Israel approves biggest expansion of settlements in West Bank in decades
In the biggest expansion of occupied
West Bank
settlements in decades,
Israel
has approved the establishment of 22 new Jewish communities in the occupied territory. The move has been criticised by Israeli human rights groups.
Two of the settlements – Homesh and Sa Nur – were evacuated as part of the 2005 disengagement plan from Gaza, which also included four settlements in the northern West Bank.
Four new settlements are also earmarked along Israel's eastern border with Jordan, as part of the effort to reinforce Israel's presence along the Jordan river.
Defence minister Israel Katz described Jewish settlements as a vital defensive shield for the big population centres in central Israel. 'This historic decision to establish 22 new settlements in Judea and Samaria strengthens our hold on the land, anchors our historical right to the Land of Israel and constitutes a crushing response to Palestinian terrorism that seeks to harm and weaken the settlement movement,' he said, using the Biblical name for the West Bank.
READ MORE
'It is also a strategic step that prevents the establishment of a Palestinian state that would endanger Israel and serves as a buffer against our enemies.'
Finance minister Bezalel Smotrich, head of the far-right Religious Zionist Party, said: 'Through hard work and determined leadership, we have, thank God, succeeded in creating a strategic shift, returning Israel to a path of building, Zionism and vision. Settlement in the land of our forefathers is the protective wall of Israel, and today we took a giant step in strengthening it. The next step: sovereignty. We did not take a foreign land, but rather our ancestral homeland.'
Israel has built about 160 settlements across the West Bank since it captured the land from Jordan in the 1967 Six-Day War. The settlements are considered illegal by most of the international community.
Nabil Abu Rudeineh, a spokesperson for Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas, said it was a 'dangerous escalation', accusing Israel of continuing to drag the region into a cycle of violence and instability. 'This extremist Israeli government is trying by all means to prevent the establishment of an independent Palestinian state,' he said, urging Washington to intervene.
[
Israeli finance minister calls for Palestinian villages to be 'flattened' after pregnant woman shot dead in West Bank
Opens in new window
]
Lior Amichai, director of the Israeli anti-settlement Peace Now NGO, also criticised the move. 'The government of Israel is making clear it plans to annex the West Bank and is doing so in a dramatic fashion. Establishing 22 new settlements is a clear message to the world: We want to prolong this war and this conflict to last forever.'
Meanwhile, Israeli leaders are threatening that if states such as France and Canada pursue plans to recognise a Palestinian state, Israel will respond with 'unilateral measures' – thought to be a reference to annexing parts of the West Bank.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
4 hours ago
- Irish Times
Letters to the Editor, June 23rd: On the EU and Israel, organ donation and tattoos
Sir, – Today, the EU foreign ministers are to meet to discuss whether the EU-Israel Association Agreement should be suspended, in whole or part, due to Israel's failure to meet human rights obligations. The review recommendations indicate Israel has failed to meet their human rights obligations, as they relate to their actions in Gaza. And yet all indications are that because there will not be consensus among the EU foreign ministers, they will provide a further month to see if Israel will change its posture on provision of aid to Gaza. This approach beggars belief. For the past 20 months Israel has faced innumerable 'red lines' from world governments and bodies, and ignored them with impunity. READ MORE On May 19th, Canada, France and the UK indicated there would be 'concrete actions' if Israel did not permit aid entering Gaza – we still await! On June 10th Australia, the UK, Canada, New Zealand and Norway placed financial sanctions and travel bans on two Israeli government ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir (national security minister), and Bezalel Smotrich (finance minister) – big swing! Yet every time it appears that taking firm action is close, Israel changes the narrative; the latest 'Israel is threatened by Iran', and the world shrinks back to the position of 'Israel has the right to defend itself'. While this occurs, Gaza slips further from public consciousness. The result being the killing and starvation continues unabated, and where aid posts appear to have become the new killing fields for the IDF. The EU foreign ministers must act with decisiveness today. Similarly, equally decisive action must come from EU leaders on Thursday. Failure to do so will indicate the EU leaders and politicians, our leaders, have parked their humanity. – Yours, etc, PHILIP BRADY, Donnycarney, Dublin 9. Sir, – Jane Mahony suggests in her letter (June 20th) that Trinity College is anti-Semitic and racist for singling out Israel, while maintaining ties with other unnamed countries with well documented human rights and international law violations. To suggest what Israel is doing in Gaza is comparable to what other unnamed countries are doing is a gross understatement of the atrocities Israel is carrying out on a daily basis. The slaughter of civilians, the destruction of homes and infrastructure, and the