20 Feb 2026·Source: The Hindu

3 min

International RelationsNEWS

India condemns Israel's West Bank plan in UN statement

India signs joint statement at UN condemning Israel's West Bank settlement expansion plans.

India signed a joint statement at the UN condemning Israel's plans for West Bank settlements, after initially skipping the condemnation. The statement criticized the Israeli government's moves to expand control over West Bank areas. More than 100 states and international organizations joined the statement. India's initial decision not to sign was linked to PM Modi's upcoming visit to Israel.

Key Facts

India initially skipped signing the joint statement.

The statement condemns Israel's plan for West Bank settlements.

More than 100 states and international organizations joined the statement.

India's initial decision was linked to PM Modi's upcoming visit to Israel.

The Palestinian Ambassador to the UN read out the statement.

UPSC Exam Angles

GS Paper 2: International Relations - Effect of policies and politics of developed and developing countries on India’s interests.

Connects to India's foreign policy, its relations with Israel and Palestine, and its role in international forums like the UN.

Potential question types: Statement-based MCQs on international law, India's foreign policy, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

In Simple Words

Basically, India first didn't join other countries in criticizing Israel's plan to build more settlements in an area called the West Bank. Later, India changed its mind and signed the statement. This shows how India is trying to balance its relationships with both Israel and Palestine.

India Angle

India has traditionally supported Palestine, but it also has growing ties with Israel, especially in defense and technology. This situation is like a shopkeeper who has good relations with two customers who are in conflict; the shopkeeper has to be careful not to upset either one.

For Instance

Think of it like a neighborhood association where some members want to condemn a neighbor's construction project. India's initial hesitation is like a member who doesn't want to offend the neighbor, but eventually joins the consensus to maintain unity.

This affects India's image on the world stage and its ability to influence peace in the Middle East. It also shows how India balances its values with its strategic interests.

India's foreign policy is a balancing act: supporting Palestine while maintaining ties with Israel.

Visual Insights

West Bank Settlements

Map showing the location of the West Bank and its significance in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Highlights the area where Israel's settlement plan is being condemned.

Loading interactive map...

📍West Bank📍Israel

More Information

Background

The issue of Israeli settlements in the West Bank is a long-standing point of contention in international relations. The West Bank, captured by Israel in 1967 during the Six-Day War, is considered by most of the international community to be occupied Palestinian territory. The United Nations Security Council has passed numerous resolutions declaring the settlements illegal under international law, specifically the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits an occupying power from transferring its own population into occupied territory. Despite these resolutions and international condemnation, Israel has continued to expand its settlements in the West Bank. These settlements are seen as an obstacle to peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, who claim the West Bank as part of their future state. The expansion of settlements changes the demographic makeup of the region and makes a two-state solution more difficult to achieve. The international community's response to these settlement activities has varied, ranging from diplomatic statements to economic sanctions. India's position on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has historically been one of support for the Palestinian cause. However, in recent years, there has been a noticeable shift towards closer ties with Israel, particularly in areas of defense and technology. This shift has led to a more nuanced approach to the conflict, balancing India's traditional support for Palestine with its growing strategic partnership with Israel. India's recent decision to initially abstain from the joint statement, and then later sign it, reflects this balancing act.

Latest Developments

In recent years, the international community has intensified its focus on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, particularly concerning the expansion of settlements. The International Criminal Court (ICC) has opened investigations into alleged war crimes in the Palestinian territories, including the construction of settlements. Several countries have also imposed sanctions on individuals and entities involved in settlement activities. Looking ahead, the future of the West Bank remains uncertain. The possibility of renewed peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians seems remote, given the current political climate. The expansion of settlements continues to be a major obstacle, and the international community faces the challenge of finding effective ways to address the issue. The role of international organizations like the United Nations and regional powers will be crucial in shaping the future of the region. India's evolving relationship with both Israel and Palestine will continue to influence its approach to the conflict. India's economic and strategic interests in the region require a delicate balancing act, and its diplomatic efforts will likely focus on promoting dialogue and de-escalation of tensions.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is the central issue in the India-Israel-West Bank situation?

The core issue revolves around Israel's plans to expand settlements in the West Bank, a territory considered by most of the international community as occupied Palestinian territory. India initially skipped signing a joint statement condemning these plans but later joined.

2. Why did India initially hesitate to condemn Israel's West Bank plan at the UN?

India's initial reluctance to sign the joint statement was reportedly linked to Prime Minister Modi's scheduled visit to Israel. Balancing diplomatic relations and international commitments often requires careful consideration.

3. What are the key facts to remember about this issue for the UPSC Prelims exam?

Key facts include: India's initial decision to skip the joint statement, the condemnation of Israel's West Bank settlements, the number of states and organizations involved (100+), and the connection to PM Modi's visit. Remember that the West Bank is considered occupied Palestinian territory by most of the international community.

Exam Tip

Focus on the geographical location of the West Bank and the key players involved.

4. What is the significance of the number '100+' in the context of this news?

The '100+' refers to the number of states and international organizations that joined the joint statement condemning Israel's West Bank settlement expansion plans. This indicates broad international consensus against the settlements.

5. How might India's stance on the West Bank settlements impact its relationship with Israel and Palestine?

India's position requires balancing its growing relationship with Israel and its historical support for the Palestinian cause. Any perceived shift in policy can be sensitive and impact diplomatic ties with both nations.

6. What recent developments related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are important to note?

Recent developments include the International Criminal Court (ICC) investigations into alleged war crimes in the Palestinian territories, including the construction of settlements, and sanctions imposed by some countries on individuals and entities involved in settlement construction.

Practice Questions (MCQs)

1. Consider the following statements regarding the West Bank: 1. The West Bank was captured by Israel during the Six-Day War in 1967. 2. The United Nations considers the West Bank to be occupied Palestinian territory. 3. The Fourth Geneva Convention is applicable to the West Bank. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A.1 and 2 only
B.2 and 3 only
C.1 and 3 only
D.1, 2 and 3

Show Answer

Answer: D

All three statements are correct. The West Bank was indeed captured by Israel in 1967. The UN considers it occupied territory. The Fourth Geneva Convention, which protects civilians in times of war, is applicable to the West Bank. This convention prohibits an occupying power from transferring its own population into occupied territory, making Israeli settlements a violation of international law.

2. Which of the following international organizations has opened investigations into alleged war crimes in the Palestinian territories, including the construction of settlements?

A.United Nations Security Council
B.International Court of Justice
C.International Criminal Court
D.European Court of Human Rights

Show Answer

Answer: C

The International Criminal Court (ICC) has opened investigations into alleged war crimes in the Palestinian territories, including the construction of settlements. The ICC's jurisdiction extends to war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. The United Nations Security Council can refer cases to the ICC, but the ICC can also initiate investigations independently.

3. Assertion (A): India initially skipped signing a joint statement at the UN condemning Israel's West Bank plan. Reason (R): India has been maintaining closer ties with Israel in recent years. In the context of the above, which of the following is correct?

A.Both A and R are true and R is the correct explanation of A
B.Both A and R are true but R is NOT the correct explanation of A
C.A is true but R is false
D.A is false but R is true

Show Answer

Answer: A

Both the assertion and the reason are true, and the reason is the correct explanation of the assertion. India's initial decision to skip the statement was likely influenced by its growing strategic partnership with Israel. However, India later signed the statement, reflecting its traditional support for the Palestinian cause and its commitment to international law.