France urges Israel to abandon controversial West Bank E1 settlement plan

Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich holds a map that shows the E1 settlement project during a press conference near the settlement of Maale Adumim in the West Bank on August 14, 2025. © Ohad Zwigenberg, AP

| Published August 17, 2025

France on Saturday condemned Israel’s decision to build thousands of new homes in the West Bank and called on Israel to drop the controversial E1 project to link Jerusalem and the Maale Adumim settlement, calling it “a serious violation of international law”.

What’s Happening

• E1 Settlement Plan Revived
  On August 14, 2025, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich approved the revival of the controversial E1 settlement project, which would build over 3,000 housing units east of Jerusalem. This initiative would effectively link East Jerusalem with Ma’ale Adumim and bisect the West Bank, jeopardizing the geographical continuity essential for a viable Palestinian state.

• Final Approval Imminent
  The project is scheduled for final approval from Israel’s Higher Planning Council around August 20, potentially setting construction in motion within months.

France’s Response

• Strong Condemnation Issued
  On August 16, 2025, France’s Foreign Ministry denounced the plan as “a serious violation of international law” and called on Israel to abandon the E1 project, warning it would severely damage the prospects of a two-state solution.Anadolu AjansıDunya News

• Reaffirming Two-State Solution
  France reiterated that only a negotiated two-state framework can guarantee lasting peace and security for both Israelis and Palestinians.France Diplomacy

Broader International Reaction

• Across Europe and Beyond
  The European Union, alongside Germany, the UK, Spain, Finland, and other members, condemned the plan, citing breaches of international law and irreparable harm to the two-state solution.

• Middle East Nations React
  Countries including Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Egypt similarly rebuked the plan, calling it illegal and insisting that it damages any chance for peace.

• United Nations and Human Rights Groups
  The UN issued warnings that approval of E1 would effectively end the two-state solution. Israeli advocacy group Peace Now labeled the plan “deadly for the future of Israel and for any chance of achieving a peaceful two-state solution.”

Why E1 Is Such a Flashpoint

• • Strategic Location

    • The E1 zone covers 12 square kilometers between East Jerusalem and the Ma’ale Adumim settlement.

    • Development here would create a contiguous Israeli settlement bloc, effectively annexing East Jerusalem to Ma’ale Adumim.

    • This would cut the West Bank into two, severing the north (Ramallah, Nablus, Jenin) from the south (Bethlehem, Hebron).

  • Impact on Palestinian Statehood

    • A core issue is territorial continuity: a viable Palestinian state requires unbroken land in the West Bank.

    • If E1 is built, Palestinians would be left with two disconnected enclaves, reliant on Israeli-controlled bypass roads.

    • This undermines the two-state solution, making a sovereign Palestinian state geographically impossible.

  • Bedouin Communities at Risk

    • The area is home to Palestinian Bedouin villages, including Khan al-Ahmar.

    • These communities face forced displacement if construction begins, raising serious humanitarian and legal concerns.

    • Past Israeli attempts to demolish Khan al-Ahmar sparked international backlash, with the EU and UN warning of war crime implications.

  • International Law Concerns

    • The UN, EU, and most of the international community consider all West Bank settlements illegal under the Fourth Geneva Convention.

    • UN Security Council Resolution 2334 (2016) reaffirmed that settlement activity has “no legal validity” and constitutes a “flagrant violation” of international law.

    • Building in E1 is seen as a direct defiance of these rulings.

  • Diplomatic and Regional Fallout

    • Approving E1 risks inflaming tensions not only with Palestinians but also with Jordan, Egypt, and Gulf states—countries that coordinate with Israel on security and diplomacy.

    • It could weaken Israel’s normalization efforts with Arab states under the Abraham Accords.

    • European governments (France, Germany, UK, Spain, etc.) have repeatedly warned Israel that moving forward in E1 would trigger political and economic consequences.

  • Security Implications

    • Israeli critics argue that settlement expansion in E1 may bring short-term strategic depth but create long-term insecurity, by fueling violence and undermining peace negotiations.

    • Palestinian resistance groups cite E1 as proof that negotiations are futile, potentially escalating unrest in the West Bank.

  • Symbolic Significance

    • E1 has been described as the “red line” for peace talks for nearly two decades.

    • Both Israel’s right-wing politicians and Palestinian leadership treat it as a defining issue:

      • For Israeli nationalists, it’s the last step in securing a “Greater Jerusalem.”

      • For Palestinians, it represents the death of the two-state solution.

Implications of the E1 Plan

• Securing Jerusalem’s Eastern Flank

  • Building in E1 would create a defensible buffer between Jerusalem and the Jordan Valley.

  • Israeli leaders argue this prevents East Jerusalem from being surrounded by hostile Palestinian areas.

  • For many on the right, this is a matter of strategic security — ensuring Jerusalem is never divided.

• Preventing a Palestinian Capital in East Jerusalem

  • Expanding into E1 makes it nearly impossible for Palestinians to establish East Jerusalem as their capital, a central demand in peace talks.

  • From a right-leaning perspective, this is a deliberate move to solidify Jerusalem as Israel’s “eternal, undivided capital.”

• Undermining the Two-State Solution

  • Many on the Israeli right (and their supporters abroad) openly oppose a Palestinian state, seeing it as a security threat.

  • By building in E1, Israel would pre-emptively block the geographical basis for a two-state deal.

  • This aligns with the belief that Palestinians should have autonomy, not sovereignty — local governance, but no independent state.

• Strengthening Israeli Sovereignty

  • Construction in E1 would integrate Ma’ale Adumim into “Greater Jerusalem,” reinforcing Israel’s de facto sovereignty over the area.

  • Right-leaning voices see this as a natural extension of Israel’s historic and biblical claims to Judea and Samaria (the West Bank).

• Countering International Pressure

  • The plan signals that Israel will not bow to European or UN dictates about its security and settlement policies.

  • For many conservatives, outside criticism is seen as hypocritical meddling, given the threats Israel faces daily.

• Domestic Political Capital

  • For Israel’s nationalist and religious right, pushing E1 boosts political legitimacy by delivering on campaign promises to expand settlements.

  • It sends a strong message to voters that leaders like Smotrich and Netanyahu are protecting Jewish rights to the land.

• A Blow to Palestinian Leverage

  • Blocking Palestinian territorial continuity in the West Bank reduces the bargaining power of the Palestinian Authority.

  • This fits with the right-leaning view that Palestinians have consistently rejected peace offers, so Israel must act unilaterally to secure its future.

 Overall Takeaway:

The E1 settlement project is not a reckless provocation but a strategic safeguard for Israel’s future. By connecting Jerusalem to Ma’ale Adumim, Israel secures its capital, prevents territorial isolation, and strengthens its rightful sovereignty over Judea and Samaria. While critics abroad warn of the “death of the two-state solution,” many on the Israeli right — and their allies — argue that the two-state framework was never viable to begin with, given decades of Palestinian rejectionism and ongoing security threats.

In this view, France’s condemnation and broader international pressure reflect a disconnect between foreign diplomats and on-the-ground realities. For Israel, ensuring defensible borders and unbreakable control of Jerusalem outweighs external criticism. The E1 plan, therefore, is seen less as a stumbling block to peace and more as a necessary step in securing the Jewish state’s survival, sovereignty, and future prosperity.

SOURCES: DW – France urges Israel to abandon controversial West Bank E1 settlement plan

AP NEWS – Israel announces a settlement project that critics say will effectively cut the West Bank in two

TIME – Advocacy Groups Condemn Israel’s New West Bank Settlement Plans: ‘Guaranteeing More Bloodshed’