Podcast Summary: Arab Israeli Peace and New Visions for Gaza feat. Dana El Kurd

Podcast: It Could Happen Here (Cool Zone Media & iHeartPodcasts)
Date: December 8, 2025
Host: Dana El Kurd
Guests: Ben Schuman Stoller & Matan Kaminer (creators of the Bad Cousins podcast)

Episode Overview

This episode explores the contemporary landscape of Arab-Israeli normalization — particularly the Abraham Accords and emerging geopolitical visions for Gaza’s future. Host Dana El Kurd probes the ideological, historical, and political underpinnings of these “peace” frameworks, using a recently leaked US-Israeli "GREAT" plan for Gaza as entry point. Guests Ben Schuman Stoller and anthropologist Matan Kaminer dissect how myths, selective historical narratives, and the language of “tolerance” and “coexistence” are wielded to obscure ongoing structural violence and sidestep the core Palestinian question. The conversation builds from the political substance of normalization to a deeper critique of how biblical stories—especially that of Abraham—are instrumentalized in regional and global power plays.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Context of the Episode: US-Israeli “GREAT” Plan for Gaza

• Dana opens by summarizing a leaked PowerPoint from the Trump administration, titled “From a Demolished Iranian Proxy to a Prosperous Abrahamic Ally,” outlining a vision for Gaza’s “reconstruction” (02:16).
  • Key Takeaway: The plan aims to turn Gaza into an economic hub but denies real political rights to Gazans; it discusses incentivizing Gazan population transfer.
  • “Whatever remains of Gaza’s population will not have any political rights… incentivize a significant segment of Gaza’s population to leave Gaza altogether and not return.” — Dana El Kurd [03:32]

2. Arab-Israeli Normalization: Definitions, History, and Shifting Premises

• Matan Kaminer traces normalization to over a century ago, linking to figures like Chaim Weizmann and King Faisal, and outlines historical normalization milestones:
  • 1979: Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty
  • 1994: Jordan-Israel Peace Treaty (Oslow Accords framework)
  • 2020: Abraham Accords (with UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, Sudan; future ambitions with Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Pakistan) [07:10–09:16]
  • Main Shifts:
    • Early Arab positions (Arab Peace Initiative 2002) conditioned normalization on resolution of the Palestinian conflict; Abraham Accords break this precedent.
    • Normalization often involved “under-the-table” cooperation before it became public.
• “The big fish is Saudi Arabia, and we can talk about that as well, right?” — Matan Kaminer [09:04]

3. What Are the Abraham Accords? PR vs. Substance

• Ben Schuman Stoller highlights two separate agreements: a Declaration of Principles (the “Accords” proper) and formalized peace treaties.
• Accords are pitched as region-wide vehicles for security, economic cooperation, cultural exchange, and “peace”—but function largely as PR for international and elite audiences. [10:01–10:51]
• Matan notes the central role of the Abraham figure as both a mythical common ancestor and a symbol of “tolerance”; the framing serves ideological purposes extending far beyond actual policy.

Quote:

“It’s like a massive PR exercise.” — Ben Schuman Stoller [10:15]

4. The Myth of Abraham: Origins, Instrumentalization, and Dark Sides

• The Accords and related normalization exploit the “Abrahamic” framing—Jews and Arabs as kin, “bad cousins”—to overwrite the political nature of the conflict.
• Matan enumerates the problematic aspects latent in the Abraham narrative, such as misogyny, slavery, migration, and especially xenophobia. [11:10–12:56]
  • Migrant labor exploitation connects Israel and Gulf states, especially as Israel shifts away from Palestinian labor after October 7.
• The episode title (“Bad Cousins”) references this plural, often dark legacy.

Quote:

“Abraham is kind of a prism or a figure through which we start to explore all these issues.” — Matan Kaminer [12:31]

5. The Deception of “Interfaith Peace” and Authoritarian Conflict Management

• Dana critiques the framing of the Abraham Accords as rooted in religious peacemaking, calling it “deceptive” and a calculated distraction from the political conflict:
  • Points out how public “tolerance” is used to dampen dissent and depoliticize Arab societies, preparing them for consumerism and disengagement from political activism.
• Matan stresses that this “myth” is a tool for Arab governments (especially Gulf elites) and Israel/the US to sideline the Palestinian issue and present normalization as both modern and moral.
• “It maintains structural violence. It’s not attempting to solve the underlying motivations for that violence…” — Dana El Kurd [21:37]
• “There’s a sort of…switcheroo game in which something else is brought into view and the Palestinians are hidden.” — Matan Kaminer [15:02]

6. How Myths Shape Power Politics

• The Abraham myth and the “brotherly conflict” frame allow outsiders, especially in the West, to style themselves as impartial mediators, exonerate global powers (US/Europe) from responsibility, and reinforce orientalist tropes of intractable local feuds. [29:06–31:29]
• Ben: The Accords allow Gulf elites to claim “moderation” and progressiveness by allying with Israel, pivoting public discourse away from Palestine toward “business-forward” regionalism—AI, data centers, etc. [32:27–33:18]

