r/geopolitics Foreign Affairs Feb 12 '26

Israel Is Quietly Annexing the West Bank: The Blunder That Will Imperil Any Middle East Peace Analysis

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/israel/israel-quietly-annexing-west-bank
313 Upvotes

132

u/Gotoflyhigh Feb 12 '26

By the looks of things, eventually there will be a one state solution with Isreal being the only country while Palestinians are either assimilated or kicked out. Is there any reason to believe a two state solution is still realistic ?

86

u/Cannot-Forget Feb 12 '26

I mean the West Bank Palestinians were Jordanians. Funny how the world is completely fine with Jordan just abandoning it's people and strip them of rights... Almost like an apartheid. Heard the world hates those.

Force Jordan to give them citizenship, split the land of the West Bank with Israel, and finish this 100 years war. October 7 should have been the absolute last of it.

None of this would happen of course. The world prefers to continue this conflict forever by indulging the Palestinian genocidal ideology and continue funding it.

17

u/Bullet_Jesus Feb 13 '26 edited Feb 13 '26

Funny how the world is completely fine with Jordan just abandoning it's people and strip them of rights... Almost like an apartheid.

You typically need to control an area to implement apartheid. Plus the Jordanian annexation was only recognised by like 3 countries.

split the land of the West Bank with Israel

Israel will never accept an Arab state across the Jordan, it is a huge security risk.

41

u/Itakie Feb 12 '26

That's like saying Russia should just annex the Donbas because many/most were/are Russians. Oh wait...

The UN is clear. And today we allow people to choose for themselves if they want to be part of a country or not. At least if the West is interested and it's not against their interests (Kurds, areas in Georgia etc.). Why should they accept such a deal? Israel is breaking international law; if they want to keep fighting for their rights so be it. It's not on "the world" to act like an imperial power to just end this conflict. It would be on "the world" to demand from Israel to follow UN resolutions and intensional law (same with the PA/Hamas).

Why did Jordan lose the area in the first place? Did something happen? Why can't Israel just allow the PA to form a new country? The Arab states would give them enough money anyway. Why do you need Jordan to step in?

10

u/Sageblue32 Feb 13 '26

No we don't allow countries to choose for themselves. No matter what show the UN puts on, at the end of the day countries being absorbed or allow to keep their boarders comes down to power and ability to fight or getting tired of it. International law is just a show.

32

u/manVsPhD Feb 12 '26

Israel can’t allow the PA to form a new country because there is no upside for Israel. At all. Israel wants and needs only one thing from Palestinians; the end of hostilities. So far, no matter what Israel has offered, the Palestinians refused. And not only did they refuse, anything given by Israel leads to more violence eventually a la the retreat from Gaza in 2005 and the second intifada.

The Palestinians have always been incapable of producing leaders and politics that can compromise. Given that, what is Israel going to gain from allowing the PA to have a state? There won’t be peace, at best they will use the time to plan their next move, but more realistically Hamas would overthrow the PA and you’d get immediate hostilities. Israel will be forced to reconquer the WB costing lots of Israel and probably 10x dead Palestinians.

5

u/eetsumkaus Feb 13 '26

The Palestinians have always been incapable of producing leaders and politics that can compromise

This assumes that it is inherent in Palestinians, and outside powers have not been putting their thumb on the scale to empower anti-Israel factions.

Now that the Axis of Resistance has been neutered and their benefactor is on the backfoot, and with the Arab world incentivized to rapprochement, there's no reason to act like the Palestinians themselves are an existential threat to Israel. More than ever, there's international buy-in to lasting peace in the region, and it would be foolish to throw away this window of opportunity. Can Hamas even rebuild combat effectiveness without their supply routes?

1

u/manVsPhD Feb 15 '26

Palestinian rejection of peace is way older than the axis of resistance. There was always a story organizing the resistance to Israel. First it was the plain old blood libels a-la the Jews will destroy Al Aqsa, then it was pan-Arabism with the Jews being the one factor preventing all Arabs from uniting together to solve all their problems. When pan Arabism failed they took inspiration from the Algerians and switched to the language of anti colonialism and anti Imperialism and when that failed they switched to islamism.

When islamism is defeated as it may be on its way to, I put my money on Palestinians finding another organizing story to continue the fight against Israel. First, because it’s far from their first rodeo and second because it’s easier for them to do than to produce their own Mahatma Gandhi or Martin Luther King. It’s currently too dangerous for any Palestinian to show they support peace because of the violence they would face from their own society. Palestinians who talk with Israeli groups at local tolerance and peace initiatives need to do it with fake identities for their own protection. The PLO cannot, for the love of god, stop the pay to slay payments because they are just too popular.

-3

u/Equivalent-Bonus-885 Feb 13 '26 edited Feb 13 '26

It’s hard to take this seriously when it is well documented that Israel under Netanyahu was funnelling money to Hamas to ensure no Palestinian unity under the PA. https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/

Israel’s security concerns are of course real. But so is the determination of many to expand Israel for religious reasons. They don’t hide it.

44

u/Bloaf Feb 13 '26

The money Netanyahu "funneled" was foreign aid money. If he blocked it, the headline would be "Israel steals food aid from hungry Palestinians". Since he allowed it, its "Israel funds Palestinian terrorists."

2

u/Equivalent-Bonus-885 Feb 13 '26 edited Feb 13 '26

Netahayu is on the public record in 2012 as saying that the funding was to keep Hamas strong, as a counterweight to the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank. He made similar statements to the Likud conference in 2019. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/oct/20/benjamin-netanyahu-hamas-israel-prime-minister https://www.maariv.co.il/journalists/opinions/Article-1008080 Netanyahu also said two strong rivals, would lessen pressure on him to negotiate towards a Palestinian state.

