The struggle for control of Palestine is a hotly contested issue that has not relaxed in recent years, continuing to pit people separated by religion and worldview against each other. This precarious situation is complicated by the policy interests of the United States. The State of Israel occupies crucial strategic territory in the Middle East, giving the United States a key geopolitical ally in a region that is largely hostile towards both countries and counterbalancing regional powers such as Iran. Israel’s importance is bolstered by their probable possession of nuclear weapons, a reality corroborated by the CIA and officially denied by the Israeli government.

The international community has walked a fine line since the creation of the State of Israel in 1948. Palestinians, many of whom were dispossessed to make room for the new Israeli state, were forced into greater hardship following the conclusion of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. Large refugee camps were constructed for Palestinians displaced by the war, some of which still exist today. Israel captured much of the territory allotted to a Palestinian state during the Six-Day War of 1967, and administered it under military occupation until 1992.

Thus, as the State of Israel has expanded, land allotted to the Palestinian Authority has correspondingly shrunk. The political division of Palestinians between Fatah in the West Bank and Hamas in the Gaza Strip prevents the Palestinian Authority from forming stable governments. Squalor and destitution has led to extremism; conflict between the two sides is frequent, and violence in 2018 was the deadliest seen since the fifty-day war in the summer of 2014, in which more than 2,000 people were killed.

American policy has subtly—and not so subtly— shifted under the Trump administration. In December 2017, the United States announced the move of its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, upsetting Palestinians who also lay claim to the historic city . Then, in April of 2019, the US recognized Israel’s possession of the Golan Heights. This land, officially under Israeli occupation since its capture during the Six Days War, remains hotly contested by Syria. Crucially, on November 18, 2019, the United States updated its policy once more with the announcement that it no longer viewed Israeli settlements in the West Bank as illegal, upending 41 years of international consensus that the settlements needed to be abandoned. Home to roughly 400,000 Israelis, their illegality under international law has been a hallmark of global policy towards Israel. Despite their status, the Israeli government has encouraged the settlements, granting tax breaks and other benefits to settlers. The consequences of the policy change are yet to be seen, but will likely boil down to two key issues: continued Israeli settlement and the shifting American role in the world.

By deeming the West Bank settlements as legal, the United States has given its de facto support for their proliferation. The natural outcome is increased Israeli settlement, followed by even greater Palestinian opposition and retaliation. Violence on either side is frequent and is most common in areas where Palestinians and Israelis live in close proximity to each other; continued settlement will heighten its incidence. American support will also increase the difficulty associated with conflict mediation and demilitarization in the region, a crucial accompaniment to addressing the settlements. 

Beyond merely inciting violence, proliferation of the settlements endangers a two-state solution to the conflict. Supported by the United Nations and most countries, a two-state solution maintains the State of Israel while the weaker Palestinian government is given international governmental and economic support. However, this scenario is incumbent upon Palestine possessing enough territory to form a viable state. Israeli settlements are quietly taking this option off of the table. Maps of the West Bank show that Israeli settlements, as well as Israeli laws prohibiting Palestinian economic development in certain territories, are highly efficient at separating Palestinian population centers from each other. And though possible, the likelihood of Israel returning occupied territory to Palestine is marginal. Beyond negotiations, no other mechanism exists for the return of Palestinian land, as anything else would infringe upon Israeli sovereignty. More probable is a continuation of the current situation, in which Israel politically dominates its fractured Palestinian neighbors. 

The announcement also signals a new position for American foreign policy outside of the mainstream. The United States has dominated global policy making since the Second World War, frequently resorting to armed force, as well as economic sanctions, to bring outlier nations back into the fold. The Trump administration, however, has taken a different tact, seeming to express support for a wide range of controversial topics, such as the recent Turkish invasion of Kurdish Syria. American foreign policy lacks its former coherency, and the interests of the government are less recognizable than under past administrations. Previously the protector of the mainstream, the United States now finds itself outside of it, with little international support for its positions and little hope of swaying allies to support its new policy priorities. 

The European Union, while wracked with its own internal divisions, has largely assumed the role formerly played by the United States in defining the status quo of Western foreign policy. In November, the European Court of Justice ruled that all member countries must label all products made in Israeli West Bank settlements, denoting their manufacture in occupied territory. This makes the EU’s opposition to the settlements concrete in a manner impossible in a diplomatic setting. While international groups such as Human Rights Watch support the ruling, Israel strongly condemned it as discriminatory and the United States concurred. As the settlements proliferate, issues such as this seem inevitable until a definitive solution is formed and acted upon.. 

There are no simple solutions to Israeli settlements in the West Bank. If a lasting peace is to be created, a compromise will have to be found once more. The Oslo Accords attempted to lay out a path to peace, but at nearly thirty years old their provisions are from another time. In the short term, Israeli establishment of further settlements should be halted. A long term solution is much more complicated, and will likely involve the forced migration of either Israelis or Palestinians from their current homes. Regardless, the current inertia in Palestine is unsustainable. Violence can be prevented, but it will take boldness and imagination, as well as a willingness by both Israelis and Palestinians to compromise on strongly held policy priorities. Recent history suggests this will be difficult, but the desire for peace is a strong motivator.