Expansion in the shadows: The dangers of Israeli aggression in the West Bank

The intensifying conflict between Israel and Iran has captured the world’s attention. But as missiles pound Israel and Iran and (some) world leaders hurriedly call for de-escalation, the situation in Palestine continues to deteriorate. In Gaza, Israel is continuing its campaign of ethnic cleansing. On June 17th, the Israeli military killed at least 70 people waiting for aid trucks and at least 47 people a day later. A few kilometres away, Israel has put the West Bank under lockdown. Since the conflict with Iran broke out on June 13th, Israeli forces have sealed the entrances of cities and villages and established more checkpoints, severely restricting the movement of the 3.2 million Palestinians in the territory. This comes on top of Israel’s continued systematic destruction of civilian infrastructure in West Bank refugee camps and the creeping annexation of Palestinian territory.

These actions are a deliberate attempt to permanently obstruct the pathway to a two-state solution, entrenching an apartheid Israeli regime and complicating any resolution to the conflict. Alongside this, Israeli aggression in the West Bank is destabilising an already unstable region, risking an existential crisis for neighbouring countries like Jordan. After its failed engagement policy, the EU should finally act against Israeli violations in the territory as it reviews its Association Agreement with Israel.

The failure of European engagement

So far, the EU has opted for dialogue over sanctions in its engagement with Israel, but this has failed to stop or even restrain the brutality of Israel’s occupation in the West Bank. The EU has reiterated its “condemnation” over the Israeli government’s settlement expansion; its eviction of Bedouin communities in the Israeli-controlled Area C; and hard-line lawmakers’ calls to destroy the mosque on al-Haram Al-Sharif/Temple Mount, coupled with restrictions on Muslim worshippers while permitting Jewish prayers on top of the site. But in response to such actions, the bloc has merely suggested a “regular and structured dialogue with the Israeli government on these issues” to no avail.

Likewise, during internal discussions in early 2020, member states suggested re-assessing the European Neighbourhood Initiative funding to Israel, reviewing trade arrangements, and suspending the Association Agreement in response to Israeli moves towards annexation of parts of the West Bank.[1] This too was eventually shelved in favour of dialogue and support for Israeli normalisation with the Arab members of the Abraham Accords, even as Israel’s settlement activity continued apace.

More recently, the EU justified the holding of its Association Council meeting with Israel in February 2025 as an opportunity to review its ties and reiterate the need for a ceasefire in Gaza and unhindered humanitarian access. EU diplomats maintained the meeting was important to “keep dialogue going and not hold a tribunal for Israel”. Just a few weeks later Israel resumed its campaign of destruction in Gaza and blocked the delivery of humanitarian aid for nearly three months. Meanwhile in the West Bank, the Israeli government has only sped up its annexation of territory, cementing its vision of “Jewish supremacy” over Palestinians.

The EU again broached the topic of broad economic action against Israel in March this year, when it said it will review its Association Agreement and potentially stop European companies operating in the Israeli occupied West Bank. But so far the EU has only imposed sanctions on a handful of individuals and entities in the settler movement to little or no effect. Meanwhile, Israeli aggression in the West Bank shows no signs of relenting.

The building of a Greater Israel

Israeli forces are actively reconfiguring the architecture of the West Bank. Its operation “Iron Wall”, which began in January, is forcing the evacuation of refugee camps sheltering Palestinian armed groups. It has conducted brutal military incursions including the use of airstrikes, helicopter gunships and drone strikes on a scale previously unprecedented in the West Bank, displacing at least 40,000.

Israel claims it is responding to Palestinian militancy. But the operation supports a bigger plan by Israeli extremists to entrench Israeli control in the West Bank and squeeze out Palestinians. They view this as necessary to establish a “Greater Israel”—a vaguely-defined territory beyond Israel’s current borders that hardliners would like to incorporate into the state.

Beyond the camps, Israeli forces are depopulating Palestinian neighbourhoods through a similar pattern of raids, closures and demolitions. West Bank Palestinians increasingly worry Israel could carry out far-right threats to forcibly evict them to neighbouring countries, which Jordanian officials have warned would be an existential risk to their country’s stability and be seen as an “act of war”. 

