RSS
Here’s What You Should Know About Israeli Settlements
Whether in the mainstream media, academia, or a casual conversation among friends, any discussion of Israeli politics inevitably brings up the issue of “Israeli settlements.”
But while the term “Israeli settlements” has entered the popular lexicon, how much does the average person really know about them?
Let’s take a look at the history of the Israeli settlements from their genesis in 1967 until today.
The First Settlements (1967-1968)
In June 1967, Israel fought a defensive war against the armies of Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. After six days of fighting, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) emerged victorious and not only pushed back the enemy militaries, but also gained control over large swathes of territory: the Sinai Desert and Gaza Strip from Egypt, the Golan Heights from Syria, and eastern Jerusalem and the West Bank from Jordan.
Soon after the war ended, Israelis began to undertake grassroots initiatives to establish communities in these new territories. These Israelis viewed this community-building as a continuation of the pioneering spirit that had infused the Jewish community before the creation of the State of Israel.
Most of these early settlements, which were few in number, were established in areas that were designated as being of strategic value by the Alon Plan, in order to keep Israel safe.
The Alon Plan, which was conceived by the Israeli Minister of Labor Yigal Alon between June and July 1967, was a program whereby Israel would maintain control over certain parts of the West Bank (primarily the Jordan Valley, Gush Etzion, and eastern Jerusalem) in order to protect itself from future Jordanian attacks. The rest of the territory would either go to Jordan or a Palestinian administration.
According to the vision of the Alon Plan, the newly founded settlements would serve as advanced positions that would help secure these new defensible borders.
In addition to security considerations, some of the early settlements were established on the sites of Jewish communities that had been depopulated during periods of violence, particularly during the Arab insurgency (1947-1948) and the Israeli War of Independence.
For example, Kibbutz Kfar Etzion, one of the first settlements to be established, was set up in September 1967 by children of the original residents of the kibbutz, who had largely been killed in a Jordanian-led massacre in May 1948.
The Second Wave of the Settlements (1968-1980)
In 1968, a group of religious families attempted to set up a community in the ancient city of Hebron, which had been emptied of its Jewish population following the 1929 Hebron Massacre. This group ultimately became the nucleus of the nearby settlement of Kiryat Arba and, later, the re-established Jewish community of Hebron.
This attempt heralded the “second wave” of settlement building, which was more ideologically driven and viewed the establishment of Jewish communities as a national and religious imperative, due to the status of Judea and Samaria (the traditional Jewish name for the West Bank) as the birthplace of the Jewish people.
In 1974, the Gush Emunim (“Bloc of the Faithful”) movement was officially established as a grassroots organization that would work towards setting up new Jewish communities across Judea and Samaria.
Following the election of Menachem Begin’s right-wing government in 1977, the Israeli government became more amenable to the establishment of Jewish communities across the West Bank.
However, this does not mean that Israelis were given carte blanche to set up settlements anywhere they saw fit.
In a now-famous 1979 incident, the Israeli government was compelled by the Supreme Court to move the nascent community of Elon Moreh six miles (10 kilometers) down the road following an appeal brought by Arab residents of a nearby village.
Settlement Growth, Settlement Freezes, and Settlement Destruction
Since the 1970s, there have been periods of settlement growth within Judea and Samaria as well as periods of construction freezes, particularly during periods of peace negotiations with the Palestinians and other neighboring Arab countries.
Due to the freeze on founding new settlements since the Oslo peace process, outposts were built by those who wished to create new communities in Judea and Samaria but did not have the permission of the Israeli government. Since the mid-1990s, several of these outposts have been recognized by the Israeli government as official settlements.
On occasion, the Israeli government has also uprooted Jewish communities in the West Bank, including four that were dismantled as part of the disengagement from Gaza in 2005 and the Amona settlement that was evacuated between 2006 and 2017.
For further information on settlements, outposts, and settlement blocs, see Blocs, Towns & Outposts: What Are the Settlements?
The author is a contributor to HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.