constant dehumanisation of Palestinians, are actions which Israelis and Israel's supporters should be ashamed of. Trinity's actions will at a minimum help to raise awareness with some Israelis of what their government are doing, while conveying the horror of many of us as we continue to watch the atrocities unfold. In the grand scheme of things, a small but brave step – the world could do with more of these. Yours, etc, MARTIN FOLAN, Leixlip, Co Kildare. New rules on organ donation Sir, – The new rules underpinning organ donation and transplant in Ireland, on which matter I was kindly quoted in a report online (' What are the new rules around organ donation in Ireland and what if I want to opt out ?', June 17th) are welcome but, as as observed by Dr Liam O'Neill (Letters, June 20th), are unlikely to boost activity in this literally vital realm. There is indeed a logical argument that they might reduce it. At present, ICU doctors aim to seek family consent from all potential organ donors and data shows that we largely achieve this. Henceforth, we will only seek consent in the case of patients not on the register. It is not obvious that significantly higher rates of acquiescence will result from these fewer requests. The point made by Dr O'Neill that, to match the best in the world, which he sees as 'the Spanish system', will require 'higher levels of Government support, investment and transplant infrastructure' is fair but there are cultural factors that also apply. Ireland is a very litigious society and this discourages doctors from taking on high-risk cases. This is a rational viewpoint that runs through our practice but that is not conducive to pushing the limits of medical innovation. We doctors may need to become braver. Another trend in recent years is that life-expectancy in Ireland has increased significantly, with safer roads and better outcomes from stroke among the factors. These disasters were major sources of donor organs. The consideration of older, less robust donors is becoming necessary. Notably, in recent years the US has soared in terms of international transplant activity reports. This appears to be good news, but the unfortunate reality is that the opioid epidemic there which has caused so many deaths has been the source of many donations. One must recall that organ donation is underpinned by tragic deaths of donors, and so be careful what we wish for. The priority of preventing those deaths in the first place is surely the most fundamental one. However, given the altruism of Irish people there is much to be optimistic about and I have no doubt we can achieve higher levels of transplantation. Investment in ICU beds and better theatre access are key targets. Currently, organ donation is the outcome of about 0.3 per cent of deaths it Ireland, and about 0.6 per cent of those in Spain. Approximating the rates of the latter country would enable us to greatly reduce waiting lists and improve quality of life, most markedly for those on dialysis. The new rules introduced will be merely a small step toward achieving this goal. The consideration of higher-risk donors is essential. – Yours, etc, BRIAN O'BRIEN, Kinsale, Co Cork. Tattoos, you lose Sir – I am not surprised to read that Gen-Z ( late 1990s and early 2010) are miserable according to Finn Mc Redmond. ( 'It's no wonder people my age are miserable. Everyone keeps telling them they're totally screwed,' June 19th) . When they look at their young bodies defaced with multiple tattoos, it cannot fill them with joy. Years ago the only people with tattoos were male prisoners , sailors and psychiatric patients. Now the young people of Generation Z have followed in their footsteps and those of the primitive tribes where this practice originated . I have yet to meet a person who did not regret getting a tattoo in later years . – Yours, etc, DR PAT Mc GRATH, Co Dublin. Sir, – I am not a great fan of tattoos, but one fascinated me a few days ago. A young man, out for a run overtook me. He was wearing shorts but no top. His entire back was covered in tattoos and I wondered where was the point, as obviously he couldn't see them , unless, of course, he has set up a double mirror at home. If so, I hope he enjoys his reflection after his run! – Yours. etc. MARGARET BUTLER, Co Dublin. Brain injury and better care Sir, – I refer to the letter from Joe Condon (June 14th) regarding the placement of younger people with disabilities in nursing homes. I want to endorse his call for the Government to take a leadership role in actively addressing this significant and enduring issue. An estimated 19,000 people in Ireland suffer a life-changing brain injury every year – that's 52 people every day, of all ages, from all corners of the country. Often, the impacts make it impossible for the person to return home directly from hospital and – for too many – the only available option is to live in a nursing home designed for the care of older people. As Mr Condon rightly asserts, this is not a place where a young person with a brain injury can engage effectively in rehabilitation to maximise their recovery and independence. Investing in community-based neuro-rehabilitation services is key to the solution. Rehabilitation services enable people with brain injury to move more seamlessly and successfully from hospital to home. They focus on ensuring that the person can rebuild their life after injury, reducing their limitations over time, promoting autonomy and community integration. Specialist brain injury case managers are essential to