Illustrative: View of Ma’aleh Adumim in Judea and Samaria on Jan. 1, 2017. Photo: Yaniv Nadav / Flash90.

Hundreds of thousands of Israelis live in the West Bank. Known in Israel by its historical name of Judea and Samaria, the area contains cities that are home to tens of thousands of people.

The urban center of Ariel, for example, has a university that was founded more than 40 years ago. The area is bustling with houses, schools, shops, and parks. Ariel is home to the young and old — to teachers, taxi drivers, business owners, and students.

In short, places like Ariel are filled with ordinary people.

Why, then, did British news and opinion site UnHerd suggest in a recent piece by foreign correspondent David Patrikarakos, that everyone living in the West Bank is a marauding zealot out for Palestinian bloods?

Patrikarakos reports:

Beyond the trauma of the war in Gaza, there is another trauma in the West Bank: Israeli settlers. There are more than 450,000 Israeli settlers (and more than 100 Israeli illegal outposts) in the West Bank, with an additional 220,000 living in East Jerusalem. Since October 7, their thieving and violence has gone into overdrive. The UN humanitarian office has recorded more than 250 settler attacks, which resulted in the murder of eight Palestinians, including a child, and injuries to more than 70 others. Since late October, more than 1,000 Palestinian residents have fled several West Bank villages, claiming that Israeli settler violence and threats had driven them out.”

Patrikarakos’ journey through the West Bank, with his theatrical descriptions and selective encounters, reads more like a scene from an apocalyptic novel than a piece of objective reporting.

The portrayal of anyone and everyone could not be less subtle: they are religious fanatics who are hellbent on driving out every last non-Israeli man, woman and child — by violent means if necessary.

This is a gross generalization that ignores the myriad reasons people choose to live in the West Bank, including historical and legal justifications, while reducing their motivations to divine real estate deals.

The article charges hundreds of thousands of peaceful, law-abiding Israelis with being responsible for a handful of isolated incidents of violence toward Palestinians.

The depiction of all Israelis living in the territory as extremists sharply contrasts with that of the Palestinians, who are simultaneously portrayed as defeated victims and successful resisters:

I later meet Mustafa Barghouti, who leads the Palestinian opposition party, Palestinian National Initiative. We gather in a boardroom in his office nearby (most things are nearby in Ramallah) where a large photo of the Dome of the Rock stretches across a wall. ‘Please record me. I like to be recorded,’ he says, in a joking reference to the mass surveillance Israel subjects Palestinian leaders to […]

‘We are already in an intifada,’ he says. “What does it mean? Self-organisation, self-reliance, and defying Israel measures. The IDF cannot enter any town or city without being confronted by young people who try to resist in non-violent ways.’ But these confrontations can easily slip into violence, which in this region easily expands.

That Patrikarakos fails to challenge Barghouti’s characterization of the Palestinian intifadas as “non-violent” is simply astounding, and ignores the reality of these dark periods that were characterized by horrific violence meted out against Israelis and Jews, including suicide bombings, stabbings, and Molotov cocktail attacks.

In the next paragraph, Patrikarakos is forced to acknowledge Barghouti’s cognitive dissonance, noting that while he “appears sincerely to want peace,” in a later interview with CNN, Barghouti claimed “no Israeli civilians were killed on October 7.”

It takes considerable mental gymnastics and boundless determination to cast Barghouti as a moderate and peace-seeking Palestinian, while also accepting that he has denied the biggest mass slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust.

The role of Palestinian terrorist groups, including Hamas and Islamic Jihad, in fomenting violence in the West Bank is also glossed over throughout the piece, with the implicit suggestion instead being that Israeli counterterrorism raids exist in a vacuum.

In the last paragraph of his article, Patrikarakos laments the likelihood of further violence. He contends this violence will result from young Palestinian men having “no hope of finding a job,” leading them to “drift toward organised violence and extremism” — a perspective that omits any consideration of the antisemitic and anti-Israeli incitement that is pervasive in Palestinian society.

And this core message of the piece: Palestinians lack agency and are entirely at the mercy of a much stronger and inflexible Israel.