In a dramatic turn of events on the world stage, President Donald Trump declared he would not permit Israel to proceed with plans to annex the West Bank, sending ripples through diplomatic circles and igniting fierce debate among allies and adversaries alike. The announcement, made in the Oval Office on September 27, 2025, came at a time of heightened tension, with Israel embroiled in a major offensive in Gaza and Western powers moving to recognize Palestinian statehood.
Trump, known for his unwavering support of Israel throughout his presidency, stunned many by taking a firm stand against annexation. As reported by News Today Net, he told reporters with characteristic bluntness, "I will not allow Israel to annex the West Bank. I will not allow it. It’s not going to happen. It’s been enough. It’s time to stop now." This statement, delivered while signing unrelated executive orders, marked a rare moment of direct pushback against Israeli policy from the White House.
The backdrop to Trump’s decision is a complex web of recent developments. Just days earlier, France, Britain, Australia, and Canada had joined the growing list of countries—now totaling 147—that formally recognized the State of Palestine. According to The Times of Israel, these moves were widely seen as symbolic gestures, unlikely to change the facts on the ground, but they still triggered a strong response in Israel, where politicians across the spectrum denounced the recognitions as a reward for Hamas. Hamas leaders themselves welcomed the declarations, calling them one of the "fruits of October 7."
The wave of recognitions, however, did little to ease the ongoing conflict or secure the release of Israeli hostages held by Hamas. Instead, as The Times of Israel noted, the recognitions appeared to increase domestic political pressure on Israeli leaders to respond—some calling for annexation of parts or all of the West Bank as a form of retaliation. In the words of one Israeli commentator, "Among powerful voices in Israel, that contempt prompted calls to retaliate by annexing part or all of the West Bank."
But Trump’s intervention was decisive. He reportedly spoke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, making clear that the United States would not tolerate any annexation move. Netanyahu, who was scheduled to visit the White House on September 29 for his fourth trip since Trump’s second term began, now faces a delicate balancing act. The Israeli government, as News Today Net described, strongly opposes Palestinian statehood and has long supported eventual annexation of much of the West Bank, seeing it as crucial for national security.
The United Arab Emirates, a key player in the Abraham Accords and one of Israel’s new Arab allies, issued its own stark warning, calling annexation a "red line." The Abraham Accords, signed five years ago and hailed as a diplomatic breakthrough, had averted a previous annexation crisis by offering normalization with Arab states as an alternative. Now, as The Times of Israel pointed out, any unilateral move by Israel to absorb West Bank territory could unravel these hard-won agreements, and even threaten peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan. "There is a very real possibility that Israel’s original Arab peace partners, Egypt and Jordan, would be forced by their own public opinion to take severe retaliatory measures, perhaps even to suspend their peace treaties with Israel," the article warned.
International reaction was swift and pointed. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, addressing the United Nations General Assembly on September 28, accused Israel of threatening to "blow up" the Middle East with its military actions and annexation plans. According to AFP, Lavrov said, "Israel’s illegal use of force against the Palestinians and aggressive actions against Iran, Qatar, Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq today threaten to blow up the entire Middle East." He specifically condemned proposals by hard-right allies of Netanyahu to annex the West Bank, labeling them as an attempt to "bury UN decisions on the creation of a Palestinian state" and describing them as a "coup d’etat in diplomatic terms."
Lavrov’s speech also highlighted the growing divide between Russia and the West over Middle Eastern policy. He mocked the timing of Western recognitions of Palestine—"What took them so long?"—and suggested that the declarations were made only after years of delay, possibly in hopes that the situation on the ground would change irreversibly. Russia, which has recognized Palestinian statehood since the Soviet era, has maintained a nuanced relationship with both Israel and Arab states, seeking to preserve its influence in the region.
The United States, meanwhile, found itself in a complicated position. While opposing the recent recognitions of Palestinian statehood, it has also urged Israel not to proceed with annexation. Trump’s administration, despite its reputation for pro-Israel policies—including the controversial move of the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem in 2017—has now drawn a line in the sand. As The Times of Israel argued, annexation would not only jeopardize the Abraham Accords but also undermine the United States’ ability to build a regional coalition to counter threats from Iran.
Some Israeli officials and commentators have floated the idea of "limited annexation," such as absorbing the Jordan Valley or certain settlement blocs near the pre-1967 Green Line. But, as The Times of Israel observed, "distinctions between full and limited annexation would be totally lost on Israel’s Arab peace partners." In the current climate—marked by daily images of suffering in Gaza and mounting Arab anger—even the smallest annexation move could trigger a diplomatic crisis.
There is also skepticism about Trump’s ability to compel Netanyahu to change course, especially given the president’s recent criticism of an Israeli attack on Hamas officials in Qatar. Nevertheless, Trump’s public opposition to annexation has shifted the debate, at least for now. As one analyst put it, "Kudos to President Trump for stopping this madness." The prevailing wisdom among many diplomats is that Israel would be better served by a "confident, self-assured position"—ignoring the recognitions of Palestine and avoiding any drastic moves that could unravel decades of fragile diplomacy.
Meanwhile, Russia’s Lavrov continued to rail against what he called "Western manipulations," condemning the reimposition of UN sanctions on Iran and accusing the West of seeking unilateral concessions through pressure and blackmail. These broader geopolitical tensions only add to the uncertainty surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with each major actor pursuing its own interests and strategies in a region already on edge.
As Netanyahu prepares for his Washington visit, the world watches closely to see whether Trump’s intervention will hold, whether Israel’s government will heed the warnings of its Arab neighbors, and whether the fragile architecture of Middle East peace can withstand yet another test. For now, the prospect of West Bank annexation appears to be off the table—but in the Middle East, nothing stays settled for long.