The West Bank between the "Defensive Wall" and the "Iron Wall"

The Israeli occupation army's military campaign in the West Bank, which began in Jenin camp, continues for the seventh consecutive day. It began last Tuesday, January 21, 2025, and the army called it (the Iron Wall).

The West Bank was the scene of an Israeli military campaign in 2002, which the army called at the time “Defensive Shield,” and which was considered the largest military operation by the Israeli army in the West Bank since its occupation in 1967.

This article seeks to examine the compatibility and differences between the two operations in terms of the name, objectives and strategic contexts of each, then to review what Israel has achieved in terms of accomplishments, according to its expression, in the first operation, in an attempt to understand what Israel seeks to achieve in the current aggression, and whether it will succeed?

In terms of the compatibility between the two operations, it is evident first in geography, as the West Bank is their stage, and Jenin, especially its camp, is the starting point for the two operations, in addition to the apparent compatibility in calling each of them “the wall.”

As for the difference, the first aspect is evident in the nature of this wall, as in the first operation it was “protective”, that is, of a defensive nature, while in the second it was iron, that is, of an offensive nature more than defensive.

The second difference between the two operations lies in the objectives of each. Israel had declared at the time that the objective of Operation Defensive Shield was to eliminate the resistance infrastructure in the West Bank, including eliminating the structure of the Palestinian National Authority, which Israel considered an integral part of the structure of the Palestinian resistance, especially since the Fatah movement, the organization on which the PLO and the Palestinian Authority are based, had become deeply involved in the resistance through its military wing, which bore the name Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades.

The Israeli army reoccupied the entire West Bank, destroyed all the security (sovereign) institutions of the Authority, besieged the presidential headquarters (the Muqata’a) and destroyed most of its buildings. The most important thing in this regard was Israel’s audacity to assassinate President Yasser Arafat two years after the start of “Operation Defensive Shield.”

While there seems to be agreement between the goals of the two campaigns regarding the elimination of the resistance infrastructure, the difference this time, according to the official Israeli discourse, lies in the components of this infrastructure, as the Palestinian Authority, especially its security services, are not included in the resistance infrastructure. The second aspect of the difference lies in the declared goals of the "Iron Wall" campaign, as the Israeli Minister of Finance and Second Minister in the Ministry of Defense (Smotrich) announced that the goal of the operation is to impose the concept of Israeli security in the West Bank, while Netanyahu added that the goal of the operation is to pursue Iran's hands in the West Bank.

It is worth noting here that the Fatah movement, the Authority and its security services are not included in the structure of the Palestinian resistance according to the Israeli discourse regarding the military campaign. However, it is noteworthy that Israel does not hide its rejection and lack of trust in either of them, which appears clearly in Netanyahu’s famous phrase (neither Hamas nor Fatahstan), and appears even clearer in the statement of the Minister of Settlers Smotrich that the goal of Operation Iron Wall is to impose the Israeli security concept in the West Bank, which deprives the Palestinian Authority of embodying the Palestinian concept of security in the West Bank and prevents it from becoming an independent, sovereign state, and makes Palestinian security and its applications, according to Smotrich’s vision, an appendix or subordinate to the Israeli security concept.

There are many differences in the strategic contexts regulating the two campaigns, and they relate to the strategic environment (local, regional and international) for both the Palestinians and the Israelis. However, the most prominent of these is that the West Bank is considered a war front on which Israel has been waging a war of extermination for more than fifteen months, especially on the Gaza Strip, which Israel has called “Iron Swords,” which means that the war on the West Bank, which bears the name “Iron Wall,” is an extension of the war of extermination on Gaza. This means that eradicating the resistance, its applications and those who advocate it in Palestine is a declared primary goal of the war on the Palestinian front, whether the Gaza front or the West Bank front.

Another aspect of the difference between the two operations is evident in the Israeli vision for dealing with the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. It seems clear that the coalition that now governs Israel has replaced the strategy of political settlement of the conflict, which Israel did not deviate from during Operation Defensive Shield, with a strategy of extermination, cleansing and displacement, as happened in Gaza and is happening in Jenin now.

Another aspect of the difference lies in the American position on the conflict and its handling. During Operation Defensive Shield, specifically on June 24, 2002, the former American President (Bush Jr.) announced the Palestinians’ right to an independent Palestinian state of their own that lives alongside Israel in security and peace. During the current campaign on both Gaza and the West Bank, the American administration is participating with Israel in the extermination of the Palestinian people. It seems that its participation during the term of President Trump will be more severe than during the term of President Biden, which was evident in his choice of a team to work with him that is more right-wing than the extreme right that rules Israel led by Netanyahu. His statements, which were reported by Reuters yesterday, were about his request for some countries in the region to receive Palestinians from Gaza, which is no longer a suitable place to live.

Regarding what Israel achieved during the "Defensive Shield" campaign, it can be summarized as annexing large parts of the West Bank, destroying a large area of the Jenin camp, and assassinating President Yasser Arafat, which makes it legitimate to ask: Will it annex large areas of the West Bank to its sovereignty during Operation Iron Wall, which is an extension of the war of extermination on Gaza? Especially since Smotrich had announced that 2025 is the year of annexing the West Bank? Will Israel be satisfied with destroying the entire Jenin camp or will it move on to destroy other camps and villages in the West Bank? Will it return to the approach of a political solution to the conflict, or will it maintain the approach of decisiveness through extermination? Will it succeed in generating a new Palestinian leadership that adopts the concept of Israeli security in the West Bank according to Smotrich's announcement, which seems impossible, especially since the current Palestinian leadership headed by President Mahmoud Abbas, the last founder of the Palestinian national project, sees Israel as a fierce colonial settlement project that cannot succeed in Palestine.

It is worth noting here that a new Palestinian generation has grown up in the period extending from the “Defensive Wall” to the “Iron Wall,” and that the determination of this generation to confront genocide is clear and tangible, and more importantly, its insistence on steadfastness on its land is even clearer, which indicates very clearly that the “Iron Wall” is destined to fail, just as the “Defensive Wall” was, and that the genocidal military approach that Israel sees as the most effective approach to resolving the conflict with the Palestinians on this land brings nothing but failure to Israel and its citizens, which forces the Israelis, especially the Jews among them, to expand the circle of serious discussion among themselves about the feasibility of their colonial project from the beginning.

* Researcher specializing in Palestinian and Israeli national security research.

——

It is worth noting here that a new Palestinian generation has emerged in the period extending from the “Defensive Wall” to the “Iron Wall,” and that the determination of this generation to confront genocide is clear and tangible, and most importantly, its insistence on steadfastness on its land is even clearer.