This Q&A is part of a Century International series exploring a shared future for Palestine and Israel that guarantees the fundamental rights of both communities. The Gaza war has exposed the bankruptcy of the existing policy frameworks. Our “Shared Future” series intends to spur conversation and promote new, better options for security, rights, and governance—for Palestinians and Israelis.
Here, Century International speaks to Dalia Hatuqa, a journalist with extensive experience in the West Bank, about just how bad the rights and settlement situation has grown in the Occupied Territories. Israeli land appropriations are at an all-time high—a fact that has been mostly overshadowed by the war in Gaza. Hatuqa describes a raft of measures the United States could take to ease pressure on Palestinians in the West Bank, and open a path toward conflict resolution and equality, if only the political will could be mustered.
Century International: Since the war in Gaza began last October, Israeli settlers and the Israeli government have put the West Bank under a kind of siege, as you wrote for Century International in April. What are the latest developments in the West Bank?
Dalia Hatuqa: The situation in the West Bank has deteriorated even more since I wrote that commentary in April. The fog of the war in Gaza continues to provide cover for some really egregious Israeli activities.
In July, for example, Israel approved the seizure of 4.9 square miles of land in the Jordan Valley. It was the largest land grab in the occupied West Bank in more than three decades, according to Peace Now, an Israeli settlement watchdog. Israel declared the whole parcel to be “state property,” which means Palestinians there are denied private ownership and usage rights.
This seizure was just the largest in a banner year for stealing Palestinian land. Israel has officially confiscated 9.15 square miles of land in 2024, according to Peace Now, which is the largest expansion since the Oslo Accords.
It’s not just the size of these land seizures that make them notable. The plots are contiguous, which would give “territorial continuity” to any settlements that get built there—in a key corridor bordering Jordan. And the plots are located northeast of Ramallah, the headquarters of the Palestinian Authority.
These land seizures are only one of the many methods Israel is using to shrink Palestinian access to land in the West Bank. The seized parcels cover an area north of the illegal settlement of Yafit that had already mostly been designated as a nature reserve or a “firing zone”—a closed area exclusively reserved for military training purposes. These two designations are basically another type of land grab.
In particular, it’s pretty clear that Israel’s motivation for creating nature reserves in the West Bank is not the preservation of nature. The designation requires Ministry of Defense approval, and amounts to a sneaky way to keep Palestinians from using the land, because it prohibits Palestinian grazing, agriculture, and development. Israel has declared about 48 nature reserves in the West Bank, with a total area of at least 95,000 acres, which is about 12 percent of Area C and about 7 percent of the entire West Bank. The majority of such reserves are located along the Jordan Valley and Dead Sea area.
There are, of course, already more than 100 settlements and half a million Israeli settlers in the West Bank. So these land grabs are part of a much bigger project.
Century: Who, or what, is behind this annexation strategy? Why now?
Hatuqa: The Gaza war has really opened the door to a lot of extreme Israeli ideas and policies in the West Bank. These ideas have been swirling in Israeli politics and society for a while, but they now have a new opportunity to thrive. In particular, there are some Israeli officials—like Bezalel Smotrich, the finance minister, and Itamar Ben-Gvir, the national security minister—who are advocating for the annexation of the entire West Bank and dismissing the idea of a Palestinian state. These positions resonate with parts of Israeli society, galvanizing those who view any concession to Palestinians as a betrayal.
Smotrich’s strategy represents a decisive move away from negotiated settlement with the Palestinians, and instead, toward embedding segregation and dispossession.
Smotrich, in particular, has emerged as a pivotal figure in the recent West Bank annexation strategy. A hardline nationalist, he has leveraged his position to push policies that entrench Israeli control over Palestinian territories, significantly shifting the dynamics of settlement expansion.
Central to Smotrich’s approach is the transfer of authority over the West Bank from military to civilian agencies, effectively normalizing settlements and accelerating construction. This shift has facilitated the retroactive legalization of numerous outposts, further embedding Israeli presence deep into Palestinian territories. According to Peace Now, there has been a notable surge in settlement activity since Smotrich assumed his role in 2022, undermining prospects for a contiguous Palestinian state.
Smotrich has also fostered an environment of impunity for settler violence. Under his watch, and with the help of Ben-Gvir—who has been convicted multiple times for supporting terrorist organizations—attacks on Palestinian communities have increased, with settlers often acting with little to no intervention from authorities.
