You’re listing the four classic covenants as if their mere existence guarantees their literal‑land, literal‑nation fulfillment today, but that’s exactly where your system breaks: the Abrahamic, Land, and Davidic covenants are unconditional, yes — but the NT tells you how God fulfills unconditional covenants, and it is never by resurrecting the Mosaic land‑grant structure.
Paul says the Abrahamic promise was never ultimately about Canaan but about Christ (Gal 3:16),
Hebrews says the patriarchs understood the land typologically and were aiming at a better country (Heb 11:16), and
Peter says the Davidic kingdom is fulfilled in Christ’s enthronement, not a restored ethnic monarchy (Acts 2:30–36).
The so‑called “Palestinian covenant” (a later theological label, not a biblical one) is simply the exile‑return pattern embedded in Deuteronomy — and the NT says the final return is resurrection, not geography.
In other words: unconditional covenants guarantee fulfillment, not form; God keeps the promises, but the NT tells you the fulfillment is Christological, not cartographical.
Modern Israel can exist politically, but none of these covenants require a modern state to carry their eschatological weight — because the apostles relocate the inheritance into Christ and new creation, not back into ancient borders.
No, the Bible shows you (when you read the Old Testament books, the ones Jesus said He would fulfill in Luke 24:44) that there is absolutely both a literal and spiritual fulfillment of the Covenants.