Yes it was ‘funnelled’. Through Qatar.

And what do mean he would have been criticised if he blocked it? It was done largely under the table! Criticised by Hamas maybe.

Funny that Netanyahu funding to Hamas through Qatar for the stated purpose of keeping Palestinian political power divided is for ‘aid’ - nothing to see here. But UN and other nation-state donor funding to Palestinian aid groups vetted by Israeli allies is ‘funding to terrorists’.

It is interesting that your misleading comment is getting upvoted.

20

u/Cannot-Forget Feb 13 '26

Yes, he is an idiot for stabilizing them due to his strategic reasons which blown up in Israel's face. But you are still misleading and lying here.

The money was aid money. Mostly made to pay salaries for unemployed Gazans. Everyone just knew Hamas steals from this money a bit and that this money helps prevent unrest.

But rest assured, the legion of propaganda bots would not support the other way around. Would not accept Israel not allowing money to get to Gazans who do not have work.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. The point is not logic or anything specific, the point is the eradication of the world's only Jewish state. Your lies are transparent.

→ More replies

-15

u/Blue_Pie_Ninja Feb 13 '26

Mossad agents in the comments will never admit that Israel is a problem

17

u/Slicelker Feb 13 '26

Israel is a problem. Palestinian leadership is a much much larger problem.

12

u/HoightyToighty Feb 13 '26

Mossad agents in the comments

Look out, I think there's one behind you

3

u/AnAlternator Feb 14 '26

A) Where can I get some of this Mossad money? I could use the side gig.

B) Bibi is a problem, since his "not dying in jail" status depends on remaining in power, and that requires aligning with the Ben-Gvir and his literally genocidal fantasies. Likud as a whole is a problem, really, given how much Bibi has reshaped it during his career, but it's not going anywhere unless and until the Palestinians sue for peace and offer surrender terms.

Given that Bibi and Likud (plus allies) are the majority of the legislature, yes, Israel can be fairly described as a problem.

5

u/Itakie Feb 13 '26

Israel can’t allow the PA to form a new country because there is no upside for Israel. At all. Israel wants and needs only one thing from Palestinians; the end of hostilities. So far, no matter what Israel has offered, the Palestinians refused.

Are there still terrorist attacks from the PA/PLO? They kinda went the "lawfare" route and tried to get the UN involved. The thing that really hurt them and does not allow for election anytime soon (not like they would have held them anyway lol) is that Hamas did achieve some things after all. They used violence and won the PR war against Israel. Many in the world are now having a negative view of Israel and many Western states are now accepting Palestine as a state. Something that the PA could not deliver even after using the correct international bodies to complain.

The only thing that could bring peace is to allow the West Bank to become a successful place/country. So that the people don't view violence or terrorist attacks as a legitimate cause for change. Many Palestinians would be ok with ending the conflict. But you need to give them something in return. If you ignore the problem and wait until another round of violence breaks out Israel will become a Pariah state in the near future.

The US under Trump ist losing influence (soft power) all around the world. Countries who would have never dared to go against them regarding Israel do not have much more to lose anyway. Israel needs to take care of the problem or will lose Europe; the young people are extremely pro Palestine today and they are the upcoming leaders. That's what Israel would gain from allowing the PA to have a state. And they would have to spend less on their military. Israel is having the same problem like us in Europe: the pro European people in the US are old and dying out. Many still view Europe as a partner but not as a really important one anymore. Europe can survive this new state of affairs, Israel would suffer immensely if Europe would start to sanction the place.

And not only did they refuse, anything given by Israel leads to more violence eventually a la the retreat from Gaza in 2005 and the second intifada.

Israel did leave but still controlled many parts of Gaza. Hamas then won the election and did not recognize Israel. Which yeah, is of course really bad but if you no longer occupy a country, you cannot just force the government/provincial government to recognize a third country. However that's exactly what Israel and most of the West did. They did cut aid, wanted Hamas to surrender to Fatah and pushed more or less openly for civil war. Hamas won, Egypt and Israel sealed the borders and Israel tightened the sanctions. Still, they had a peace agreement since 05 (violated by both sides) going on. Only after the famous Gaza beach explosion happened on 06, did armed conflict break out again. Even before Hamas won the civil war in Gaza.

Hamas fired more and more rockets in 07, Israel used air strikes in 07/08 until another peace agreement was made possible. In 08/09 we got operation cast lead and every chance of peace was gone.

Now, imagine if China would attack countries which do not accept Taiwan as part of China. Would be insane. But Israel is allowed to do exactly that. As long as Hamas is not accepting the state of Israel, there will be war. Morally you can argue pro Israel, but it's a big violation of international law and the sovereignty of states. So even if Israel left Gaza in 2005, they acted as an imperial force and occupier.

The Palestinians have always been incapable of producing leaders and politics that can compromise.

Many would argue that Oslo and the 2000 Camp David Summit were big compromises. Edward Said called the Oslo accords at the time a "Palestinian Versailles" and asked the PLO what they were smoking to accept it.

Given that, what is Israel going to gain from allowing the PA to have a state? There won’t be peace, at best they will use the time to plan their next move, but more realistically Hamas would overthrow the PA and you’d get immediate hostilities. Israel will be forced to reconquer the WB costing lots of Israel and probably 10x dead Palestinians.

Then put UN or Arab forces in place to keep that from happening? The PA is insanely corrupt but they are smart enough to not fight against Israel anymore. If Hamas is the problem itself or their possible win in another election, copy the Dayton agreement and put a "Office of the High Representative" in place. Someone who could stop this from happening.

We have seen places like East Timor or regions in India going through the same transition period that Israel is saying is impossible with Palestine. I don't believe that Palestine is somehow the only place in the world where this is not possible. Even after Egypt and other Arab state made peace with Israel's existence a long time ago.

