The state’s monopoly on weapons and the legitimate use of force is one of the most important foundations of the modern state. There can be no true sovereignty when armed groups hold the power to decide on war and peace outside constitutional institutions. From this perspective, calls to disarm militias and subject all armed formations to the authority of the state appear legitimate and necessary demands for protecting security and stability. However, this principle loses its credibility when applied selectively, becoming binding on some states and groups while being ignored when it comes to Israel and the armed settlers in the occupied Palestinian territories.

 

The United States demands that Lebanon restrict weapons to the state and disarm Hezbollah, and has supported a plan for the Lebanese army to take control of all weapons outside the authority of official institutions. In Iraq, Washington is pressing for the dismantling of armed factions or the individual and disciplined integration of their members into official security forces, and for an end to the phenomenon of uncontrolled weapons and foreign interference. In Yemen, the US is taking action against the Houthi missile and drone arsenal, emphasizing the need for state institutions to regain control over territory, resources, and ports. In Syria, it supports the establishment of a unified national army, the integration of armed groups into the Ministry of Defense, and the extension of state authority over all its territory.

 

In principle, this approach is sound; the proliferation of weapons outside state control leads to multiple centers of power, weakens sovereignty, threatens civil peace, and transforms societies into arenas for regional and international conflicts. However, the fundamental question is: why does this principle stop at the borders of the occupied Palestinian territories? Why is arming civilians considered a threat to the state in Beirut, Baghdad, Damascus, and Sana'a, while arming Israeli settlers is presented as a legitimate measure to enhance security?

 

Since October 7, 2023, the Israeli Ministry of National Security, headed by Itamar Ben-Gvir, has led a broad campaign to facilitate access to weapons for Israelis and settlers. Published Israeli figures indicate that more than 250,000 personal gun licenses were issued in less than three years, a significant increase from the pre-war period when the number of license holders was much lower. The areas eligible for gun ownership were also expanded to include additional settlements in the West Bank, and hundreds of local emergency response teams were armed and equipped with assault rifles. In the first year alone, Ben-Gvir announced the distribution of approximately 120,000 weapons, in addition to those distributed by the army to security teams and regional defense units.

 

More alarmingly, some settlers have been integrated into regional military formations, effectively combining civilian and military status. They carry army-issued weapons and exercise security powers within an occupied environment. This blurring of the lines between civilian and military, complicating the determination of responsibility and the chain of command, and creating a reality that allows for the use of force against Palestinians with minimal oversight and accountability.

 

This arming cannot be separated from the unprecedented escalation in settler attacks. The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) documented more than 1,800 settler attacks in 2025, averaging nearly five attacks per day. More than 830 Palestinians were injured in these attacks during the same year. From the beginning of 2023 until April 2026, 45 Palestinian communities were completely displaced due to settler attacks and related restrictions, while dozens of other communities experienced partial displacement.

 

These figures do not reflect isolated incidents, but rather a systematic pattern of violence that leads to land confiscation and the forced displacement of Palestinian residents. OCHA further states that obtaining an Israeli permit does not eliminate the danger of weapons or grant settlers international legitimacy, especially since settlements are established in occupied territory and are illegal under international law.

 

Moreover, Israel, as the occupying power, is obligated to protect the Palestinian population and maintain public order, not to arm civilian groups residing illegally on their land. When security forces become a parallel force operating alongside the army, the state no longer effectively monopolizes the use of force, but rather delegates its use to ideological groups that may employ it to intimidate the indigenous population and seize their land.

 

The American position has gone beyond mere political silence. While it is true that President Joe Biden’s administration imposed sanctions in 2024 on settlers and groups accused of violence, including the “Hilltop Youth,” President Donald Trump revoked the executive order upon which those sanctions were based in January 2025, and the Treasury Department removed the sanctioned names from its lists. Thus, Washington retreated from one of its limited accountability tools without exerting any real pressure to halt the policy of arming settlers.

 

This double standard not only harms the Palestinians but also undermines the credibility of American policy and the entire international system. Washington cannot demand that Arabs disarm armed groups while simultaneously accepting the arming of settlers under the protection of the occupying army. If the state's monopoly on the use of force is a necessary principle, it must be applied to everyone without exception. Israel must be required to collect the settlers' weapons, dismantle their armed groups, investigate their attacks, hold those responsible accountable, and guarantee the protection of Palestinians.

 

Principles are not measured by the strength of an ally or the identity of the victim. Either uncontrolled weapons pose a danger everywhere, or the call for disarmament is transformed from a legal and moral principle into a selective political tool. True peace cannot be built in the region as long as weapons are taken from one side while being distributed to another to be used in entrenching the occupation and displacing the rightful owners of the land.