The danger of these trends increases as decision-makers and segments of the opposition avoid discussing the future of the Palestinian territories, and those calling for negotiations and the establishment of a Palestinian state are subjected to accusations of pessimism, naivety, and treason, while the space for proposing displacement projects—described as "voluntary"—expands. These positions reflect a shift in political discourse toward extremism, which weakens the chances for a settlement and opens the door to a long conflict over land, identity, rights, and sovereignty.
These shifts are linked to the growing influence of extremist religious and nationalist currents, which prioritize control over land over political and humanitarian considerations, and justify attacks on Palestinians and their property, and even on opponents of these projects within the Israeli occupation state. The danger of this approach is manifested in settlement expansion, the establishment of settlement outposts, and the escalation of violence, which deepens divisions within Israeli society and weakens the chances of reviewing existing policies.
The attacks during the olive harvest season, and the assault on a "Washington Post" photographer and European diplomatic delegations near Ramallah, provide indicators of the widening repercussions of these trends and their reflection through the crimes that are continuously committed against Palestinians and everyone who sympathizes with them. However, the targeting of Palestinians, journalists, and diplomatic delegations raises questions about the protection of civilians and accountability for violations, and reinforces international criticism of the Israeli occupation's policies in the occupied Palestinian territories.
These risks are directly connected to the security of the region, especially with the escalation of calls to annex parts of the West Bank, the proposal of projects for the displacement of Palestinians, and the changing of the historical and legal status quo of Islamic and Christian holy sites in Jerusalem. These policies pose a threat to the chances of establishing a Palestinian state, increase the possibilities of escalation, and place neighboring countries before worsening security, political, and humanitarian challenges.
Jordan is at the forefront of countries concerned with these developments, by virtue of the connection of its national security to the stability of the West Bank and Jerusalem, its rejection of displacement and the "alternative homeland," and its adherence to the only path to achieving regional stability through the establishment of an independent Palestinian state on the June 4, 1967 lines with East Jerusalem as its capital. This is especially true given that imposing facts by force or liquidating the Palestinian cause at the expense of the rights of its people will affect Jordanian national interests and threaten the stability of the region.
The strategic dilemma in Israeli thinking lies in the belief that military superiority is capable of providing sustainable security while the occupation continues and Palestinians are denied their national rights. In reality, however, those who adopt these ideas—and they are many in the occupation state—fail to realize that policies of settlement, annexation, and displacement deepen the causes of the conflict, increase Israel's international isolation, exacerbate its internal divisions, and make a future settlement more complex and costly.
In conclusion, confronting these risks requires decision-making centers within the occupation state to return to reason and political realism and to reject all manifestations of extremism instead of supporting and strengthening them. This must be done by stopping the crimes committed against the Palestinian people in their various areas, halting settlement activity, preventing forced displacement, respecting international law, and restoring consideration to the political path based on ending the occupation and ensuring the Palestinian people's right to self-determination and the establishment of their independent state, as it is the only path leading to achieving security and stability in the region. This is particularly true since regional stability is linked to addressing the roots of the conflict, while the continuation of extremism and the imposition of a fait accompli lead to expanding the circle of confrontation and raising its cost for the peoples and countries of the region.
