Paris misreads Israeli reality: Sanctioning settlers won't bring Palestinian statehood

France is reportedly collaborating with several European nations to implement coordinated national sanctions targeting "violent" and "extremist" Israeli settlers and organizations. This move comes after efforts to enact similar sanctions at the European Union level were blocked due to a lack of unanimous agreement. A European diplomat noted that discussions have shifted to the national level.

Recent weeks have seen sanctions imposed on various settlement groups and individuals considered violent or extremist by the EU, such as Amana and Regavim. Reports of alleged violence against Palestinians in Judea and Samaria over the weekend are expected to intensify calls for sanctions against "extremist" settlers. The editorial contends that while Europeans may cite the need to confront violence, which the Israeli government has struggled to stop, the deeper motivation is a persistent belief that pressure on settlements can pave the way for a Palestinian state.

This belief is deemed mistaken and likely to boomerang. The editorial argues that European sanctions will be misinterpreted in Israel's upcoming election campaign, where right-wing parties will likely use them to claim external pressure for territorial concessions, necessitating a strong nationalist bloc. The sanctions campaign is framed not merely as a response to the actions of a violent fringe, but as a broader effort to delegitimize the settlement enterprise and create international leverage for a predetermined political outcome.

Many Israelis will question why violence by a small fringe garners international sanctions while violence that has shaped Israeli political thinking for decades, including suicide bombings, rocket attacks, the October 7 massacre, and ongoing terrorism, often fades from diplomatic conversations. While Europe may largely support a two-state solution, its leaders must acknowledge the significant shift in Israeli attitudes since the October 7 massacre.

“

There is no unanimity at the EU level, so we have moved to discussions at the national level