As the Israeli regime intensifies its occupation of the West Bank, expands settlements and creates more space for settlers, it is seeking to generate political gains to repair its tarnished image following repeated setbacks in Gaza and across the region. Yet developments have produced the opposite outcome for the regime. Tel Aviv is seeking to turn these measures into political capital, particularly in the event of early elections, but what has happened in practice is an expansion of protests and condemnation, from streets around the world to Western political circles, universities and think tanks.

This trend has now reached even the Israeli regime’s European allies and could signal the regime’s entry into a new phase of international isolation. Unlike in the past, this isolation is no longer merely the product of temporary political disagreements. Rather, it is rooted in the widening gap between Tel Aviv’s occupation policies and the views of Western public opinion and governments.

West Bank: Where Occupation Has Become a Boomerang

The global pushback against the Israeli regime’s policies is no longer limited to street protests or media statements and has now reached prominent Western think tanks as well. Dennis Citrinowicz, a member of the Atlantic Council, openly criticized Israel’s policies, citing the expulsion of Dutch officers from the headquarters of the multinational force in Kiryat Gat and the possible expulsion of British officers as examples of Tel Aviv’s attempt to ignore a reality that can no longer be denied: Europe does not accept Israel’s policies in the West Bank.

In his words, Israel cannot simultaneously move toward the gradual annexation of the West Bank and expect to maintain its political and economic relations with Europe unchanged. Trying to pursue both paths at once, he said, is like “drying the sea with a spoon.”

These positions go beyond ordinary criticism and point to a shift in the political environment surrounding the Israeli regime. The change shows that even among Tel Aviv’s traditional partners, tolerance for its occupation policies is declining.

Europe: Cost of Supporting Israeli Apartheid

In their pursuit of eliminating the Palestinian issue from regional equations, Israeli regime leaders have turned the West Bank into a new arena for expanding the occupation. Support for settler violence and the expansion of settlements, however, has not removed Palestinians from the equation. Instead, it has once again turned the Palestinian issue into one of the most important concerns of global public opinion.

Europeans are now confronting a fundamental contradiction that goes beyond viewing these developments solely through the lens of Palestinian rights: Tel Aviv’s policies are in open conflict with principles that the West has promoted for decades under banners such as human rights, international law, the two-state solution and Middle East peace.

The West’s excessive support for the Israeli regime over past decades, particularly its silence in the face of crimes in Gaza and the regime’s military actions across the region, ultimately contributed to the emergence of a form of false immunity among Tel Aviv’s leaders. This has reached the point where they now address European critics in derogatory terms and even respond to official protests by European countries by resorting to the expulsion of their military personnel and representatives.

An Isolation That Deepens by the Day

What is now being seen in Europe is not merely a diplomatic shift or a repetition of traditional positions on the two-state solution. It is a sign of a widening divide between the Israeli regime and a significant part of the international community.

Countries that for decades supported Tel Aviv’s occupation, blocked its condemnation at many critical junctures and provided it with billions of dollars in weapons are now, under pressure from their own public opinion, being forced to adopt different positions. Proposals for sanctions, criticism of settlement expansion and calls for the implementation of international judicial rulings, while still falling short of the expected practical action, are nevertheless signs of a changing political equation.

This wave has reached the United States as well, where criticism of the political, economic and security costs of unconditional support for Israel has become part of the electoral climate. Even politicians such as Donald Trump and JD Vance have been compelled to adopt critical positions in an effort to win public support.

An Achievement the Resistance Has Imposed on the World

Europe’s insistence on opposing settlement expansion and settler extremism has even forced Netanyahu to take a position against their violence. He condemned violent acts in the villages of Qusra and Jalud and said such behavior damages Israel’s image around the world. These remarks cannot be viewed merely as a political position; rather, they can be regarded as an inadvertent acknowledgment of the heavy cost of the Israeli regime’s international isolation.

What has emerged today in Europe and the United States against Israeli settlement expansion and occupation in the West Bank can, on a broader level, also be regarded as an achievement for the Palestinian resistance. It has succeeded in bringing the Palestinian issue from the margins of global affairs back to the center and placing the dimensions of the Israeli regime’s crimes before global public opinion.

However, Palestinian suffering cannot be healed through statements and condemnations alone. Condemning settlement expansion, unless it leads to practical action, accountability for Israeli regime leaders, implementation of rulings by international judicial bodies, and guarantees of Palestinians’ right to self-determination both inside and outside the occupied territories, will remain an incomplete step.

If Europe genuinely seeks to restore its global standing and role, it must move beyond statements and condemnation. Decades of support for the occupation have placed Europe before a historic test. In this test, the distance between “condemning a crime” and “ending participation in the crime” is the very distance that will determine the future of Europe’s global credibility.