7. Ethnonationalism, Modernism, and Migration

• Dana and Matan critique rising global ethno-nationalism, arguing that Gulf regimes can’t sustain ethnic “purity” narratives due to their own demographics (minority ruling over majorities of migrants/expats).
  • Yassin Al Hasadah’s theory of “modernism”: prioritizes secular, technocratic values and economic growth over freedom, equality, or dignity—perfect for Gulf and Israeli agendas.
  • Migration and the myth of “people in their rightful place” is a growing tenet of far-right rhetoric globally.
  • “It’s about people being better because they’re in the right place.” — Matan Kaminer [34:31]

8. Where Are We Headed? Future of Normalization & Gaza

• The guests warn of horrifying plans for Gaza: ethnic cleansing, a “concentration camp-style” Special Economic Zone, and continued Palestinian disenfranchisement.
• The “big US plan” is the “IMEC corridor” (India–Middle East–Europe Economic Corridor) designed to counter China’s Belt and Road, relying on stable investment zones like Gaza—at great human cost. [43:49–47:06]
• Ben remains (cautiously) hopeful that elite normalization may in time allow for more vocal criticism of Israeli policies, though trade has only increased post-October 7.
• Both stress the importance of public opinion in the Arab world, which remains deeply opposed to normalization.
• “If the Palestinians don’t have sovereignty…then things are not going to calm down in the region. It’s just going to be more and more, more and more violence, more and more of this hell for everybody.” — Matan Kaminer [45:26]

9. Connecting Palestine with Wider Struggles

• The hosts argue that Palestine is increasingly a global justice issue—publics everywhere oppose Gaza genocide, even as their governments support it.
• Civil society must connect opposition to normalization and Israeli violence with demands for democracy, migrant rights, and climate justice.
• Matan: “The question for the region is the Palestinian question. If the Palestinians don’t have sovereignty...it’s just going to be more and more violence, more and more hell.” [45:26]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the G.R.E.A.T. Gaza Plan:
  • “Throughout the entire document, it’s very clear that whatever remains of Gaza’s population will not have any political rights.” — Dana [03:32]
• On Abrahamic Framing:
  • “Abraham is kind of a prism or a figure through which we start to explore all these issues.” — Matan [12:31]
  • “It maintains structural violence. It’s not attempting to solve the underlying motivations for that violence…” — Dana [21:37]
• On Western Narratives:
  • “There’s this idea that this is like an age-old conflict…we rational outsiders, we Westerners, we Christians…can play a mediating role.” — Matan [29:41]
• On Migration:
  • “It’s about people being better because they’re in the right place…that’s really coming up very, very strong on the global far right.” — Matan [34:31]
  • “The basic test of humanity is going to be this test of hospitality, whether people are allowed into new places that they have to go to in order to survive. And this sort of ideology…is primed to deny that.” — Matan [36:22]
• On Authoritarian Modernism:
  • “It entirely neglects issues of values such as freedom, equality, human dignity…in favor of morally amorphous categories like secularism, enlightenment, and modernism itself.” — Dana, paraphrasing Yassin Al Hasadah [40:31]
• On the Future:
  • “Trade continues to go up and it doesn’t seem to have an impact...Polling shows increasing criticism of normalization with Israel. The idealist in me thinks that civil society will win out eventually...” — Ben [47:09–48:54]
  • “There’s no effective democracy anywhere in the world, really…except maybe in a few places. So this idea that the West is somehow essentially different from these other countries, it’s also kind of a lie.” — Matan [50:21]

Timestamps for Key Segments

• Introduction & Washington Post Gaza Plan: 02:16–06:16
• History of Arab-Israeli Normalization: 07:10–09:16
• Abraham Accords: Meaning and Framing: 10:01–12:56
• Abrahamic Myth and Its Uses: 12:56–16:50
• Critique of “Tolerance” and Structural Violence: 21:37–22:41
• European/American Outsider Narratives: 29:06–31:29
• Modernism & Gulf Legitimacy: 40:14–41:31
• The Future: Gaza, IMEC, and Palestinian Sovereignty: 43:24–47:06

Conclusion

This nuanced episode lays bare how public relations exercises like the Abraham Accords and Western “peace” frameworks sideline Palestinian rights, entrench authoritarianism, and recast structural violence as “normal.” By interrogating the role of myths, ideology, and the selective application of modernist rhetoric, the hosts and guests push listeners to see beyond surface narratives and consider how justice (for Palestinians and others) is inextricably linked to broader struggles—for democracy, rights, and dignity—around the globe. The current juncture is depicted as a test for civil society, both within the region and internationally: can ordinary people reclaim the narrative, connect their struggles, and challenge authoritarian “solutions” masquerading as peace?

For more analysis, see the full conversation in the episode and visit the show notes for additional readings and resources on the topics discussed.