The consequences have been profound. For Palestinians, these policies mean increased dispossession and violence, further entrenching an apartheid-like system. Internationally, Israel’s actions present a challenge to peace prospects in the region. Smotrich’s strategy represents a decisive move away from negotiated settlement with the Palestinians, and instead, toward embedding segregation and dispossession, which makes a just and lasting peace increasingly remote.
Century: What has been the response from the international community to these recent annexations?
Hatuqa: The international community has widely condemned the recent annexations in the West Bank. And the UN, the European Union, and various countries have labeled these actions as violations of international law and barriers to peace. But these responses have had limited impact on the ground, for a few different reasons.
First, strategic alliances and interests make international pressure fickle. The United States, a key ally of Israel, has taken inconsistent positions on settlement activity depending on the administration in power. This inconsistency undermines international pressure and emboldens Israeli policies.
Second, international responses often lack substantive action. While statements and resolutions condemn the annexations, there is a noticeable absence of tangible measures such as sanctions or significant diplomatic repercussions. This lack of concrete action signals to Israeli authorities that there are minimal real-world consequences for their policies.
The political dynamics within Israel also contribute to the limited impact. The current Israeli government, led by figures like Smotrich, is driven by a nationalist agenda that prioritizes territorial expansion. This government derives its power from its domestic constituency, making it somewhat immune to international disapproval.
Lastly, Palestinians and their supporters are growing weary, and even resigned. Decades of occupation, cycles of violence, and failed peace processes have fostered a belief that international interventions are largely symbolic and ineffective. This perception weakens the potential for international responses to catalyze meaningful change.
So, while the international community’s condemnation of the recent annexations is clear, addressing the power dynamics that sustain the occupation would require a concerted effort that goes beyond rhetoric.
Century: What do the recent land seizures and settler activity mean for the feasibility of a two-state solution—and for the Israeli–Palestinian conflict in the longer term?
Hatuqa: The recent land appropriations and settlement expansions in the West Bank significantly undermine the feasibility of a two-state solution. By expanding settlements deep into Palestinian territories, Israel is creating irreversible facts on the ground that fragment Palestinian land and disrupt the territorial continuity necessary for a viable Palestinian state. These actions make the prospect of a contiguous and sovereign Palestinian state increasingly remote, complicating efforts for a negotiated peace.
The settlements, often strategically placed, effectively bisect the West Bank, isolating Palestinian communities and limiting their mobility. This fragmentation not only makes the establishment of a coherent Palestinian state difficult but also exacerbates daily hardships for Palestinians, fueling resentment and hostility. The expansion of settlements is accompanied by increased settler violence and the displacement of Palestinian families, further deepening the humanitarian crisis and eroding trust between the two sides.
Long-term, these actions have profound implications for the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. The entrenchment of settlements solidifies a one-state reality characterized by unequal rights and systemic discrimination against Palestinians. This reality risks institutionalizing an apartheid system in which two sets of laws govern the same territory—one for Israeli settlers and another for Palestinians. Such a scenario is not only morally and legally untenable, but also poses significant security risks for Israel, as prolonged occupation breeds cycles of violence and instability.
The international community’s inability to effectively counter these expansions emboldens hardline Israeli policies and diminishes the prospects for a negotiated settlement. As settlement expansion continues, the window for a two-state solution narrows, pushing both parties toward a more intractable and potentially violent future. The erosion of the two-state framework leaves Palestinians with few options, potentially leading to increased support for more radical solutions, including calls for equal rights within a single binational state.
Annexation has always been on the Israeli agenda, but now it’s a goal that’s much more in reach. On July 16, Smotrich finally said the quiet part out loud. In response to the impending ruling of the International Court of Justice on the illegality of the Israeli occupation, he demanded Israel annex the entire West Bank.
Century: What do you expect the Israeli government and the Palestinian leadership to do next when it comes to settlements and land seizures?
Hatuqa: For the Israeli government, the trajectory is likely toward further consolidation of control over the West Bank. This may include continued settlement expansion, increased annexation efforts, and policies aimed at integrating settlements deeper into Israeli administrative frameworks. The government is likely to continue to defy international criticism, leveraging its strategic alliances and the fragmented global response to mitigate any significant diplomatic fallout. Domestically, the government will likely continue to rally support from nationalist constituencies by emphasizing security concerns and portraying settlement activities as a defensive measure.
