America’s ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee — a former Baptist minister, former Arkansas governor, and current theological cartographer — caused an international incident of biblical proportions last Friday by telling podcaster Tucker Carlson that it would be “fine” if Israel took all the land from the Gaza Strip to the West Bank. That is, to be clear, most of all Israel. Saudi Arabia called it “extremist rhetoric.” Egypt called it a “flagrant breach” of international law. Jordan called it “absurd and provocative.” The Foreign Office called it a Tuesday.
Five Observations Before We Begin
- The modern world trusts polling data more than prophecy, unless the prophecy polls well.
- Every time a U.S. ambassador quotes the Bible, a European diplomat spills their mineral water.
- If history were decided by press conferences, Rome would still be in charge and Caesar would have a podcast.
- Nothing frightens a Question Time panel like a man who believes ancient parchment outranks a Twitter thread.
- When someone says “promised land,” critics hear “planning application,” but believers hear “signed, sealed, delivered.”
Bible, History, and the HOA: Why the Promised Land Still Has Better Paperwork Than the UN
In what commentators described as “a deeply unsettling outbreak of Old Testament,” U.S. Ambassador Mike Huckabee recently suggested that Israel’s claim to its land predates modern diplomatic mood swings by several millennia. This prompted the usual ritual: experts gasped, pundits clutched their pearls, and one postgraduate student in comparative grievance studies fainted onto a stack of decolonisation pamphlets.
The controversy began after remarks to Tucker Carlson, where Huckabee, apparently having read a book printed before 1968, invoked the Bible as part of the historical narrative surrounding the Jewish people’s presence in the land. Carlson asked whether the Genesis covenant from the Nile to the Euphrates gave Israel a right to basically the entire Middle East. Huckabee, after a considered pause that suggested he was either praying or mentally annexing Jordan, replied: “It would be fine if they took it all.” Fourteen nations subsequently issued a joint statement. The State Department has not returned calls. Critics responded with the theological equivalent of “Excuse me, this is a Greggs.” Supporters simply noted that the book in question has been in circulation for approximately 3,000 years.
The phrase “promised land” tends to cause allergic reactions in certain academic departments. But as every Sunday school child and several archaeologists can confirm, the idea is not a recent planning application. It appears repeatedly in the Hebrew Bible, from Genesis onward, long before the United Nations had a subsidised canteen.
When Ancient Kingdoms Meet Modern Bureaucracy
Of course, history is not merely scripture. The Jewish presence in the region includes ancient kingdoms, the Kingdom of Israel, the Kingdom of Judah, Roman expulsions, Byzantine shifts, Ottoman chapters, and British paperwork that still gives archivists migraines — not least because half of it was written on napkins by Lord Balfour after a particularly long lunch.
Yet the uproar suggests Huckabee committed a diplomatic faux pas by acknowledging that for millions of Jews, the connection to the land is not merely political but covenantal. To critics, this sounds dangerously religious. To supporters, it sounds like reading comprehension.
A senior fellow at the Institute for Strategic Antiquity, Dr Miriam Feldman, told reporters, “The concept of Israel as a homeland is not a 20th-century invention. It is embedded in religious tradition, liturgy, and continuous historical presence.” She added, “Also, Rome tried to erase it and failed, which should tell you something about durability.” She did not add: “And the British tried paperwork, which was arguably worse.”
An anonymous European diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity because he still has dinner reservations in Brussels, reportedly sighed: “We prefer conflicts that begin in 1993. Anything older complicates the paperwork.”
When History Meets Hashtag Outrage
The modern debate often treats the Middle East as if it sprang into existence around the invention of rolling news. Yet archaeological evidence from Jerusalem and beyond points to Jewish temples, inscriptions, and artefacts dating back thousands of years. The ruins are not metaphors. They are rocks. Very old rocks. Rather like the Foreign Office’s position on most things.
Supporters of Huckabee argue that acknowledging this history is not a theological coup but a factual one. They note that Jerusalem has been central to Jewish identity since long before the word “colonialism” was coined in a Parisian café by someone who had never visited a colony.