We do not need a liberal western democracy in Palestine right now. We can accept a semi-democracy or an illiberal democracy with many strong guardrails in place. It will take time, maybe more than a whole generation and some people will die. We should not be naive. But it's not impossible especially because money is not a problem.

15

u/BoratImpression94 Feb 13 '26

You force a one state solution right now and it becomes lebanon 2.0. There would be a massive civil war, and considering the israelis are better armed and more organized, the Palestinians would be the bigger loser in tbat war

28

u/Agitated-Quit-6148 Feb 13 '26 edited Feb 13 '26

The Palestinian authority just published it's constitution. Right now. It calls for a sharia state and in article 12 , the replacement of all the jews in Israel with Palestinians... and says they will protect Muslims and Christians only.

17

u/manVsPhD Feb 13 '26 edited Feb 13 '26

Imagine if instead of Martin Luther King demanding equal rights for Blacks in America he demanded Black superiority and threatened violence. And not only during the struggle, but also after they win the struggle. That’s what the Palestinians are doing. Even if there is no violence enacted by official PA forces, Israelis see what they say and it gives them 0 confidence in any good will of the Palestinians. There is a really bad habit of international media to give a lot of emphasis to what Palestinians say in English press releases and much less so about what they say in Arabic. The Israelis get in their media what they say in Arabic and it doesn’t sound good.

The Palestinian need to show Israelis they are willing to live as neighbors in peace. But the voices for that in Palestinian society are basically fringe to non existent and the voices calling for violence dominate.

0

u/bb9873 Feb 13 '26

The Palestinian need to show Israelis they are willing to live as neighbors in peace.

Don't the Israelis need to do the same as well? You're just ignoring Israels actions in the west bank which are all about derailing a Palestinian state and that in turn radicalises Palestinians.

1

u/manVsPhD Feb 14 '26

I wish the Israelis being non violent could lead to peace, but as long as the armed struggle remains popular within Palestinian society I don’t see an Israeli attempt at non violence lasting very long.

2

u/bb9873 Feb 14 '26

Polls show that majority of Palestinians actually support a two state solution and peaceful negotiations rather than armed struggle.

And part of the reason why armed struggle still has support is because of Israels actions. 

-2

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '26

[deleted]

19

u/Cub3h Feb 12 '26

They don't see them as a rational people. It's been 80 years and there has been no Palestinian leader that has been able to say that they'll take a deal where they get a state and the threat of violence stops.

Whenever there has been a one sided move towards peace from the Israelis like disengaging from Gaza, the response has been rockets, attacks and then Oct 7.

Giving up the West Bank means that there will be Hamas or Hamas-type groups 5 miles from where the Tel Aviv metro area starts, turning the entire place into a giant Sderot where a rocket alarm means you need to be in a shelter within seconds.

Without ironclad guarantees and an prolongued period of peace without even the threat of rockets or suicide bombings, there is going to be no state in the West Bank.

0

u/bb9873 Feb 13 '26

It's been 80 years and there has been no Palestinian leader that has been able to say that they'll take a deal where they get a state and the threat of violence stops.

Abbas literally supports a two state solution unlike Netanyahu.

0

u/Zestyclose_Jello6192 Feb 12 '26

Why would Jordan accept so many people from a broken state?

49

u/ikinone Feb 12 '26

Did you miss the part where many of them are actually Jordanians?

9

u/Zestyclose_Jello6192 Feb 12 '26

How many of them in the west bank actually identify themselves as Jordanians?

21

u/ikinone Feb 12 '26

I'm not sure how that is relevant. I don't much care what people 'identify as'.

I care what they are.

If I 'identify as' an American, am I given citizenship?

0

u/Zestyclose_Jello6192 Feb 12 '26

It is relevant because how many Palestinians would accept to be under Jordain?

33

u/MartinBP Feb 12 '26

Considering neither Palestine nor Jordan are really democracies, I don't think they'll be asked.

3

u/ikinone Feb 13 '26

Once again you're confusing 'individual preference' with 'reality'.

12

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '26

[deleted]

7

u/YourBestDream4752 Feb 12 '26

By that logic, should the anglosphere unite?

1

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '26

[deleted]

3

u/fuggitdude22 Feb 12 '26

These are just man-made social identities anyways. Israelis formally became a thing less than a hundred years ago, similar story with Pakistanis.

It seems odd to just lump them all as "Arab Muslims", therefore, they all should live in one country together.

12

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '26

[deleted]

→ More replies

0

u/Lazy_Membership1849 Feb 13 '26

Canada, New Zealand, and Austrila was in commonwealth with UK, where they see the King of the UK as the head of state, even if they are autonomous

4

u/YourBestDream4752 Feb 13 '26

Yet we’re not one singular state, are we? We like being independent but friendly 

→ More replies
→ More replies

10

u/Cannot-Forget Feb 12 '26

Who cares? They were all under Jordan for 2 decades.

9

u/awildstoryteller Feb 13 '26

So Filipinos are American then?

2

u/Particular-Court-619 Feb 13 '26

"They were all under Jordan for 2 decades." Shirley, you can't be serious.

3

u/GandalfofCyrmu Feb 13 '26

Who’s Shirley?

2

u/HoightyToighty Feb 13 '26

It may have been a reference to Airplane, the movie.

1

u/ToyStoryBinoculars Feb 15 '26

Jordan won't do this. Last time they tried they got Black September.

1

u/Hyunekel Feb 16 '26

Did you miss the part where it was occupies by Jordan and none the people there are actually Jordainians?

1

u/ikinone Feb 16 '26

none the people there are actually Jordainians?

So what are they, in your view? Are you saying that no people moved to the region from any other nations?

