Sovereignty Is in the Air: A Conversation with Nadia Matar
“No More Oslo, No More Apologies”: Nadia Matar on What Sovereignty Entails
In the months following October 7, one phrase has gained momentum in the Israeli political discourse: sovereignty. For Nadia Matar, co-founder of the Sovereignty Movement together with Yehudit Katsover, this is not a passing slogan—it is a long-overdue imperative. I spoke with her about current legislative efforts, demographic realities, and how the events of October 7 shifted the conversation to the mainstream.
The Sovereignty Movement does not use the word annexation, which implies seizing foreign land. Rather, applying Israeli sovereignty to Judea, Samaria, and Gaza is not about acquiring territory, but about restoring Israeli law to the heartland of the Jewish people, where moral, legal, and historical claims already exist.
What Sovereignty—and Which Sovereignty?
Multiple bills are currently before the Knesset. Some propose applying Israeli sovereignty only to the Jordan Valley. Others focus on Maaleh Adumim or the broader settlement blocs. One bill tries to combine them. None mention Gaza. I asked Matar if she thinks the best approach would be to accept going in small steps or going all the way in one single move.
Matar is unequivocal in her stance: now is not the time for partial steps or political caution.
Our stand is clear: Ultimately sovereignty must be applied over all of Judea, Samaria, the Jordan Valley, and Gaza.
If we take a step-by-step approach, it must come with a condition: no Arab autonomy, no state, no political entity of any kind.
Some people used to talk about declaring sovereignty over the ‘Jewish settlement blocs’ only, but that is not enough. Now we say the opposite: if you really need to take a step-by-step approach, then everything except the Arab urban areas should be under Israeli sovereignty immediately. Not only Area C but also large parts of A and B that are open lands.
In fact, we should not be talking in these terms anymore, for Areas A, B, and C are 'Oslo terms,’ and Oslo needs to be nullified at once.
Why Now?
It is true that sovereignty should have been applied at the end of the Six Day War when Israel returned to its heartland.
It took time, and now is really the time. Because this land is ours and only ours. Because we have a right-wing government. Because we are at war. Because we have a U.S. president who is supportive.
And because the Israeli public is ready for it. After October 7, the overwhelming majority understands that wherever Israel is not in control, the area will become another jihadist outpost.
Still, Matar acknowledged that even a first step, such as sovereignty in the Jordan Valley, could serve as a meaningful beginning.
In the past, with other presidents in power, we knew it was unrealistic to go for the whole region. But now? With Trump talking about relocating the Arab Gazans from Gaza? We should go for the maximum.
A newly released position paper by the Sovereignty Movement reinforces this view, arguing that full Israeli control over both Gaza and Judea & Samaria is not only possible, but necessary—morally, strategically, and historically. The paper frames the 2005 disengagement from Gaza as a catastrophic error that empowered Hamas and turned Gaza into a launchpad for terrorism, culminating in the horrors of October 7.
The takeaway is clear: any attempt to hand territory to “moderate” Arab actors would be read as surrender, would embolden jihadist forces, and would put all of Israel at risk. In their words, “the struggle in Gaza and Judea & Samaria is one and the same.
Echoing Trump’s proposal for Gazans*, the plan envisions Israeli sovereignty coupled with large-scale Arab emigration, long-term deterrence, and regional redevelopment. The transformation of Gaza into a future Israeli hub for innovation and tourism should be the approach for Judea and Samaria as well.
Matar put it bluntly:
We are at war. We need to show the Arab world that we are going to win. The moment Israel applies sovereignty, we are saying: this will never be yours.
A Post–October 7 Awakening
The Sovereignty Movement was once viewed as messianic or extreme. No longer. Matar described how support for the movement surged after October 7.
People used to be skeptical. Now they are worried. They understand what is at stake. And they are enthusiastic about the idea.
Sovereignty is in the air.
Political Theater and Real Numbers
When I asked whether there is currently a Knesset majority in favor of sovereignty, Matar’s answer was immediate:
Yes. Overwhelmingly so. Remember, the Knesset passed a law against the establishment of a Palestinian state. The only opposition comes from the Arab parties.
So why has there been no movement?
“Politics,” she said, bluntly.
When [Avigdor] Liberman presented the bill for the Jordan Valley, others refused to support it—not because they opposed sovereignty, but because they did not want to give him credit. If every MK voted according to their beliefs, even the Zionist Left would support sovereignty in the Jordan Valley.
Population Numbers and Citizenship
The numbers matter. But which numbers?
