Israel’s control of Judea and Samaria (commonly known as the West Bank) is essential to its national security, counterterrorism strategy, and regional stability.

The tone blends historical context, military reasoning, and moral clarity.

Strategic Reality: Why Israel’s Control of Judea and Samaria Is Vital for National Security and Defense Against Terrorism

Introduction: The Geography of Survival

Israel is a small nation surrounded by volatile regions. Its geography is narrow and vulnerable — roughly 15 kilometers wide at its narrowest point between the Mediterranean Sea and the western slopes of the Judean Hills. In such a tiny country, terrain equals survival.

The areas known historically as Judea and Samaria sit at the heart of this landscape — highlands that dominate Israel’s most populated coastal plain. Control over these hills determines whether Israel can defend its cities or be exposed to existential threats.

Critics often frame Israel’s presence in Judea and Samaria as a political or ideological issue. Yet from a defense perspective, this region represents Israel’s strategic backbone. Losing control would not only endanger Israeli civilians but also destabilize the entire Middle East.

1. The Geography That Shapes Israel’s Security

To understand the military importance of Judea and Samaria, one must grasp Israel’s geography — a land smaller than the state of New Jersey.

• The Judean and Samarian mountain ridge runs north to south, rising up to 900 meters above sea level.

• From these ridges, one can see Israel’s entire coastal plain — including Tel Aviv, Ben-Gurion Airport, and the port of Ashdod.

• Without control of these heights, Israel’s most vital infrastructure would be within direct line-of-sight — and artillery or rockets could strike with ease.

In military terms, whoever controls the high ground controls the battlefield. Historically, invading armies — from the ancient Assyrians to modern Arab forces — sought to occupy these hills as staging grounds for attacks.

For example:

• In the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, the Jordanian Arab Legion seized Judea and Samaria, including East Jerusalem. From these hills, Jordanian artillery shelled West Jerusalem and the coastal plain below.

• Israel’s narrow pre-1967 borders left it vulnerable to a potential split down the middle — a scenario that top generals, including Yitzhak Rabin, called “indefensible.”

Thus, control of Judea and Samaria is not about expansion; it is about depth, visibility, and defense. In military doctrine, these areas form Israel’s strategic shield.

2. The Lessons of 1967: The Six-Day War and Security Depth

Before 1967, Israel was 9 miles wide at its narrowest point. The entire population center — including Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, and Ben-Gurion Airport — lay within minutes of enemy artillery.

When Arab armies from Egypt, Jordan, and Syria massed along Israel’s borders in June 1967, the threat was existential. Israel’s lightning victory — capturing Judea, Samaria, Gaza, the Golan Heights, and Sinai — changed that reality.

The capture of the Judean and Samarian highlands gave Israel:

• A buffer zone protecting its heartland from direct assault.

• Early warning stations to monitor hostile movements from the east.

• Control of key mountain passes and valleys that serve as natural defensive barriers.

After 1967, for the first time, Israel’s major cities were no longer under constant artillery threat. The lesson was clear: without control of these highlands, Israel’s national security would be untenable.

3. The Security Vacuum of 1990s: Terrorism and Oslo’s Consequences

In the 1990s, under the Oslo Accords, parts of Judea and Samaria were transferred to the newly created Palestinian Authority (PA). The hope was peace through self-governance.

However, the partial withdrawal created security vacuums exploited by terrorist groups like Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Fatah’s own militant wings.

Between 2000 and 2005, during the Second Intifada, Israel faced an unprecedented wave of suicide bombings. Many attacks were planned or launched from cities like Nablus, Jenin, and Ramallah — all within short driving distance of Israel’s population centers.

Key data from that period show:

• Over 1,000 Israelis killed, mostly civilians.

• Thousands more injured.

• Nightly terror infiltrations from villages across the Green Line.

Israel’s response was to reassert security control through counterterror operations and the construction of a security barrier. Once the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) regained operational freedom in Judea and Samaria, the terror wave sharply declined.

The hard lesson: when Israel withdraws from key areas, terror fills the vacuum. The same pattern later occurred in Gaza after 2005, when Israel’s full withdrawal led to Hamas’s takeover and rocket wars.

4. Intelligence and Counterterrorism: The Strategic Advantage of Control

Modern counterterrorism depends on proximity, intelligence, and mobility. Israel’s security network in Judea and Samaria allows it to detect, prevent, and neutralize threats before they reach urban centers.

Key security functions enabled by control include:

• Human and signal intelligence (HUMINT & SIGINT) gathering through field presence.

• Rapid-response deployment of IDF units to neutralize threats within minutes.

• Coordination with Palestinian Authority forces, which would collapse without Israeli backing.

