Summary: The idea that Israel must dismantle all settlements to achieve peace is a myth that ignores the true goals of Palestinian leadership, the legal rights of Israeli settlers, and the glaring double standard applied to Jewish and Arab residents. The real obstacle to peace is not the presence of Jewish communities in the West Bank but the refusal of the Palestinian Authority to recognize Israel's right to exist. For peace to be genuine and lasting, it must be based on mutual recognition and coexistence, not on the forced removal of communities or the erasure of Israel from the map.

Debunking the Myth: Israel Must Dismantle All Settlements for Peace

One of the most widely accepted narratives in discussions about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is that peace can only be achieved if Israel dismantles all Jewish settlements in the West Bank (Judea and Samaria). Critics argue that these settlements are obstacles to peace, claiming that their removal would pave the way for the creation of a Palestinian state and end the conflict. However, this argument ignores the complex realities on the ground, including the true intentions of Palestinian leadership, the legal case for Israeli settlements, and the double standard applied to Jewish residents of the disputed territories.

The Palestinian Leadership’s Stated Goal

The idea that dismantling settlements will lead to peace is undermined by the Palestinian Authority's (PA) consistent actions and rhetoric. According to the Palestinian Accountability Project (https://www.paccountability.org/), which has hundreds of documented sources, the PA actively works against the existence of the Jewish state. They do this by financially rewarding terrorists through their “pay-for-slay” program, where families of terrorists receive monthly stipends. Moreover, the PA's educational curriculum promotes hatred against Jews, teaching children from a young age that Israel should be destroyed and replaced with a Palestinian state. These indoctrination efforts clearly show that the PA’s vision for the future is not a two-state solution, but rather a one-state solution—a Palestinian state without Israel.

Given this reality, dismantling settlements is unlikely to foster peace, as the primary obstacle to peace is not the presence of Jewish communities in the West Bank, but the refusal of the Palestinian leadership to recognize Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state.

The Legal Case for Israeli Settlements

The claim that Israeli settlements are illegal is also not as clear-cut as it is often portrayed. International law, particularly the Fourth Geneva Convention, is frequently cited in these discussions. However, the West Bank is legally considered "disputed territory," not "occupied territory," because its status was never formally resolved after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, which had controlled the land for centuries. Israel took control of the West Bank in 1967 during the Six-Day War, a defensive war against multiple Arab armies that sought to destroy the Jewish state.

Furthermore, under the terms of the League of Nations' Mandate for Palestine, Jewish settlement was not only permitted but encouraged in what was then considered the Jewish national homeland. No internationally recognized sovereign power held the West Bank between 1948 and 1967, as it was illegally occupied by Jordan, which also did not grant the Palestinians independence. Thus, Israeli settlements do not violate international law, and the issue of settlements should be resolved through negotiations rather than unilateral demands for their removal.

The Double Standard

Another significant flaw in the argument that Israel must dismantle its settlements for peace is the double standard it creates. It suggests that for a Palestinian state to be viable, it must be free of Jews, requiring the removal of all Jewish communities in the West Bank. This would amount to ethnic cleansing of Jews from their homes, a deeply troubling notion in any modern political context. Yet, at the same time, over a million Palestinians live as citizens in Israel, enjoying full rights, including the right to vote, freedom of speech, and access to education and healthcare.

It is absurd to demand that a future Palestinian state must be judenrein (free of Jews), while expecting Israel to maintain its Arab population, which lives as full citizens under Israeli law. Peace cannot be built on such unequal and discriminatory terms, where one side must uproot entire communities, while the other is allowed to remain and thrive.

Conclusion

The idea that Israel must dismantle all settlements to achieve peace is a myth that ignores the true goals of Palestinian leadership, the legal rights of Israeli settlers, and the glaring double standard applied to Jewish and Arab residents. The real obstacle to peace is not the presence of Jewish communities in the West Bank but the refusal of the Palestinian Authority to recognize Israel's right to exist. For peace to be genuine and lasting, it must be based on mutual recognition and coexistence, not on the forced removal of communities or the erasure of Israel from the map.