A former Israeli diplomat has expressed deep concern regarding the escalating settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territories, describing them as a concrete step toward annexation that defies international law. The official emphasized that the global community cannot ignore the systematic violations occurring in the region, which include settler violence and the erosion of legal distinctions between Israel proper and occupied lands.
Legal Violations and Administrative Shifts
Tova Hassel, writing for the “Wall” website, noted that the upcoming anniversary of the 1967 war highlights six decades of control over territory acquired from Jordan. She argued that while historical claims are often debated, they do not negate the applicability of international law to occupied territories. Under these laws, the acquisition of land by force is prohibited, and occupation is considered a temporary status rather than a source of sovereignty. Furthermore, the occupying power is obligated to protect local populations and is strictly forbidden from transferring its own civilian population into the occupied areas.
Hassel pointed out that for decades, Israel maintained a clear administrative distinction between its pre-1967 borders and the occupied territories. This separation was evident in international agreements, such as those with the European Union, which granted privileges to Israeli institutions while explicitly excluding counterparts in settlements. However, she warned that the current government structure has undermined this boundary. By placing the Civil Administration under the Ministry of Security, led by Bezalel Smotrich, who also serves as Finance Minister, the state is actively blurring the lines of the Green Line.
The Paradox of De Facto Annexation
The diplomat described Israel’s current strategy as an attempt to “have the cake and eat it too.” She explained that while Israel avoids formal annexation to evade immediate heavy costs and complex political questions regarding the status of millions of Palestinians, it is simultaneously advancing policies that establish permanent control. This approach creates a reality where Israel acts as if it intends to hold the land indefinitely, effectively ignoring the prospect of a political solution.
Hassel cautioned that this dual approach is unsustainable. Formal annexation would likely result in a binational reality between the Jordan River and the sea, challenging Israel’s identity as a Jewish state and triggering significant international backlash. Conversely, continuing without formalizing the status quo leads to growing friction with major trading partners, particularly European nations. These countries maintain close ties with Israel but refuse to ignore the increasing crimes against Palestinians or the trajectory toward annexation.
The former ambassador concluded that Israel must make a definitive choice regarding its future direction. If the state proceeds with de facto annexation, it must accept the resulting consequences. As long as formal annexation does not occur, the world should not treat the occupied territories as part of Israel. The message is clear: the two opposing paths cannot be combined, and a final decision on the country’s trajectory is inevitable.
