nastasya: israel has scrapped parts of a law barring settlers from some areas ofhe occupied west bank. tensiohas been running high in thregion. so, what's behind the move, and just how problematic are these illegal settlements in the palestinian territories? this is "inside story.” ♪ hello there, and welcome to the program. i'm nastasya tay. now, israel's parliament has overturned part of a law that banned illegal settlements in a northern region of the occupied

west bank. it's been in place since 2005, when israeli sectors were moved -- settlers were moved out during israel's withdrawal, too, from the gaza strip. the move fulfills a long-held goal of the far-right politicians who dominate benjamin netanyahu's coalition government, and they are the latest in a series of initiatives by the government to increase illegal settlements across the occupied west bank. well, the areas that are affected include the palestinian villages of homesh, sa-nur, kadim, and ganim, as you can see there. as we mentioned, the illegal settlements there were dismantled back in 2005, when israeli forces left gaza under then prime minister ariel sharon. well, israel's minister of national missions, orit strock, has hailed this decision. in an interview, she predicted that the next step will be a return to the gaza strip. she said, "i don't know how long it will take. sadly, a return to the gaza strip will involve many casualties, just as the departure from the gaza strip came with many casualties. but ultimately, it is part of the land of israel, and a day will come when we will return to it.”

but washington has condemned israel's move to revoke this law, saying it further undermines a two-state solution. >> we have been clear that advancing settlements is an obstacle to peace and the achievement of a two-state solution. this certainly includes creating new settlements, building or legalizing outposts, or allowing building of any kind on private palestinian land or deep in the west bank, adjacent to palestinian communities, all of which would be facilitated by this legal change. the action also represents a clear contradiction of undertakings the israeli government made to the united states. ♪ nastasya: well, let's bring in our panel now. in tel aviv, we have akiva eldar. he is a columnist and also the author of "lords of the land: the war over israel settlements in the occupied territories.” in ramallah, we have nour odeh, a political analyst, and also the former spokeswoman for the palestinian task force on public diplomacy. and in washington, d.c., michael

omer-man. he is the director of research for israel and palestine at democracy for the arab world now. that's a non-profit organization that supports human rights in the middle east and north africa. a very warm welcome to each of you. thanks so much for joining us here on "inside story.” nour, i'm going to start with you. can you give me your reaction to this week's move? >> well, i think we have to look at this as part of the big picture, which is that this is a government that has a very clear agenda. it is working to permanently colonize the land, and that includes reversing a very symbolic withdrawal from these settlements at the time of the unilateral exit from gaza. those supplements were never -- those settlements were never returned to the palestinians, the land was never returned to its owners, and so now this is just a a one way to

signal to the constituency of this right-wing government that it will push ahead with settlement construction and expansion with taking over really the rest of the west bank, no matter what the world thinks or says. because again, they know that thinking and saying is where the buck will stop and so far there is no signal that there are any consequences for such actions, which are illegal under international law. nastasya: okay, i do want to give our viewers just a little bit more context here. we're talking about these four settlements. settlers were moved out in 2005. this move allows them back. but i do believe it still has to be signed by an israeli military commander, in order to actually been be enforced. -- in order to actually be enforced. presumably, that will happen. akiva, let me turn to you. what does the timeline potentially look like, and is this a done deal, or is there a legal recourse? >> i'm sure that it will be appealed, and these days, the story is the relationship between the judiciary and the government.

i'm sure that in the some peace -- i'm sure that in some peace ngo's, they are ready with the appeal. it will actually not change the situation on the ground. because underground, the settlers are doing whatever they like. actually, the settlers are the government, and the government is now full of settlers. the minister in the ministry of defense, smotrich, is a settler. the minister of national police is a settler. so now, they are part of the decision-making process. and their agenda, their priorities are very different from i can even say the majority of the israelites. because even the voters, even people who believe in in greater israel, most of them are not

messianic. most of them are not kind of jewish ayatollahs. so to connect my answer to the previous guest, i can say that as long as the domestic -- political domestic price that this government has to pay is close to zero, because the security council will not use chapter seven, it will not use sanctions in israel, and let's wait and see if president biden will still use the veto power to stop sanctions against israel, i wouldn't put my money on it. nastasya: well, this seems to be a good time to bring michael into the discussion. i know the u.s., michael, particularly president george w. bush, was instrumental in getting the 2005 deal done back then. this is obviously a very sensitive time for joe biden's

