Yehudit Katsover and Nadia Matar are Co-chairs of the Sovereignty Movement
President Trump’s opposition to applying Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria stems from a Western view that sees such a step as destabilizing. In the Middle Eastern context, however, this is a misreading of reality. Israeli sovereignty is a necessary strategic move.
Beyond being a security and political necessity, sovereignty fulfills the Jewish people’s natural right to their land-a biblical, historical, and legal right, recognized under international law. No other people in the world has such a continuous, documented, and unmistakable connection to its land, with defined borders and a recognized homeland.
Anyone familiar with the Middle East knows that the region’s key players-from Iran to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood-are primarily driven by a religious-political ideology. For them, Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel is not a territorial dispute but a challenge to the Islamic order. Political ambiguity or delaying decisions does not produce stability-it signals weakness.
For this reason, applying Israeli sovereignty is urgent. Clear sovereignty establishes law and borders and eliminates the illusion of a “future Palestinian state."
Implementing sovereignty also raises the question of the Arabs in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, which requires attention and solutions that cannot be avoided. Attempts to impose Western models of binationalism, mass citizenship, or the creation of a Palestinian Arab state in the heart of our land are not only unrealistic-they are dangerous.
History repeatedly shows that in the Middle East, states cannot survive as multiethnic entities without a clear sovereign identity:
Iraq after World War I, with Sunnis, Shiites, and Kurds, continues to face internal conflict.
20th-century Syria, with Druze, Alawites, Kurds, and Christians, failed to achieve stable unity.
Multi-religious Lebanon in the 20th century faced a prolonged civil war (1975-1990) due to imbalances between groups.
The civil war in Syria, the crisis in Yemen, and Iraq’s fragmented governance all demonstrate that multiethnic states without clear sovereignty collapse.
While the Jewish people have only one state-Israel-Arabs in Judea and Samaria have the option of dozens of countries with a shared Arab or Muslim identity. Insisting on perpetuating conflict within the Jewish state, instead of allowing a natural regional solution, defies Middle Eastern logic.
We must also consider the Gaza Strip. The current technocratic Palestinian administration there uses symbols of a “Palestinian state"-an open invitation to disorder. Achieving regional stability requires complete Israeli sovereignty from the sea to the Jordan, with Gaza as an integral part of the Land of Israel. Only then can a clear, lawful order replace the illusion of a Palestinian Arab state.
The relocation of Arabs from Judea, Samaria, and Gaza is not a precondition for sovereignty-it is a natural consequence. Once sovereignty is clarified and it is clear that no Palestinian Arab state will emerge, the path opens to the only realistic solution: voluntary emigration, incentivized economically and supported internationally.
History provides many precedents: population exchanges between Greece and Turkey; the migration of millions of Hindus and Muslims following India’s partition; the relocation of German populations from Eastern Europe after World War II-all contributed to long-term stability.
Moreover, the international community turns a blind eye to forced or agreed-upon demographic changes elsewhere, including these days, with the displacement of Kurds and other minorities. In those cases, such moves are framed as promoting regional stability. Yet only in the Israeli case is demographic change portrayed as illegitimate, even when it is the most humane and realistic solution. Israel must demand an end to this double standard.
Arabs of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza have natural alternatives in 22 Arab states and 59 Muslim-majority countries, sharing language, culture, and space. Managed, voluntary relocation with international support is far preferable to perpetuating an ideological conflict that cannot be resolved within Israel’s borders.
Israeli sovereignty is not an obstacle to regional stability-it is the decisive step from which order begins. In the Middle East, only decisiveness and determination create stability.