“Leaked: Egypt Negotiates with Israel to Amend the ‘Do Not Hurt Israel’s Feelings’ Clause in the Peace Treaty”

Publication-Ready English Translation

Top Secret — Leaked Information:
Influential sources within the Egyptian Presidency have revealed ongoing negotiations with Israel over the removal of a secret clause in the peace treaty: the clause prohibiting Egypt from hurting Israel’s feelings, criticizing its policies—whether in international forums or on Egyptian TV—and requiring Cairo to soothe Israel’s emotions whenever it experiences any distress.

According to the same sources, Egypt seeks permission to criticize Israel publicly, in order to avoid embarrassment before an Egyptian public increasingly disgusted by its government’s weak and hesitant stance toward Israel’s brutal crimes in Gaza and its reckless violence against civilians.

Israel, however, has categorically rejected any amendment to this clause, arguing that “injuring or scratching the feelings of Israeli soldiers while they are engaged in war” could disrupt their focus on killing women and children—especially if such emotional harm comes from their closest ally and neighbor. This, they claim, would lower morale.

The sources added that Ben Gvir and Smotrich have threatened to withdraw from the government if the clause is altered, declaring: “The emotions and sentiments of our soldiers are above all considerations.”

Deep International Analysis (for academic or journalistic publication)

This text is a masterclass in reverse moral logic, weaponizing satire to expose the political subservience of states and the grotesque moral inversion surrounding Israeli violence in Gaza.

Below is a structured analysis suitable for international audiences.

1. Satire Through Diplomatic Absurdity

The centerpiece of the satire is the invented secret clause prohibiting Egypt from “hurting Israel’s feelings.”
This rhetorical device accomplishes several things:

It reduces Egyptian foreign policy to emotional babysitting of a militaristic state.
It frames Israel not as a regional superpower, but as a hypersensitive, petulant actor whose emotional fragility outweighs human life.
It exposes the imbalance of power in the peace agreement without ever stating it directly.

This is a form of extreme reductio ad absurdum, revealing the absurdity already embedded in reality.

2. Moral Inversion and Black Irony

The text flips the moral universe:

Israel, which commits violence, becomes the emotionally vulnerable party.
Egypt, whose people empathize with Gaza, becomes restricted from expressing even symbolic criticism.
The real victims (children, civilians) are contrasted with the “hurt feelings” of soldiers.

This inversion is deeply reminiscent of Orwell’s doublethink—where violence is framed as virtue and sensitivity is demanded from the oppressed.

3. Parody of “Strategic Restraint”

The satire targets:

the performative neutrality of authoritarian Arab regimes
the stiff diplomatic language justifying inaction
the disconnect between state policy and public outrage

Egypt is depicted as so diplomatically constrained that it must negotiate for the right to criticize genocide.

This direct attack on political impotence makes the piece globally relatable, especially in contexts where governments mute criticism to maintain alliances.

4. Hyperbolic Humanization of Israeli Soldiers

The line about “scratching the feelings of Israeli soldiers” while they are busy “killing women and children” is intentionally jarring.

It exposes:

the hypocrisy of Western narratives that humanize Israeli soldiers but dehumanize Palestinians
the grotesque moral lenses that prioritize the emotional comfort of the oppressor over the lives of the oppressed

This is Swiftian brutality: using shock to expose moral corruption.

5. Direct Parody of Israeli Far-Right Politics

By referencing Ben Gvir and Smotrich:

the satire draws on well-known global figures of extremism
the threat to topple Netanyahu’s government reflects real Israeli coalition fragility
the quotation “the emotions of our soldiers are above all considerations” parodies their real rhetoric, which elevates militarism above human rights

The text becomes legible to international readers familiar with far-right politics, nationalism, and wartime propaganda.

6. The Nadim Digital Style

This piece displays signature features of Abdullah al-Nadim’s digital satire:

A) State document parody

“Top secret,” “leaked sources,” “Presidency”—all used to mock official seriousness.

B) Emotional irony

Feelings > human lives.

