JERUSALEM, Aug. 16, 2025 — A coalition of Arab and Muslim governments condemned in “the strongest terms” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s embrace of a “Greater Israel” vision, warning it threatens Arab national security, state sovereignty, and regional peace as Israel advances a contentious settlement plan in the occupied West Bank.
In an interview aired Tuesday on Israel’s i24NEWS, host Sharon Gal asked Netanyahu if he subscribes to a “Greater Israel” vision. “Absolutely,” Netanyahu replied, adding that he feels connected to the idea “very much.” The concept, popular among ultranationalists, lays claim to territory far beyond Israel’s 1967 lines, encompassing the West Bank, Gaza and parts of neighboring states.
A joint rebuke from Arab and Islamic capitals
In a rare display of coordination, at least 31 Arab and Islamic states—backed by the secretaries-general of the Arab League, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC)—issued a joint statement denouncing the remarks as a “blatant and dangerous violation” of international law. The communiqué stressed Israel has “no sovereignty” over Palestinian territory occupied since 1967 and urged the world to stop any steps enabling annexation.
The statement also blasted a fresh Israeli move to expand settlements in the West Bank, calling it a flagrant breach of law and a direct strike at Palestinians’ right to an independent state on the June 4, 1967 lines, with East Jerusalem as its capital.
Smotrich advances the E1 plan: ‘buries’ a Palestinian state
Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who wields significant authority over civilian affairs in the West Bank, said he will approve more than 3,000 housing units in the E1 corridor east of Jerusalem—long viewed by diplomats as the “doomsday” project for a viable two-state solution because it would sever East Jerusalem from the rest of the West Bank and fragment Palestinian movement between Ramallah and Bethlehem. “This buries the idea of a Palestinian state,” Smotrich said.
Diplomats and analysts say the E1 revival, shelved for years due to international pushback, would tighten Israeli control around occupied East Jerusalem via Ma’ale Adumim and potentially lock in de facto annexation. Several Western governments have warned of consequences; some have floated recognizing Palestine if Israel continues to discard a two-state framework, according to recent reports.
‘Allow them to leave’: displacement fears escalate
Netanyahu has also revived language about “allowing” Palestinians to leave Gaza amid ongoing military operations, insisting Israel is not “pushing them out.” Critics—including rights groups and Arab governments—say such phrasing amounts to facilitating forced displacement under the fog of war. “Give them the opportunity to leave… first from combat zones, and also from the Strip if they want,” he said in the i24NEWS interview aired this week.
In parallel, Netanyahu has argued Israel’s objective is to “liberate Gaza from Hamas, not to occupy it,” a claim that sits uneasily beside reports that Israeli decision-makers approved expanded ground operations in Gaza City.
The war’s toll and a shifting legal landscape
As of mid-August, Gaza’s Health Ministry reports at least 61,827 Palestinians killed and more than 155,000 wounded since October 2023, with humanitarian agencies warning of famine and disease. (Israel disputes the ministry’s figures.)
Last year, the UN General Assembly demanded that Israel end its unlawful presence in the occupied Palestinian territory within 12 months, explicitly tying its demand to the International Court of Justice’s July 19, 2024 advisory opinion that found Israel’s presence unlawful and urged an end “as rapidly as possible.”
Separately, on Jan. 26, 2024, in the South Africa v. Israel case, the ICJ determined there was a plausible risk of violations of rights under the Genocide Convention and ordered provisional measures—an assessment commonly summarized as finding a “plausible risk of genocide,” not a final ruling on the merits.
What ‘Greater Israel’ and E1 mean in practice
International law experts note that permanent acquisition of territory by force is prohibited under the UN Charter; the transfer of an occupier’s civilian population into occupied territory is banned by Article 49(6) of the Fourth Geneva Convention; and UN Security Council Resolution 2334 (2016) reaffirms that Israeli settlements have “no legal validity” and constitute a “flagrant violation” of international law.
The E1 plan, critics argue, would close the land ring around East Jerusalem, slicing Palestinian contiguity and foreclosing a capital there. CNN and others have described the project as a geographic “game-over” for two states.
Regional and diplomatic stakes
Arab and Islamic states reiterated their “absolute rejection” of any mass displacement of Palestinians and called for immediate ceasefire steps and unhindered humanitarian access. Some governments are weighing diplomatic recognition of Palestine if Israel cements the current trajectory, signaling a potential realignment if settlement expansion proceeds.
Israel, for its part, says military operations will continue until hostages are released and Hamas is dismantled, while officials argue that measures like corridors or departures are “voluntary” humanitarian options—claims widely disputed by legal scholars and aid groups operating in Gaza’s devastated landscape.