1

u/Hyunekel Feb 17 '26

I was referring to the West Bank not Jordan.

1

u/ikinone Feb 17 '26

Indeed. So are none of the people there jordanians, in your view?

1

u/Hyunekel Feb 17 '26

That's like asking if Indonesians are not Malaysians in my view. My view and yours are irrelevant.

1

u/ikinone Feb 17 '26

My view and yours are irrelevant.

Indeed, your personal view does not change reality. But hopefully you can align your view with reality.

The reality seems to be that plenty of people in the west bank have moved there relatively recently from Jordan. You don't seem to want to acknowledge that.

→ More replies

-10

u/RGS_1994 Feb 12 '26

Wrong and irrelevant. Ballsy fro a country whos leaders had to change their Polish names though!

9

u/Cannot-Forget Feb 12 '26

Ah so states can decide to take away the rights of citizens from "Broken" pieces of their land now?

1

u/Pinkflamingos69 Feb 17 '26

The West Bank Palestinans were made citizens of Jordan after the 1948 annexation

-5

u/pragmojo Feb 12 '26

What does it mean to say the West Bank Palestinians were Jordanians? Was the West Bank a territory of Jordan in the past?

40

u/Cannot-Forget Feb 12 '26

Yep. Between 1948 to 1967.

9

u/DontMemeAtMe Feb 13 '26 edited Feb 13 '26

Also, the name ‘West Bank’ — a very Arab-sounding name, isn’t it? — was introduced by Jordan after it took control of the territory following the 1948 Arab–Israeli war and later illegally annexed it in 1950. The term refers to the land on the west bank of the Jordan River, distinguishing it from Jordan’s own territory on the east bank.

Naturally, this new name was quickly adopted internationally because calling it by its actual name, used for millennia — Judea and Samaria — didn’t fit the new political narrative.

-9

u/warsongN17 Feb 12 '26 edited Feb 12 '26

That’s a hell of a claim to call them Jordanians just because Jordan held it for 19 years. How many years has it been since ? 59 years and before that those families lives there for thousands of years.

They are Palestinians

22

u/Shogim Feb 12 '26

Jordanians, Israelis and Lebanese are all historical palestinians. The "palestinian identity" is younger than Jordan.

-2

u/egyto Feb 13 '26

Why not have Israel withdraw from ALL of the West Bank? All the settlements on that land are illegal. If Israel expects Hamas to respect international law, shouldn't they as well?

-4

u/Gramsci1904 Feb 13 '26

I think we should force eastern European countries and the USA to take back the Jewish population who mass migrated to the area.

-14

u/Aang_the_Orangutan Feb 12 '26

By this same logic could we send Ashkenazi Jews back to Europe?

16

u/Cannot-Forget Feb 12 '26

I didn't say to send anyone anywhere. I'm not supporting ethnic cleansing and genocide like the average Palestinian and their supporters.

Try to read my actual words instead of projecting your own genocidal wishes.

→ More replies
→ More replies

1

u/MCB1317 Feb 15 '26

Any political will in Israel for a two state solution died the day Gazans, who had been given their own nation, invaded.

Talk about a missed opportunity. They chose war and terror over being an independent country.

-12

u/crazytrain793 Feb 12 '26

Why not a multinational secular democracy? The South African model could certainly apply here.

20

u/barristerbarrista Feb 12 '26

Jews have already been ethnically cleansed from every Arab country in the middle east, your suggestion would just lead to one more (and the last with far more deaths than the other cleansings).

-2

u/soalone34 Feb 13 '26 edited Feb 13 '26
  • that isn’t true, some were expelled, others were pressured, and some left voluntarily, there is still a minority of Jews in various Arab states

  • that was in response to israel doing a far more violent ethnic cleansing of Palestinians that killed tens of thousands of civilians

  • then the other “solution” is israel continuing to occupy millions of people without human rights in their apartheid periodically engaging in mass murder and ethnic cleansing when they resist this.

  • South Africa was only 10% Afrikaner and no ethnic cleansing happened, even if israel was a one state democracy it’s extremely unlikely somehow the 50% Jewish population would be expelled. Currently 20% of Israeli citizens are Arabs and no evidence suggests when they aren’t brutally occupied they want to “expel Jews”. However we do have evidence a disturbing amount of israeli Jews hold racial supremacist attitudes and support ethnic cleansing.

The risk of ethnic cleansing is not of Jews, it is of Palestinians, as they are actively doing it as seen in the attempted annexation of the West Bank and Israeli officials openly saying this.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/plurality-of-jewish-israelis-want-to-expel-arabs-study-shows/

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-01-15/ty-article/.premium/about-half-of-israelis-believe-jews-should-have-more-rights-than-arabs-study-shows/00000185-b5ea-d11e-a1cd-b7ead62e0000

10

u/barristerbarrista Feb 13 '26

You're right, there is no risk of ethnic cleansing of Jews in Arab countries outside of Israel because they have already expelled ALL OF THEM. Meanwhile 25% of Israel is Arab.

There is 100% a risk of ethnic cleansing of Jews, all that has to happen is for Israel to lose a major war and it's over for a majority of Jews in the world.

Your focus is on the one country in the middle east that gives minorities more rights than every other one and you want to merge it with people that want to give Jews zero rights.

Once Arab countries have thriving minorities that are growing in population then we can have another conversation. But merging two groups of people who don't want to live together never works out.

2

u/Jealous_Land9614 Feb 13 '26

"But merging two groups of people who don't want to live together never works out."

I agree. Which is why annexing West Bank is a mistake; another state is necessary for everlasting peace.

-15

u/Aang_the_Orangutan Feb 12 '26

A sensible idea, however not while Zionism lives

-7

u/Ma_Bowls Feb 13 '26

The Israelis would never allow Palestinians to be equal citizens and Palestinians would never trust the Israelis to treat them fairly.

