I wake up every morning in Efrat, a town tucked into the hills of Judea, about twenty minutes south of Jerusalem. I drive past vineyards that trace back to the days of King David and shepherds still tending their flocks in the same fields where Ruth once gleaned. My neighbors are teachers, doctors, soldiers, and shopkeepers. In other words—we are living normal Israeli lives in the land of the Bible. And yet, every time my town needs to build a new classroom for our children or expand a road to handle traffic, I’m reminded of an absurd reality: though we live in Israel’s ancient biblical heartland, and even though we are all Israeli citizens, the modern State of Israel has never fully and unequivocally stated that this land is part of our country.
This is why the debate over sovereignty in Judea and Samaria matters.
People often ask me, “But aren’t you already living there? Don’t you already have Israeli schools, roads, and synagogues? What difference would sovereignty make?” It’s a fair question. To the outside world, life in Judea and Samaria looks like any other Israeli community. But beneath the surface lies a tangle of legal contradictions and bureaucratic absurdities that affect daily life in ways many Israelis—and certainly most people outside of Israel—don’t realize.
That’s why this debate is so critical. Sovereignty isn’t about adding new land to Israel. It’s about telling the truth about where Israel already is. It’s about ending the legal twilight zone that governs hundreds of thousands of Israeli citizens and making clear that Judea and Samaria are not “temporary holdings” but part of Israel itself.
This is why sovereignty is such a burning issue. It isn’t primarily about changing facts on the ground. The facts are already here: There are already close to 600,000 Jews living in Judea and Samaria in thriving communities and busy towns. What sovereignty will do – if we have the courage to declare it – is bring honesty and order. It means the government of Israel will finally acknowledge what we who live here already know—that Judea and Samaria are the eternal heartland of Israel.
Living in Limbo
When Israel won the Six-Day War in 1967, we liberated Jerusalem, Judea, and Samaria from foreign Jordanian rule. Jerusalem was annexed and fully incorporated into Israel. Judea and Samaria were not. Instead, they were left under a strange patchwork of military law and temporary regulations.
That means daily life here operates in a kind of legal twilight zone. For example: if a fire breaks out in a Jewish neighborhood inside Israel’s pre-1967 borders, emergency services are obligated by law to respond. But if it happens in my community, there is no such obligation. Police investigations here require extra steps and approvals. Building permits are entangled in endless layers of military oversight rather than streamlined through government ministries. It can take years – often decades! – to receive official government approval to build houses on Jewish owned land!
The result is that hundreds of thousands of Israeli citizens—tax paying families like mine—live as if we are outside our own country. On paper, we are Israelis. In practice, we are often treated like temporary residents. That contradiction can’t last forever.
Sovereignty matters for several reasons:
Strengthening Israel’s Position: First and foremost, sovereignty is a matter of principle. It sends a message to Israelis and people all over the world that Judea and Samaria are not bargaining chips. It makes clear that the “Two-State solution” that many in the Western world are trying to force Israel to accept – which would create a Palestinian terror state in the middle of Israel – is never going to happen. Judea and Samaria are the very heart of Israel—biblically, historically, and practically.
Far from weakening Israel’s standing, speaking with clarity and strength will earn Israel respect. Our enemies test hesitation, not resolve. Our allies recognize authenticity, not apologies.
When Jerusalem was recognized as Israel’s capital, critics warned it would spark chaos. Instead, nations adapted, and many strengthened ties with us. The same will prove true here. Sovereignty may shake things up in the short term, but long term, it secures Israel’s future.
Ending the Bureaucratic Chaos: Right now, no one within Israel takes full responsibility for Judea and Samaria. Ministries in Jerusalem pass the buck, saying “that’s the army’s problem.” The army, for its part, never wanted to run schools, hospitals, or waste collection. Sovereignty would bring clarity: civilian affairs would be handled by civilian authorities, as they should be.
The current system is built on temporary military orders renewed year after year. It’s absurd that soldiers, not elected officials, are technically responsible for civilian matters. Extending sovereignty would mean permanent laws apply here, just as they do in Tel Aviv or Haifa. It would finally give equal legal footing to every Israeli citizen, no matter where he or she lives.
The Demographic Question : Critics always raise one fear: “If Israel declares sovereignty, won’t millions of Arabs suddenly become citizens and threaten Israel’s Jewish majority?”
The facts tell a different story. When East Jerusalem was annexed, Arabs there were offered Israeli citizenship. Only about 5% accepted. Most preferred permanent residency and Jordanian or Palestinian affiliations.
The same pattern would likely unfold in Judea and Samaria. Some might seek citizenship, but most would not. And even if they did, the numbers do not radically alter Israel’s demographic balance. The nightmare scenario of “two million new Arab citizens who hate Israel overnight” is simply not reality.
Four Approaches to Sovereignty
There are different ideas about how to apply sovereignty. Each has merits and risks:
- Full Annexation – From the Jordan River to the Mediterranean. This maximalist vision eliminates the idea of a Palestinian state but demands answers on Arab integration. What would their status be?
- Partial Sovereignty – Apply sovereignty only to Jewish settlements and key security zones. Arabs would maintain autonomy in other areas.
- Incremental Sovereignty – Begin with major Jewish settlement blocs, then expand gradually. This avoids shocks while normalizing sovereignty.
- Settlement-Focused Sovereignty – Apply sovereignty directly to Jewish communities, leaving Arab towns to self-manage under limited autonomy.
These different paths are being debated, but are all based on the same principle: Judea and Samaria are Israel, and pretending otherwise only prolongs confusion and endangers Israel.
The Bottom Line
From my porch in Efrat, I can see Bethlehem to the north and Hebron to the south. I can hear children laughing on their way to school, soldiers heading out to protect our borders, and parents rushing to work. This is not a temporary outpost. A new mall was just built in my neighborhood, as well as a beautiful new gym and swimming pool. Jewish life is thriving in the Judean hills; we aren’t going anywhere.
And yet, in the eyes of cowardly nations like France and England, I am an evil occupier of land that belongs to Arabs. And Israel’s historic fear of formally applying sovereignty to this land only strengthens their spurious arguments.
The current situation cannot go on forever. Sovereignty is the honest answer. Judea and Samaria are not “disputed territories.” They are Israel—yesterday, today, and forever.
