While international — and especially Western — discussion returns to reviving the two-state solution, Israel continues to pursue two parallel tracks: (1) official or public policies that reject the establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state, and (2) a practical “alternative plan” designed to make a territorially connected, sovereign Palestinian state effectively impossible by means of de-facto annexation or geographic fragmentation of the West Bank.
This paper explains the mechanisms of that alternative plan, the field and diplomatic evidence that indicates its existence, and its strategic dimensions. It concludes with practical recommendations for Palestinian and international actors.
1 — What is the “alternative plan”? A concise and candid summary
In short, the plan does not always require a formal, sweeping annexation (which carries high diplomatic and political costs). Instead, it relies on a calibrated mix of measures that render the West Bank a reality of Israeli control: rapid settlement expansion, changing planning/building rules (especially in Area C), building infrastructure that integrates settlements with Israel, local laws granting administrative sovereignty to settlers, weakening Palestinian local institutions, and severing geographic continuity between Palestinian centres (Ramallah, Bethlehem, etc.). This de facto annexation leaves any future Palestinian government with no genuine sovereignty.
2 — Implementation tools: how the plan works on the ground
(a) Rapid settlement expansion
Large batches of planning approvals and tenders for tens of thousands of housing units inside the West Bank and East Jerusalem increase Israeli demographic and geographic facts on the ground.
(b) Calculated partial annexation
Targeted moves on strategic areas — such as the Jordan Valley and settlement-linking corridors — aim to secure land and security control while leaving Palestinians fragmented in small, non-contiguous enclaves. Such partial annexation scenarios have surfaced repeatedly in political discussions and prior proposals.
(c) Administrative and economic fragmentation
Restrictive measures on the movement of people and goods, combined with infrastructure and permit regimes, turn Palestinian towns into disconnected cantons, crippling local governance and public finances.
(d) Institutional weakening
Policies and actions that erode Palestinian local institutions — judicial, municipal, and civil society — reduce the ability to govern effectively and to sustain the foundations of a future state.
(e) Diplomatic containment
Periods of US political tolerance — whether explicit or tacit — have historically allowed Israel to pursue gradual tactics rather than face immediate diplomatic backlash. This tactical environment enables incremental approaches that are harder to reverse.
3 — Why act now? Strategic and political motivations
- Countering international pressure: When Western or international pressure rises — recognition initiatives, diplomatic momentum for Palestine — the Israeli response can be to accelerate facts on the ground, deliberately shrinking the political space for a contiguous state.
- Turning politics into facts: Each settlement expansion, each obstructed connection between Palestinian areas, narrows the room for negotiation and forces the international community to choose between accepting a new reality or paying high diplomatic and economic costs to reverse it.
4 — Empirical indicators: data and documentary evidence
Multiple Western, UN and rights-monitoring reports documented tens of thousands of planned or advanced housing units over 2023–2024 and beyond. Domestic Israeli oversight bodies, think-tanks and media coverage have also published maps, planning documents and scenarios that point to deliberate, systemic strategies rather than isolated cases. Together, these indicators suggest a methodical process of territorial and administrative transformation.
5 — Likely scenarios and endgames
- Partial formal annexation: A targeted declaration of sovereignty over selected strategic areas (e.g. the Jordan Valley and settlement corridors), leaving fragmented Palestinian enclaves. This would provoke international and regional backlash, but could be imposed as a fait accompli.
- De facto annexation through practice: No single formal declaration; instead, continuing legal, administrative and security measures produce effective control. This is the most probable scenario because its diplomatic cost is lower than sudden, full annexation.
- International pushback and rollback: Coordinated diplomatic pressure might force a halt or slowdown, but its success depends on sustained and unified international action — something that historically has been difficult to maintain.
6 — Strategic, legal and humanitarian consequences
- Economic and social fallout: Accelerated displacement, fragmentation of markets and infrastructure, worsening poverty and the collapse of local services.
- Political consequences: The erosion of any viable political horizon for a sovereign, contiguous Palestinian state.
- Legal implications: A rise in legal challenges and international complaints alleging violations of international law and occupation rules. Documentation of patterns of practices will feed accountability mechanisms and human-rights processes.
7 — Practical recommendations
The alternative plan must be met with a comprehensive, defensive and proactive strategy — not only declarations and rhetoric:
- Palestinian political unity and a realistic strategic plan
- Urgent coordination between Palestinian factions (political leadership, civil society and institutions) to present a single, practical strategy combining political, legal and diplomatic tools.
- A shared roadmap that prioritises protecting territorial contiguity, municipal capacities and economic links.
- Intensified international legal and diplomatic pressure
- Use of international courts and UN mechanisms, strategic litigation, and targeted diplomatic campaigns to raise the political and economic costs of de-facto annexation.
- Mobilise Arab, European and international partners to make bilateral relations conditional on measurable steps to preserve Palestinian territorial integrity.
- Defend the Palestinian civic and economic fabric
- Invest in resilient service networks that link Palestinian communities (water, electricity, transport), and protect municipal records, land registries and development plans.
- Support local economic initiatives that reduce vulnerability to fragmentation (market linkages, labour mobility strategies, cross-community commerce).
- Document, monitor and litigate
- Scale up systematic documentation — photographs, maps, contracts, planning permits and administrative orders — to prove pattern and intent before international bodies and rights organisations.
- Empower local and international NGOs with resources for forensic documentation and legal advocacy.
- Strategic public diplomacy and media campaign
- Launch coordinated international media and advocacy campaigns that explain the realities of de facto annexation, highlight humanitarian impacts, and mobilise public opinion to support effective political measures.
Conclusion
Israel’s alternative plan to preclude a sovereign Palestinian state is not a mere theory. The combination of settlement growth, administrative fragmentation, security regimes and diplomatic manoeuvres forms a sustained policy of de facto annexation. Confronting this strategy requires more than protest — it requires unity, an integrated political and legal strategy, robust documentation, and international pressure that raises the real costs of continuing down this path. Only a measured, multi-pronged response that protects Palestinian civic life and applies credible diplomatic and legal pressure can offer a realistic defence against the slow erosion of Palestinian statehood.