the rehabilitation process and critical to the realisation of the recommendations in the 2021 Wasted Lives report. They act as the bridge between acute hospitals, rehabilitation services, and community supports, making sure that no one with a brain injury is left to face their recovery alone – or worse, that they fall through the cracks and are forgotten about. They work in partnership to identify inappropriate nursing home placements, develop alternative pathways to recovery, and support young survivors of brain injury to move from residential care to more independent living. Some of those young people go on to work and further education. All of them – when they have the opportunity – return to play active roles and contribute to their communities. Currently, access to specialist brain injury case management is limited by geography. It is, in essence, an Eircode lottery. Acquired Brain injury Ireland is actively campaigning for an investment of €2 million per annum to provide this service nationwide. Not only would this targeted investment directly support commitments made in the programme for government to end the systemic misplacement of younger people in nursing homes – it would also uphold Ireland's obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which affirms the right of every person to access timely, appropriate rehabilitation. Brain injury can happen in the blink of an eye. Lives are changed, but not ended. We can do better. – Yours, etc, KAREN FOLEY, Chief executive , Acquired Brain Injury Ireland, Dublin. Infrastructure for cyclists Sir, – On my cycle to work in Galway University Hospital each day I pass through a number of new and under-construction housing developments in the Letteragh area, providing much needed modern urban housing for the people of Galway. What can't be seen anywhere are new protected cycle lanes or bus stops to accompany this rapid expansion of housing. Enforcing car dependency, through lack of active travel infrastructure, on a new generation of residents is both regressive and short-sighted. Galway already suffers from some of the worst congestion in Europe, adding thousands of cars to the picture can only worsen this. Located just 3km and 15 minutes by bike from the city centre, linking these new developments (and all those like it) to the city centre with active and public travel infrastructure should be a mandatory requirement for councils and developers. If we are serious about reducing congestion, improving our air pollution and health and meeting our legally binding emissions reductions targets, these are the open goals which we can't afford to miss. – Yours, etc, DR CALLUM SWIFT, Galway University Hospital, Galway. .
Irish Times
8 hours ago
- Irish Times
The Irish Times view on the US attacks on Iran: Trump's biggest gamble
Donald Trump's bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan has made the world a significantly more dangerous place. As UN secretary general, Antonio Guterres rightly warns, the strikes are a 'dangerous escalation in a region already on the edge – and a direct threat to international peace and security.' He said there was 'a growing risk that this conflict could rapidly get out of control – with catastrophic consequences for civilians, the region, and the world.' Although Trump claims that the strikes have successfully 'obliterated' Iran's nuclear programme , their ostensible sole and arguably welcome purpose, it is clear that he does not now intend to disengage. Israel has, as it has hoped for some time, acquired a formidable partner whose continued commitment will be assured by Iran's inevitable retaliation at US targets. 'Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace,' Trump warned. 'If they do not, future attacks will be far greater and a lot easier.' Israel's purpose, unlike the US, in launching its attack was never solely the disabling of the infrastructure of a nuclear weapons programme. Its objective, largely unstated, has always been the regime in Tehran itself. It has no intention of leaving the job half done. The leader of Israel's parliamentary opposition, Yair Lapid, a committed critic of prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu, yesterday backed the US attack: 'It was the right and correct thing for Israel, Israeli security and global security. It's a good moment.' But rightly added that Israel should now aim to wrap up the war with Iran, saying that its 'main objectives had been achieved.' Netanyahu is unlikely to listen. READ MORE Regime change is likely to prove difficult with unpredictable consequences as the US should have learned in Afghanistan and Iraq. Although the US strikes are clearly in breach of international law, most western capitals while emphasising that they were not involved, and appealing for 'de-escalation', have dodged the issue to avoid antagonising Trump. Not so his Democratic opponents in the US, who are complaining bitterly that once again the president has ignored the constitutional limits of presidential power by usurping Congress's authority to declare war. Within the ranks of his MAGA movement sharp divisions are also opening up between those who signed up because of his promise to pull America out of all 'forever wars', and those who will back him whatever he does. And the polls are showing the president's performance rating sliding, By attacking Iran, Trump has taken a huge gamble in what is a defining moment for his presidency. The consequences are uncertain and the risks that it could all backfire are substantial.