The post Here’s What You Should Know About Israeli Settlements first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Iranian nuclear program degraded by up to two years, Pentagon says
A satellite image of Iran’s Fordow nuclear facility. Photo: File.
The Pentagon said on Wednesday that US strikes 10 days ago had degraded Iran’s nuclear program by up to two years, suggesting the U.S. military operation likely achieved its goals despite a far more cautious initial assessment that leaked to the public.
Sean Parnell, a Pentagon spokesman, offered the figure at a briefing to reporters, adding that the official estimate was “probably closer to two years.” Parnell did not provide evidence to back up his assessment.
“We have degraded their program by one to two years, at least intel assessments inside the Department [of Defense] assess that,” Parnell told a news briefing.
U.S. military bombers carried out strikes against three Iranian nuclear facilities on June 22 using more than a dozen 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs and more than two dozen Tomahawk land attack cruise missiles.
The evolving U.S. intelligence about the impact of the strikes is being closely watched, after President Donald Trump said almost immediately after they took place that Iran’s program had been obliterated, language echoed by Parnell at Wednesday’s briefing.
Such conclusions often take the U.S. intelligence community weeks or more to determine.
“All of the intelligence that we’ve seen [has] led us to believe that Iran’s — those facilities especially, have been completely obliterated,” Parnell said.
Over the weekend, the head of the UN nuclear watchdog, Rafael Grossi, said that Iran could be producing enriched uranium in a few months, raising doubts about how effective US strikes to destroy Tehran’s nuclear program have been.
Several experts have also cautioned that Iran likely moved a stockpile of near weapons-grade highly enriched uranium out of the deeply buried Fordow site before the strikes and could be hiding it.
But US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said last week he was unaware of intelligence suggesting Iran had moved its highly enriched uranium to shield it from US strikes.
A preliminary assessment last week from the Defense Intelligence Agency suggested that the strikes may have only set back Iran’s nuclear program by months. But Trump administration officials said that assessment was low confidence and had been overtaken by intelligence showing Iran’s nuclear program was severely damaged.
According to Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi, the strikes on the Fordow nuclear site caused severe damage.
“No one exactly knows what has transpired in Fordow. That being said, what we know so far is that the facilities have been seriously and heavily damaged,” Araqchi said in the interview broadcast by CBS News on Tuesday.
The post Iranian nuclear program degraded by up to two years, Pentagon says first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Switzerland Moves to Close Gaza Humanitarian Foundation’s Geneva Office Over Legal Irregularities
Palestinians carry aid supplies received from the US-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation in the central Gaza Strip, May 29, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ramadan Abed/File Photo
Switzerland has moved to shut down the Geneva office of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), a US- and Israeli-backed aid group, citing legal irregularities in its establishment.
The GHF began distributing food packages in Gaza in late May, implementing a new aid delivery model aimed at preventing the diversion of supplies by Hamas, as Israel continues its defensive military campaign against the Palestinian terrorist group.
The initiative has drawn criticism from the UN and international organizations, some of which have claimed that Jerusalem is causing starvation in the war-torn enclave.
Israel has vehemently denied such accusations, noting that, until its recently imposed blockade, it had provided significant humanitarian aid in the enclave throughout the war.
Israeli officials have also said much of the aid that flows into Gaza is stolen by Hamas, which uses it for terrorist operations and sells the rest at high prices to Gazan civilians.
With a subsidiary registered in Geneva, the GHF — headquartered in Delaware — reports having delivered over 56 million meals to Palestinians in just one month.
According to a regulatory announcement published Wednesday in the Swiss Official Gazette of Commerce, the Federal Supervisory Authority for Foundations (ESA) may order the dissolution of the GHF if no creditors come forward within the legal 30-day period.
The Trump administration did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the Swiss decision to shut down its Geneva office.
“The GHF confirmed to the ESA that it had never carried out activities in Switzerland … and that it intends to dissolve the Geneva-registered branch,” the ESA said in a statement.
Last week, Geneva authorities gave the GHF a 30-day deadline to address legal shortcomings or risk facing enforcement measures.