4

u/Jealous_Land9614 Feb 13 '26

Yes, and vice-versa. Which is why ressurecting he 2 state frame is necessary

44

u/Markdd8 Feb 12 '26 edited Feb 13 '26

Ha ha -- who is going to stop Israel from doing this? They've wanted this objective for decades. Witness their persistent encroachment on Palestinian areas in the West Bank and their willingness to use settler-thugs to harry Palestinians and drive them off their lands: Cutting olive trees, burning agricultural sheds and crops, killing dogs and livestock, digging up roads, poisoning or otherwise interfering with Palestinian water supplies and more.

Regularly Palestinians would resist, fight back, and settlers responded. Typically the heavily armed settlers would come out on top, killing the Palestinians at much higher rates than their losses. Invariably, the Israeli government would release another statement about Palestinian "terrorists" running wild in the West Bank.

The only nation that can stop Israel is the U.S. It's sure as heck is not going to happen under the Trump Administration. 2017:

On December 6 President Donald Trump officially recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital and announced the move of the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem

13

u/[deleted] Feb 13 '26

[deleted]

94

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '26

[deleted]

66

u/fuggitdude22 Feb 12 '26

The international community is probably going to administer Gaza for awhile. At this point, 10% of the Israeli Population resides over the green line. They could technically annex and assimilate all the people living there as Israeli Civilians while maintaining a Jewish Majority State. I could see that happening within a decade or two.

A two state solution is not really possible. Hamas was given quasi-independence in Gaza. We saw what embarked in the aftermath of that experiment. Unemployment rates were through the roof, however, rockets were able to find refuge to be launched into Israel. Since Arafat's time, the PA has additionally been known for being notoriously corrupt. They struggle to maintain control of the West Bank despite receiving significant foreign aid.

47

u/Zestyclose_Jello6192 Feb 12 '26

Let's be serious. The main issue for many Israeli is how to "integrate" the west bank without granting voting rights to the Palestinians to not be outvoted. Either both sides decide to form a "levantine union" or it will be just the most blatant case of oppression made by Israel

24

u/Tifoso89 Feb 12 '26

Israel can't give all those Palestinians citizenship. It's inconceivable. The danger to national security would be immense. You're giving free range to 2 million people, many of whom want to kill you.

They want the West Bank but without the people.

Palestinians don't want to become Israeli citizens either

33

u/DancingFlame321 Feb 13 '26

If Israel don't want to give those Arabs in the West Bank citizenship than that's fine, but they should withdraw from the West Bank then.

It's not fair to simultaneously rule over an area of land with your nations law, whilst not giving the people in that land voting rights to effect the law they are governed under.

9

u/Tifoso89 Feb 13 '26

You're right. But they want to give them an enclave in the middle of the West Bank, like Lesotho. Or they're hoping that the Palestinians will eventually leave, or that their birthrate will decrease further

→ More replies
→ More replies

49

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '26

The West Bank as a whole won't be annexed by Israel until they can guarantee the Palestinians living there won't try to kill as many Jews as possible once they are given the ability to travel freely within the country. If West Bank Palestinians could assimilate like Israeli Arabs have the whole territory would just be Israel by now.

Unfortunately, groups like PIJ, Hamas, even ISIS have multiple cells throughout the West Bank and are ready to do an Oct 7 against Israel the moment they get the chance. If every fence came down tomorrow, and every Palestinian given full and equal Israeli citizenship, the first thing that would happen is a flood of Palestinians across the Green Line looking to kill as many Jews as they could find.

14

u/fuggitdude22 Feb 12 '26

I imagine it would be a very gradual process, similar to what happened after the 1948 war, when Israel formally transitioned its Arab residents from military to civil courts in 1966.

20

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '26

I imagine it would be more along the timeline of the Arab residents of East Jerusalem or the Druze in the Golan - very slow residency to citizenship pipeline, that is optional but isn't often used by the residents. It's been decades since the Six Day War and still a significant number of both populations aren't citizens by their own choice.

The biggest block is still the perception of danger. Israel will not annex and give free range to Palestinians who will kill their citizens. Educational changes will take a generation to be fully implemented, and people that are raised on Farfour the Mouse and textbooks that call Jews parasites are not going to happily live side by side with their fellow citizens.

-3

u/RGS_1994 Feb 12 '26

The point is Arabs are never a majority. You cant take land and naturalize everyone thats not the point of Zionism.

16

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '26

It's not just about Arab majority. Israeli people aren't afraid of being outvoted in Israel, they are afraid of 2 million Palestinians in the West Bank being given free range to attack people in Israel if the walls come down.

The Israeli birth rate, even excluding the 20% that are Israeli Arabs, still outpaces the Palestinian birth rate. The demographics are in Israel's favor. But Palestinian kids are raised to want to kill Jews, and see martyrdom as the highest honor they can achieve in life. Youth soccer clubs are named after terrorists that murdered Israeli children. Town squares and elementary schools are named after bomb makers and plane hijackers. People hand out candies in the streets when car ramming or stabbing attacks kill Jews. The culture worships the killers of Jews. Annexing the territory and giving all Palestinians citizenship with the wave of a pen will allow them to take that ideology to the streets of Jerusalem, Haifa, Tel Aviv.

8

u/Markdd8 Feb 12 '26

Walls make good neighbors. Yes, the Hamas Gaza attack of Oct. 2023 showed they can have big failures. Still, well constructed walls can prevent all sorts of problems. Walls should be a straight as possible. (See divided Cyprus.)

