WI: Israel annexed West Bank?

What would have happened if, at some point following the 1967 Six Day War, a right-wing government in Israel had decided to extend Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank in the same way they had done to East Jerusalem & the Golan Heights?

What would the result have been?

The Israeli right-wing makes the case that Israel can annex the West Bank and still maintain a strong 66% Jewish majority (the West Bank Arabs would initially be getting permanent residency status with a path to citizenship like the Druze in the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem Arabs).

Even so I imagine the Arab political parties in Israel would gain more influence, it'd be interesting to see how this would effect future coalition governments.

The much poorer West Bank Arabs would also become eligible for welfare and social programs which would be interesting. I could see a left-wing alliance with Arab parties if Islamism doesn't take hold.

The left-wing argues that this would destroy the Jewish majority if not immediately then at some time in the future with higher Arab fertility rates. All this depends on the actual number of Arabs living in the West Bank and their fertility rates (I really don't know which to believe). If the left is true I could still imagine the majority of West Bank arabs refusing citizenship/not voting and the Jewish state surviving (or alternatively, they might be systematically refused citizenship).

I assume there would be allot more Jews living and working in the West Bank (And Muslims working and living in Israel proper).

The Gaza Strip would be left in an interesting predicament. If annexation was done after 2005 it's likely the post-withdrawal Hamas government would continue running the Strip as a de-facto independent state. Alternatively Egypt might annex it.

As far as human rights, no segregated settlements, no checkpoints, no military occupation etc. I could also see women's rights, religious rights and gay rights improving (compared to PA or Israeli military rule).

As far as the economy, I imagine there would be more economic development (whether it would be skewed in favor of Jews is open to debate).

While the Israelis might allow a greater degree of local autonomy, there would basically be no compromising for Palestinian resistance/terrorist groups if this was done. It would be either destroy Israel, create a binational state, or continue with this new status quo. The two-state solution would never be possible again.
 
Haven't they done that already to a degree? But in a bad way?

And plus ASB. Israel would not be happy to have them nor would the Palestinians accept this.
 
Last edited:
Haven't they done that already to a degree? But in a bad way?

And plus ASB. Israel would not be happy to have them nor would the Palestinians accept this.

He means doing it properly, offering all of the residents citizenship.

And while it's maybe a little unlikely, it's far from ASB.

Historically, the main reason why Israel didn't annex the West Bank and Gaza in 1967 isn't some argument about demographics, it's because they expected for several years to trade them back in exchange for peace treaties (yes, this is contradictory with Israel's immediate development of the Sinai - not, I think, the first time in history a country's pursued inconsistent policy).

If the annexation happens a while (probably more than a few months to a year) after the war, there probably won't even much or any ethnic cleansing - after all, it's one thing for the theoretically highly liberal Israeli government to turn a blind eye to the necessities of war; it's another to see it plan peace-time atrocities.

And as for the Palestinians...yes and no. True, Fatah has already been around for a couple years now, but the Palestinian resistance are un-yet forged to a large degree. Don't try to back-project today's attitudes to 50 years ago - before the First Intifada, the average Israeli and Palestinian got along really quite well on a day-to-day basis, and Israel has over a million examples of what happens after a generation or so of Palestinians - many displaced from their homes - being permitted to be full citizens; and while a lot of them are a little angry, and some Jews constantly talk about them being a Fifth Column, and they are notably a disadvantaged minority, the Arab citizens of Israel are more regular citizens than they aren't, and they certainly aren't actively "resisting the occupation"
 
Wasn't the thing with the Golan Heights that they wanted to stop their settlements in the north from being shelled? Though considering how the Israeli army had been bulldozing the homes of Christian Palestinians on the border of Lebanon after the Israeli courts said the army had to give them back their houses, I suppose their might be other motives. I also believe that the Israelis wanted Jordan and Egypt to annex those slices or area, so they had some place for Palestinians to go to. If they were to suddenly decide to expel everyone after a war though, it would not go down well. Muslim, Christian, Samarian, every person of every stripe in the Middle East would now have a beef with Israel for trying to clear everything between the Jordan and Mediterranean for themselves. I image that the propoganda about Israel wanting everything from the Nile the Euphrates would have been used even to this day, and similar things might have happened if they went into the Sinai. Actually, that does bring up another question. Is it just the West Bank they would move into, acting as if everyone there was Jordanian and therefore should go to Jordan or would non-Jewish Arabs in Israel also be sent away?
 
I also believe that the Israelis wanted Jordan and Egypt to annex those slices or area, so they had some place for Palestinians to go to.
It's my understanding the Allon Plan was Israel's original intention of what to do (basically Israel annxes large swaths of the West Bank for security reasons while Jordan re-annexes the major Palestinian population centers in the West Bank with a small corridor connecting them to the rest of Jordan. A Druze state is created in the Golan Heights while the Gaza Strip would be annexed into Israel, later the plan was changed to have Gaza become a disconnected part of Jordan).

If they were to suddenly decide to expel everyone after a war though, it would not go down well. Muslim, Christian, Samarian, every person of every stripe in the Middle East would now have a beef with Israel for trying to clear everything between the Jordan and Mediterranean for themselves. I image that the propoganda about Israel wanting everything from the Nile the Euphrates would have been used even to this day, and similar things might have happened if they went into the Sinai. Actually, that does bring up another question. Is it just the West Bank they would move into, acting as if everyone there was Jordanian and therefore should go to Jordan or would non-Jewish Arabs in Israel also be sent away?
I'm not talking about ethnically cleansing the West Bank or Israel proper. I'm talking about Israel annexing the West Bank in the same way they annexed East Jerusalem and Golan Heights (granting the Palestinians living in the West Bank permanent residency status and a path to citizenship).
 