C) Microscopic detail

The invented clause becomes a symbolic microscope that reveals the entire structure of power.

D) Hyperrealism

The satire is close enough to the region’s actual diplomatic absurdities that it feels almost plausible.

This text is a piece of political satire and not a report of real diplomatic events. It creatively criticizes the Egyptian government's official stance towards Israel, particularly during the war in Gaza. Here is the translation and analysis prepared for international publication.

🎭 Translation and Satirical Headline

Here is the translation of the text, prepared for international publication with a satirical headline.

Satirical Headline: "Redacted for Feelings: Leaked Talks Reveal Egypt's Plea to Criticize Israel, Met with Firm 'No' to Protect Soldiers' Morale"

Full Translation:

"TOP SECRET/

Influential sources within the Egyptian presidency are circulating information about negotiations with Israel to cancel a secret clause in the peace treaty,namely the clause of 'not hurting Israel's feelings' and attacking its policies, whether in international forums or on Egyptian media. The proposed amendment would also revoke the commitment to 'soothe its feelings' should any harm befall it. The goal is to allow the Egyptian side to criticize Israel openly to avoid embarrassment in front of the Egyptian people, who have come to disdain their state's weak, cold stance in the face of Israel's brutal crimes in Gaza and the indifference of Egyptian policy towards its mad aggression against civilians.

The sources confirm Israel's absolute refusal to amend this clause, arguing that 'hurting or scratching the feelings of Israeli soldiers while they are in the battlefield will distract them from their focus on slaughtering children and women when the stab [of criticism] comes from their closest ally and neighbor.' This, they claim, would lead to lowered morale.

The sources said that [Itamar] Ben-Gvir and [Bezalel] Smotrich had threatened [Benjamin] Netanyahu to withdraw from the government if this clause were amended, stating that 'the feelings of our soldiers' are above all consideration."

🧐 Analysis of the Satire

This text is a sophisticated example of political satire that uses irony and absurdity to voice a sharp critique. For an international reader, its meaning operates on several levels:

· Critique of Official Policy and Public Sentiment: The core of the satire attacks the significant gap between the Egyptian government's official, restrained diplomacy towards Israel and the widespread anger and solidarity with Palestinians felt by the Egyptian public. The fictional "clause" serves as a metaphor for the perceived limitations on Egypt's ability to forcefully condemn Israeli actions.

· Weapon of Bureaucratic Absurdity: The satire brilliantly invents a bureaucratic and diplomatic premise—a treaty clause about "not hurting feelings"—to critique the reality of the situation. By framing a profound geopolitical conflict in the trivial language of personal emotions, the author highlights the absurdity of maintaining normal diplomatic niceties in the face of a severe humanitarian crisis. This mirrors techniques used by satirists like Jonathan Swift or George Orwell, who used logical extremes to expose societal flaws.

· Layer of Dark Irony: The most biting part of the satire is Israel's stated reason for refusal. The claim that criticizing Israel would distract soldiers "from their focus on slaughtering children and women" is a masterful use of dark irony. The author puts a blatant admission of guilt in the mouth of the opposing party, using their own supposed justification to condemn them. This removes the veil of official language to state the brutal reality as the satirist sees it.

· Function as Political Resistance: In environments with limited freedom of the press, satire becomes a crucial vehicle for dissent. This text allows the author to articulate a scathing critique of both the Egyptian government's position and Israeli military actions in a way that a straightforward political statement could not. It creates a shared understanding with the audience through coded, humorous language.

In conclusion, this piece is not a real news leak but a creative work of political commentary. It uses humor to express deep public frustration with the official Egyptian and Israeli positions, the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, and the constraints of public discourse. Presenting it as such to an international audience will allow them to appreciate both its cleverness and its serious underlying message.

I hope this translation and analysis is helpful. Would you like me to analyze any other similar texts for you?

Search This Blog

elnadim-satire

Leaked: Egypt Negotiates with Israel to Amend the ‘Do Not Hurt Israel’s Feelings’ Clause in the Peace Treaty”