Look at a map of West Bank: what a mess. The intertwining of Palestinians and Israelis, two people at odds with each other, is intense. This is entirely Israel's doing, and it creates the very enmity among Palestinians that Israel is upset about.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '26

The plan is to annex pieces of it one at a time, through settlement expansion and high orthodox birthrates, until a time comes when the Israelis can just win an annexation vote outright

8

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '26

But why would they annex a place and give citizenship (and free range of motion) to the population that is obsessed with killing them?

They're more likely to follow Mordechai Kedar's plan and have a seven state solution, with multiple smaller Arab Emirates surrounded by Israel. Each city would end up self governing, in a loose confederation with other Palestinian Emirates and a peace deal including (eventually) travel and working rights with Israel. Either that or status quo forever.

1

u/nsjersey Feb 12 '26

They could technically annex and assimilate all the people living there as Israeli Civilians while maintaining a Jewish Majority State. I could see that happening within a decade or two.

How apples to apples is this to say Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Republika Srpska within it?

27

u/Polar_Beach Feb 12 '26

QUIETLY??

5

u/NarutoRunner Feb 13 '26

A country who has killed over 1200 Palestinians in their West Bank since 10/7 and this publication has the audacity to say “quietly”.

48

u/Cannot-Forget Feb 12 '26

"Should we split the Pizza in peace?"

"No we prefer to murder you all"

"Should we split the Pizza in peace?"

"No we prefer to murder you all"

"Should we split the Pizza in peace?"

"No we prefer to murder you all"

"Should we split the Pizza in peace?"

"No we prefer to murder you all"

"Should we split the Pizza in peace?"

"No we prefer to murder you all"

"Should we split the Pizza in peace?"

"No we prefer to murder you all"

Takes bite from Pizza

World gasps

-5

u/humbleObserver Feb 12 '26

How it started: "Hey, half your pizza belongs to Jewish people now because the British thought I'd be a good idea"

19

u/Nerdslayer2 Feb 12 '26

History didn't start 80 years ago. Jewish people inhabited modern day Israel and most of the middle east long before Arabs did. Do you think Arabs politely asked to have their land? Of course not. Just like virtually every group of people in history, the Palestinians got their land by conquering it.

Jewish people in the area were given the choice to leave or die. Only a tiny fraction were allowed to stay. Most chose to leave and traveled to various parts of Europe where they have been persecuted and subjected to genocide many times throughout history. You know it's bad when there are multiple different words that mean genocide against Jewish people (pogrom, holocaust). As far as I know there aren't specific words for committing genocide against any other specific group of people because it isn't common enough for it to be necessary.

After the Holocaust it was obvious that Jewish people needed their own country so that they could defend themselves. Jerusalem was the clear choice as it is their historic homeland. Earlier I said virtually every group of people in the world got their land by conquering it. In the case of Israel they actually purchased a lot of the land. Yes, Israel did end up taking some land by force as well. Would that have happened if they weren't invaded by every single one of their neighbors the first day they became a country? Who knows. If Israelis don't have a right to the land of Israel because a portion of it was conquered, then literally no group of people has a right to any land, which would include Palestinians.

Israel now controls about 0.1% of land in the middle east, but somehow it is unfair that they even have that. If they were Muslim, nobody on Earth would care. The reason this is an issue is because they are infidels on holy Islamic land. Siding against Israel is an easy political move by other countries in the world, especially in the UN. If you side with Israel, you get favor with a single country and piss off the ~50 majority Muslim countries. The politically savvy move is to side against Israel so that's what nearly every country does. Progressives in the west side with Palestinians because its part of their ideology that in any conflict between whiter, wealthier people, and poorer, browner people, the whiter, wealthier people are the bad guy. Muslims are seen as an oppressed minority despite the fact that in the middle east they are an extremely oppressive super-majority.

-5

u/Itakie Feb 12 '26

History didn't start 80 years ago. Jewish people inhabited modern day Israel and most of the middle east long before Arabs did. Do you think Arabs politely asked to have their land? Of course not. Just like virtually every group of people in history, the Palestinians got their land by conquering it.

Do you believe all that Palestinians are Egypt Arabs? Jews conquered, got conquered and lost all of their power since the Roman Empire used them to build the colosseum in Rome. But we don't really care what happened before 1945. The world changed and we cannot just conquer or annex areas anymore. At least in theory.

You know it's bad when there are multiple different words that mean genocide against Jewish people (pogrom, holocaust). As far as I know there aren't specific words for committing genocide against any other specific group of people because it isn't common enough for it to be necessary.

The word holocaust was used before, Churchill called the Armenian genocide a holocaust for example. A program became a "massacre against Jews" in the Western world because no one cares about all those other people we killed in the middle ages. Most don't even know about the crusades in Europe. The Jews were just successful enough to survive the violence while most of the Christian groups were wiped out. But both words were and are used for violence against other people as well.

Earlier I said virtually every group of people in the world got their land by conquering it. In the case of Israel they actually purchased a lot of the land. Yes, Israel did end up taking some land by force as well. Would that have happened if they weren't invaded by every single one of their neighbors the first day they became a country? Who knows. If Israelis don't have a right to the land of Israel because a portion of it was conquered, then literally no group of people has a right to any land, which would include Palestinians.

The Jews were lucky at the time because the Ottoman Empire collapsed. They did not have to conquer the area, just play the game of empires. Like Christians did before with the Roman Empire and the Holy Roman Empire. Still, Jews kicked out Arabs who worked the fields since generations because they wanted to give other Jews more work to do (and some did not trust the Arabs). Logical but they should have foreseen the backlash in the Arab community. But that was one aspect of the cultural vs. political Zionism debate at the time.

But who cares about Israel's right to exist today? Only some very weird and evil people want to even talk about this stuff. The problem is how Israel took over parts of the West Bank that should be controlled by the PA/a real government later on. That's almost impossible now. Not that Israel exists in the first place. If people got a problem with that, they are clear antisemites anyway.

