West Bank Settlement Supporters Have Big Hopes for Trumps Presidency

The Biden administration this week imposed sanctions on more groups and individuals it accuses of having ties to Israeli settlers inciting violence in the occupied West Bank, a last-ditch show of disapproval of Israelis’ annexation of land there before U.S. policy on the issue most likely swings the other way under the next administration.

When President-elect Donald J. Trump returns to the White House next year, he could easily revoke the February executive order authorizing the sanctions or, even, some pro-settlement activists hope, use the order to go after Palestinian organizations instead.

Texans for Israel, a Christian Zionist group, and several other settler supporters and organizations this month renewed a challenge to President Biden’s order in federal court, arguing that it was being applied unconstitutionally, targeting Jewish settlers and violating the rights of Americans exercising freedom of religion and speech in support of them.

The case highlights the growing international controversy over West Bank settlement amid the war in the Gaza Strip and the great expectations of the settler movement and its supporters of another Trump presidency.

Israel seized control of the West Bank from Jordan in a war in 1967, and Israeli civilians have since settled there with both the tacit and the explicit approval of the Israeli government, living under Israeli civil law while their Palestinian neighbors are subject to Israeli military law. Expanding Israel’s hold over the West Bank is a stated goal of many ministers in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s far-right government.

The international community largely views the Israeli settlements as illegal, and Palestinians have long argued that they are a creeping annexation that turns land needed for any independent Palestinian state into an unmanageable patchwork.

Mr. Biden, in an executive order in February, declared increasing violence in the West Bank a threat to security there, in Israel and the broader Middle East, and to American policy goals, “including the viability of a two-state solution.” Although he called out settler violence particularly, anyone who directly or indirectly threatens “the peace, security, or stability of the West Bank” is subject to sanctions under the order.

Since then, sanctions have been imposed on 33 organizations and individuals for their activities in the West Bank, according to the State Department. One Palestinian group is among the sanctioned, those challenging the order say, arguing that the numbers mean West Bank Jews and their supporters are being unfairly targeted.

“The government focuses exclusively on, and condemns the religious beliefs of, Jews and those who assist Jews,” the plaintiffs argued in a complaint filed this month.

But the plaintiffs aren’t calling for the Biden order to be revoked necessarily. They instead hope that Mr. Biden’s sanctions on Jewish settlers, supporters and organizations will be found illegal and that the Trump administration will turn the tables and use the same power or a similar authority to impose sanctions on Palestinian activities.

“The existing executive order, especially as applied, is extremely open-ended,” said Eugene Kontorovich, a legal adviser to the plaintiffs who is a law professor at George Mason University. “Just like the Biden administration came to certain conclusions, the Trump administration could come to opposite conclusions.”

The plaintiffs’ suit dismisses a documented surge in settler violence against Palestinians since the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas-led attack on Israel ignited the war in Gaza, as well as a growing international consensus that Israeli annexation undermines Palestinians’ right to self determination. The rise in violence, and support for extremist settlers from members of the government, has raised alarms from Israeli military leaders.

In July, the International Court of Justice issued a nonbinding opinion finding that Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem violated international law.

Karoline Leavitt, the spokeswoman for the Trump-Vance transition, did not respond directly to a request for comment on the incoming administration’s plans, if any, for the Biden order or on its proposed West Bank policy positions. In a statement, she pledged Mr. Trump would “restore peace through strength around the world.”

Mahmoud Abbas, the leader of the Palestinian Authority, has spoken to Mr. Trump since his re-election and had already been making efforts to repair a relationship that severely frayed during the previous Trump administration over policies that harmed Palestinians and bolstered the goals of Israelis intent on expansion. Mr. Trump has called for an end to the war in Gaza, and Mr. Abbas and the president-elect discussed a possible meeting and agreed to work together.

Still, settlement supporters like Texans for Israel have good reason to believe that U.S. policy toward the West Bank will change for the same reason that Palestinians have cause to be wary, based on the last Trump presidency and initial indications about the direction of the next one.

The Trump administration in 2019 declared that the United States did not consider Israeli settlements in the West Bank a violation of international law, reversing longstanding American policy and removing what had been seen as an important barrier to annexation of Palestinian territory. In February, Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken said that Israeli settlements were inconsistent with international law and that the Biden administration opposed them.

Mr. Trump in 2019 also recognized Israel’s authority over the Golan Heights. In 2017, he recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, this time reversing a U.S. policy in place since Israel’s founding, in 1948. It was another move that bolstered Israel’s right-wing.

In an interview with Time magazine in April, Mr. Trump suggested that a two-state solution for Israelis and Palestinians might not be viable in light of the war in Gaza. He added: “There was a time when I thought two states could work. Now I think two states is going to be very, very tough,” and suggested Palestinians’ attitudes were to blame.

Mr. Trump’s choice for the next ambassador to Israel, former Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas, suggests that expansionist Israeli ministers who support fully annexing the West Bank will face little pushback from the U.S. government. An evangelical Christian, Mr. Huckabee said during a visit to Israel in 2017: “There is no such thing as a West Bank. There’s no such thing as a settlement,” adding, “There’s no such thing as an occupation.”

In an interview with a religious Zionist station in Israel last week, he reiterated these beliefs and referred to the occupied territories by the Hebrew name, Judea and Samaria, a biblical allusion. Asked in that interview to respond to a recent statement from Israel’s far-right finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, implying that West Bank annexation was imminent by declaring 2025 “the year of sovereignty in Judea and Samaria,” Mr. Huckabee indicated there would be no objections to such a plan from Mr. Trump.

That suits Texans for Israel and others who support annexation. Still, the group won’t be abandoning its lawsuit challenging the Biden order, even if it is withdrawn under the next administration, Mr. Kontorovich said, arguing that the sanctions have left settlement supporters in a state of “ongoing fear.”