Yehudit Katsover and Nadia Matar are Co-Chairs of the Sovereignty Movement
Sovereignty Because This Is Ours
Sovereignty is a political decision: the decision to apply the sovereignty of the State of Israel to the regions of its homeland, out of a profound recognition that this is our land, the land of our forefathers, the land promised to the people of Israel by the Almighty. This is where our roots lie, this is where our history is, and this is where we will build our future.
Our right to this land does not begin with a United Nations decision, nor does it depend on the world's approval. It stems from the deep historical and national connection between the people of Israel and their land. To realize this right in the political and legal spheres as well, vision, sovereign consciousness, and the courage to make a decisive choice are required.
For far too many years, we have lived in a state of indecision and continued to abide by the Oslo Accords. We build, settle, pave roads, develop communities, and strengthen our hold on the land, but we avoid the necessary step: repealing the Oslo Accords and clearly declaring that Judea, Samaria, and the Gaza Strip are an inseparable part of our homeland.
We hesitate to formalize our political and legal status. We invest in settlement, but leave open the question of whether this territory will remain part of the State of Israel in the future.
This hesitation is not merely political. It is also a matter of consciousness. As long as Israel does not make a decisive choice, it sends the message that it is itself uncertain of the justice of its path and of its right to formalize its hold on the land through a binding political decision. If Israel does not apply sovereignty, what do we expect from the world?
The World Opposed Us Then-and Opposes Us Now
It is worth returning for a moment to the year 1948. Did the entire world stand by our side when we declared the establishment of the State of Israel? Certainly not. Although the partition plan received a majority in the UN General Assembly, it did not guarantee the borders of the Jewish state, its security, or its establishment without war. The Arab states opposed the very establishment of a Jewish state, and the leadership of the Jewish community knew that declaring independence would lead to a difficult war.
Even then, warnings were heard about the political and security costs. Even then, reality was complex and full of dangers. And Ben-Gurion made the decision.
He did not declare the state because all the conditions were ripe, because the world agreed to every detail, or because all the difficulties had been resolved. He understood that there are moments in history when leadership is required to make a decision and shape reality, rather than wait until reality grants it permission.
This is the lesson of 1948: do not wait for perfect circumstances, but define a national goal and act to achieve it. This is also the courage required today-to make a political decision.
The Golan as Another Example
In 1981, Israel applied its laws, jurisdiction, and administration to the Golan Heights. The world opposed the move, and the UN Security Council declared in Resolution 497 that it had no validity under international law. Nevertheless, Israel did not revoke its decision. In 2019, the United States recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights.
This does not mean that international opposition disappeared, or that the reality in Judea and Samaria is identical to that of the Golan Heights. However, this case once again demonstrates that a political decision does not have to wait for prior international agreement.
A sovereign decision does not guarantee that the world will immediately accept Israel's position. It does make clear that Israel knows its goal and will not leave its future indefinitely open.
The Status of the Arabs Is No Excuse
One of the main arguments against applying sovereignty in Judea and Samaria concerns the status of the Arab population. This is indeed a serious question that requires serious answers. But it cannot become an excuse for avoiding a decision forever.
When Zionist settlement in the Land of Israel resumed, Jews were a minority in the population of the land (in 1882, there were approximately 24,000 Jews, compared with approximately 440,000 Arabs). Even on the eve of the establishment of the state, the Zionist movement faced a complex demographic, national, and security reality (650,000 Jews compared with 1.3 million Arabs). And yet, it did not abandon the vision of a Jewish state.
The Jewish people worked to promote immigration, establish communities, purchase land, create national institutions, and build the foundations of a state. The Jewish people did not wait for the day when all the challenges would disappear on their own.
Today, there is a Jewish majority between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. According to Yoram Ettinger, Israel and Judea and Samaria are home to approximately 8 million Jews and 3.5 million Arabs, making Jews approximately 69% of the population, excluding Gaza. This Jewish majority benefits from the tailwinds of fertility and net migration. (Source: Yoram Ettinger, The Ettinger Report, 2026.)
The question of the status and rights of the Arabs requires an orderly, responsible, and feasible plan that addresses security concerns and is based on President Trump's proposal for the emigration of Gaza's Arab population. But there is an enormous difference between recognizing complexity and surrendering to it. Zionism did not wait for difficulties to disappear before realizing its vision. It acted to confront them.
The Race Is On-Sovereignty or Palestine?
Since the Six-Day War, we have been living in a prolonged interim situation. Israel controls extensive parts of Judea and Samaria but has not applied its sovereignty to them. For decades, we have grown accustomed to speaking of a future arrangement, future negotiations, and conditions that will ripen in the future.
Meanwhile, time does not stand still. The Palestinian Authority is creating facts on the ground through massive construction, land registration and regularization, and efforts in the international arena to advance recognition of a Palestinian state (157 out of 193 UN member states have recognized it as a "state"). Israel continues to strengthen its hold on the land but refrains from giving it full sovereign expression.
