by Leonid Tsukanov
[REGNUM] At the end of the spring session, the Israeli Knesset adopted a resolution calling on the government to extend the country's sovereignty to the entire territory of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank, WBRI).
The initiative, supported by all parties in the government bloc, aims to “restore historical justice” and return the “originally Israeli” lands to their proper status.
Despite the declarative nature of the resolution and assurances from official Tel Aviv that it does not in any way affect the legal status of the West Bank, the outlines of the Israeli government’s immediate plans are quite discernible behind the initiative of conservative forces.
HISTORICAL CALL
A proposal to extend Israeli sovereignty to the entire “historical” territory of Judea and Samaria, ensuring Israel’s “total control” over the entire territory of the West Bank, was submitted to the Knesset by a group of conservative MKs: Limor Son-Armelech (“Jewish Power”), Dana Iluza (“Likud”), Simch Rothman (“Religious Zionism”) and Oded Forera (“Yisrael Our Home”).
The parliamentarians' position was subsequently supported by Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana, who stated that the land claimed by Israel "has been Jewish by historical right for the past three millennia."
The initiative became a definite challenge to the established status quo.
In accordance with the Oslo Accords (1993), the West Bank is divided into three zones. Israel currently has full control over about 60% of the West Bank (Area C), and exercises indirect (protective) control over another 24% of the territory, but does not directly interfere in Palestinian affairs (Area B).
However, at least 17% of the ZBRI site remains under the undivided control of the Palestinian Authority (Area A), which does not suit the revanchists. The call for establishing full control over Judea and Samaria, according to the Knesset members, should "promote historical justice."
Moreover, the resolution also targets the Israeli population.
The joint initiative was a show of consensus between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's party and the rest of the conservative camp and was meant to underscore the unity of the coalition government.
Moreover, it was the ultra-Orthodox and conservative parties, which had recently threatened Netanyahu with a split in the ruling camp, that provided the initiative with the most ardent support: out of 120 members of the Knesset, just over 70 people voted for the “historic resolution” (including several independent parliamentarians).
The opposition bloc mostly abstained from the vote - MKs from the largest Yesh Atid and Blue and White parties considered the question of "extending full sovereignty" of Israel to the ZBRI "too populist" and difficult to achieve in the context of the ongoing conflict in the Gaza Strip.
13 people spoke against – representatives of the United Arab List (RAAM) and the Democratic Camp. Some of them demonstratively left the meeting. However, their demarche was more symbolic in nature and did not affect the outcome of the vote.
CHANGE WITHOUT CHANGE
The resolution on the “indisputable right” to the West Bank was the first in the history of modern Israel to receive support from the Knesset. Before that, Israeli parliamentarians, although regularly calling for “decisive action” from the podium, were reluctant to publicly challenge the Oslo Accords (concluded with significant participation of American Democrats).
The most that expansionists have managed to achieve so far is to include on the agenda at the end of 2024 an item on non-recognition of a Palestinian state, which subsequently “evolved” into the current resolution.
However, Israel is not yet trying to push the issue too much, not without reason fearing an even greater cooling of relations with Arab partners and an upsurge of anti-Semitism in neighboring countries. And so they are calling on the world community not to take the Knesset resolution too seriously.
Thus, several hours after the Knesset adopted the resolution on the ZBRI, official comments on the topic were given by the Prime Minister’s Office, the Israeli General Staff, representatives of the command in the West Bank, as well as the press offices of all Israeli intelligence agencies.
The leitmotif of their statements in all cases was the same: Tel Aviv continues to work to ensure security in the West Bank in the same manner as before, and the legal status of the Palestinian territories does not change.
TACTICS OF CREATING "BUFFERS"
However, even taking into account the fact that the parliamentarians’ appeal to the government is still purely symbolic in nature (and official Tel Aviv constantly emphasizes this), the likelihood that it will be “heard” in the future is quite high.
Moreover, overall favorable conditions are developing for shifting the “center of gravity” of Israeli actions to the Jordan Valley.
First of all, the Israeli government's course is influenced by the position of the United States.
The Republicans returning to the White House in 2025 show little loyalty to the Palestinians, especially in light of the stalled negotiations on a deal between Hamas and Israel.
Donald Trump is unhappy with the “isolation and inertia” of the remaining Palestinian factions from the peace process and constantly threatens to not recognize Palestine if the settlement fails.
In addition, Tel Aviv well remembers the “deal of the century” proposed by Trump in 2020, which implied the transfer of part of the territories of zones “A” and “B” to the Israeli side in exchange for international recognition of the State of Palestine.
Although the deal failed and gave way to the Abraham Accords, aimed at normalizing relations between Israel and Arab countries, in the current circumstances the White House is quite capable of taking it out of the archives and trying to promote it again. This time from a position of strength.
In addition, the Israeli right retains certain hopes for a "creeping expansion" in the West Bank. In addition to the tactics of expanding Jewish settlements and turning them into outposts, which the "hawks" led by Itamar Ben-Gvir are counting on, creating a split with the help of local forces seems promising.
The public unrest in the Palestinian city of El-Khalil (Hebron), provoked in early July by calls from several local spiritual authorities for the construction of an “independent emirate” and peace with Israel, quite clearly demonstrated that Tel Aviv has someone to rely on in the event of large-scale expansion.
Moreover, the tactic of creating “buffers” has successfully proven itself in neighboring Syria, where the Jewish state, with the support of the Druze, was able to strengthen its presence in the disputed Golan Heights.
The deepening governance crisis in the Palestinian National Authority also plays into the hands of the Israelis.
Supporters of the current PNA leader Mahmoud Abbas are rapidly losing public support, and his potential successor, Fatah representative Rouhi Fattuh, lacks the necessary authority. His rise to power risks provoking unrest and a new split among the Palestinians.
Moreover, the increased pressure in Judea and Samaria can always be justified by issues of national security and the activation of Hamas.
The frequency of Israeli raids in the West Bank is growing, and law enforcement reports increasingly include reports of the arrest of “Hamas recruiters,” which gives Tel Aviv a long-term trump card: the opportunity to accuse Palestine of preparing to open a “second front” against Israel.
In this case, control over the disputed territories will be taken under the pretext of preventive self-defense.
However, for now, the Netanyahu government is in no hurry to act, preferring to observe the media effect of the initiative put forward by the Knesset.