From a national enterprise to a political tool: When the settlement movement switched camps | Col. (res.) Amir Noy

The article examines the transformation of Jewish settlement in Judea and Samaria, from a broad Zionist enterprise associated with the Labor movement to a political symbol of religious Zionism. The author, Col. (res.) Amir Noy, describes the process of change, the 2005 disengagement plan and its security consequences, and the renewed return to settlements in northern Samaria in recent years.

The article, by Col. (res.) Amir Noy, addresses the historical process in which Jewish settlement in Judea and Samaria transformed from a broad national enterprise, associated with the Labor movement, into a political symbol of religious Zionism. The author describes how after 1967, the center of gravity of settlement shifted from the kibbutznik and moshavnik to religious Zionism, and how Gush Emunim adopted an old Zionist enterprise and gave it a new religious-national meaning. He notes that the Allon Plan and the Galili Document from 1973 dealt with settlement in the territories as part of a security concept, meaning the idea was not born on the right. The next significant milestone is 2005, when four settlements in northern Samaria (Ganim, Kadim, Homesh, and Sa-Nur) were evacuated as part of the disengagement plan. The author argues that the withdrawal created a security vacuum that led to the establishment of terrorist infrastructure by Hamas and Islamic Jihad in the Jenin area. In 2025-2026, the government made decisions to reestablish the settlements, and in 2026, families began returning to Ganim, Homesh, and Sa-Nur. The article presents the controversy: supporters of the move claim it improves security and creates a security buffer for central cities, while critics see it as a security burden and a source of friction. The author leaves the question open: whether settlement is a project of a particular political camp or another chapter in a broader Zionist idea.