The Difference Between Annexation and Imposing Sovereignty

Monday, July 28, 2025

The difference between the terms "annexation" and "imposing sovereignty" over the West Bank is fundamentally a legal, administrative, and political difference in form and content, even though the goal in both cases is the same: subjecting the occupied Palestinian territory to complete Israeli control.

First: Annexation

Annexation is a unilateral legal procedure taken by a state to incorporate a territory not under its sovereignty (often occupied land) into its territory officially and permanently.

Results of Annexation:

• Official declaration that the territory has become an integral part of the state
• Complete application of Israeli law, sovereignty, and administration to the land and Palestinian population
• Usually requires internal legislative amendment (such as a Knesset law)
• Considered a blatant violation of international law, especially Article 2 of the UN Charter and the Fourth Geneva Convention

Examples:

• Annexation of East Jerusalem in 1980
• Annexation of the Syrian Golan in 1981

Second: Imposing Sovereignty

The term "imposing sovereignty" is more of a political than legal term, sometimes used by Israel as a lighter formula than "annexation" to reduce international reactions.

Results of Imposing Sovereignty:

• Refers to applying Israeli law to a specific area in the West Bank without officially declaring it has become part of "the State of Israel"
• May include settlements or specific areas (such as the Jordan Valley)
• Sometimes done through ministerial or administrative decisions without explicitly declaring "annexation"
• It is de facto annexation without declaration

International Legal Position

Both annexation and imposing sovereignty are illegal under international law and violate fundamental principles of international law including:

• UN Charter Article 2(4)
• Fourth Geneva Convention Article 47
• UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and 478
• International Court of Justice advisory opinions