This creates an intolerable situation: we build and take action on the ground, yet leave the question of our future open, while our enemies work to advance their own political decision. Avoiding a decision does not convey neutrality. It conveys weakness and hesitation.
Sovereignty Is the Bulletproof Vest of the Settlement Enterprise
The settlement enterprise is an extraordinary Zionist undertaking. Every home, community, farm, and road deepens our hold on the land. But settlement alone does not guarantee its future.
In Sinai, Gush Katif, and northern Samaria, we saw how communities built through hard work, dedication, and faith were uprooted as a result of political decisions. Thousands of homes and an entire life's work did not prevent the evacuation once the decision to uproot them had been made.
This is not merely a warning from the past. As long as sovereignty has not been applied, even the most magnificent settlement enterprise remains vulnerable to changes in policy. A future government may make decisions that reverse the achievements of settlement. What has been built over decades could once again become a bargaining chip in negotiations or be subject to evacuation. For this reason, our hold on the land must be anchored within Israel's political and legal framework, making the uprooting of communities and the surrender of territory far more difficult, legally and politically.
The Basic Law: Referendum stipulates that a decision to withdraw territory from the application of Israeli law, jurisdiction, and administration requires approval in a referendum, unless it is approved by a majority of 80 Knesset members. In Judea and Samaria, by contrast, as long as sovereignty has not been applied, this special constitutional protection does not apply under this Basic Law. Thus, as we learned painfully from Gush Katif and northern Samaria, a political decision supported by a regular majority in the Knesset (59!) led to the uprooting of entire communities.
This is one of the main reasons why sovereignty is the bulletproof vest of the settlement enterprise. Therefore, the question is not whether settlement is important. It is more important than ever. The question is whether we are prepared to settle for an achievement that can be reversed, or to move on to the next stage of Zionism: applying sovereignty.
Sovereignty Will Bring the Million
The argument that we must wait to apply sovereignty until one million Jews live in Judea and Samaria reverses the order of things. Applying sovereignty will help advance national planning for the construction of cities and communities, investment in infrastructure, roads, transportation, industrial zones, educational institutions, and security for investors. These will enable the expansion of settlement and the population of the region by millions of Jews.
There is no need to wait until one million Jews live there to apply sovereignty. Sovereignty itself will bring them.
Bureaucracy Must Not Be Allowed to Block a National Decision
Nearly sixty years have passed since the Six-Day War, and Judea and Samaria are still not fully included in the national planning framework of the State of Israel. Anyone looking at the map of National Outline Plan 35 can see that Judea and Samaria and the Gaza Strip are not included in Israel's planning framework. We cannot continue planning the future of the State of Israel as though these regions of our homeland were not part of it. Judea and Samaria and the Gaza Strip must be integrated into overall national planning, and the Israeli planning system must be applied to them as an inseparable part of the sovereign decision.
Some fear that such a move would bring bureaucracy, delays, and lengthy approval processes, as happens in other parts of the country. However, if applying the Israeli planning system creates bureaucratic difficulties, they must be addressed through appropriate reforms, streamlined procedures, and the removal of obstacles. There is no logic in leaving Judea and Samaria and Gaza outside the national planning framework, or in avoiding a political decision simply because the planning system needs improvement. We do not leave regions of our homeland outside national planning because of bureaucracy. We reform the bureaucracy and move toward a decisive decision.
Sovereignty-The Next Stage of Zionism
Zionism knew how to move from dream to action, from exile to return, and from settlement to the establishment of the state.
Now the next transition is required: from holding the land to declaring sovereignty.
Statements of support are not enough. Opposing a Palestinian state is not enough. Symbolic decisions are not enough, nor is declaring that Judea and Samaria are the heart of our homeland if we are not prepared to give that statement binding political expression. We need leadership that will say: we are no longer satisfied with managing the situation. We seek to shape the future.
The Sovereignty Movement has succeeded in bringing the idea of sovereignty from the margins to the center of public discourse. Now the transition from consciousness to declaration is required.
A New Reality Has Been Emerging in Israel Since October 7
To bring about this transformation, a Knesset law alone is not enough. A deeper movement is needed-a movement of the spirit and of national consciousness. We must free ourselves from a defensive mindset, from the constant need to explain why we are entitled to be here, and from the habit of seeking the world's approval for every step concerning our future.
This does not mean ignoring the world, security challenges, or possible costs. Responsible leadership must take all of them into account. But there is a difference between weighing the cost and allowing fear of the cost to become policy.
A sovereign mindset begins with a clear understanding of the national goal. It rests on faith in the justice of our cause and on recognition of our responsibility for the future of the land.
Since October 7, a new spirit has been growing among the people-a profound awakening, a yearning for a strong Jewish and national identity, for genuine independence, and for the realization of our sovereignty in our land. This spirit can be felt in the air, and on its wings we must dare to declare sovereignty.
In the upcoming elections, the question is not who talks about sovereignty, but who is prepared to make the decision and implement it.