Opposition to settlements is not a denial of Israel's legitimacy | Sharon Pardo

Sharon Pardo argues that opposition to settlements is not equivalent to denying Israel's legitimacy. The sanctions imposed by European countries on settlements pertain to territorial sovereignty, not to the existence of the state. The direct economic impact is expected to be limited, but the legal and political message is significant.

Sharon Pardo argues in an opinion piece that opposition to settlements is not equivalent to denying Israel's legitimacy. The sanctions imposed by European countries on settlements pertain to territorial sovereignty, not to the existence of the state. The direct economic impact is expected to be limited, as settlement products constitute a tiny fraction of trade with these countries, and enforcement is complicated due to the economic overlap between Israel and the settlements. However, the legal and political message is significant: it establishes a principle that agreements with Israel apply to Israel, but not to the territories under its control. This principle has previously served as a basis for product labeling, restricting European funding, and excluding entities operating in settlements from cooperation programs. Pardo emphasizes that Israel cannot demand that countries recognize a territorial definition that it itself has never officially established.