Far-right ministers Smotrich and Ben Gvir have driven record settlement approvals, E1 construction, and civilian ministry oversight into Area C, with land registration rules favoring Israeli ownership. Annexation undermines Palestinian viability, risks Jordanian destabilization, and contradicts Trump’s regional plan. Conditional US aid and European trade leverage remain untapped.
The expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank undermines prospects for long-term regional peace. The US, Europe and Arab states should act before it’s too late.
While the world has been distracted by the US-Israeli war on Iran and its fallout, the Israeli government has accelerated the de facto annexation of the occupied West Bank.
If this unilateral imposition of facts on the ground is not immediately addressed, it will become even more difficult to tackle the underlying causes of the Arab-Israeli conflict and could lead to dangerous scenarios for Israel, the Palestinians and the region.
Accelerating annexation measures
Accelerated annexation efforts have been spearheaded by Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir. These two far-right cabinet ministers have been open about their determination to exercise Israeli sovereignty over the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) and to ‘continue to kill the idea of a Palestinian state’.
Israel has not formally annexed the West Bank. But since Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition government took office in December 2022, there has been a surge in settlement expansion policies and settler violence in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. As part of the coalition agreement, Netanyahu pledged to legalize illegally built outposts and increase settlement funding. He also promised to advance policies that would apply Israeli sovereignty in the West Bank ‘while choosing the timing and considering the national and international interests of the state of Israel’.
In July 2025, the Knesset approved in a symbolic vote a non-binding motion to ‘apply Israeli sovereignty to Judea, Samaria and the Jordan Valley,’ in a reference to the West Bank.
And while US President Donald Trump has voiced his opposition to annexation of the West Bank, the number of settlements approved by the Israeli government increased dramatically after he was elected for a second term in November 2024, with an annual record of 54 new settlements officially approved in 2025.
That year, Israel gave final approval to the controversial settlement project close to East Jerusalem known as E1, a long-proposed settlement scheme that covers around three per cent of the occupied West Bank. The project creates a ring of control around historic Jerusalem and the holy sites, breaks territorial continuity of the West Bank and critically undermines the viability of a future peace process. Smotrich said the project would ‘bury the idea of a Palestinian state.’
This February, Israel’s security cabinet approved a series of measures that expand Israeli rule and governance over the occupied West Bank, a move widely condemned as in breach of international law. These measures explicitly extend the authority of Israeli ministries and government institutions into the West Bank, marking a shift away from military administration and effectively integrating parts of the occupied territory into the administrative framework of Israel.
Within these measures, the government established a process to register West Bank land as ‘state property’. The process builds on a cabinet decision in May last year, which Defence Minister Israel Katz said ‘does justice for Jewish settlement in Judea and Samaria, and will strengthen, consolidate and broaden it.’
This process will require Palestinians living in ‘Area C’, which comprises about 60 per cent of the West Bank, to prove ownership of their lands under conditions that critics say are ‘nearly impossible for them to meet.’ In case ownership cannot be proven, the default is that land will be registered as state owned.
The rest of the West Bank, comprised of ‘Area A’ and ‘Area B’, could also face a similar fate. February’s measures already expand Israeli oversight and enforcement in parts of these areas with regard to water issues, heritage and archaeological sites. A controversial bill that would establish an Israeli civilian body with broad powers to manage archaeology in the West Bank is already under review for Knesset legislation.
Implications
Annexation is a short-sighted plan with dangerous long-term implications.
UN resolutions and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) recognize that the OPT constitutes a single territorial unit, reinforcing the legal coherence of Palestinian statehood.
Israeli land seizure measures are already establishing unilateral facts on the ground that would make the prospect of Palestinian statehood very difficult to achieve. Blurring governance lines between settlements and the Israeli state while denying Palestinians their basic rights will only increase their displacement and dispossession.
This is in line with Smotrich’s 2017 ‘decisive plan’, in which he envisioned Palestinians giving up their aspirations for an independent state and then either emigrating or remaining in the West Bank ‘as individuals in the Jewish State.’
Annexation measures continue to shrink the space for Palestinian independence, undermine Palestinian agency and push the Palestinian Authority (PA) to political and financial collapse.
This undermines the feasibility of a viable independent Palestinian state alongside Israel and plays into the hands of extremists who have long opposed Arab-Israeli peace.
What can be done?
These measures also hinder any progress of President Trump’s 20-point plan and undermine the prospect of Israel’s regional integration.
Annexation impedes the implementation of UNSC Resolution 2803 and directly conflicts with the White House’s stated support for a ‘stable West Bank.’ If the US wants long-term stability in the Middle East, pressuring Israel through conditioning political and military support to reverse annexation measures should be a priority.
Annexation also risks the further deterioration of Israel’s already-strained relations with its immediate neighbours, especially Jordan. Amman has long considered the displacement of Palestinians and any schemes to relocate them to Jordan as red lines. Many Jordanians now fear that the recent measures in the West Bank will lead to a potential influx of refugees across the border.
Egypt, a key party to the implementation of the Trump 20-point plan, has also condemned annexation. Both countries should leverage their peace treaties with Israel to obtain guarantees from the US to stop settlement expansion.
As for the wider region, while the Iran war and its fallout have shifted political and financial priorities, the urgent need for regional stability has only increased. The wave of regional conflict that followed Hamas’s October 7 attack has shown that, regardless of how many defence and commercial ties Arab countries forge with Israel or the US, stability in the region will not be achieved without resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a just and sustainable manner.
Countries like the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey should coordinate to push against annexation. As key political and financial members of Trump’s ‘Board of Peace’, they can make reversing Israel’s annexation measures a condition of their membership of the board and leverage their bilateral economic relations with the US.
European and other countries that have recognized the state of Palestine should also be concerned that decades of political and financial investment in the PA may all go to waste. Europeans must now follow up on their recognition with concrete and coordinated steps to prevent annexation.
The full suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement has been deemed unlikely as it requires a unanimous vote, but the ousting of Victor Orbán may change dynamics in the EU. Meanwhile, partial suspension of trade benefits, which requires a qualified majority, should be considered.
European countries, including non-EU members such as the UK, can also leverage their bilateral economic, trade, arms and tech relations with Israel to push for a halt to annexation measures. For example, they could insist bilateral agreements with Israel include a specific clause that explicitly excludes the OPT, and could ban imports of goods from Israeli settlements. Sanctions on individuals and entities promoting settler violence should be enhanced.
While international leverage is key, Israeli voters have an opportunity to choose an alternative path to this government’s agenda. The outcome of the Israeli elections – due to take place by late October 2026 – will have far-reaching consequences that can shape Israel’s future and that of a region in turmoil.