Israel’s new settlement plan stands out as one of the most significant steps in escalating tensions in Palestinian territories. The Israeli government, pursuing an expansionist policy in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, aims to transform the demographic and political landscape of the region with this move. This development is reshaping not only Palestinian-Israeli relations but also the power dynamics in the Middle East and international relations as a whole.
1. Israel’s Strategy and Domestic Political Situation
The current government in Israel, particularly with the strong support of far-right and settlement groups, is one of the main reasons for the aggressive continuation of settlement policies. The government under Netanyahu has adopted these policies as a key strategy to ensure its legitimacy in domestic politics and strengthen its alliance with coalition partners. This strategy not only involves expansion in Palestinian territories but also caters to the expectations of right-wing and settlement groups within Israel.
The expansion of settlement areas is a concession made by the government, particularly to its far-right coalition partners. The Netanyahu government aims to reinforce the support of right-wing Israeli voters, especially through settlement projects. These policies are often justified by certain segments of Israeli society through national security and religious motives. Settlement groups see this expansion not only as territorial gain in Palestinian lands but also as a necessity for Israel’s security and religious rights. These groups view expansion as a matter of “territorial integrity” and “religious duty,” while the government uses this narrative as a tool to increase the legitimacy of the settlement projects.
However, there is significant opposition to these settlement policies within Israel. Among some left-wing Israelis, particularly younger generations, there is concern that these settlement policies will negatively affect Israel’s international relations and diplomatic standing. These groups worry that Israel might become increasingly isolated, especially as Western countries and the United Nations (UN) have been responding more harshly to Israel’s expansionist policies. In the long run, they argue, these policies could lead to Israel’s diplomatic isolation and greater estrangement in its foreign relations.
Despite these reactions, the far-right wing of the government continues to push forward with the acceleration of settlement projects. These groups view the current government’s policy as a vital step for national security and the preservation of Israel’s Jewish identity. For them, expanding settlements is seen not only as an extension of Israel’s sovereignty over Palestinian territories but also as a responsibility grounded in Israel’s ideological foundations.
2. The Arab World’s Response and New Balances
Israel’s expansionist policies stand out as a development that reshapes the strategic calculations of many actors in the Middle East. In this context, the reactions of the Arab World are crucial in understanding the evolution of regional dynamics and international relations. The shift in Arab countries’ attitudes toward Israel reflects a more nuanced and pragmatic approach compared to the past, when there was a strong, unified opposition. Particularly countries like Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) have taken steps toward normalizing relations with Israel, yet support for Palestine among their populations still holds significant importance. This contradictory situation highlights the complexity of regional politics.
Historically, the Arab World was known for its unified and strong stance against Israel. However, today, especially with the steps taken by Saudi Arabia and the UAE to normalize relations with Israel, there is a clear shift in the traditional stance of the Arab World. This normalization process has not been limited to the establishment of diplomatic ties but has also included economic and strategic cooperation. However, since a large portion of the public in these countries still strongly supports the Palestinian cause, these normalization steps have become a major subject of debate among their populations. This situation can be seen as a reflection of domestic political control mechanisms and pragmatic calculations in foreign policy.
According to an analysis by Al Jazeera, countries like Saudi Arabia and the UAE, unable to ignore their sensitivity toward the Palestinian issue, may feel the necessity to continue diplomatic steps to appease their public. This situation not only demonstrates these countries’ efforts to balance their reputations within the Arab World but also on the international stage. In countries that have normalized relations with Israel, there have been pressures within their domestic public to continue supporting Palestine, which has been a shaping factor in their foreign policies. In the process of establishing diplomatic relations and enhancing economic cooperation, these countries may strive to maintain a balanced foreign policy towards other actors in the region.
Unlike Saudi Arabia and the UAE, countries like Qatar and Turkey may take a more cautious and firm stance in relation to the normalization process with Israel. Turkey, particularly in recent years, has shown strong support for Palestine, signaling that its stance on the Palestinian issue can be influential not only regionally but also globally. Turkey can demonstrate strong opposition to Israel’s expansionist policies through diplomatic statements and economic sanctions. Furthermore, Turkey’s position offers an alternative to the policies of countries in the Arab World that are taking steps toward normalization and reshapes the regional power balance.
3. How Does the Trump Administration Support Israel?
In 2025, with Donald Trump returning to the presidency in the United States, his support for Israel has significantly increased. During his first term, Trump recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and acknowledged Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. In his new term, the Trump administration continues to directly support Israel’s settlement policies.
The U.S. has increased military aid to Israel while adopting a more aggressive stance against resolutions at the UN that criticize Israel. Despite criticism from the European Union (EU) and some Arab countries, the Trump administration does not apply any pressure to halt Israel’s expansionist policies. This situation further narrows Palestine’s diplomatic maneuvering space and escalates tensions in the region.
4. Iran and the Position of Regional Actors
Iran may view Israel’s expansionist policies as an opportunity for its own geopolitical strategy. Particularly, it could escalate tensions in the region through Hezbollah and other militia groups. Furthermore, Iran’s relationships with Palestinian resistance groups could strengthen during this period, potentially leading to a new wave of conflict in Gaza. This could alter the current balance of power in the Middle East and intensify regional power competition.
5. The EU’s Response and New Balances
The EU’s response to Israel’s expansionist moves has historically been shaped by its sensitivity to stability in the region. However, in recent years, the EU has adopted a more pragmatic approach and has taken a more cautious stance in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This shift will be influenced by the EU’s internal dynamics and foreign policy decisions, impacting its role in global relations.
In the past, the EU supported Palestine’s struggle for independence and may take a firmer stance against Israel’s expansionist policies. However, the differing attitudes of member states make it difficult to form a unified policy. Strong countries like Germany, France, and the Netherlands continue to maintain strong ties with Israel, while Scandinavian countries and Spain may take a more open position in support of Palestine.
While the EU has accepted Palestine’s demands for independence, it has also considered Israel’s security concerns. However, the increase in Israel’s expansionist actions could solidify the EU’s support for Palestine. The EU will consider the balance of economic and military power in maintaining regional stability and will aim to influence the geopolitical balance of the Middle East. The EU’s role as a mediator could contribute to security and peace efforts in the region.
In conclusion, if Israel persists with these policies, the two-state solution may become an entirely unattainable goal. This could push the Palestinian leadership toward a more radical stance and create long-term instability in the region. Recent developments highlight once again the sustainability of the Palestinian cause on a global scale. If the international community fails to manage this crisis, it could open the door to a new period of instability in the Middle East.