One poll conducted by the Centre for Ancient Memory Studies found that 68.3 per cent of respondents agreed with the statement: “History did not begin the day I joined social media.” An oddly specific 12.7 per cent replied: “Wait, it didn’t?”
Eyewitness accounts from 1948 also complicate the simplistic narrative. Holocaust survivors arriving in the newly declared state did not view it as a trendy start-up nation. They viewed it as survival. As one elderly resident of Haifa recalled in archival footage: “We did not come for ideology. We came because there was nowhere else.”
Critics argue that modern geopolitics cannot be settled by citing scripture. Fair enough. But supporters counter that dismissing scripture entirely ignores the foundational motivations of millions. You may not believe in the covenant, they say, but it is rather difficult to deny that people who do believe in it have been shaping history for millennia.
The Diplomatic Scandal of Quoting Genesis on a Podcast
When Huckabee referenced biblical language during a wide-ranging Tucker Carlson interview, commentators treated it as though he had attempted to annex territory using a church newsletter. Yet American political rhetoric has long included religious references. Presidents quote scripture. Civil rights leaders quoted scripture. Even critics of Israel occasionally quote scripture when it suits them.
The difference, it seems, is which verse is being cited and by whom.
A political analyst from the University of Perpetual Outrage explained: “Religious language in politics is perfectly acceptable when it supports my cause. When it supports yours, it is theocracy.”
Supporters of Huckabee shrug. They argue that recognising Israel’s ancient ties does not negate the complex realities of the present. It simply acknowledges that this story did not start yesterday.
There is also the small matter of international law. The Balfour Declaration, the League of Nations Mandate, and the UN partition plan all form part of the modern legal architecture — alongside, it should be noted, a considerable quantity of British paperwork of dubious quality. One may debate borders and policies, but the existence of Israel is not a clerical error, even if some of the clerical work was rather shoddy.
What the Funny People Are Saying
“Every time someone says the Bible isn’t historical, I wonder why archaeologists keep digging up footnotes.” — David Mitchell
“If you think the Middle East started in 1948, I’ve got a map from 1492 you’re not going to enjoy.” — Frankie Boyle
“Nothing clears a Newsnight studio faster than a man who read the Old Testament without irony.” — Jo Brand
“The promised land is the only property on earth where the deed is older than the estate agent.” — Rory Bremner
The Larger Argument: Whose Narrative Actually Counts?
At its core, the Huckabee controversy reveals something deeper. It is not merely about policy. It is about narrative. Whose story counts? How far back does legitimacy reach? Does ancient history matter, or do we only recognise claims filed in triplicate after World War II?
Supporters of Israel argue that Jewish connection to the land is not a slogan. It is woven into prayer, ritual, and identity. For centuries, Jews ended Passover with the phrase “Next year in Jerusalem.” They did not say: “Next year in a hypothetical geopolitical arrangement subject to committee review and a public consultation period.”
Critics worry that invoking divine promise inflames tensions. Supporters reply that ignoring millennia of belief does not make them disappear. It merely ensures that policymakers misunderstand the emotional core of the conflict, which is, admittedly, something of a British foreign policy tradition.
In the end, Huckabee’s remarks did not redraw borders. They did something far more dangerous in the modern era: they reminded people that history did not begin with the latest trending topic. And then, for good measure, he blamed Tucker Carlson for the clip. As one does.
The Middle East remains complex. Peace remains elusive. But the Jewish claim to the land of Israel is rooted not only in 20th-century resolutions but in ancient texts, enduring presence, and survival against empires that no longer exist.
Empires rise. Empires fall. Twitter threads expire. Even the British Empire eventually handed back the keys, albeit after considerable fuss and a great deal of paperwork.
And if acknowledging that fact causes diplomatic indigestion across fourteen Arab nations simultaneously, perhaps the problem is not the history. Perhaps it is our appetite for forgetting it.
Auf Wiedersehen, amigo!
Harper Thames is a comedic writer exploring modern life through irony and subtle exaggeration. Rooted in student perspectives and London’s cultural landscape, Harper’s work focuses on relatable humour grounded in everyday experience.
Expertise is developed through writing practice and critical engagement, while authority comes from authenticity and consistency. Trust is reinforced by transparent satire and ethical humour choices.
