Judea and Samaria for the West Bank



The phrase that I do not quite understand comes from a newspaper article
Peace talks? What's on TV? in the New York Times:

"The old Likudnik's biblical reference lingers - Judea and Samaria for the West Bank..."

Thank you for your help
  • Tazzler

    Senior Member
    American English
    What's the rest of the article say? I have a feeling that "for" indicates that those ancient places are being exchanged in some way for the modern place, but I'm not sure.


    Senior Member
    US, English
    "Judea and Samaria" is a way of referring to the West Bank that is favored, more or less, by Israeli settlers who feel the West Bank really is or should be part of Israel proper.


    The passage goes like this:

    Netanyahu, like Yitzhak Rabin and Ariel Sharon, has abandoned Greater Israel, admitting the inevitability of a Palestinian state: “I have to ask myself what should be done about the million-and-a-half Palestinians living in Judea and Samaria. Should they become Israeli citizens? That’s not my point of view. << --- >>"
    The old Likudnik’s biblical reference lingers — Judea and Samaria for the West Bank — but he’s embraced two states because he’s grasped the alternative: more Arabs than Jews in a single state. << --- >>

    << Moderator's note: Excessive quotation deleted. See Rule 4. >>
    Last edited by a moderator:


    Senior Member
    English - South-East England
    I think 'for' here means "meaning the same as". The term 'Judaea and Samaria' is Zionist code for what the rest of us call the West Bank: that is, the ancient historical terms Judaea (Judea) and Samaria are used to lay Jewish claim to what is today the Palestinian West Bank region. That is, those words are used for (as a substitute for) another term.
    < Previous | Next >