Depopulation is also being advanced through Israeli legislation, such as the new ‘Regularisation Law’ passed by the Knesset on May 11th which will facilitate the seizure of Palestinian property and land in areas of the West Bank home to 300,000 Palestinians under Israeli control (Area C). The equally vulnerable Palestinian community in East Jerusalem is also being forced out through Israeli appropriation and demolition measures. The Israeli government is extending these tactics to areas under Palestinian and joint control (Areas A and B), severing the network of roads that tenuously link the already fragmented Palestinian territories and cutting them into three sections: northern, southern and central.

As of May, Israel’s “E1” plan to construct 3,412 housing units for Israeli settlers in East Jerusalem—an EU redline—is reportedly moving ahead, which will forcibly displace the Bedouin community there. Also last month, Israel approved the construction of 22 new illegal Israeli settlements, including recognising existing informal settlements, while construction is proceeding in Har Homa and Givat Hamatos—the first new settlement in Jerusalem in 20 years. Government hardliners have advocated for these settlements as a way of making a Palestinian state impossible. 

A West Bank without a future

Against this backdrop, the future for Palestinians in the West Bank looks grim. The dismemberment, contraction and isolation of Palestinian territories and the subsequent economic fallout will severely impact the ability of the Palestinian Authority (PA) to administer the limited territory it ostensibly controls. Already facing an intractable and long running financial crisis, the authority has become little more than a mechanism of Israel security control, undermining its legitimacy in the eyes of many Palestinians. At the same time, it is unable to contain Palestinian frustration given its inability to offer them jobs, subsidies or a political route to a better future. As Palestinians become increasingly brutalised by Israeli violence—propelled by the Greater Israel project—and the conditions of their day-to-day life deteriorate, they are increasingly likely to search for new forms of armed resistance instead.

The EU’s moment of truth

The next EU Foreign Affairs Council meeting on 23 June is expected to discuss Israel’s compliance with its human rights obligations under its Association Agreement with the EU. Though the impetus for this discussion comes from Israel’s actions in Gaza, the EU should not ignore its actions in the West Bank. However, as of a week ago, European support for Israel in its war with Iran threatens to overshadow these concerns. The EU may be less willing to impose any measures to hold Israel accountable for its actions in Gaza and the West Bank in light of its unfolding confrontation with Iran. This, however, would be a mistake. 

The EU may be less willing to impose any measures to hold Israel accountable for its actions in Gaza and the West Bank in light of its unfolding confrontation with Iran. This, however, would be a mistake

The occupied Palestinian territories have long been a regional flashpoint, especially in the last 20 months. If European leaders want to seriously address the escalating insecurity and retain any political credibility in the region, they need to enforce some form of accountability on Israel for its actions that clearly violate the EU’s own human rights standards and long-standing red lines.

European countries must take action to press Israel to not only halt its brutal assault and restrictions on the entry of aid to Gaza, but also to reverse its escalating violence in the West Bank and deter a potential mass expulsion of its Palestinian population. Diplomatic pressure from the recognition of a Palestinian state by Norway, Ireland, Spain and later Slovenia was no more effective in pressuring Israel diplomatically than previous recognitions by European states. More substantial action to prevent Israel eroding the territorial foundation of a future state of Palestine is required. 

A lack of EU unanimity due to the continued backing for Israel from the likes of Hungary means that a full suspension of the Association Agreement is unlikely. However, a qualified majority of member states could still suspend parts of the agreement relating to preferential trade tariffs and Israeli access to programmes such as Horizon Europe. This would go some way to imposing a cost against Israel over its actions in Gaza and the West Bank. More can also be done to challenge its settlement project, long underway in the West Bank (and on the horizon in Gaza), such as banning settlement trade and investment—a move that could also be done through a qualified majority—and expanding existing sanctions to target Israeli entities such as settlement councils.

By acting against Israeli violations of international norms, the EU could begin to fulfil its ambitions to be a geopolitical actor capable of asserting its economic leverage and political influence on the global stage. Rather than allowing Israel to blatantly walk through EU red lines, the bloc still has a chance to act against them, supporting regional stability and a two-state solution.

---

[1] Confidential EEAS summary of EU member state discussions, April 2020. (copy on file with ECFR)