Image Caption: Palestinian woman worshippers cross the Qalandia checkpoint on their way to Jerusalem on July 4, 2014 near Ramallah, West Bank. In the last decade, mobility restrictions on Palestinians have only worsened. Source: Ilia Yefimovich/Getty Images
The Palestinian leadership faces a precarious and volatile situation. The Palestinian Authority, led by Mahmoud Abbas, is likely to continue its diplomatic efforts to garner international support and pressure Israel through international forums such as the UN. However, the Palestinian Authority’s credibility with its constituents has been severely weakened by its perceived ineffectiveness and its coordination with Israeli security forces—many Palestinians view the authority as being complicit in the occupation.
In a climate of land seizures and increasing discontent with the Palestinian Authority, Palestinian factions may escalate their resistance efforts, both nonviolent and armed. There may be a rise in grassroots mobilizations, protests, and possibly renewed violence, particularly as frustration and despair grow among Palestinians who see diminishing prospects for statehood. Additionally, there is already increased coordination among various Palestinian factions, including those in Gaza and those in the northern West Bank, to present a unified front against Israeli policies.
In the long term, both sides face significant risks. Israel’s policies may further isolate it internationally and exacerbate security threats, while Palestinians may endure heightened repression and deteriorating living conditions. The lack of a viable peace process and the continuation of unilateral actions by Israel are likely to lead to a more entrenched conflict, with severe humanitarian and geopolitical consequences.
The next steps for both the Israeli government and Palestinian leadership are likely to involve a combination of consolidation and resistance, respectively. There are few immediate prospects for a return to meaningful negotiations—or more importantly—a resolution to the ongoing crisis.
Century: Century International recently published a commentary arguing that the two-state solution is, at this point, a fantasy, and that a framework for integrated life and politics is the only path to long-term peace. Based on your reporting and experience, how do you think this idea lands with Palestinians in the West Bank?
Hatuqa: My lived experience says that an integrated framework is the only way forward for a long-term, just, sustainable shared future. But at the moment, Palestinians in the West Bank would probably have mixed reactions to this idea.
For many Palestinians, the two-state solution has been the cornerstone of their aspirations for self-determination and statehood. The notion of abandoning this framework could potentially cause confusion and resistance, especially among older Palestinians and those who have long invested in the peace process based on this paradigm. And of course, the ruling Palestinian Authority clique based in Ramallah doesn’t have an incentive to jettison the two-state solution: almost all foreign aid must run through these leaders, giving them power and influence. They only have this position because of the two-state framework.
However, there is also a growing recognition, particularly among younger Palestinians and activists, that the reality on the ground has rendered the two-state solution increasingly unfeasible. For these groups, the idea of integrated life and politics, based on equality and justice for all, might resonate more deeply. They may see it as a pragmatic approach that addresses their immediate need for rights, dignity, and an end to systemic discrimination.
So, while such a radical proposal might face initial resistance, it is already gaining traction among those disillusioned with the stalled peace process and seeking viable alternatives to achieve long-term peace and justice. The challenge lies in bridging the gap between these perspectives and building a consensus around a new framework for sharing land and resources between the Jordan River and Mediterranean Sea.
Century: What do you think U.S. policymakers are missing about life in the West Bank at this moment, almost a year into the Gaza war?
Hatuqa: American policymakers have long failed to recognize the daily realities and complexities of life in the West Bank, and the problem has gotten worse during the Gaza conflict. They tend to focus on high-level diplomatic efforts and security concerns, overlooking the human impact of the occupation and settlement expansions.
First, the pervasive presence of Israeli military checkpoints severely restricts Palestinian mobility, affecting access to healthcare, education, and economic opportunities. This creates a sense of isolation and frustration among Palestinians.
Second, there is insufficient recognition of the violence and intimidation faced by Palestinians from Israeli settlers. These incidents, often ignored or inadequately addressed, contribute to a climate of fear and insecurity. The expansion of settlements and the displacement of Palestinian families exacerbate these tensions, further diminishing the prospects for peace.
U.S. policymakers also frequently underestimate the impact of the political and economic instability in the West Bank. The Palestinian Authority, weakened and often seen as complicit with Israeli policies, struggles to maintain legitimacy and provide basic services—except for providing U.S.-trained “security,” which is a euphemism for aggressively pursuing and prosecuting political critics. This situation is compounded by the lack of economic opportunities, leading to high unemployment and poverty rates.
There is a failure to appreciate the generational shift in Palestinian attitudes.
