AS LEADER of the Religious Zionist Party Bezalel Smotrich’s announcement of new measures to increase Israel’s control of the West Bank under their own property law comes as no surprise.

Described as “de facto” annexation, it is the latest step in his crusade to annex Palestinian territories first as a fait accompli, then by force of law. He has been very clear that his intention is to “kill off the idea of a Palestinian state.”

If one were to listen to Keir Starmer, Yvette Cooper and their fellow travelling obsequious supporters of Israel (often sponsored by them), you would believe that it was somehow Palestine that was the obstacle to peace and a two-state solution.

But it is Israel that has, since its foundation, been fundamentally opposed to any notion of there being a Palestinian state. It has never said it would recognise Palestine in any form or circumstances; it has never defined or put any limitations on its borders.

Indeed, recent events have proved that it regards its borders as a one-way trap door that give it the right to bomb and invade any country within military range that denies its sovereign right to rule the Middle East. Supported and abetted by the United States, but as the war against Iran shows — primarily in pursuit of its own aims and objectives.

These were set out quite clearly in the Declaration of the Foundation of the State of Israel in 1948. The declaration refers to Eretz-Israel — the Land of Israel “as envisaged by the prophets of Israel,” a much larger biblically defined space than even “from the river to the sea.”

Whereas it refers to equality between inhabitants, according to Israeli laws and definitions, there were only 64,000 non-Jewish inhabitants after the Nakba in 1948.

The Nakba — the catastrophe — did not start or finish in 1948. Whereas until the current war, it was the most significant act in the zionist strategy to eliminate Palestinians from their own land, it should be seen as a part, a fundamental part, of the long-term, systematic plan of settler-colonial inversion whereby “the settlers become natives and the natives become aliens in their own land.”

Throughout this process Israel has tried to use the law to legitimise and normalise its theft of Palestinian land. And land is the key issue, the ownership of land by indigenous Palestinians obstructs the invasive settlement of that land. The Israeli answer, therefore, is to remove that right.

Within Israel after 1948 all rights and registration of land by Palestinians, be it from Ottoman or British eras, was wiped away and derecognised. The same is being done in the West Bank, removing rights stemming from the time of the Jordanian mandate and before. And, of course ignoring the fact that you are and have been living there for decades, and your predecessors for centuries beforehand. Henceforward it will only be Israeli registration and laws that will apply. Or, in the West Bank’s case, military law as pronounced by Israel’s military commander.

And so, the never-ending Nakba continues, replicating the processes that have been used by Israel time and time again. After the terror and expulsion of 750,000 Palestinians in 1948, aided and abetted by the then British occupiers, it was necessary to regularise the legal position of the plunder of land that had taken place.

Using the self-serving mechanisms created for this purpose — the Jewish National Fund, the Custodian of “Absentees’” Property, the Development and the Israel Land Authority, miraculously turning a 6 per cent minority ownership into legitimised and normalised property rights to over 90 per cent of the land within Israel — a literal numeric inversion.

It being reasonable to take someone’s property because you have “absented” them by driving them away.

An inversion that Israel is planning to repeat in the West Bank, with settlers mimicking the methods of zionist terror groups in 1948 to drive Palestinians out of their homes and villages. Then the land will be “bought” and settled.

However, Israel has a fundamental problem it did not have in 1948. Then it was physically able to drive the Palestinians off the land and out of “their space.” Now there are over five million Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza and a further two million living within Israel — leaving aside the millions of Palestinian refugees in bordering countries.

Its problem is that Israel wants the land and not the people. Even the genocide in Gaza and the terror in the West Bank has not rid Israel of this problem. Hence it would love Egypt to take the Palestinians from Gaza and Jordan from the West Bank.

It is not international law or the fear of opprobrium that is preventing Israel from actually annexing the West Bank.

Annexation, illegal under international law, is the forcible acquisition and assertion of legal title over territory by another state, usually following military occupation of that territory. What holds Israel back is what to do with the Palestinians.

In 1948 it had to have a “two-law strategy” ensuring that full rights went to — as set out in its Founding Declaration — the “ingathering of Exiles”; an exclusionary term referring solely to Jews. There was a separate Nationality Law covering the lesser rights of non-Jews.

When Israel officially and illegally annexed Jerusalem in 1980, having occupied it since 1967, it had to create a new category of “permanent residents” for the non-Jewish Palestinians living in Jerusalem, ensuring they had no rights to vote in general elections.

Israel sees itself in a demographic war with the Palestinians. It is inconceivable that it would give rights in any shape to a further five million people. Nor does it want responsibility for the upkeep of the population — a bill for the occupation footed, primarily, by European countries, while the US pays for Israel’s war machine.

Also, any such arrangement would expose even more transparently the fundamentally racist and apartheid nature of the Israeli regime.

Hence the measures announced by Smotrich. Israel wants what is being described as “de facto annexation,” because it can’t politically or financially incorporate the Palestinian population within its official borders.

Therefore, the racialised enclavisation and encirclement of Palestinians will continue, creating ghettoes and bantustans which the West will turn a blind eye to — seeing no evil while proclaiming Israel to be the only democratic state in the Middle East.

With Israel in total military control of all the land from the River Jordan to the Mediterranean Sea it is meaningless to talk about a one- or two-state solution. Without a total rebalancing of power, no solution is possible.

The ending of the occupation sounds like a minimalist demand, but in reality, it is huge. It would require a dismantling of the zionist regime Israel has built up over the last 75 years. Not only would Israel’s military forces have to withdraw, so would the settlers and settlements and the wall.

Palestinians would need to be given back not just their rights, but their water, energy and most importantly their land.

Recognition of Palestine means nothing unless backed up by measures to force Israel to comply with international law. Ironically, despite its demonstrations of its military might, its slaughter of innocent people because they don’t count, they are “other,” not Jewish, Israel is probably more vulnerable than it has ever been.

It has lost global opinion and support, even increasingly in the US. It has helped create a huge and growing solidarity movement. It has become a military economy, totally reliant on war and US military aid.

With Donald Trump in power two years will feel like a very long time — he will do a lot more damage. But there will be a post-Trump, post-Starmer era when sanctions could become a reality.

The arms trade and US military aid being the most significant revenue streams to cut off. One Hungarian swallow does not make it springtime, but Israel could become very weak and isolated very quickly.

While Palestinians, Lebanese and Iranians continue to die in their hundreds and thousands we must continue to protest, but we must also organise to help bring about political change through our campaigning. BDS — boycott, divestment and sanctions — are central to this. Our challenge is to go from B, to D, to S — crucially electing politicians prepared to implement them.

As South Africa proved, we will need government sanctions to bring down Israel’s zionist regime, its apartheid state. It might seem a distant hope, but it must be our aim, if the resistance and resilience of the Palestinian people is not to go unrewarded, they both need and deserve not just an end to the Nakba but the self-determination which is their right.