Israeli Policy in the West Bank: From Occupation to Silent Actual Sovereignty

The West Bank is no longer a field for an occupiable reality, but has transformed into a laboratory for an old Israeli policy dressed in a more brazen form; a policy quietly constructed and gradually implemented, but essentially aims to unilaterally end the conflict—not by resolving it, but by politically erasing it.

What is revealed in the study by Oudi Dekel and Tami Kinner, published in the "Israeli National Security Studies Institute" under the title: "A Shift in Perception Towards the West Bank, Based on Absolute Security, Resolution, and Sovereignty," is that the danger lies not only in the scale of the accumulated changes, but in their structural nature; the occupation has shifted from the logic of "temporary administration" to "establishing permanent sovereignty" without legal noise, but rather through coercive realities imposed on the ground.

The study indicates that the idea of "absolute security," which has been reinforced since October 7, has taken on a central political function, as it assumes that any threat necessitates a military response, and that Israel must maintain operational freedom and complete control over Palestinian lands. In contrast, the Israeli government views any political settlement as a strategic threat. Although the formal legal status has not changed formally, the government is working to impose actual sovereignty that alters the structure and nature of control from within, without the need for an explicit legal declaration that conflicts with the international community.

With the rise of Bezalel Smotrich's role within the Ministry of Defense and his increasing control over the civil administration, the strategy of resolution begins from nationalizing the geographic space; the land is no longer a negotiation space, but a material legally and administratively reshaped to block the way for any future Palestinian entity. Opening the land market, resuming ownership arrangements, and turning the state into a direct player in purchasing are all not technical procedures, but tools to establish final ownership that fundamentally change the nature of the geopolitical conflict.

Then comes settlement, not as a gradual expansion but as a tool for simultaneously reshaping and dismantling Palestinian geography. It is embedded within the Palestinian fabric itself, producing an alternative map: fragmented land, restricted movement, and daily reliance on the Israeli control system. Thus, the idea of a Palestinian state is targeted politically, not only, but is drained of its geographic and practical substance before it is born.

In return, the Palestinian political foundation is systematically dismantled. The Palestinian Authority is not passively weakened, but is financially and administratively drained, meaning that the danger lies not only in the absence of a state, but in emptying the arena of any framework capable of representing a comprehensive national project, and erasing the entity that originally carries this project.

At the heart of this scene, the "violence of the settlers" transcends being a marginal phenomenon to become a systematic mode of action that enjoys protection from state institutions. This violence, in the absence of deterrence, transforms into a structural part of the control environment to produce a pressing reality that forcibly reshapes demographic distribution.

All of this is presented under the guise of "security." But the paradox is that these policies do not produce stable security, but rather increase friction points and burden the security system, revealing that "security" here is not an ultimate goal as much as it is a pretext to pass the resolution project.

In this context, the most dangerous transformation emerges: the transformation of the Palestinian from a "people" with a political right to merely "residents" within a management system. Their movement is restricted, and their options are besieged within a space without a horizon. With the erosion of the old contractual framework and the loss of the classifications (A, B, C) of their meaning, a permanent reality is imposed by force, extending its model from the West Bank to Gaza, where sharper tools are used for the same idea: reshaping the conflict until it loses its political meaning.

What is happening in the West Bank is not merely a change in policies, but a redefinition of the Palestinian cause from its very foundation. However, this "resolution" being quietly constructed does not end the conflict but postpones it in a more explosive manner; the realities imposed by force do not produce legitimacy, and control that negates politics opens doors wide for a harsher existential conflict, less amenable to containment.