There is a failure to appreciate the generational shift in Palestinian attitudes. Many young Palestinians are increasingly disillusioned with the peace process and are calling for new strategies that emphasize human rights and equality over traditional statehood aspirations. Addressing these issues with empathy and a focus on human rights could lead to more effective and just policies.
Century: How much impact have American sanctions had on the settler movement? Could sanctions be more effective at halting land seizure?
Hatuqa: American sanctions have had minimal direct impact on the Israeli settler movement, primarily due to the lack of targeted measures against settlement activities. The movement is sustained by significant support from within Israel and private international donors. Notably, U.S. nonprofits with 501(c)(3) designations facilitate these activities through tax-deductible donations, effectively subsidizing settlement expansion and associated violence.
Sanctions targeting these financial flows, including those channeled through U.S. nonprofits, could be more effective. This approach would require robust international cooperation and consistent enforcement. However, the political will to implement such targeted sanctions remains a challenge.
Century: If the U.S. were genuinely interested in rolling back settlements and land grabs, what existing policy tools could it use?
Hatuqa: There are five distinct policy tools that come to mind.
The first is conditioning military aid. The United States provides substantial military aid to Israel. Conditioning this aid on halting settlement expansion could exert significant pressure.
The second is targeted sanctions. Washington could implement sanctions specifically targeting individuals, companies, and financial institutions involved in settlement activities—including entities within the United States that support these activities through tax-deductible donations.
Third, the United States could leverage diplomatic channels to push for international resolutions and agreements condemning settlement expansion and reinforcing the illegality of land grabs.
Fourth, the United States could enforce trade restrictions on goods produced in settlements, ensuring they are not labeled as “Made in Israel,” which could discourage economic activities linked to settlements.
Finally, the United States could revoke the tax-exempt 501(c)(3) status of American nonprofits that support settlement activities, thereby cutting off a significant source of funding.
The situation is dire in the West Bank, and will take time to fix. But the United States absolutely has the tools and power to push for change, if it wants to.
Header Image: People walk through the damaged streets of Jenin in the West Bank on December 14, 2023, after a multi-day raid in the city by members of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) that left more than ten residents dead and wounded. Source: by Spencer Platt/Getty Images
Tags: gaza, palestinian, israel palestine, gaza war
Israel Is Seizing a Record Amount of Palestinian Land in the West Bank. The Implications for Peace Are Dire.
This Q&A is part of a Century International series exploring a shared future for Palestine and Israel that guarantees the fundamental rights of both communities. The Gaza war has exposed the bankruptcy of the existing policy frameworks. Our “Shared Future” series intends to spur conversation and promote new, better options for security, rights, and governance—for Palestinians and Israelis.
Here, Century International speaks to Dalia Hatuqa, a journalist with extensive experience in the West Bank, about just how bad the rights and settlement situation has grown in the Occupied Territories. Israeli land appropriations are at an all-time high—a fact that has been mostly overshadowed by the war in Gaza. Hatuqa describes a raft of measures the United States could take to ease pressure on Palestinians in the West Bank, and open a path toward conflict resolution and equality, if only the political will could be mustered.
Century International: Since the war in Gaza began last October, Israeli settlers and the Israeli government have put the West Bank under a kind of siege, as you wrote for Century International in April. What are the latest developments in the West Bank?
Dalia Hatuqa: The situation in the West Bank has deteriorated even more since I wrote that commentary in April. The fog of the war in Gaza continues to provide cover for some really egregious Israeli activities.
In July, for example, Israel approved the seizure of 4.9 square miles of land in the Jordan Valley. It was the largest land grab in the occupied West Bank in more than three decades, according to Peace Now, an Israeli settlement watchdog. Israel declared the whole parcel to be “state property,” which means Palestinians there are denied private ownership and usage rights.
This seizure was just the largest in a banner year for stealing Palestinian land. Israel has officially confiscated 9.15 square miles of land in 2024, according to Peace Now, which is the largest expansion since the Oslo Accords.
It’s not just the size of these land seizures that make them notable. The plots are contiguous, which would give “territorial continuity” to any settlements that get built there—in a key corridor bordering Jordan. And the plots are located northeast of Ramallah, the headquarters of the Palestinian Authority.
These land seizures are only one of the many methods Israel is using to shrink Palestinian access to land in the West Bank. The seized parcels cover an area north of the illegal settlement of Yafit that had already mostly been designated as a nature reserve or a “firing zone”—a closed area exclusively reserved for military training purposes. These two designations are basically another type of land grab.
