The Palestinian State at Risk

On May 28, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced his intention to annex portions of the West Bank. Netanyahu’s announcement sparked intense debate about whether peace in the form of a two-state solution remains possible. In the eyes of many observers, annexation is the nail in the coffin of a dilapidated Oslo Process. On July 1, the proposed annexation date, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace hosted a livestream entitled The Way Forward for Palestine: A Conversation with Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh. The names and affiliations of all speakers are listed below. Since this event, Netanyahu has hesitated. No new annexation has yet occurred.

Mohammad Shtayyeh: Prime Minister, Palestinian National Authority

Marwan Muasher: Vice President for Studies, Carnegie Endowment

Aaron David Miller: Senior Fellow, Carnegie Endowment

Zaha Hassan: Visiting Fellow, Carnegie Endowment

The annexation plan was drafted by the Trump Administration and unveiled in January 2020. In brief, it sanctioned the Israeli annexation of up to 30% of the West Bank. The Trump-Netanyahu plan was not well received, and it triggered local, regional, and international objections. The Palestinian National Authority (PNA) firmly rejected annexation and vowed to end all cooperation with Israel. Jordan opposed annexation on the basis that it posed an existential threat to Jordanian security, and most other Arab states opposed it on moral grounds. The European Union (EU) warned that EU-Israel relations would be negatively impacted by annexation.

Implications of Annexation
The immediate consequences of annexation would be dramatic. According to Shtayyeh, annexation will hinder the PNA’s efforts to generate the infrastructure, socio-political institutions, and state capacity necessary for statehood. If the PNA is poorly equipped for self-government, the national liberation movement will fail. 

Annexation also has the potential to derail the peace process. Shtayyeh argues that annexation “erodes the geographic base of the eventual Palestinian state.” If annexation occurs, Israel will control large swaths of territory claimed by Palestinians, and it will become difficult for Palestinians to win back control in future negotiations. In Muasher’s eyes, annexation poses an existential threat to the realization of a two-state solution; if anything, annexation pushes the conflict toward a so-called “one state reality,” in which Palestinians and Israelis do not enjoy equal protection under the law. 

According to Shtayyeh, July 1 would not be the first instance of Israeli annexation. In his opinion, Israel has engaged in a “creeping annexation” of the Palestinian territories since 1967. Shtayyeh argues that settlement construction and land expropriation effectively constitute annexation.

The Future of Palestine
Shtayyeh is not hopeful about the prospect of peace with Israel in light of the planned annexation. In response to a question, he noted that the debate within Israel is no longer about whether to annex but how much and what to annex. Nevertheless, Shtayyeh resisted Muasher’s various attempts to get him to renege on his support for a two-state solution. He repeatedly affirmed the PNA’s commitment to a two-state solution. 

The PNA’s goal is the establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state, with East Jerusalem as its capital and pre-1967 borders. To accomplish this, Shtayyeh believes that there must be incremental expansion of Palestinian sovereignty in the West Bank, until the vast majority of the territory is considered Area A and only “final status” issues remain. 

Citing the history of failed negotiations and the United States’ long standing relationship with Israel, Shtayyeh argues that a new framework for negotiations is necessary. He and the PNA believe that the most appropriate course of action is multilateral negotiation, facilitated by the Quartet (European Union, United Nations, United States, Russia). 

To watch the Carnegie Endowment’s livestream in full, click here.