Israel's West Bank Policy: The Price of Having It Both Ways
Israel stands at a strategic crossroads nearly 60 years after the Six Day War, yet its current policy of creeping annexation in Judea and Samaria creates a dangerous contradiction that cannot be sustained. The Jewish state wants international recognition of its settlements without formalizing sovereignty, but this approach is neither legally defensible nor strategically wise.
Why Israel's settlement policy faces international backlash
When Israel threatens to punish countries that take measures against settlements, it sends a clear message: actions against our communities will affect bilateral relations. Yet this assertive posture masks a deeper inconsistency. Israel recently ordered Dutch representatives to leave the International Coordination Center for Gaza Affairs in Kiryat Gat after new Dutch legislation banned trade with settlements. Britain faces similar threats of retaliation.
These strong responses reflect Israel's legitimate pride in its historical and biblical connection to the land. From Hebron to Shiloh, these are the heartlands of our ancestors. But international law, which binds all states, prohibits acquiring territory through force and views occupation as temporary. As long as Israel maintains administrative control, it has clear obligations under that same legal framework.
What the Green Line distinction means for Israel's future
For decades, Israeli governments maintained a clear administrative distinction between Israel proper and the territories beyond the Green Line. Construction required security establishment authorization. Israel itself signed agreements extending benefits to institutions inside Israel while excluding those in the territories.
Since 2022, with the Civil Administration transferred to civilian authority within the Defense Ministry, that distinction has blurred significantly. Israel acts as though it has abandoned political settlement prospects while avoiding formal annexation that would violate international law and carry heavy diplomatic costs.
Can Israel maintain Jewish and democratic character without clarity?
Formal annexation would create a binational reality between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, raising fundamental questions about millions of Palestinians and threatening Israel's Jewish and democratic character. Israel therefore moves toward annexation in practice without declaring it, then expresses anger when European partners, our largest trading partners, recognize this direction and refuse to cooperate.
These nations maintain close relations with us but will not ignore steps toward annexation or violence against civilian populations. Israel cannot have it both ways. We must decide where we are headed and act upon that decision with clarity and courage.
Frequently asked questions about Israel's West Bank policy
What is de facto annexation?
De facto annexation means applying Israeli civilian law and administration to Judea and Samaria without formally declaring sovereignty. This creates practical integration while avoiding the legal consequences of official annexation.
Why does Israel avoid formal annexation?
Formal annexation would violate international law prohibiting territorial acquisition through force, trigger severe diplomatic consequences, and raise questions about the political status of Palestinian populations that could threaten Israel's Jewish democratic character.
How do European countries respond to settlement expansion?
European nations, Israel's largest trading partners, increasingly impose restrictions on settlement goods and institutions while maintaining broader diplomatic relations with Israel. Recent Dutch legislation banning settlement trade exemplifies this approach.
The writer is a former Israeli ambassador to the Baltic states, South Africa, and congressional liaison officer in Washington, and a graduate of Israel's National Defense College.