In a joint statement issued Monday, foreign ministers from more than a dozen countries, alongside the secretaries-general of the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, criticized recent Israeli decisions that reclassify Palestinian land and advance settlement activity. The group said such actions violate international law and run counter to longstanding diplomatic efforts aimed at resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The coordinated response underscores growing international concern over developments in the West Bank at a time when regional tensions remain high and diplomatic initiatives related to Gaza and broader Middle East integration are ongoing.

Broad International Rejection of Settlement Moves

The statement was endorsed by the foreign ministers of Saudi Arabia, Palestine, Qatar, Egypt, Jordan, Turkiye, Brazil, France, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Indonesia, Ireland, Luxembourg, Norway, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden.

The ministers said recent Israeli decisions “reclassify Palestinian land as so-called Israeli ‘state land,’ accelerating illegal settlement activity, and further entrenching Israeli administration.”

They described Israeli settlements as illegal under international law, citing previous United Nations Security Council resolutions and the 2024 advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice. Israel disputes the characterization of settlements as illegal, arguing that the status of the territories should be resolved through negotiations.

According to the joint statement, the measures form part of what the signatories called a “clear trajectory” aimed at altering realities on the ground and advancing what they termed unacceptable “de facto annexation.” The ministers said such steps weaken ongoing efforts to promote peace and regional stability, including diplomatic proposals linked to Gaza.

Settlement expansion has long been one of the most contentious issues in Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. Most of the international community considers the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, to be occupied territory captured by Israel in 1967. Israel has built numerous settlements there over decades, housing hundreds of thousands of Israeli citizens.

Concerns Over E1 Project and Two-State Viability

The ministers pointed specifically to the approval and tender publication of the E1 project, a highly sensitive settlement plan east of Jerusalem. Critics argue that development in the E1 area could further fragment Palestinian territory and complicate the geographic continuity required for a viable Palestinian state.

In their statement, the foreign ministers said such actions amount to “a deliberate and direct attack” on the viability of a Palestinian state and the implementation of a two-state solution based on the 4 June 1967 lines.

The two-state framework — envisioning Israel and an independent Palestinian state existing side by side — has been a cornerstone of international diplomacy for decades. However, repeated cycles of violence, stalled negotiations and settlement growth have led many observers to question whether the model remains feasible.

The signatories reiterated their opposition to any measures that would alter the demographic composition, character or legal status of the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem. “We oppose any form of annexation,” the statement said.

Call to Reverse Decisions and Halt Violence

The ministers called on Israel to reverse the recent decisions and respect its international obligations. They urged Israeli authorities to refrain from actions that could permanently change the legal or administrative status of the occupied Palestinian territory.

The statement also raised alarm over escalating violence in the West Bank, describing the situation as “alarming.” The ministers called for an end to settler violence against Palestinians and urged that those responsible be held accountable.

Violence in the West Bank has intensified in recent months, with frequent Israeli military operations, Palestinian attacks and reported incidents involving settlers. Human rights organizations have documented rising casualties and displacement, though Israeli authorities maintain that security operations are aimed at countering militant threats.

The joint statement further stressed the importance of preserving the historic and legal status quo in Jerusalem and its holy sites, particularly during the Islamic holy month of Ramadan. The ministers recognized the special role of Jordan’s Hashemite custodianship over Islamic holy sites in Jerusalem and condemned what they described as repeated violations of the status quo.

Jerusalem remains one of the most sensitive and symbolically charged issues in the conflict, with competing claims over sovereignty and access to religious sites central to both Israeli and Palestinian narratives.

Financial Pressures and Regional Stability

Beyond territorial concerns, the coalition urged Israel to release tax revenues it collects on behalf of the Palestinian Authority under the Paris Protocol. The ministers said the funds are essential for providing basic services in both Gaza and the West Bank.

Israel has periodically withheld such revenues in response to political disputes, citing concerns over payments made by the Palestinian Authority to families of prisoners or individuals involved in attacks. Palestinian officials argue that withholding funds exacerbates economic instability and humanitarian pressures.

The joint declaration concluded with a reaffirmation of commitment to a “just, comprehensive and lasting peace” based on the two-state solution and the Arab Peace Initiative. The ministers said ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is imperative for broader regional peace, stability and integration.

While statements of condemnation have become a recurring feature of international diplomacy on the conflict, coordinated messaging from a diverse group of countries — including European and Latin American states — signals sustained multilateral concern over the direction of developments in the West Bank.