government. how is netanyahu and his broader coalition being viewed in d.c.? >> i think with heartbreak, really. i think that this process, this government, the best way to understand the way that the united states has seen it and will see it and will probably dictate its actions is a parent or a sibling of somebody who is an addict, and they understand that their behavior is destructive and against their own interests, but they're -- all they can do is change their own behavior. so i agree with akiva, that we don't think we'll see sanctions on israel from the united states from this, but what it does do is create the space for the administration to have a more honest discussion with itself, reconciling the image or the myth of israel that american politicians are more comfortable with and have had for many, many

years with what israel has become, but quite frankly with what israeli leaders have been saying, they want what they are and what israel is for many, many years. so i think the administration understands that, but they're taking a long time to to come around and sort of acknowledge and believe it. but we may see that soon, and we're seeing sort of escalating steps, from small changes in language, to the way that they describe the relationship, to we saw the summoning of the israeli ambassador to the state department a couple of days ago over this move specifically. but i think that what we're likely to see is this type of move, which as nour pointed out quite correctly, is part of a bigger package. we can't look at this as an isolated piece of legislation. the law itself is is one page -- the law itself is one page long, and it's part of a package of dozens of laws to completely reshape the israeli political and legal system, but more importantly, its relationship to the palestinian territories and

the palestinian people. with annexation. nastasya: i want to look at some of those those other pieces of legislation in a minute, but just sticking with this particular move this week for now, i know the u.s. has come out and said it's extremely troubled by this new law. i believe that biden and netanyahu had a conversation on the phone on sunday, and they didn't talk settlements at all. now, beyond the outward condemnation here, nour, what would you like to see from the u.s.? >> well, from the u.s. and others, i would like for them to be consistent and to treat this government as a rogue government, the way it would if it were governing any other country. this is a government that's not only flaunting international law, it is declaring its intention to commit both crimes. it is assaulting the tenants of the jewish democracy, so to speak, which is a defective

democracy in israel that also excludes the 20% of palestinians who hold israeli nationality, but even that is now under threat. so despite all of that, the american administration continues to treat the situation with kid gloves. the european union has had a few statements here and there, but still, the largest trading partner with israel is refusing to take any accountability steps, including sanctions or at least banning of settlement products. these are steps consistent with international law, steps that the europeans and the americans have taken in response to other situations of occupation, including that in ukraine. and yet, the culture of impunity, the feeling of invincibility that the israeli government, this and the previous ones have, that is a natural outcome of the fact that they've always been shielded

from any kind of accountability. and unless that is broken, then really, there isn't much that's going to change, except the fact that with their back to the corner, the palestinians are not going to simply watch as all of their land is stolen from under their feet. and smotrich, who is really the de facto ruler of the west bank, kind of gets to act out or or play out the plan that he has for controlling the entirety of historic palestine by doing away with the palestinians, whether by encouraging them to leave or by expelling them or confining them to their cities and villages. that's the direction we're heading. nastasya: nour, so sorry, i want to pick up on something you just said there, that the palestinians won't just sit idly by and watch this happen. i noticed the timing of this.

it's obviously the start of ramadan, eastern passover are both just around the corner. akiva, is there a concern that the timing of this could be viewed as provocative in itself? >> yeah, you know, there have been attempts now to get the israelis and the palestinians together. because now, even a meeting between prime minister netanyahu and abu mazen, you know, something that we took it as the most natural thing to happen because we have an agreement, we have the oslo agreement. actually, when we are talking about the disengagement from the northern west bank and from gaza, this was actually part of the process, and where is the process? we are now 30 years after the -- you know, i was in the white house in the south lawn, when simon paris and robin hands with

him, now it looks like it was in another century. so i believe that the israeli people are now starting to realize the linkage between those messianic, smotrich, and democracy, and you see now half a million people in the streets today demonstrating against the blitz, the attempt to change the israeli democracy, and on steroids. and the occupation, you don't see israeli arabs in the streets, because the israeli democracy is democracy for jews mainly. and if we don't find a way to find some kind of -- to live together, a way to bring together jewish values and