I've often thought that this might not have been the most absolutely horrible idea. My specific scenario is that Israel offers all Arabs in the West Bank the following choice:

1. Stay here and accept Israeli citizenship.
2. Leave. If you do, we will pay full price for your property. We'll also cover your bus fare.
Oh, and you have a year to decide.

A majority of the Arabs would probably choose to leave, especially once word got out that the Israelis were actually paying a fair price for Arab property (the Israelis actually doing so is a key part of the plan). Jordan would also get a population boost out of this (being Jordanian citizens, most would go to Jordan).

The legal justification would be that the expulsion is based on citizenship, not on ethnicity or religion. As Jordan is still at war with Israel, Israel is within its rights to expel Jordanian nationals from its territory.

The reason for choosing this policy while not doing so with the Sinai could be in recognition of the fact that Jordan's ties to the West Bank are weak - Jordan only acquired the West Bank in 1948 during the War of Independence - where the Sinai was long part of Egypt. Also, considering that IOTL Israel achieved peace with Jordan without returning the West Bank, maybe someone guesses this outcome.

As for Gaza, Israel probably hands it back to the Egyptians along with the Sinai.

The Palestinian nationalist movement might not die out, but it probably remains very weak. With little support on the ground in Israel, its base would be in Syria or Lebanon. It would be difficult to remain separate from local conflicts. I'd venture a guess that Hezbollah ends up absorbing the PLO. This would have its own impact in making Hezbollah less sectarian (OTL Hezbollah is Shiite, while Palestinians are largely Sunni). Lebanon might actually be better off.
 

Lateknight

Banned
I've often thought that this might not have been the most absolutely horrible idea. My specific scenario is that Israel offers all Arabs in the West Bank the following choice:

1. Stay here and accept Israeli citizenship.
2. Leave. If you do, we will pay full price for your property. We'll also cover your bus fare.
Oh, and you have a year to decide.

A majority of the Arabs would probably choose to leave, especially once word got out that the Israelis were actually paying a fair price for Arab property (the Israelis actually doing so is a key part of the plan). Jordan would also get a population boost out of this (being Jordanian citizens, most would go to Jordan).

The legal justification would be that the expulsion is based on citizenship, not on ethnicity or religion. As Jordan is still at war with Israel, Israel is within its rights to expel Jordanian nationals from its territory.

The reason for choosing this policy while not doing so with the Sinai could be in recognition of the fact that Jordan's ties to the West Bank are weak - Jordan only acquired the West Bank in 1948 during the War of Independence - where the Sinai was long part of Egypt. Also, considering that IOTL Israel achieved peace with Jordan without returning the West Bank, maybe someone guesses this outcome.

As for Gaza, Israel probably hands it back to the Egyptians along with the Sinai.

The Palestinian nationalist movement might not die out, but it probably remains very weak. With little support on the ground in Israel, its base would be in Syria or Lebanon. It would be difficult to remain separate from local conflicts. I'd venture a guess that Hezbollah ends up absorbing the PLO. This would have its own impact in making Hezbollah less sectarian (OTL Hezbollah is Shiite, while Palestinians are largely Sunni). Lebanon might actually be better off.

They would have to fight them to make them leave then it's just ethic cleasing.
 
I don't see how it would necessarily lead it ethnic cleansing. My worst case scenario would be that Arab Muslims would come to outnumber Jews. (as a clarification, I am a supporter of Israel so that bias exists).

The reason I'm asking this is because recently Caroline Glick proposed doing just this in her book "The Israeli Solution". Annex the West Bank, provide permanent residency status to West Bank Arabs and offer them a path to citizenship (just like the Druze in the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem Arabs). The Gaza strip would be excluded and remain a Hamas dominated de-facto independent Palestinian state (subject to land, air and naval blockade). Presumably the Palestinian Refugees would either be assimilated into their respective Arab countries (getting citizenship, settling down, getting jobs) or else remain refugees.

The objections to this plan include
1: The demographics issue (liberals argue that Muslims would come to outnumber Jews, the Israeli right disagrees, arguing that Israel would still maintain a 66% Jewish majority.)
2: The issue of implementation (you'd be cancelling the Oslo Accords and would need to forcibly remove the Palestinian Authority/Fatah
3: The increase in the number of poorer Arabs would be a strain on welfare and would result in Muslims having more of an influence on parliament.
4: Palestinian nationalists would not get their state (unless you consider Jordan Palestine or the Gaza Strip Palestine).
5: The Palestinian refugees wouldn't be helped in this plan (proponents of the plan would argue that the refugees should just be assimilated in their Arab country and give up on returning to any part of Palestine).

The benefits of the plan include
1: The Palestinians would get all the rights Israeli Jews and Israeli Arabs have in Israel proper (gay rights, women's rights, religious freedom, freedom of speech, assembly etc)
2: Israelis and Palestinians would get freedom to move wherever in Israel they like (no checkpoints, no occupying IDF presence)
3: The Palestinians would get the opportunity to become citizens of and vote in a liberal democracy.
4: Israel would have all their security concerns satisfied (control over the Jordan valley, control of West Bank airspace and land, no repeat of Gaza strip) and terrorism would be reduced by security measures.
5: No need to forcibly remove West Bank settlers
6: After generations of living in Israel alongside Jews and getting an Israeli public education, it's argued that West Bank Arabs would be integrated and not want to destroy Israel (much like Israeli Arabs living in Israel proper).

It seems good, unless the demographics don't work out.
 
Top