• Monitoring of weapons smuggling routes from Jordan and Syria.

Without such access, Israel would face blind spots — allowing militant cells to regroup and operate freely. The intelligence gathered in these areas has prevented thousands of attacks, including car bombings, kidnappings, and coordinated assaults.

Military commanders often summarize the logic simply: “We fight terrorism in Nablus so we don’t have to fight it in Tel Aviv.”

5. Preventing the Creation of a Terror State in the Heart of Israel

Israel’s leaders across political lines — from Rabin to Netanyahu — have agreed on one point: an unrestrained withdrawal from Judea and Samaria would invite catastrophe.

If these areas were handed over without ironclad security arrangements:

• Militants could deploy rockets on the hilltops overlooking Ben-Gurion Airport, grounding Israel’s air travel and economy.

• Tel Aviv, Herzliya, and Netanya would be within range of short-range missiles.

• Terror groups could link up with Iran-backed militias across Jordan’s porous border.

The experience of Gaza after 2005 offers a stark warning. When Israel withdrew and dismantled all settlements, Hamas seized control within two years. Since then, thousands of rockets have targeted Israeli towns, and multiple wars have erupted.

Duplicating that scenario in Judea and Samaria would be disastrous, placing 80% of Israel’s population under direct threat.

Israel’s control, therefore, is not colonial expansion but preventive defense — maintaining stability until a secure peace is achievable.

6. Regional Stability and Deterrence

The strategic landscape is broader than the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Israel’s control over Judea and Samaria also prevents regional destabilization that could spill into Jordan and beyond.

The Jordan Valley, forming the eastern edge of Samaria, serves as a natural barrier between Israel and the Arab world. Without control of this corridor:

• Iranian-backed groups could infiltrate from Syria or Iraq through Jordan.

• Jordan’s fragile monarchy could face pressure from militant infiltration.

• The entire region’s anti-terror intelligence network would weaken.

Even moderate Arab leaders, including Jordan’s King Abdullah, privately acknowledge the stabilizing effect of Israeli presence — though they express it cautiously in public.

Thus, Israeli control indirectly supports regional peace and Western security interests by blocking extremist expansion.

7. The Moral and Defensive Logic of Security Control

Some critics claim that Israel’s presence in Judea and Samaria is incompatible with peace. Yet, the moral obligation of any state is to protect its citizens from violence.

Israel does not seek to rule others but to ensure safety. Every time it has withdrawn without guarantees — from Lebanon (2000) or Gaza (2005) — terrorism filled the void.

In contrast, Israel’s presence in Judea and Samaria has enabled:

• Joint patrols and cooperation with the Palestinian Authority to suppress Hamas.

• Economic growth in PA-controlled areas due to security stability.

• Religious access for all faiths in Jerusalem and Hebron, something impossible before 1967.

Therefore, control of Judea and Samaria is not a denial of peace but a prerequisite for peace — ensuring that any future state will emerge in stability, not chaos.

8. The Global Context: Counterterrorism and Sovereign Responsibility

In the post-9/11 era, nations worldwide recognize the principle of preemptive defense. The United States operates globally to prevent terror before it strikes home. European states maintain intelligence outposts abroad for similar reasons.

By the same logic, Israel’s security measures in Judea and Samaria are not unique — they are standard national defense doctrine adapted to a uniquely small and hostile environment.

Israel’s right to self-defense is recognized under Article 51 of the UN Charter. Its continued control of strategically vital areas ensures that this right is not theoretical but actionable.

To demand Israel’s total withdrawal without sustainable security guarantees is not moral idealism; it is strategic blindness that endangers both Israelis and Palestinians.

9. Coexistence Under Security Stability

Despite political friction, Judea and Samaria today host a complex web of economic, social, and security interactions. Tens of thousands of Palestinians work daily in Israeli industry, agriculture, and construction.

This coexistence is possible because security stability allows life to function. Were these areas to fall under extremist control, both communities would suffer. Thus, maintaining security control is not merely for Israel’s sake — it protects the daily livelihood of many Palestinians as well.

Security as a Foundation for Peace

Israel’s control of Judea and Samaria is not about domination — it is about survival, deterrence, and peace through strength. In a region where borders are fluid and threats are ideological, geography cannot be ignored.

The hills of Judea and Samaria are not political trophies; they are defensive walls that safeguard millions of lives. Until a genuine, demilitarized peace partner emerges — one that rejects terror and recognizes Israel’s legitimacy — maintaining control remains an act of self-preservation and moral responsibility.

"Peace built on weakness collapses. Peace built on security endures".
Thus, Israel’s presence in Judea and Samaria stands not as a symbol of occupation, but as the strategic and ethical foundation of a secure, stable, and peaceful Middle East.