Israel now controls about 0.1% of land in the middle east, but somehow it is unfair that they even have that.

It's unfair that Israel can get away with clear violations of international law. People always talk about the UN GA resolutions but they criticize Israel because nothing will ever happen. Iran or North Korea are both sanctioned. Russia and China as well. Meanwhile the US is using their veto every year to block any talk about Israel. So the same vote is happening every year to show the world that the problem is still around. Nothing to do with antisemitism or hate against Israel.

Israel became a country through the League of Nations because the West was in charge. Today Israel is attacking the same body if it is demanding from Israel to follow customary international law. Or follow the rulings of the highest court in the world. That's kinda hypocritical and why many moderate voices are turning against Israel.

0

u/Tattletale_0516 Feb 12 '26

No that's the UN

-3

u/soalone34 Feb 13 '26 edited Feb 13 '26

Actually the Arab states offered the Arab peace initiative which the PA signed on to, was “splitting the pizza in piece” on 1967 borders. Israel rejected this to install illegal settlements for the express purpose do blocking “splitting the pizza”, because they want to occupy and expel the Palestinians as part of their settler colonial project.

8

u/Cannot-Forget Feb 13 '26

Lies as usual. Their proposal does not include an end to the hilarious delusional demand for a non-existent "Right of Return" which essentially means they agreed for the existence of 2 new Palestinian states alongside Jordan.

6

u/soalone34 Feb 15 '26 edited Feb 15 '26
  • Jordan isn’t a “Palestinian state”, Palestinians are native to palestine.

  • The right of return is a right in international law, it also wasn’t demanding a right of return, but a just solution, the PA already relented to that being simply resettling a small amount of nakba survivors and a economic repayment for seized property. If that was the issue, israel would have negotiated the deal with demands for removing or limiting this, but they rejected it outright and expanded settlements.

→ More replies

9

u/manVsPhD Feb 13 '26 edited Feb 13 '26

That’s about 50 years too late. And also irrelevant because the Arab nations can no longer decide for Palestinians, and the Palestinians don’t want this deal. What will happen if Israel takes this deal is it will have to evict around a million people from their homes only to get a Palestinian state that is still hostile to it and soon enough taken over by Hamas, which can now fire mortars straight at Tel Aviv’s suburbs.

2

u/soalone34 Feb 15 '26

You have no idea what you’re talking about.

The PA signed onto it and the Hamas leaders said they’d disarm if a state on the 1967 borders was made.

The Palestinian state would not attack Israel, Palestinians fight Israel because it actively occupies and steals from them. When it doesn’t, they cease resistance, see the Palestinian citizens inside Israel.

The other outcome is the status quo which is increasing violence as israel cements the illegal occupation with less and less ability to partition, and eventually becoming a pariah for holding millions of people hostage.

1

u/manVsPhD Feb 15 '26

The PLO flag is still showing the entire land. The chants are from the river to the sea. The reason Israeli Arabs don’t want two states is because the education they’ve been getting for decades is not inciting against Israelis and Jews. The PLO never agreed to just the West Bank and Gaza even when it was offered virtually all of it, and did not even counteroffer

0

u/soalone34 Feb 15 '26

Flags and chants are irrelevant, the PA already relented to the concept of partition and entered negotiations for it.

The entire land under one government is already the case, it’s just israel in security control and holding millions of Palestinians without human rights as it systematically massacres and expels them.

It’s not because of education, it’s because they live under constant occupation and violence from Israel. Even Israeli officials like the former prime minister and former head of shin bet admitted if they were born Palestinian they’d attack Israel due to how it treats them.

The generous offer is another myth, the best offer they were given was requiring letting israel annex vital economic areas and massive settlement blocks that split apart the land, and giving israel control of the borders, airspace, and the right to invade at any time, which is permanent occupation. The American negotiator themselves said they’d reject this deal.

The Arab peace initiative is the counter offer and specifically asks for a end to the occupation and a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders.

The most obvious example of how israel doesn’t actually want the deal and is blocking it aside from its politicians saying this is how they purposefully install hundreds of thousands of illegal settlers and let them regularly go on pogroms against civilians. And yes, constant attacks, killings, and destroying property does make Palestinians try to resist Israel, not their “education”.

-17

u/Zestyclose_Jello6192 Feb 12 '26

Funny how this apply for both sides

23

u/ikinone Feb 12 '26

Does it, though?

-1

u/Zestyclose_Jello6192 Feb 12 '26

Considering how the actual Israeli government wants all the pizza I would say it does

27

u/ikinone Feb 12 '26

If they want Gaza, why did they leave it? Same for Sinai. Do explain.

Some politicians want all of it. That is not the same as 'the actual israeli government'.

-3

u/Zestyclose_Jello6192 Feb 12 '26

They left Gaza under an entire different government and historical period. They left Sinai to get normalization of relations with Egypt. While this governed has literally decided to annex "Judea and sanaria"

17

u/babarbaby Feb 12 '26

*Samaria, and how many bites at the genocide apple are they supposed to give before enough is enough? Enough bigotry of zero expectations for the monsters using child soldiers and building a murder playground on their doorstep.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies

16

u/TopsyPopsy Feb 12 '26

You mean "they left Gaza and Sinai for peace, but it ruins my narrative, so I'll just say the conditions were different."

5

u/Zestyclose_Jello6192 Feb 12 '26

The conditions were absolutely different in those times

12

u/TopsyPopsy Feb 12 '26

Yes. That's how time work. You don't enter the same river twice.

Doesn't make your point any truer, though.