democratic values, we are heading towards abyss. nastasya: you say that there needs to be a way for people to live together, but i noticed that settler violence in particular has also been on the rise. i took a look at some of the numbers. now, since the start of this year, 2023, israeli secular related violence reached what an average of three incidents per day, compared with two incidents per day last year, one incident day per day the year before, in 2021, those are un numbers. now, i know part of israel's justification for the settlements itself has been this idea of security. michael, do you think the west or anyone in the west still buys that? >> i think that, picking up on what akiva said, and i'll get to your question in a second, that it's always been easier, and this is both a tragedy and an opportunity at the moment for the west in particular, but for the world to care more about the

rights of jewish israelis than the lives of palestinians and the safety of palestinians, and that's tragic, because it means that there's been 55 or 75 years of tragedy, of massacres, of killings and injustice, but the opportunity is that if the world stops seeing israel as a democracy the way that jewish israelis experience it, then it's very difficult to continue the charade or to continue looking at the israeli-palestinian situation as two separate regimes. because if israel is not a democracy within its own borders, recognized by the world, then how can you separate that from the undemocratic military regime that's been ruling over millions of palestinians within 55 years? so, you know, i think that there is an opportunity for the world to change the way that it looks at the israel-palestine

situation, but its focus is in the wrong place. nastasya: michael, you're talking there about this shift away from democracy in israel. in fact, all three of you are. and we have obviously seen these huge, huge protests that have been taking place in israel as part of this huge swathe of legislation that this coalition government wants to to put through. now, i'm wondering about the the -- now, i'm wondering about the public opinion that you're seeing there, akiva, is there a bit of a normalization now, do you think, of the far right? >> oh, yeah. according to the recent polls, if there were elections today, they could form a coalition. having said that, while they were in power for the last year or so, they didn't make any attempt to reach out to the palestinians or to get closer to a final settlement agreement.

in the last election, the former elections, on the ticket, he was responsible, as the chief of staff, for the killing of more than 1,000 palestinians in gaza. so we needed deeper change in this equation. and the equation is not only israeli and palestinian, without the americans not only facilitating, but putting the political trips, and giving us, as was said before -- as long as there is impunity, and the occupation is so cheap for the israelis. yes, some israelis have been also killed, we have to mention this, we lost two young brothers a few weeks ago. but the palestinians have

nothing to lose, because at the end of the tunnel, there is no light. and more than that, there is no tunnel, because even negotiation, going back to the table looks now like a fantasy that many people and israelis, including people in the left have lost it, and now they are demonstrating to save the democracy. and it's not about the occupation. nastasya: i want to hop in there, akiva, because we are having this very broad discussion, which is an incredibly important one about the future of israel and the future of palestine, but also within the context of this move, this this move about this specific four villages that we've seen this week, just one of a whole host of things that's taking place at the moment, this is all obviously part of a much larger picture. now, in terms of settlements, it's something like 600,000 and 750,000, between those numbers

that israeli settlers live in at least, what, 250 settlements and outposts across the occupied west bank and occupied east jerusalem? now, i know the man who as of february is in charge of settlements and netanyahu's coalition government, he is the man that you've been talking about, bezalel smotrich. i want to listen to what he had to say earlier this week. >> there's no such thing as a palestinian. there's no such thing as a palestinian people. do you know who's palestinian? i am palestinian. my late grandfather, whose 13th generation of jerusalemite is the true palestinian. -- who's 13th generation of jerusalemite is the true palestinian. the palestinian people are an invention that is less than 100 years old. nastasya: now, i know that's deeply profoundly hurtful and offensive to many people. do you regard that as as reflective of the tone broadly from netanyahu's government? >> i think it's a very honest

representation of where this government stands. it's not just smotrich, who denies the existence of the palestinian people and their national identity and their humanity, really, but this genocidal -- this denialism of the palestinian people, it is the ground on which all of these ministers stand. and i would remind the viewers that when netanyahu first became prime minister, his statements were maybe a bit more eloquent, a bit more suave, but they weren't really far from where smotrich is, and the policies that have been adopted by his successive governments, netanyahu, really translate or led up to where we are now. in 2018, when israel adopted the so-called nation-state law,

which afforded only jews the exclusive right to self-determination in historic palestine, it considered settlements to be a national priority, and basically treated indigenous palestinians as squatters with no rights. all of that, it's only natural for us to hear someone like smotrich spelling out his ideology with such audacity in a foreign capital. i would remind that he didn't say this in israel, where he says it all the time, he said it in paris, and still, he wasn't told to leave. so, again, we go back to that sense of invincibility, these politicians know, because of practice, that they can say anything, they can do anything, and they will get away with it. nastasya: i want to bring michael in here, because given the tone that we're talking about, nour, and what you were saying, akiva, about this real