There are two schools of thought. There is the Amnon Sofer school that believes the Palestinian Authority’s numbers—three million Arabs in Judea and Samaria. But Israeli demographers Mark Weiss and Yoram Ettinger show they are lying.
The Palestinians count the dead as if they were still alive. They count those living abroad as if they were still living here. The real number? About 1.8 million.
She dismissed any idea of granting citizenship to the Arab population in these areas.
We cannot give them the tools to overturn the Jewish state. Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish People. The axiom must be clear: Israel must always have an overwhelming Jewish majority and a tiny non-Jewish minority, loyal to the Jewish state.
In any nation-state, members of the nation have more rights than those who are not part of the nation. That is normal. We should not apologize.
There are dozens of huge Arab states. There is only one tiny Jewish state.
In fact, she added, Israel does not need to reinvent the wheel. She mentioned research by Bithonistim (IDSF – Israel Defense and Security Forum), which studied modern democracies and concluded that it is not “apartheid” to grant fewer rights to those who do not belong to the nation.
The study found over 60 international precedents in which there are territories under sovereign rule that provide only partial political rights. From the U.S. territories of Guam and Puerto Rico to the Dutch Caribbean islands and British Overseas Territories, there are established models in which a state retains sovereignty over a population that does not receive full citizenship—especially when that population poses potential security threats or has rejected integration.
This is what responsible nations do when they value their survival. And if they reject that option for Israel, then they must reject it for the other countries as well.
Relocation and Residual Residency
Before October 7, the movement had supported the idea of offering residency rather than citizenship to Arabs. But things have changed.
According to their own polls, over 80% of Arabs in Judea and Samaria support the October 7 massacre.
When I see 100 Arabs, I know that 80 are ready to cut off my head and smash my baby’s head or strangle it.
In light of this, she said:
We now understand what is required: full Israeli sovereignty, and the relocation of the hostile Arab population.”
What of those who do not wish to leave?
“For the minority who accept Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people and have no national aspirations of their own, we can offer residency. But the rest? No country is supposed to commit suicide.
Israeli Arabs
I asked Matar how she believes Israeli Arabs, many of whom self-define as Palestinians-with-Israeli-passports, will respond to the dissolution of the Palestinian Authority and Israeli sovereignty over all of the land.
We cannot predict. But the moment they know there will never be a Palestinian state, some—especially the secular—might choose loyalty to the state. Others, especially the religious, might leave. Or they might turn to terror.
“That choice,” she added, “will be theirs.”
Israel will have to make it clear to all of them that this is the nation-state of the Jewish people and that it will not tolerate anyone who wishes to undermine that.
Aliyah and Sovereignty
In order to thwart the demographic fear of applying sovereignty, parallel to applying sovereignty Israel will have to finally promote an attractive aliyah program, helping at least another 2 million Jews to come and live in our beautiful God-given Biblical Heartland.
This will ensure that Israel will always have an overwhelming Jewish majority.
For Matar, sovereignty is not just about defense; it is about destiny.
You can learn more about the Sovereignty Movement here: https://linktr.ee/sovereignty.il
* The Trump relocation plan refers to a provision in the 2020 Peace to Prosperity proposal that envisioned incentivized emigration of Arab residents from Gaza and parts of Judea and Samaria, supported by international funding. It did not call for forced transfer but framed relocation as a voluntary, long-term regional solution.
🕯️ Thank you for being here.
I try to write what others overlook — about Iranians, Alawites, sovereignty, survival, and the war over narratives.
If you're new, start here: “Why I keep writing even when it would be easier to stop.”
And if what you read moved you, consider sharing or subscribing.
Because Israel is not supported on the Substack payment platform, I have set up an alternative for those who want to support my work.
You can make one-time or repeated donations in your own currency using Paypal (click image above) or the Ko-fi payment platform here. Israelis can send me a private message for another option.
Articles will always be free for all subscribers but a one-time or repeated donation is a way to help me sustain myself while doing all the work involved in putting these articles together and would be greatly appreciated.
Thank-you to all those who have supported my work by subscribing and/or by donating to my writer’s fund.
"It is true that sovereignty should have been applied at the end of the Six Day War when Israel returned to its heartland."
'Sovereignty' isn't applied. It is asserted. Israel has had sovereignty since at least 1994 when Jordan relinquished any claim to Judea and Samaria, and probably earlier. For whatever reasons, Israel has not asserted its sovereignty. Better late than never.
The Leftie mindset was the worst thing that could have happened to Israel. Nadia and her coalition have been correct. To this day every time I think about Moshe Dayan giving the Temple Mount away I get nauseus.