Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • US-Israel-Iran
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • Western Hemisphere
    • NATO
    • China
  • Analysis
    • Policy Papers
    • Symposia
    • Q&A
    • Polls
    • Grand Strategy Explained
    • Target Taiwan
  • Programs
    • Grand Strategy Program
    • Military Analysis Program
    • Asia Program
    • Middle East Program
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Media
  • About
    • Mission & Vision
    • People
    • Jobs
    • Contact
  • Donate
Select Page
Home / Israel-Hamas / Trump should rule out Israel annexing the West Bank
Israel‑Hamas, Israel, Middle East

December 17, 2024

Trump should rule out Israel annexing the West Bank

By Rosemary Kelanic

Will the second Trump Administration greenlight Israeli annexation of the West Bank? Several of the President-elect’s recent appointments have suggested at least a friendliness to the idea. Donald Trump’s choice for U.S. ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, who has said in the past that “there’s really no such thing as a Palestinian,” has told Israel’s Army Radio that “of course” Israeli annexation is a possibility, though nothing has been decided. Pro-annexation Israeli hardliners, seemingly bolstered by Trump’s picks, are pushing the idea with new verve.

Whether Trump intended to signal support for annexation is unclear, but if Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu interprets it that way, tragedy is the likely result. If Israel absorbed the West Bank, it would erase any hope of a Palestinian state, cause enormous damage to U.S. global standing, and plunge a region where over 40,000 U.S. troops are stationed into the worst chaos it has seen since at least the 1973 Arab-Israeli war. It would be disastrous for U.S. interests and the Trump Administration should vigorously discourage it.

Israeli annexation of the heartland of a future Palestinian state would unleash massive unrest that could spur new waves of terrorism directed not only at Israel but the U.S. as well. Washington’s support for Tel Aviv was one of Osama bin Laden’s three stated rationales for declaring jihad against the U.S. Already, U.S. officials have testified to Congress that U.S. support for Israel’s war in Gaza could motivate future anti-American terrorism, given that Washington is the main arms supplier to Tel Aviv, possibly with “generational” impacts.

Read at TIME

Author

Rosemary
Kelanic

Director, Middle East Program

Defense Priorities

More on Middle East

Press ReleaseUS‑Israel‑Iran, Iran, Israel, Israel‑Iran, Middle East

Escalation against Iran increases risks to U.S. troops

By Jennifer Kavanagh

July 20, 2026

Op-edIsrael, Middle East

Why Lebanon’s Trilateral Framework Is a Recipe for Disaster

By Alexander Langlois

July 20, 2026

Op-edUS‑Israel‑Iran, Iran, Middle East

The U.S.-Iran War Cannot End Without U.S. Pressure on Israel in Lebanon

By Alexander Langlois

July 20, 2026

Op-edUS‑Israel‑Iran, Iran, Middle East

It’s Time To Walk Away From the Iran War

By Adam Gallagher

July 15, 2026

In the mediaUS‑Israel‑Iran, Iran, Middle East

The U.S. and Iran Reckon With Shrinking Options to End the War

Featuring Rosemary Kelanic

July 15, 2026

Op-edUS‑Israel‑Iran, Iran, Middle East

Trump can’t escape the Iran war

By Daniel DePetris

July 14, 2026

Events on Israel-Hamas

See All Events
virtualMiddle East, Basing and force posture, Diplomacy, Houthis, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Israel‑Hamas, Military analysis, Syria

Trump in the Middle East: Impacts, implications, and alternatives

May 16, 2025
virtualHouthis, Iran, Israel‑Hamas, Middle East, Yemen

Houthi conundrum: defend, degrade, or defer

March 28, 2024
virtualMiddle East, Iran, Israel‑Hamas, Israel‑Iran, Syria, Yemen

Keeping the U.S. out of war in the Middle East

January 16, 2024

Receive expert foreign policy analysis

Join the hub of realism and restraint

Expert updates and analysis to enhance your understanding of vital U.S. national security issues

Defense Priority Mono Logo

Our mission is to inform citizens, thought leaders, and policymakers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure U.S. security.

  • Experts
  • Papers
  • Symposia
  • Q&A
  • Polls
  • Events
  • Media
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • About
  • Jobs
  • Contact
  • Donate
© 2026 Defense Priorities Foundation. All rights reserved.