-- well, this foundering, if anything, peace process, i see the u.s. is still talking about a peace process and a two-state solution? i mean, michael, a lot of people including our two panelists here, might argue that those are very empty terms. >> i would agree completely. i would just add to what nour was saying, that before last week, that quote, that type of statement, that there's no such thing as a palestinian people, and that i, you know, the israeli politician speaking was most closely associated with gold in my ear, this is not a new thought to be coming from israeli leaders. and, you know, the the opportunity again here is that this government is saying the quiet part out loud. so i don't think that we're gonna see any consequences here. i do think that, as we were saying before, that the world is going to have to start seeing this government for what it is, and this government as

reflective of israel. and it's not all of israel, you know, we're seeing massive protests against this government. but you have to remember also that again this is part of a package that is in the eyes of the justice minister and in the eyes of bezalel smotrich, in the eyes of many other members, senior members of this israeli government, is ultimately aimed at enabling the annexation of the entire west bank and what they call the land of israel. nastasya: well, we are hearing as well from other senior members of this government of this desire as well to move back into gaza? akiva, do you anticipate that, or a building spree to take place? >> no, i don't think so. i think that even the voters would not like to send the sons back to gaza. the member from the radical

right said that regardless of the price, we have to pay one day, we have to go there. this is rhetoric. the problem in my eyes is that the people of israel keep voting for those parties, and i heard so many times from american diplomats and civil servants, the united states cannot want peace more than you. the israelis, and some of them even add more than the palestinian. so as long as the israelis don't have the desire to put an end to the conflict, they can live this -- most of them are very comfortable with their economic situation, with their ability to travel anywhere.

the shekel was strong, but the game changer can be the economic repercussions of what's happening now in the field, in the other field of democracy versus dictatorship. and here it seems that people are starting to move. they read in the newspapers that the high-tech experts in israel are moving people, are taking out their money, transferring to switzerland, so once they will see the connection between their personal safety and well-being and the occupation, then we may see some changes in the stream. nastasya: sure. i need to really change the

calculus here. now, before we end, because we have been talking about settlements to begin with. i want to throw this to you, nour, can you give us a sense of what it's like to live in these areas as palestinians close to israeli settlements? i know there have been not only rising levels of violence, but also attacks on olive trees, for example. can you describe how it feels to live there? >> well, it's a nightmare, to put it in a nutshell. and those affected, those most affected live right next to the settlements, and we're talking about dozens and dozens of small isolated villages, villages that know they have no recourse to safety, they can't call the firefighters, they can't call palestinian police for protection. the israeli army accompanies the settlers while they're attacking these villages. and so, there's a constant sense of helplessness and being under attack. every palestinian traveling on the road in the occupied west

bank checks constantly on the status of the road, whether there are settlers on the road, are they attacking the palestinian cars, which roads to take and which roads to not take, and that sense of being under attack is exactly what settlers want. it's exactly what they've been enabled to do. but i think it's very important to highlight to the viewers that palestinians don't see these settlers as separate from the state, from the israeli establishment. they are an another part of it that is funded and aided and protected by the israeli occupation army, by the occupation regime. and so, they see it as one very the same. nastasya: and a sense of impunity on the israeli side. i'm afraid we'll have to leave it there. but thank you to all of our guests, akiva eldar, nour odeh, and michael omer-man. and thank you, too, for

watching. you can see this program again anytime by visiting our website, aljazeera.com. for further discussion, do go to our facebook page. that's facebook.com/ajinsidestory. remember to join the conversation on twitter. our handle @ajinsidestory. from me, nastasya tay, and the whole team here in doha, bye for now. ♪

■■■■■÷ ÷ úç [captions made possit

television] ♪ ♪