Türkiye’s resistance against this geopolitical imposition is the sole guarantee preventing not only its own territorial integrity from being compromised, but also the region’s ethnic and religious fault lines from being dragged into an all-out war of religion. The future of our geography will be shaped by the resolute defense of the sovereign rights of nation-states against these imposed artificial cantonization projects, and by the nullification of global theopolitical timetables through military and diplomatic wisdom.
