Why the ICJ's impending West Bank ruling has Israel on edge

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is set to rule on Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories at the end of this week, including the occupied West Bank. The United Nation's top court will issue a non-binding judgement that could declare Israeli actions to be in clear breach of international law.

The ruling will also mark the culmination of an 18-month investigation into the legal consequences of Israel's decades-old occupation, and features arguments from over 50 countries at the World Court.

With only a few days to go, fear and anxiety are dominating the Israeli camp. Officials appear convinced that the ruling would condemn Israel's "permanent occupation" of the West Bank.

The ICJ could also pass on its findings to the International Criminal Court (ICC) for prosecution proceedings against senior Israeli political and military figures in the future. Additionally, the ruling could put more pressure on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his delicate alliance with far-right coalition members.

Look no further than hardline Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich. He recently called on Netanyahu to annex the entire occupied West Bank if the ICJ rules against Israeli settlements. But underneath these tall demands is a lingering fear that the United States, United Kingdom and key European powers could step up sanctions against Israeli leaders and businesses involved in settlement expansion.

So, will the ICJ's ruling further isolate Israel and escalate tensions over the occupied West Bank? Or will Israel continue to expand illegal settlements without facing consequences?

Tighter scrutiny

By condemning Israel's permanent occupation of the West Bank, the ICJ ruling could make it difficult for Israel's Western allies to ignore future land grabs. Until now, Netanyahu's government has been offering tacit assistance to Jewish extremists to seize Palestinian lands and sustain settler violence without fear of consistent international pushback.

Friday's ruling could alter some of those dynamics.

First, it could harden Western attitudes towards individuals and Israeli entities that are involved in illegal West Bank settlements, indicating a fresh wave of Western sanctions. Brussels could enforce these sanctions under the EU’s Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime, which includes an asset freeze and a travel ban.

Washington would need to expand the list of West Bank sanctions to include Israeli businesses with ties to violent settlers, and target entities that help these businesses escape the ban. The European Union recently sanctioned five Israeli settlers, two outposts and an extremist entity that it said was "responsible for serious and systematic human rights abuses against Palestinians in the West Bank."

Meanwhile, Paris, London and Washington have all imposed similar penalties and denounced Israel's settlement expansion plans as "counterproductive to the cause of peace."

Since the ruling will focus on the legal ramifications of Israel's current occupation, expect more international scrutiny of actors and groups who are complicit in settler violence. This includes the Israeli military, which continues to block Palestinians from accessing thousands of acres of land in the occupied West Bank.

Israel is also using reserve soldiers as a cover to fuel settler violence and legitimise extremist acts against Palestinians in almost every settlement. This includes the use of settler soldiers as a violent militia to aid land grabs, prevent resistance from Palestinians, and justify killings in the name of counterterrorism operations.

Thus, the ICJ's ruling could make it difficult for Western states to side with Israel on the occupied West Bank, and prompt stronger legal action against those that are found complicit in illegal settlements.

Despite funding and facilitating Israel's ongoing genocide in Gaza, many Western countries are under pressure to deliver a Hamas-Israeli ceasefire and prevent the war from escalating in the region.

To promote future de-escalation, it is also critical to put Israeli actions in the occupied West Bank on notice. After all, as Israel beefed up its military presence there after October 7, violent clashes with Palestinians have surged.

More than 530 West Bank Palestinians have also been killed by occupation forces since October. Despite the rising death toll, Netanyahu’s Likud party continues to build on its promise to expand settlements in occupied territories. Hamas has already warned that the move would escalate tensions further.

Collision course on the cards?

From a domestic standpoint, the ICJ ruling could put more pressure on Netanyahu as he struggles to maintain his coalition with far-right partners. On the one hand, Netanyahu feels he has a point to prove when it comes to the occupied West Bank: his government recently approved plans to build about 5,300 new settlements, and has given unrestricted powers to far-right finance minister Smotrich to fast-track construction.

But Netanyahu and Smotrich could find themselves on a slight collision course.

Smotrich is demanding a full West Bank annexation in response to the expected ICJ ruling, and has vowed to persist with more violations of international law.

For Netanyahu, a complete annexation may prove counterproductive and increasingly difficult to execute. It would further validate the ICJ's findings against Israeli actions in the occupied West Bank, and potentially prompt the ICC to explore prosecution of senior Israeli officials involved in the efforts.

All this could make Smotrich a principal target for the ICC, given his responsibility of monitoring illegal settlement constructions in the occupied West Bank. It would also complicate Netanyahu's ongoing attempts to convince scores of Israeli allies that they should intervene against his own ICC arrest warrant.

Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz reportedly sent letters to 25 of his diplomatic counterparts to aid these efforts, and Netanyahu will be keen to avoid any steps that invite more pressure from the ICC.

In light of these factors, it is clear that Israel has plenty at stake in the ICJ's forthcoming ruling on the occupied West Bank. Netanyahu wants to maintain a favourable Israeli international image, robust settlement support, and close far-right ties without any fear of prosecution. Findings this week could give those ambitions a true reality check.