Israeli Settlers See Trump’s Win as Opportunity to Expand in West Bank -

On a clear day, the towering skyscrapers of Tel Aviv can be seen from the hill above Karnei Shomron, an Israeli settlement in the occupied West Bank. This view offers a striking contrast between the modern, bustling city of Tel Aviv and the contentious, heavily guarded settlement of Karnei Shomron, which is home to hundreds of Israeli families. The settlement, like many others in the West Bank, sits in a region that Palestinians claim as part of a future independent state.

The proximity between the settlement and Tel Aviv underscores the complex and often contentious geography of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, where territorial boundaries are fluid and frequently disputed. For the settlers in Karnei Shomron, the sight of Tel Aviv serves as a reminder of their connection to Israel proper, but also highlights the stark division between the city’s internationally recognized status and the disputed nature of settlements in the West Bank.

Israeli settlers, like those in Karnei Shomron, have increasingly seen political changes, such as the election of pro-settlement leaders, as opportunities to expand and solidify their presence in the West Bank. This has led to ongoing tension with Palestinians, who view the growth of Israeli settlements as a direct challenge to their aspirations for statehood. The expansion of settlements and the continued presence of Israeli communities in the West Bank remain one of the most contentious aspects of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Sondra Baras, who has lived in Karnei Shomron for nearly 40 years, expresses a deep connection to the land, saying, “I’m living in a place where my ancestors lived thousands of years ago. I do not live in occupied territory; I live in Biblical Judea and Samaria.” For her and many other settlers, the distinction between the State of Israel and the territory captured from Jordan during the 1967 Middle East war has been blurred, reshaped by their own historical and religious narratives.

At the hilltop viewpoint in Karnei Shomron, the visitors’ audio-guide reinforces this perspective, describing the West Bank as “a region of Israel” and emphasizing the biblical significance of the Palestinian city of Nablus, portraying it as the place where God promised the land to the Jews. This ideological framing is part of a broader narrative that settlers have cultivated, seeing the land not as disputed but as rightfully belonging to Israel based on biblical and historical claims.

However, while settlements in the West Bank have rapidly expanded, with many viewed as illegal under international law, formal annexation of the territory remains a significant political and legal challenge. The UN’s top court and most countries consider the settlements illegal, yet their presence has grown year after year.

For settlers like Sondra, the election of Donald Trump as US president represents a potential turning point. “I was thrilled that Trump won,” she says. “I very much want to extend sovereignty in Judea and Samaria. And I feel that’s something Trump could support.” Many settlers now see an opportunity to push for the formal annexation of the West Bank, emboldened by Trump’s pro-settlement stance and his administration’s historic recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. This marks a moment of heightened optimism among settlers, who hope that the new US administration will help them secure greater control over the disputed territories they have long claimed as part of their ancestral homeland.

There are indications that some members of Donald Trump’s incoming administration might align with the views of settlers like Sondra Baras. Mike Huckabee, nominated by Trump as the new ambassador to Israel, has openly expressed his support for Israeli claims on the West Bank. In an interview last year, Huckabee firmly rejected the term “occupied” when referring to the territory.

“When people use the term ‘occupied,’ I say: ‘Yes, Israel is occupying the land, but it’s the occupation of a land that God gave them 3,500 years ago. It is their land,'” Huckabee stated. His comments underscore a broader ideological and religious perspective shared by some within the administration, one that frames Israel’s control over the West Bank as not only justified but divinely ordained.

This rhetoric, supported by figures like Huckabee, reflects a shift in US foreign policy under Trump, which has increasingly aligned with the pro-settlement narrative in Israel. The incoming administration’s stance could embolden settlers in the West Bank, providing them with the backing they have long sought to solidify their claims over the region and pursue further annexation efforts. Huckabee’s statements exemplify how the political climate in the US may further encourage Israeli settlers to push for expanded sovereignty in Judea and Samaria.

Yisrael Gantz, head of the regional settlement council overseeing Karnei Shomron, has observed a shift in tone from the incoming Trump administration, especially after the Hamas attacks on Israel on October 7, 2023, which sparked the war on Gaza. He believes that both in Israel and the US, there is now a shared understanding that Israel must apply sovereignty over the West Bank. “It’s a process. I can’t tell you it will be tomorrow. But in my eyes, the dream of a two-state solution is dead,” Gantz stated.

While US President Joe Biden continues to uphold the position of supporting a future Palestinian state alongside Israel, Gantz has noted a difference in rhetoric from the Trump administration. “Of course, yes,” he replied when asked if he was hearing something different from Trump’s team.

However, some Israelis pushing for West Bank annexation, including figures in Israel’s cabinet, may find their hopes for full US support tempered. Their expectations were bolstered by Trump’s first term, during which he broke with longstanding US policy by recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and affirming Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, which Israel captured from Syria in 1967. These actions had fueled optimism among settlers, but it remains unclear whether Trump will take similar steps toward annexation in his second term.

Supporting the annexation of the West Bank would present a much greater and more complex challenge for Donald Trump, due to the potential fallout both internationally and domestically. A move to annex the West Bank would likely alienate key US allies, most notably Saudi Arabia, which has been a partner in various regional efforts. This could complicate Trump’s broader ambitions for a regional peace deal involving Israel and its Arab neighbors. Additionally, such a decision could sour relations with moderate Republicans in the US Congress, who are already concerned about the humanitarian and political consequences for Palestinians living in the West Bank, as well as their future status under Israeli rule.

