Netanyahu's Security Map Leaves West Bank Question Open

Israel’s next government will inherit a West Bank whose future administrative decisions have shaped more than public debate has. Three former senior Israeli figures issued that warning as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu unveiled a new national security doctrine one day before this report, eight days ahead of the October 27 parliamentary elections.

Netanyahu presented the doctrine and a map of regional alignments on Sunday, October 18. Israel’s National Security Council developed the document, and the Prime Minister’s Office published it. It prioritizes preemptive strikes, stronger home-front defenses, new partnerships and “buffer zones” on Israel’s borders. His office said “the War of Redemption necessitated an upgrade of fundamental principles,” including “giving priority to prevention and offense over containment and defense.”

The Map and Its Critics

Germany’s Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung Institute first published the map in May. It placed Israel and the United Arab Emirates in a “Hexagon Alliance” with Greece, Ethiopia and parts of India. Southwestern Sudan, controlled by the Rapid Support Forces, also appeared as friendly to Israel and the UAE. United Nations experts and media reports have described extensive Emirati support for the RSF, led by Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, which many have accused of committing genocide in Darfur. The UAE denies backing the group.

Neither Egypt nor Jordan appeared as an Israeli ally. Jordan, whose peace treaty with Israel dates to 1994, appeared as friendly to a “Sunni Diamond Alliance” of Egypt, Turkiye, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. The map grouped Hezbollah, the Houthis and Iran in an “Axis of Resistance.” Commentators in Israel and abroad have called the “hexagon” a branding exercise rather than a binding military pact, noting that countries such as India prioritize non-alignment and pragmatic trade.

Mohanad Hage Ali of the Malcolm H Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center said the framework “incubates and nurtures existential fears, which would lead Israeli voters to feel the need for a decisive leader.” He warned that expanding military control could bring “more conflict and more ethnic cleansing” under the guise of security buffers. Gadi Eisenkot, one of Netanyahu’s main challengers, called the document “two hollow pages, full of slogans that have nothing to do with a security concept.” Former Prime Minister Yair Lapid called it “superficial.”

Netanyahu, facing an ongoing corruption trial and criticism over the October 7, 2023 attacks and the wars that followed, sought to bolster his “Mr Security” credentials. U.S. President Donald Trump endorsed him Sunday. Netanyahu warned that in two years a U.S. president “extremely hostile to Israel” could come to power.

The Question Nobody Is Debating

The map says little about the West Bank, where millions of Palestinians live under Israeli military authority. In a separate opinion article, Ami Ayalon, Gilead Sher and Orni Petruschka argue that the next government must plainly state what it intends to do there. Ayalon is a former Shin Bet director and Navy commander. Sher is a former senior peace negotiator and chief of staff to Prime Minister Ehud Barak.

In February 2026, the government authorized the resumption of land-registration procedures in Area C, allocated an initial NIS 244 million for 2026-30, and created new positions to carry them out. Hundreds of former senior security and government officials petitioned the High Court of Justice, arguing that the measures amounted to de facto annexation. The government called them steps short of annexation. The authors note that, apart from east Jerusalem neighborhoods annexed right after the war, Israel hasn't formally annexed any part of the West Bank in close to six decades. Sovereignty, they argue, can still arrive gradually through changes in land administration, planning, settlement and jurisdiction.

Security, Law and Rights

The authors spell out the risks. Israeli security officials have long viewed coordination with the Palestinian Authority as a way to prevent terrorism, despite its shortcomings. Policies that weaken the PA through territorial fragmentation or economic pressure could risk its collapse, leaving a vacuum armed fundamentalist groups might fill. The Israel Defense Forces would then take greater responsibility for security and civilian administration among a large Palestinian population. The authors say Jewish terrorism is rising and could receive further encouragement.

The legal stakes are just as sharp. Oslo II envisioned a gradual transfer of territorial powers to Palestinians, with borders and settlements left to negotiation. The authors wrote that further unilateral changes could expose Israeli officials and military personnel to additional international legal pressure. Jordan has a direct interest in preventing instability or displacement across the Jordan River, while Egypt holds a central role in Gaza and Sinai security.

Then comes the hardest question. Extending sovereignty would force Israel to decide the status of Palestinians living there. Full citizenship would carry profound demographic and political implications. The authors wrote that withholding political rights while holding sovereignty “would amount to apartheid.” They cited Israel’s 1948 Declaration of Independence, which pledged “freedom, justice, and peace” and equality of social and political rights. They urged the next government to open a transparent national process on the West Bank’s future and review the February measures.

Why This Matters: A security doctrine built on buffer zones and preemption says what Israel wants to deter. It doesn't say what happens to Palestinians living under its authority. Former security chiefs now warn that creeping administrative changes in Area C could amount to annexation without a vote, with consequences for the PA’s survival, Jordan’s stability and the Abraham Accords commitment to keep Palestinian statehood possible. For Palestinians, the stakes are daily: land registration, planning and jurisdiction decide who can build, farm and stay. For Israelis, the choice is whether an elected government and the Knesset make such a transformation openly, or whether it happens by accumulation. With the election eight days away, the question sits largely outside the campaign’s spotlight.