In recent months, political developments in the occupied territories have once again brought the issue of annexing the West Bank to the forefront of Israel’s political agenda. Recently, the Knesset (the Israeli parliament) narrowly approved, in a preliminary vote, a draft law aimed at applying Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank. However, this move immediately triggered international backlash. Even U.S. President Donald Trump, in an interview with Time magazine, warned Tel Aviv against rushing into annexation, saying the move could jeopardize Washington’s full support for Israel. Vance also described the decision as foolish.
At the same time, a wave of regional and global condemnation followed. Arab and Islamic countries — including Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, Turkey, Indonesia, and Pakistan — issued a joint statement calling the Knesset’s action a clear violation of international law and a threat to Middle Eastern stability. In response to international pressure and fears of a U.S. reaction, Israeli media announced that, by order of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the submission of executive plans related to annexation had been suspended until further notice. But what is the purpose behind this annexation?
Israel’s Strategic Objectives Behind the Annexation Plan
Consolidating Territorial and Security Control:
From a geopolitical perspective, the West Bank is a key region whose central highlands overlook major cities and vital communication routes in the occupied territories. Israeli leaders, particularly the far-right, have long claimed that withdrawing from these areas would deprive Israel of its defensive depth. Thus, the annexation of key parts of this region is justified under the pretext of “Israel’s security,” while in reality, the goal is the permanent expansion of Israel’s borders.
Preserving Demographic and Racial Dominance:
Israel seeks to annex areas of the West Bank where the Palestinian population density is relatively low. In this context, Area C, which constitutes about 60 percent of the West Bank, holds the greatest significance. This policy allows Israel to seize natural resources and fertile lands while avoiding the absorption of millions of Palestinians who could alter the demographic balance.
Reinforcing Religious and Ideological Narratives:
Radical Zionist factions, including the Religious Zionism Party led by Bezalel Smotrich, interpret Jewish history through a Talmudic lens, viewing the West Bank as part of the sacred land of “Judea and Samaria.” According to this belief, annexing the territory is not merely a political act but the fulfillment of a divine promise. This ideological approach completely rejects the logic of compromise.
Legal Dimensions and Violations of International Law
Under international law, the annexation of occupied territory is strictly prohibited. Article 2 of the UN Charter and Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338 explicitly state that “no territory may be acquired by war.” In its advisory opinion of July 2024, the International Court of Justice declared that Israel, by transferring civil powers to its own governmental institutions in the West Bank, had effectively entered a stage of illegal annexation. The Court required Israel to halt settlement expansion and to respect the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination.
Nevertheless, Tel Aviv ignored the ruling and, in 2024, set a new record in settlement expansion: 27,589 new housing units were approved in the occupied territories. Such measures represent a de facto annexation, an on-the-ground reality that changes the situation without an official declaration.
Economic and Structural Dimensions of Annexation
Area C, prioritized for annexation, contains most of the Palestinians’ natural resources and fertile lands. By transferring the management of this area from the military administration to the finance ministry under Smotrich’s control, the Israeli regime has officially begun the process of “institutionalizing occupation.” In practice, this means replacing the military structure with an Israeli civil one, turning the occupation into a permanent system.
Another economic goal is to fully integrate settlement networks into Israel’s domestic economy. Projects such as building dedicated roads, industrial zones, and linking electricity and water networks to Tel Aviv are part of this plan. The result is the creation of an economic apartheid model that separates Palestinians from their vital resources and infrastructure.
Human and Social Consequences for Palestinians
The consequences of this process for Palestinian society are catastrophic:
-
Escalation of settler violence: More than 2,200 attacks were recorded in 2024.
-
Destruction of homes and infrastructure: Over 1,700 Palestinian buildings were demolished that same year.
-
Intensified internal displacement: Thousands of Palestinians have been expelled from their lands and forced into isolated enclaves.
-
Gradual denial of civil rights: In areas under Israeli control, Palestinians effectively live without citizenship or equal rights.
According to international experts, this situation is a clear example of a modern apartheid system, one that establishes two separate legal regimes for the inhabitants of a single territory.
International and Regional Reactions
Although the international community has strongly opposed annexation in words, its practical responses have been largely symbolic. The European Union has merely mentioned the possibility of suspending its economic partnership agreement with Israel but has not taken any concrete steps. In the Arab world, the joint statement by Islamic countries, while politically significant, lacks enforcement power. In reality, the silence or passivity of major powers has given Israel a kind of implicit license to continue annexation gradually.
Netanyahu’s Tactical Retreat: Temporary Move or Strategic Reconfiguration?
Netanyahu’s announcement of the temporary suspension of annexation plans does not signal a genuine withdrawal from the project but rather a recalibration of strategy. Facing U.S. pressure and fearing possible European sanctions, he chose to delay official implementation while continuing on-ground measures — from expanding settlements to administrative restructuring.
As the International Crisis Group described it, this is annexation without naming it: the creation of irreversible facts on the ground without formal declaration.
Conclusion
The annexation of the West Bank is not a temporary measure but part of Israel’s long-term strategy to consolidate the idea of a “Greater Israel.” Although international pressure has forced Netanyahu into a temporary pause, the reality on the ground shows that the process of gradual annexation continues unabated.
In the absence of concrete global action, the danger of turning a temporary occupation into a permanent apartheid regime is more serious than ever. The only way to curb this trend is to link political positions with tangible measures — from arms embargoes to the suspension of trade agreements. Otherwise, the political map of Palestine may undergo irreversible changes.
Your Comment