In particular, it’s pretty clear that Israel’s motivation for creating nature reserves in the West Bank is not the preservation of nature. The designation requires Ministry of Defense approval, and amounts to a sneaky way to keep Palestinians from using the land, because it prohibits Palestinian grazing, agriculture, and development. Israel has declared about 48 nature reserves in the West Bank, with a total area of at least 95,000 acres, which is about 12 percent of Area C and about 7 percent of the entire West Bank. The majority of such reserves are located along the Jordan Valley and Dead Sea area.
There are, of course, already more than 100 settlements and half a million Israeli settlers in the West Bank. So these land grabs are part of a much bigger project.
Century: Who, or what, is behind this annexation strategy? Why now?
Hatuqa: The Gaza war has really opened the door to a lot of extreme Israeli ideas and policies in the West Bank. These ideas have been swirling in Israeli politics and society for a while, but they now have a new opportunity to thrive. In particular, there are some Israeli officials—like Bezalel Smotrich, the finance minister, and Itamar Ben-Gvir, the national security minister—who are advocating for the annexation of the entire West Bank and dismissing the idea of a Palestinian state. These positions resonate with parts of Israeli society, galvanizing those who view any concession to Palestinians as a betrayal.
Smotrich, in particular, has emerged as a pivotal figure in the recent West Bank annexation strategy. A hardline nationalist, he has leveraged his position to push policies that entrench Israeli control over Palestinian territories, significantly shifting the dynamics of settlement expansion.
Central to Smotrich’s approach is the transfer of authority over the West Bank from military to civilian agencies, effectively normalizing settlements and accelerating construction. This shift has facilitated the retroactive legalization of numerous outposts, further embedding Israeli presence deep into Palestinian territories. According to Peace Now, there has been a notable surge in settlement activity since Smotrich assumed his role in 2022, undermining prospects for a contiguous Palestinian state.
Smotrich has also fostered an environment of impunity for settler violence. Under his watch, and with the help of Ben-Gvir—who has been convicted multiple times for supporting terrorist organizations—attacks on Palestinian communities have increased, with settlers often acting with little to no intervention from authorities.
The consequences have been profound. For Palestinians, these policies mean increased dispossession and violence, further entrenching an apartheid-like system. Internationally, Israel’s actions present a challenge to peace prospects in the region. Smotrich’s strategy represents a decisive move away from negotiated settlement with the Palestinians, and instead, toward embedding segregation and dispossession, which makes a just and lasting peace increasingly remote.
Century: What has been the response from the international community to these recent annexations?
Hatuqa: The international community has widely condemned the recent annexations in the West Bank. And the UN, the European Union, and various countries have labeled these actions as violations of international law and barriers to peace. But these responses have had limited impact on the ground, for a few different reasons.
First, strategic alliances and interests make international pressure fickle. The United States, a key ally of Israel, has taken inconsistent positions on settlement activity depending on the administration in power. This inconsistency undermines international pressure and emboldens Israeli policies.
Second, international responses often lack substantive action. While statements and resolutions condemn the annexations, there is a noticeable absence of tangible measures such as sanctions or significant diplomatic repercussions. This lack of concrete action signals to Israeli authorities that there are minimal real-world consequences for their policies.
The political dynamics within Israel also contribute to the limited impact. The current Israeli government, led by figures like Smotrich, is driven by a nationalist agenda that prioritizes territorial expansion. This government derives its power from its domestic constituency, making it somewhat immune to international disapproval.
Lastly, Palestinians and their supporters are growing weary, and even resigned. Decades of occupation, cycles of violence, and failed peace processes have fostered a belief that international interventions are largely symbolic and ineffective. This perception weakens the potential for international responses to catalyze meaningful change.
So, while the international community’s condemnation of the recent annexations is clear, addressing the power dynamics that sustain the occupation would require a concerted effort that goes beyond rhetoric.
Century: What do the recent land seizures and settler activity mean for the feasibility of a two-state solution—and for the Israeli–Palestinian conflict in the longer term?
Hatuqa: The recent land appropriations and settlement expansions in the West Bank significantly undermine the feasibility of a two-state solution. By expanding settlements deep into Palestinian territories, Israel is creating irreversible facts on the ground that fragment Palestinian land and disrupt the territorial continuity necessary for a viable Palestinian state. These actions make the prospect of a contiguous and sovereign Palestinian state increasingly remote, complicating efforts for a negotiated peace.