Irish Times
10 hours ago
- Irish Times
US attack on Iran was carried out ‘in full co-ordination' with Israel
'Fordow is gone' was the simple message sent by US president Donald Trump on social media early on Sunday, putting an end to days of speculation over whether he would be willing to provide the coup de grace to Iran's nuclear project. Seven B-2 bombers dropped a dozen 'bunker buster' bombs on the Fordow nuclear facility while navy submarines fired 30 Tomahawk cruise missiles at two other nuclear sites, Natanz and Isfahan. The US strikes came nine days after Israel's surprise attack on Iran, launching a war that has reshaped the Middle East, lifting Israel's military supremacy to new heights while leaving Iran and its so-called Axis of Resistance in tatters – and, at the same time, reinforcing Washington's image as the pre-eminent global superpower. Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu said the US attack was carried out 'in full co-ordination' with Israel and was a continuation of the Israeli military and Mossad operations in Iran against the Iranian nuclear programme, which he said threatened Israel's existence and endangered world peace. READ MORE 'At the beginning of the operation, I promised you that Iran's nuclear facilities would be destroyed one way or another. That promise has been kept,' he said. 'President Trump is leading the free world with strength. He is a great friend of Israel, a friend like no other.' Despite the apparent success of the American bombing, it remains unclear how much of its supply of enriched uranium Iran managed to transfer away from the nuclear sites that were hit. [ US attack on Iran 'not about regime change', says defence secretary after Trump hails 'spectacular military success' ] Israel's national security council chief Tzachi Hanegbi said the US attack had pushed Iran's nuclear programme back by several years. A few hours later, Iran launched 30 ballistic missiles towards Israel, scoring direct hits in Tel Aviv and another location in central Israel, injuring 30 people. However, the attack was no bigger than similar strikes last week. The discipline of residents, who headed to safe rooms and bomb shelters, ensured there were no fatalities despite large damage to buildings. Israel temporarily closed its airspace after the US attack and reinstituted strict guidelines for public gatherings, permitting only essential activity. Iran's foreign minister Abbas Araghchi said Tehran reserved all options to defend its sovereignty, interests and people', warning that the US attack would have 'everlasting consequences.' However, Iran's military options appear limited and would be likely prompt a US counter attack. Houthis in Yemen also threatened to respond, after previously warning that a US strike would lead to a resumption of attacks on international shipping in the Red Sea. For much of his political career Netanyahu has made thwarting Iran's nuclear programme his priority, raising the issue in speech after speech in apocalyptic terms, arguing that Iran would not be deterred and that an Iranian nuclear bomb would present an existential threat to Israel. With Israeli intelligence concluding Tehran was moving dangerously close to the bomb, something had to give between the two rival regional powers. Israel believed that following the defeat of Hizbullah and the fall of the Assad regime in Syria last year, Tehran took a strategic decision to acquire a nuclear bomb and already had enough enriched fissile material for at least nine bombs. The decades-long waiting game was over. The deadly Hamas attack on southern Israel on October 7th, 2023, resulted in the biggest number of Jews killed in a single day since the Holocaust. Most Israelis believed this traumatic event would become Netanyahu's legacy: a day of infamy he would never be able to erase. But he now sees an opportunity to reshape that legacy once again and go down in history as the leader who with patience and determination saved Israel from the threat of nuclear annihilation. It's a narrative that the majority of the Israeli public appear to be buying into – for now, at least.
