On July 19, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that Israel’s settlement in the West Bank and the treatment of the Palestinians are illegal, deeming it as annexation and apartheid under the UN Charter.
This alarmed foreign policy officials of both Israeli and U.S. governments, despite the growing international pressure to recognize Palestinian sovereignty.
Few realize the constant danger Israel faces. As the only Jewish state surrounded by Middle Eastern countries with histories of violence against it, Israeli leaders have reason to be wary of their neighbors. Israel’s security situation is nearly impossible, with competing claims making diplomacy into a zero-sum game.
To manage this situation effectively, Israel must ensure American public support while deterring Iranian proxy influence in a manner that aligns adjacently with international law. While Israel’s military operations in Gaza clearly show a disregard for civilian life, they are part of a larger strategy.
Since Iran’s Islamic Revolution in 1979, Israel has faced a relentless enemy across the Middle East. The rivalry, notably using militant groups known as proxies, has intensified Israel’s struggle for existence, adding to the already tense conflict with Palestine near its borders.
Iran has proven a willingness to project hard power abroad to achieve diplomatic aims, with Israel’s extreme reaction to Hamas and the Houthis undermining Israeli credibility internationally.
The Oct. 7 Hamas attack on Israeli citizens showed that Israeli influence beyond its borders is necessary for its safety. The attack likely wouldn’t have occurred if Israel had more direct control over the Gaza Strip. Hence, the West Bank remains occupied due to the recognized danger it poses to Israel.
The subject of Israeli policy in the West Bank is complex, however, in an interview with NPR’s “All Things Considered” co-host Mary Louise Kelly, Israeli President Isaac Herzog helped to clarify the rationale.
When asked if there was any hope in Israel for a two-state solution, Herzog said, “Right now, we [Israelis] are grieving, in a national mental mood. Let’s not even think about the feasibility that there will be a border five minutes from where I am sitting right now. Because nobody can trust anybody.”
The occupation in the West Bank left a distasteful view of Israel that cannot be erased by an Israeli evacuation. The occupation has divided Israeli and Palestinian communities. A free Palestine may harbor long-standing animosity and seek security from Iran.
In this deal, Palestine would be backed by a regional power that ensures a measure of military protection. An Israeli-free West Bank, in return, would offer Iran a platform for which they can attack Israel at will and achieve the strategic ambitions of both countries.
Israeli leaders and civilians, including President Herzog, are prepared for the possibility of an Israeli evacuation from the West Bank, focusing on preventing the emergence of another Iranian-led platform in the heart of the country.
History shows that in power vacuums, Iran supports proxies for strategic purposes: Hezbollah in Lebanon, ISIS in Syria and Iraq, the Houthis in Yemen, and Hamas in Gaza. This pattern fuels the belief that lasting peace between Palestine and Israel is improbable.
The westernmost border of the West Bank sits a dozen miles from Israel’s densest population center, Gush Dan, where over 4 million Israelis live in less than 600 square miles.
Hezbollah fires thousands of missiles every year into Israeli cities, located nearly 100 miles away. Israel’s Iron Dome is highly efficient but vulnerable at close range. Thus, occupying the West Bank is driven by strategic necessity, not racial bias or Islamophobia.
However, it’s even bigger than that. Israel’s foreign policy lies at the heart of international affairs, with a recognition for the fact that politics is never about intent, but capacity. It does not matter whether Palestinian leaders today say they will ally with Iran or not, because leaders change with the times.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s plan for a post-war Gaza offers a glimpse into the future. In his July 24th speech to Congress, he said, “We must retain overriding security control there [Gaza] to prevent the resurgence of terror, to ensure that Gaza never again poses a threat to Israel.”
The implications of security are indefinite, with the only difference being that Israeli leaders won’t wait for an Oct. 7-style attack to prioritize the West Bank’s security.
A close look at modern Middle East history shows that only a careful balance of power and containment can bring peace. International law does not work in the Middle East.
Despite ethical concerns, Israel has nuclear weapons and won’t hesitate to use them if its sovereignty is threatened. If Israel ever agrees to evacuate the West Bank, safeguards must prevent Iran or any other rogue actor from disrupting peace. The ICJ ruling requires reconsideration for practical adoption.
Copy edited by Camiryn Stepteau