The settlements, often strategically placed, effectively bisect the West Bank, isolating Palestinian communities and limiting their mobility. This fragmentation not only makes the establishment of a coherent Palestinian state difficult but also exacerbates daily hardships for Palestinians, fueling resentment and hostility. The expansion of settlements is accompanied by increased settler violence and the displacement of Palestinian families, further deepening the humanitarian crisis and eroding trust between the two sides.
Long-term, these actions have profound implications for the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. The entrenchment of settlements solidifies a one-state reality characterized by unequal rights and systemic discrimination against Palestinians. This reality risks institutionalizing an apartheid system in which two sets of laws govern the same territory—one for Israeli settlers and another for Palestinians. Such a scenario is not only morally and legally untenable, but also poses significant security risks for Israel, as prolonged occupation breeds cycles of violence and instability.
The international community’s inability to effectively counter these expansions emboldens hardline Israeli policies and diminishes the prospects for a negotiated settlement. As settlement expansion continues, the window for a two-state solution narrows, pushing both parties toward a more intractable and potentially violent future. The erosion of the two-state framework leaves Palestinians with few options, potentially leading to increased support for more radical solutions, including calls for equal rights within a single binational state.
Annexation has always been on the Israeli agenda, but now it’s a goal that’s much more in reach. On July 16, Smotrich finally said the quiet part out loud. In response to the impending ruling of the International Court of Justice on the illegality of the Israeli occupation, he demanded Israel annex the entire West Bank.
Century: What do you expect the Israeli government and the Palestinian leadership to do next when it comes to settlements and land seizures?
Hatuqa: For the Israeli government, the trajectory is likely toward further consolidation of control over the West Bank. This may include continued settlement expansion, increased annexation efforts, and policies aimed at integrating settlements deeper into Israeli administrative frameworks. The government is likely to continue to defy international criticism, leveraging its strategic alliances and the fragmented global response to mitigate any significant diplomatic fallout. Domestically, the government will likely continue to rally support from nationalist constituencies by emphasizing security concerns and portraying settlement activities as a defensive measure.
Image Caption: Palestinian woman worshippers cross the Qalandia checkpoint on their way to Jerusalem on July 4, 2014 near Ramallah, West Bank. In the last decade, mobility restrictions on Palestinians have only worsened. Source: Ilia Yefimovich/Getty Images
The Palestinian leadership faces a precarious and volatile situation. The Palestinian Authority, led by Mahmoud Abbas, is likely to continue its diplomatic efforts to garner international support and pressure Israel through international forums such as the UN. However, the Palestinian Authority’s credibility with its constituents has been severely weakened by its perceived ineffectiveness and its coordination with Israeli security forces—many Palestinians view the authority as being complicit in the occupation.
In a climate of land seizures and increasing discontent with the Palestinian Authority, Palestinian factions may escalate their resistance efforts, both nonviolent and armed. There may be a rise in grassroots mobilizations, protests, and possibly renewed violence, particularly as frustration and despair grow among Palestinians who see diminishing prospects for statehood. Additionally, there is already increased coordination among various Palestinian factions, including those in Gaza and those in the northern West Bank, to present a unified front against Israeli policies.
In the long term, both sides face significant risks. Israel’s policies may further isolate it internationally and exacerbate security threats, while Palestinians may endure heightened repression and deteriorating living conditions. The lack of a viable peace process and the continuation of unilateral actions by Israel are likely to lead to a more entrenched conflict, with severe humanitarian and geopolitical consequences.
The next steps for both the Israeli government and Palestinian leadership are likely to involve a combination of consolidation and resistance, respectively. There are few immediate prospects for a return to meaningful negotiations—or more importantly—a resolution to the ongoing crisis.
Century: Century International recently published a commentary arguing that the two-state solution is, at this point, a fantasy, and that a framework for integrated life and politics is the only path to long-term peace. Based on your reporting and experience, how do you think this idea lands with Palestinians in the West Bank?
Hatuqa: My lived experience says that an integrated framework is the only way forward for a long-term, just, sustainable shared future. But at the moment, Palestinians in the West Bank would probably have mixed reactions to this idea.
