The "East 1" Project and the Philosophy of "Settler Decisiveness"

On September 7, 2017, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich unveiled his plan, known as the “Decisive Plan,” presenting it as a resolution to the conflict through a deliberate political and practical decision that “there is a West Bank for a single national self-determination right, namely the Jewish right.” The first step toward achieving this was what he termed “settlement decisiveness,” implemented through political and legal activity—specifically, imposing sovereignty over all areas of the occupied West Bank, and settlement activity involving the establishment of towns and cities, extending infrastructure, and encouraging tens and hundreds of thousands of Jews to relocate to the occupied West Bank.

With the formation of the right-wing government in Israel in December 2022, Smotrich, leader of the extremist Religious Zionism party, assumed, in addition to his role as Finance Minister, the position of Minister in the Ministry of Defense overseeing civil affairs in the occupied West Bank—a newly created ministerial post within the Defense Ministry. This allowed him, in collaboration with National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, leader of the extremist right-wing Jewish Power party, to impose facts on the ground at a time when the “Decisive Plan,” in all its components, had become an integral part of the government’s action plan.

The Israeli government worked to revive the “East One” project, whose roots trace back to the early 1990s. Although the project’s structural maps received security and government approvals in the late 1990s, and thousands of dunams surrounding them were declared state land—forming the legal basis for implementation—it was frozen multiple times due to international pressure. Its activation was linked solely to responses regarding Palestine’s representation at the United Nations. Notably, the project’s interim freezing did not prevent the quiet continuation of infrastructure construction, which led to widespread displacement affecting 17 Bedouin settlements in the area between the West Bank and occupied Jerusalem. Among these was the demolition of Al-Khan Al-Ahmar village and the displacement of a large number of Al-Jahalin Bedouins, who were consolidated into a single village, contradicting the nomadic lifestyle based on mobility and grazing.

The government used the “Al-Aqsa Flood” operation as a pretext to re-propose the project, citing the need to provide security for settlers in Ma’ale Adumim. In August 2025, it approved the construction of 3,000 settlement units under this project, which the movement “Peace Now” described as a “fatal blow” to the two-state solution. At the same time, the leader of the Religious Zionism party boasted that he would “bury the idea of a Palestinian state forever,” adding that he was creating a “Jewish reality” while others spoke of a “Palestinian dream.” This approval was followed by widespread international condemnation, which prevented concrete public steps from being taken to implement it.

A year later, on the 18th of this month, the Israeli government announced the launch of the first 1,200 settlement units within this project. The mayor of Ma’ale Adumim welcomed the announcement, stating: “We have come a long way to reach this moment. There were obstacles and delays, and those who thought it would never happen believed otherwise, but we believed, moved forward, and did not give up.”

The danger of the “East One” project lies in the fact that it indeed represents a fatal blow to the two-state solution from two angles. The first is the isolation of East Jerusalem, which is supposed to be the capital of the future Palestinian state, from the West Bank. According to this project, it will become part of “Greater Jerusalem,” which is slated to occupy 10% of the West Bank’s area, compared to the actual size of the holy city, which occupies only 1.2% of that area. The second aspect is that the project will create a massive urban and demographic barrier to geographical connectivity between the northern and southern parts of the West Bank.

If we add to this the uncertain future of the Gaza Strip, it becomes practically difficult to envision the establishment of a Palestinian state within the June 4, 1967, borders. This is especially true when considering parallel developments that darken the picture further, such as the increased frequency of settler violence, the doubling of the number of outposts, and the Knesset’s decision, two years ago, to reject the establishment of a Palestinian state, describing it as a “reward for terrorism” and an “existential threat to Israel.”

Finally, it is noteworthy that the government’s call for companies to submit bids for building the settlement units set a deadline of October 19 next year—just one week before the Israeli elections. This implies that it will be difficult for any future government to reverse this step. It should also be noted that the recent Israeli decision came in the wake of significant diplomatic momentum supporting the two-state solution, resulting in a wave of international recognitions of the Palestinian state, which peaked during the UN General Assembly meetings in September 2025, with major Western countries such as France and the UK, among others, declaring recognition of the Palestinian state.

In light of the above, Arab, Islamic, and international condemnations have followed the Israeli announcement of entering the implementation phase of this controversial project. Among these is the joint statement issued by France, Britain, Italy, and Germany, calling for the immediate withdrawal of these tenders and warning companies of legal consequences. Given the grave danger of the Israeli move, it is crucial to coordinate efforts on Arab, Islamic, and international fronts to counter it. Perhaps the upcoming UN General Assembly meetings next month will offer an opportunity to highlight how this project violates international law and the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, and how it entails the suffocation of the two-state solution. It also requires working to formulate concrete and realistic plans to counter the philosophy of “settlement decisiveness” and keep the idea of establishing a viable Palestinian state as a feasible option on the ground.