Under local laws and regulations, the foundation failed to meet several requirements: it did not appoint a board member authorized to sign documents domiciled in Switzerland, did not have the minimum three board members, lacked a Swiss bank account and valid address, and operated without an auditing body.
The GHF operates independently from UN-backed mechanisms, which Hamas has sought to reinstate, arguing that these vehicles are more neutral.
Israeli and American officials have rejected those calls, saying Hamas previously exploited UN-run systems to siphon aid for its war effort.
The UN has denied those allegations while expressing concerns that the GHF’s approach forces civilians to risk their safety by traveling long distances across active conflict zones to reach food distribution points.
The post Switzerland Moves to Close Gaza Humanitarian Foundation’s Geneva Office Over Legal Irregularities first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Key US Lawmaker Warns Ireland of Potential Economic Consequences for ‘Antisemitic Path’ Against Israel
US Sen. James Risch (R-ID) speaks during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, Washington, DC, May 21, 2024. Photo: Graeme Sloan/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman James Risch (R-ID) issued a sharp warning Tuesday, accusing Ireland of embracing antisemitism and threatening potential economic consequences if the Irish government proceeds with new legislation targeting Israeli trade.
“Ireland, while often a valuable U.S. partner, is on a hateful, antisemitic path that will only lead to self-inflicted economic suffering,” Risch wrote in a post on X. “If this legislation is implemented, America will have to seriously reconsider its deep and ongoing economic ties. We will always stand up to blatant antisemitism.”
Marking a striking escalation in rhetoric from a senior US lawmaker, Risch’s comments came amid growing tensions between Ireland and Israel, which have intensified dramatically since the Hamas-led attacks on southern Israel on October 7, 2023. Those attacks, in which roughly 1,200 Israelis were killed and more than 200 taken hostage, prompted a months-long Israeli military campaign in Gaza that has drawn widespread international scrutiny. Ireland has positioned itself as one of the most vocal critics of Israel’s response, accusing the Israeli government of disproportionate use of force and calling for immediate humanitarian relief and accountability for the elevated number of Palestinian civilian casualties.
Dublin’s stance has included tangible policy shifts. In May 2024, Ireland formally recognized a Palestinian state, becoming one of the first European Union members to do so following the outbreak of the war in Gaza. The move was condemned by Israeli officials, who recalled their ambassador to Ireland and accused the Irish government of legitimizing terrorism. Since then, Irish lawmakers have proposed further measures, including legislation aimed at restricting imports from Israeli settlements in the West Bank, policies viewed in Israel and among many American lawmakers as aligning with the controversial Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement.
While Irish leaders have defended their approach as grounded in international law and human rights, critics in Washington, including Risch, have portrayed it as part of a broader pattern of hostility toward Israel. Some US lawmakers have begun raising the possibility of reevaluating trade and diplomatic ties with Ireland in response.
Risch’s warning is one of the clearest indications yet that Ireland’s policies toward Israel could carry economic consequences. The United States is one of Ireland’s largest trading partners, and American companies such as Apple, Google, Meta and Pfizer maintain substantial operations in the country, drawn by Ireland’s favorable tax regime and access to the EU market.
Though the Trump administration has not echoed Risch’s warning, the remarks reflect growing unease in Washington about the trajectory of Ireland’s foreign policy. The State Department has maintained a careful balancing act, expressing strong support for Israel’s security while calling for increased humanitarian access in Gaza. Officials have stopped short of condemning Ireland’s actions directly but have expressed concern about efforts they see as isolating Israel on the international stage.
Ireland’s stance is emblematic of a growing international divide over the war. While the US continues to provide military and diplomatic backing to Israel, many European countries have called for an immediate ceasefire and investigations into alleged war crimes.
Irish public opinion has long leaned pro-Palestinian, and Irish lawmakers have repeatedly voiced concern over the scale of destruction in Gaza and the dire humanitarian situation.
Irish officials have not yet responded to The Algemeiner’s request for comment.
The post Key US Lawmaker Warns Ireland of Potential Economic Consequences for ‘Antisemitic Path’ Against Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.