Gaza Genocide23 February, 20262 min read
Nearly 20 Nations, OIC, Arab League Condemn Israel’s De Facto Annexation of Occupied West Bank
This article is an automated aggregation of coverage from news outlets. Our editorials offer in-depth analysis curated by the NewsCord team.
Sources vary, citing 19, 20, or over 20 signatory countries. Foreign ministers plus Arab League and OIC condemned Israeli measures tightening West Bank control.
9 outlets told this the same way.
Outlets did split on Thousands March in London Calling for Britain to Stop Arming Israel and Impose Sanctions →
De facto annexation concerns
Foreign ministers from a near‑20‑country coalition, joined by the secretaries‑general of the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, issued a joint statement condemning recent Israeli measures in the occupied West Bank as a form of "de facto annexation." The ministers said Israel’s plan to register West Bank land as "state land" and to accelerate settlement activity would reclassify Palestinian land, entrench Israeli administration and change facts on the ground that threaten Palestinian statehood and the two‑state solution. The condemnations were couched in explicit legal language and cited the 2024 ICJ advisory opinion and UN Security Council resolutions as the basis for calling the measures illegal.
“Foreign ministers from 19 countries — including Turkiye, Qatar, France and Brazil, and joined by Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the heads of the Arab League and OIC — issued a joint statement condemning Israel’s plan to introduce land registration across Area C of the occupied West Bank.”
Objections to land reclassification
The joint communiqués framed the measures as unlawful under international law, repeatedly citing the 2024 ICJ advisory opinion and UN Security Council resolutions.
Delegations warned that registering land across Area C and reclassifying Palestinian land as state land would "reclassify Palestinian land as Israeli 'state land,' accelerate illegal settlement activity, and entrench Israeli administration over roughly 60% of the territory," jeopardizing the contours of a future Palestinian state.
West Bank land measures
Reports give similar descriptions of the concrete steps at issue. They include cabinet approvals this month to register West Bank land as "state property". They include measures allowing Israelis to buy that land.
“It noted the West Bank, occupied by Israel since 1967, is home to roughly three million Palestinians and over 500,000 Israeli settlers in settlements and outposts considered illegal under international law...”
They include a fast-tracked surge in settlements, including a record 52 settlements approved in 2025. Sources differ slightly on settler population figures: Al Jazeera cites ICJ figures of some 465,000 settlers in about 300 settlements and outposts, while The Straits Times and others put the number at over 500,000.
Regional demands and pledges
Ministers and regional bodies demanded an immediate reversal of the measures. They demanded accountability for settler violence. They called for an end to forcible displacement.
They also demanded the unconditional release of Palestinian tax revenues withheld under the Paris Protocol. The Peninsula explicitly called for preservation of Jerusalem's historic legal status and the Hashemite custodianship. Other outlets described pledges to take 'concrete, law-based steps' to counter illegal settlements and annexation.
Coverage of West Bank policies
All sources agree the actions fundamentally threaten the viability of a Palestinian state and the two‑state solution, but they differ in tone and context. West Asian outlets frame the measures as a direct, legal assault on Palestinian statehood and stress regional and religious stakes. Asian coverage (The Straits Times) stresses the role of far‑right ministers and provides population and settlement statistics.
“Signatories warned the measures could permanently alter the legal and administrative status of land meant for a future Palestinian state and described the moves as ‘a deliberate and direct attack’ on the viability of the Palestinian state and the two‑state solution.”
Other outlets note political responses from actors such as Hamas and the Palestinian Authority. Taken together, the reporting shows broad diplomatic consensus condemning Israel’s recent West Bank policies while minor discrepancies in signatory counts, settler figures and emphases reflect editorial choices.