For now, the diplomatic divide over settlements and annexation remains unresolved, reflecting deeper disagreements about territory, security and sovereignty that have shaped the conflict for more than half a century.

Source: Arab News – Saudi Arabia and other countries condemn Israeli decisions over extending control in West Bank

The post Saudi Arabia, Global Coalition Condemn Israeli West Bank Control Measures appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

The comments have added to diplomatic tensions at a time of fragile ceasefires and shifting front lines across the region. While there was no immediate response from Washington or Jerusalem, the statements were widely interpreted by neighboring countries as contradicting long-standing international consensus on borders and sovereignty.

In the interview, which aired Friday, Carlson cited biblical passages describing land promised to the descendants of Abraham and asked Huckabee whether Israel had a right to that territory — an area that would encompass much of the modern Middle East. Huckabee replied: “It would be fine if they took it all,” before adding that Israel is not seeking territorial expansion and has a right to security within the land it legitimately holds.

Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Ministry described the comments as “extremist rhetoric” and “unacceptable,” calling on the U.S. State Department to clarify its position. Egypt said the remarks constituted a “blatant violation” of international law and reiterated that Israel holds no sovereignty over occupied Palestinian territory or other Arab lands.

The League of Arab States said such statements were “extremist and lacking any sound basis,” warning they could inflame religious and national sentiments. Condemnations also came from Jordan, Kuwait, Oman and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, reflecting broad regional unease.

Historical Borders and Ongoing Disputes

Since its establishment in 1948, Israel has not had fully recognized borders. Its frontiers have shifted through wars, armistice agreements, annexations and peace treaties. The status of territories captured during the 1967 Arab-Israeli war remains central to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

In that war, Israel took control of the West Bank and east Jerusalem from Jordan, Gaza and the Sinai Peninsula from Egypt, and the Golan Heights from Syria. Israel later returned the Sinai to Egypt under a peace agreement following the 1973 war and withdrew from Gaza in 2005. The West Bank and east Jerusalem, however, remain occupied territories under international law, a designation Israel disputes.

In recent months, Israel has expanded settlement construction in the West Bank, legalized certain outposts and implemented administrative changes consolidating its control. Palestinians seek an independent state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with east Jerusalem as its capital — a position backed by much of the international community.

Huckabee, an evangelical Christian and longstanding supporter of Israel and the West Bank settlement movement, has previously opposed the two-state framework that has underpinned decades of international diplomacy. In past interviews, he has also rejected the use of the term “Palestinians” to describe Arab residents whose families lived in the territory during the British Mandate period.

During the Carlson interview, the host referenced the biblical Book of Genesis and described territory stretching “from the Nile to the Euphrates,” encompassing areas of present-day Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Iraq. Huckabee responded cautiously to the geographic scope but did not retreat from his broader assertion.

Regional Tensions Amid Ongoing Conflict

The controversy unfolds against the backdrop of continuing hostilities and ceasefire arrangements following the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, which triggered Israel’s war in Gaza. Under a current ceasefire framework, Israeli forces have withdrawn to designated buffer zones but retain control over significant portions of the territory. The agreement does not specify a firm timeline for further withdrawals.

Beyond Gaza, Israel has also asserted control in other border areas. After the ouster of Syrian President Bashar Assad at the end of 2024, Israeli forces moved into a demilitarized buffer zone in Syria established under a 1974 ceasefire agreement. Israel described the move as temporary and aimed at safeguarding its frontier.

In Lebanon, Israeli troops continue to occupy several hilltop positions following a brief conflict with Hezbollah in 2024. These developments have reinforced regional sensitivities regarding territorial claims and military presence.

While Huckabee’s comments were made in a personal interview rather than an official policy statement, their diplomatic impact has been immediate. Arab governments, already wary of shifting geopolitical dynamics, appear to view such remarks as undermining established legal frameworks governing sovereignty and occupation.

As of Saturday, neither the U.S. State Department nor Israeli officials had publicly clarified whether the ambassador’s comments reflect current U.S. policy. For now, the episode underscores the enduring volatility of territorial questions in the Middle East — issues rooted in history, religion and international law, and capable of igniting controversy far beyond a single interview.

Source: AP News – US ambassador causes uproar by claiming Israel has a right to much of the Middle East

The post US Ambassador’s Biblical Remarks on Israel’s Territorial Rights Spark Regional Backlash appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.