All across my recent news feeds have been headlines about Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu (Likud) seeking additional assurances from the United States for moving forward on intended annexation plans in the West Bank.
Of course, there’s not yet any publicly available map of what territories will and won’t be included in annexation, nor is it stated what happens to Palestinians living in those areas – whether they would be given Israeli citizenship or simply left with a resident alien status in the annexed territory is completely absent from the conversation.
The Trump administration has expressed its support for annexation pending Israel accepts the “Deal of the Century” and a truncated Palestinian Bantustan within the West Bank.
This back and forth is nothing new and not the point of this article. What I’m really arguing is that these macro level steps are ultimately not that important.
If Israel seeks true annexation of all or large parts of the West Bank, there are two fundamental issues it must address: How does it wish to carry out annexation and what happens to the Palestinians living under Israeli rule?
I have addressed the latter in other articles and perhaps will write something more comprehensive in the future. What I wish to do here is examine the former.
Annexation is not an end all, be all to the conflict. I know many people on the Israeli and American right think that you sign a piece of paper proclaiming annexation and khallas, it’s over.
Annexation by itself won’t solve the many problems currently plaguing Israeli society. In fact, annexation within the context of the mentality currently dominant in Israeli politics will likely compound already existing unresolved questions that Israelis seem to have ignored for 53 years.
The fundamental question is whether Israel seeks to further entrench its Western colonial mindset and exacerbate the conflict or seek an alternative path where it incorporates Palestinians as equal partners. For most of the conflict’s history, Israel has chosen the former, with rare exceptions being Menaḥem Begin’s original proposal at Camp David and a few others.
Annexation offers a unique opportunity to reposition and re-purpose Israel in the Semitic region and in the world. Israel is currently perceived by Palestinians and the broader region as a Western outpost of colonial control and influence. There are even many visible figures within the Jewish world who regard this as something positive.
To break this mold, Israel must halt the aggressive westernization efforts of its ruling class and their Diaspora cheerleaders to embrace a more Middle Eastern identity and diplomatic posture.
In Western discourse, for example, there is a preference for partitioning land between groups, even when there has been minimal confrontation between these groups. This allows Western nations to control these populations easier while promoting the idea of “minority rights.”
Middle Eastern societies on the other hand have historically been diverse, non-homogenous political and economic entities, and in fact pride themselves on it. Yes, of course there have been issues, but forcing partition and segregation based on Western identities never solves them.
What am I proposing?
If Israel truly wishes to embrace an annexation that isn’t meant to further entrench the conflict, it must accept the responsibilities of annexation and not seek only to reap the benefits. It must begin to act as a state wishing to incorporate all people between the river and the sea, and not only fight for the privileges of one ethnic group.
A tangible example would be civil services. Over 30% of employed Palestinians work for the Palestinian Authority (and 50% of people are dependent on someone who works for the PA), covering everything from education to infrastructure to policing. If Israel is serious about accepting responsibility, it should first start paying these people’s salaries. Additionally, PA salaries are about 20% that of their Israeli equivalent. So instead of a traffic cop making 1,800 NIS/month from the PA, he/she should be paid the Israeli equivalent (8-10,000 NIS) by the State of Israel.
Israel taking responsibility for Palestinian civil servant salaries should take place across the board as it would greatly weaken the PA, whose sole purposes have been to cheapen the occupation for Israel and further the West’s two-state agenda.
Taking responsibility for Palestinian civil servant salaries would also signal that Israel is serious about annexation and not looking to further exploit an already oppressed people under its rule. It would also undo the disastrous Oslo Accords, which more and more Palestinians and Israelis are learning to resent.
Lastly, it would start the process of economic and political integration that seeks to involve Palestinians as equal partners, rather than dominated subjects, in Israeli society.