For many Palestinians, the two-state solution has been the cornerstone of their aspirations for self-determination and statehood. The notion of abandoning this framework could potentially cause confusion and resistance, especially among older Palestinians and those who have long invested in the peace process based on this paradigm. And of course, the ruling Palestinian Authority clique based in Ramallah doesn’t have an incentive to jettison the two-state solution: almost all foreign aid must run through these leaders, giving them power and influence. They only have this position because of the two-state framework.
However, there is also a growing recognition, particularly among younger Palestinians and activists, that the reality on the ground has rendered the two-state solution increasingly unfeasible. For these groups, the idea of integrated life and politics, based on equality and justice for all, might resonate more deeply. They may see it as a pragmatic approach that addresses their immediate need for rights, dignity, and an end to systemic discrimination.
So, while such a radical proposal might face initial resistance, it is already gaining traction among those disillusioned with the stalled peace process and seeking viable alternatives to achieve long-term peace and justice. The challenge lies in bridging the gap between these perspectives and building a consensus around a new framework for sharing land and resources between the Jordan River and Mediterranean Sea.
Century: What do you think U.S. policymakers are missing about life in the West Bank at this moment, almost a year into the Gaza war?
Hatuqa: American policymakers have long failed to recognize the daily realities and complexities of life in the West Bank, and the problem has gotten worse during the Gaza conflict. They tend to focus on high-level diplomatic efforts and security concerns, overlooking the human impact of the occupation and settlement expansions.
First, the pervasive presence of Israeli military checkpoints severely restricts Palestinian mobility, affecting access to healthcare, education, and economic opportunities. This creates a sense of isolation and frustration among Palestinians.
Second, there is insufficient recognition of the violence and intimidation faced by Palestinians from Israeli settlers. These incidents, often ignored or inadequately addressed, contribute to a climate of fear and insecurity. The expansion of settlements and the displacement of Palestinian families exacerbate these tensions, further diminishing the prospects for peace.
U.S. policymakers also frequently underestimate the impact of the political and economic instability in the West Bank. The Palestinian Authority, weakened and often seen as complicit with Israeli policies, struggles to maintain legitimacy and provide basic services—except for providing U.S.-trained “security,” which is a euphemism for aggressively pursuing and prosecuting political critics. This situation is compounded by the lack of economic opportunities, leading to high unemployment and poverty rates.
There is a failure to appreciate the generational shift in Palestinian attitudes. Many young Palestinians are increasingly disillusioned with the peace process and are calling for new strategies that emphasize human rights and equality over traditional statehood aspirations. Addressing these issues with empathy and a focus on human rights could lead to more effective and just policies.
Century: How much impact have American sanctions had on the settler movement? Could sanctions be more effective at halting land seizure?
Hatuqa: American sanctions have had minimal direct impact on the Israeli settler movement, primarily due to the lack of targeted measures against settlement activities. The movement is sustained by significant support from within Israel and private international donors. Notably, U.S. nonprofits with 501(c)(3) designations facilitate these activities through tax-deductible donations, effectively subsidizing settlement expansion and associated violence.
Sanctions targeting these financial flows, including those channeled through U.S. nonprofits, could be more effective. This approach would require robust international cooperation and consistent enforcement. However, the political will to implement such targeted sanctions remains a challenge.
Century: If the U.S. were genuinely interested in rolling back settlements and land grabs, what existing policy tools could it use?
Hatuqa: There are five distinct policy tools that come to mind.
The first is conditioning military aid. The United States provides substantial military aid to Israel. Conditioning this aid on halting settlement expansion could exert significant pressure.
The second is targeted sanctions. Washington could implement sanctions specifically targeting individuals, companies, and financial institutions involved in settlement activities—including entities within the United States that support these activities through tax-deductible donations.
Third, the United States could leverage diplomatic channels to push for international resolutions and agreements condemning settlement expansion and reinforcing the illegality of land grabs.
Fourth, the United States could enforce trade restrictions on goods produced in settlements, ensuring they are not labeled as “Made in Israel,” which could discourage economic activities linked to settlements.
Finally, the United States could revoke the tax-exempt 501(c)(3) status of American nonprofits that support settlement activities, thereby cutting off a significant source of funding.
The situation is dire in the West Bank, and will take time to fix. But the United States absolutely has the tools and power to push for change, if it wants to.
Header Image: People walk through the damaged streets of Jenin in the West Bank on December 14, 2023, after a multi-day raid in the city by members of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) that left more than ten residents dead and wounded. Source: by Spencer Platt/Getty Images
Tags: gaza, palestinian, israel palestine, gaza war