Sondra Baras, a settler leader in Karnei Shomron, has a starkly different view on the future of West Bank Palestinians. She told me that those Palestinians who do not want to live under Israeli sovereignty could “go wherever they want.” When asked why they should leave their homeland, she explained: “I’m not kicking them out, but things change. How many wars did they start? And they lost.” Her stance reflects a broader settler narrative that views the situation as one of territorial entitlement, with little concern for the displacement of Palestinians.

Baras further emphasized that even though there would likely be significant opposition to annexation, she believes that once sovereignty is implemented, it would create a fait accompli. “If sovereignty were to go forward, there would be a lot of yelling and screaming, absolutely,” she acknowledged. “But at some point, you create a fact that’s irreversible.”

The calls for annexation have not been limited to settlers alone. Following Trump’s election victory in November, Israel’s far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich publicly declared that 2025 should be the year Israel extends its sovereignty over the West Bank. “2025 must be the year of sovereignty in Judea and Samaria,” he said, signaling that annexation remains a key agenda item for the Israeli far-right, with significant implications for the future of the region and its inhabitants.

Despite these declarations from Israeli officials and settlers, the potential for widespread annexation faces substantial geopolitical hurdles. The consequences of such a move would reverberate far beyond the West Bank, affecting Israel’s relations with key international players and potentially escalating tensions in the already volatile Middle East.

For many Palestinians, the ongoing conversation around formal annexation of the West Bank misses the critical point: that Israel is already, in practice, annexing territory. This sentiment is echoed by Mohaib Salameh, a Palestinian whose family home was recently demolished by Israeli authorities. Salameh leads me across the rubble of what was once his family’s home, located on private Palestinian land on the outskirts of Nablus. His home, like many others in the West Bank, was deemed illegal by an Israeli court and demolished in a process that Palestinians say reflects a broader strategy of territorial control.

Israel’s grip over the West Bank is more entrenched than is often acknowledged in international discussions. According to the Oslo peace accords, Israel holds full control over security and planning in 60% of the West Bank on an interim basis. However, as settlements continue to expand, the Palestinian population finds itself increasingly marginalized, with permits for new Palestinian homes almost never granted. This stark discrepancy between Israeli and Palestinian access to land and resources has led to a sharp rise in demolitions of Palestinian homes, a process that, according to local lawyers, has been intensifying in recent years.

The situation on the ground for Palestinians like Salameh is one of ongoing displacement and dispossession. As Israel continues to build and expand settlements, Palestinians face the increasing reality of losing their homes and land to Israeli authorities, a trend that many see as a de facto annexation of Palestinian territory, regardless of any formal policy declaration.

“This is all part of policies to force us to leave,” Mohaib Salameh said, standing amidst the rubble of his family’s demolished home. “It’s a policy of forced migration. What difference does it make to them [Israelis] if I build here or not? We pose no threat to them.”

Salameh’s words reflect the deep sense of injustice felt by many Palestinians in the West Bank, where the expansion of Israeli settlements, coupled with strict controls on Palestinian construction, creates an environment that increasingly pushes them off their land. For Palestinians like Salameh, the destruction of homes is not just a matter of losing property, but part of a broader strategy to force them to leave their ancestral lands.

This policy is further exacerbated by violent actions from Israeli settlers, who frequently attack Palestinian communities and intimidate them into abandoning their homes. Despite international condemnation, including sanctions from the US and the UK, these settlers often face little to no accountability in Israeli courts. This lack of legal consequences only emboldens them, allowing the cycle of violence and displacement to continue unchecked.

For many Palestinians, the struggle to stay on their land has become a daily battle, not only against the physical challenges posed by demolition and violence but also against a political system that they believe is systematically designed to erase their presence from the land. As settlements expand and the Israeli government’s control over the West Bank deepens, Palestinians are left to contend with the realities of occupation and displacement, with little hope for a fair resolution in sight.

Activists claim that more than 20 Palestinian communities in the West Bank have been forcibly expelled in recent years due to increasingly violent attacks by Israeli settlers. These settlers, often operating with little accountability from Israeli authorities, are now encroaching on new areas beyond Israel’s interim civil control, making it harder for Palestinians to remain in their homes and maintain any semblance of autonomy.

Mohaib Salameh, standing on the remnants of his demolished home, voiced a deep skepticism about any future intervention from the United States. “No US president has ever protected Palestinians,” he said. “I don’t believe Donald Trump will either.”

While Trump is often seen as a staunch ally of Israel, his reputation for striking deals and avoiding conflict could add an unpredictable dimension to his approach. His previous term as president saw dramatic shifts in US policy, including the recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and the endorsement of Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. However, questions remain as to whether he will support more aggressive annexation of the West Bank or take a more pragmatic approach to avoid deeper conflict.

For Palestinians, the uncertainty surrounding Trump’s future policies raises concerns that any hope for protection or justice will continue to be sidelined in favor of broader geopolitical considerations. For Mohaib and many others, the struggle for their land feels like an uphill battle against both the Israeli government and a US administration they see as unwilling to challenge the status quo.