Arab views on Israeli annexation

The Arab Center of Washington DC hosted an online discussion on June 2, 2020 that explored the implications of the recent announcement by Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas that the PA will end all agreements and understandings signed with Israel and the United States. The discussion was moderated by Tamara Kharroub and featured six guest speakers:

Noura Erakat: Human Rights Attorney, Assistant Professor, Rutgers University

Leila Farsakh: Associate Professor and Chair, Political Science Department, University of Massachusetts Boston

Khalil E. Jahshan: Executive Director, Arab Center Washington DC 

Rashid Khalidi: Edward Said Professor of Modern Arab Studies, Columbia University, Co-Editor, Journal of Palestine Studies, President, Institute for Palestine Studies-USA 

Nasser Al-Kidwa: Chairman of the Board of Directors, Yasser Arafat Foundation, former Palestinian Representative to the United Nations

Raef Zreik: Associate Professor of Law, Ono Academic College, Co-Director of Minerva Center for the Humanities, Tel Aviv University

Tamara Kharroub (Moderator): Assistant Executive Director and Senior Fellow, Arab Center Washington DC

Current Context

Kharroub highlighted that an Israeli Unity government between Prime Minister Netanyahu and former military chief Gantz was installed in May of 2020. One of the main policies agreed upon by these two parties is annexation of parts of the West Bank. In his coalition agreement with Gantz, Netanyahu was granted the right to proceed with the process of annexation as early as July 1. According to figures collated by the Israeli organization Peace Now, the West Bank is home to nearly 2.7 million Palestinians and 400,000 Israeli settlers. Although extending Israeli sovereignty into parts of the West Bank has been one of Netanyahu’s key campaign promises, Gantz has repeatedly spoken against unilateral annexation.

As a response to this development, PA President Mahmoud Abbas has announced that the PA will end all agreements and understandings with Israel and the United States. This comes following the Trump administration’s January 2020 Middle East Peace Plan that allows for Israeli annexation of settlements within the West Bank and Jordan Valley. To Kharroub, the increasing prospect of Israeli annexation raises various questions:

1. Does the prospect of annexation constitute a real game changer in Israeli-Palestinian relations?
2. Or, does the prospect of annexation merely signify the culmination of decades of expansionist Israeli policy and international impunity?
3. What is the strategic economic and political importance of the proposed areas of annexation?
4. The annexation of these territories violates international law. Thus, what are the legal implications?

To Khalidi, the Trump administration has gone beyond what any other American administration has done before. Notably, previous American administrations have allowed the Israeli annexation of the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem while simultaneously maintaining the public face of opposition. Khalidi stresses that unlike previous administrations, the Trump administration has openly endorsed the annexation of Israeli settlements within the West Bank and Jordan Valley.

Likewise, Jahshan finds the Trump administration’s “Peace to Prosperity Plan” to be monumental in terms of the US role in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Jahshan believes that this plan significantly differs from previous American attempts and lacks even the semblance of neutrality.

Contrasting perspectives

Al-Kidwa believes that the annexation of areas within the West Bank constitutes a threat to the present international order and accepted modes of state conduct. States possess a legal obligation in accordance with the Geneva conventions to confront settler colonialism. Palestinians must work to refine and redefine their relationship with Israel.

Zreik believes that it remains important to differentiate between the question of sovereignty and the application and enforcement of Israeli law and order. To Zreik, the question of sovereignty remains a question of international law, not local law. Although Israel enforces law and order in the Golan Heights, the international community recognizes sovereignty over the Golan Heights as belonging to Syria. Zreik states that the question of state sovereignty must be decided by the international legal system.

Legal Implications

Erakat states that the annexation of areas within the West Bank violates UN Security Council Resolution 242, the Fourth Geneva Convention, and the UN Charter that provides for the territorial integrity of all people. To Erakat, although there remains an abundance of legal remedies, politics will determine whether Israel will be held legally accountable by the international community.

Political Implications

Farsakh highlights that Arab states have denounced the proposed Israeli annexation. Jordan in particular has remained steadfast in its opposition and has threatened to withdraw the Jordanian-Israeli Peace Accords. However, negative reactions by Arab states will not have much significance because of the high degree of dependence these states have on the United States and their economic relations with Israel. The European Union, Israel’s largest trading partner, has opposed the prospect of annexation and unilateral decision making.