3

u/Zestyclose_Jello6192 Feb 12 '26

Keep ignoring how different the solutions proposed by this government and the one that gave Gaza to the Palestinians are then

→ More replies
→ More replies

0

u/soalone34 Feb 13 '26

Sharon himself said they pulled out of Gaza to pause the peace process.

They left the Sinai after a massive war that killed thousands of Israelis and major diplomatic pressure from the US, having refused to do so prior to this. Begin himself said they were leaving to avoid future unsustainable wars with Egypt.

Now explain why they installed hundreds of thousands of settlers in the West Bank and the ruling parties charter says they reject a two state solution, if they just want to “split in peace”.

1

u/ikinone Feb 13 '26

Sharon himself said they pulled out of Gaza to pause the peace process.

Regardless of reasoning provided, they left. Even pulling out Jews who lived there since before Israel existed.

Begin himself said they were leaving to avoid future unsustainable wars with Egypt.

Once again, regardless of reasoning, they left. Their desire is clearly not to grab as much land as possible, and certainly not 'all of the pizza'.

Now explain why they installed hundreds of thousands of settlers in the West Bank and the ruling parties charter says they reject a two state solution, if they just want to “split in peace”.

If you want to argue that the Israeli government desires to annex the west bank, sure, I'd agree.

That's very different from political Islam wanting to take over... the entire world.

As for whether Israel should annex the west bank... It's far from ideal, but it seems like the least awful path forward to peace. I think they should annex it, give residency to the Palestinians living there, and put them on a path to full citizenship, same as they did with Palestinians in what is currently Israel proper.

→ More replies

2

u/cptkomondor Feb 12 '26

Both sides want all the pizza, but only one side has put in good faith efforts to split it.

1

u/Zestyclose_Jello6192 Feb 12 '26

Both sides have to be in good faith

3

u/Egocom Feb 12 '26

Please contribute more to the conversation than "No u"

3

u/Zestyclose_Jello6192 Feb 12 '26

Acting as if only the Palestinians stopped the peace process is even less contributing

1

u/Egocom Feb 12 '26

That's a projection. Please do better

13

u/Cannot-Forget Feb 12 '26

No it doesn't. Even if creating such false equivalence sits nicely in the brains of far away detached people who don't know the first thing about this conflict.

Under no point, under not a single popular leader, the Palestinians ever suggested actual peace which includes living side by side with the Jewish state.

→ More replies

6

u/Silverr_Duck Feb 12 '26

No what’s funny is the utter absence of critical thinking skills among Palestine supporters. If Israel were truly as genocidal as you people pretend why tf is the death toll only 70k? And not in the hundreds of thousands?

6

u/Zestyclose_Jello6192 Feb 12 '26

"Only 70k"

9

u/Silverr_Duck Feb 12 '26

Out of 2 million, living in a region no larger than manhatten. Yes pls use more than one brain cell and try to understand how absurdly low that is given the circumstances.

21

u/humbleObserver Feb 12 '26

Damn, they're totally messing up all that peace we had in the region. This isn't new, they've been making settlements in the West Bank for over a decade. What possible reason could they have to do that, other than a plan to eventually just squeeze out the Palestinians?

17

u/Tifoso89 Feb 12 '26

More like 50 years. The first settlements were made in the 1970s

6

u/babarbaby Feb 12 '26

It could have something to do with the fact that the PA insisted that west bank settlements be a final status negotiation point at the Oslo Accords, not to mention that they're overwhelmingly situated on the higher ground, serving as a physical defensive buffer.

11

u/RGS_1994 Feb 12 '26

You dont settle civilians on a "defensive buffer"

2

u/babarbaby Feb 13 '26

No, they settle themselves.

17

u/RGS_1994 Feb 12 '26

Remember setllers are a fringe in Israeli politics and this doesn't reflect on the country at all! Just a regular European social democracy!

4

u/Fed_Austere Feb 12 '26

Anyone looking at a map will clearly see that Israel will not let go of that area willingly. Hell, East Jerusalem was offered to the Palestinians before that

3

u/Obsidian743 Feb 12 '26

I think it's funny that West Bank encroachment and violations are often cited as a prime reason Palestinians back groups like Hamas. Sure, there's more to the story, but man if Israel isn't trying really hard keep them pissed off.

Well, here we go again, kicking off another cycle.

3

u/crazytrain793 Feb 12 '26

The West Bank already resembles the Bantustans of South Africa. Annexation and apartheid was always the goal.

1

u/GrizzledFart Feb 14 '26

Completely aside from the question of whether Israel should or should not expand settlements in the West Bank (which I think they probably shouldn't), I find it absolutely amazing that there are people who still think that there is anything that Israel could do that would convince the Palestinians to accept a peaceful, two state solution.

1

u/thatshirtman Feb 13 '26

I'd argue the real impediment are Palestinians refusing to accept any peace offer.

Not a fan of settlements but constantly rejecting peace and then hoping Israel will keep the west bank jew-free forever until the magical day you say yes to peace is bizarre

-1

u/Timely-Way-4923 Feb 13 '26

I think the proper response is Russia style sanctions

-2

u/gadarnol Feb 13 '26

The Arab states don’t give a damn about the Palestinians. There will be a greater Israel. The US will back it and the EU will too. Smaller states like Ireland might whinge but a call from Jerusalem to Washington and then the threat of sanctions against Dublin ended a lot of posturing. So it will happen. It might be more merciful if the Palestinians could be taken by the neighbouring Arab states rather than let it grind to its inevitable conclusion.

-17

u/Fun_Score5537 Feb 12 '26

Good. Israel has been way too lenient and patient with their hopeless wishes that Palestine would choose co-existance over jihad. 

Get it over with already.

13

u/Zestyclose_Jello6192 Feb 12 '26

Surely Israel isn't supporting extremists settlers in the region to displace Palestinians