I think I know what is going on here.
By comparison, the US congress cannot “bind” future congresses in certain ways. And contracts that bind are often not permissible. So the US congress cannot make a contract that lasts more than their time in office, in many cases.
“Courts have long held that Congress cannot “bind” future Congresses—that is, it can’t force a future session of Congress to carry on its own policies.
“That practice, formally known as “legislative entrenchment,” is seen as privileging one group of lawmakers over another, “binding” future to the priorities set in the present.
“In the 1996 case U.S. v. Winstar Corp., Justice David Souter quoted the British jurist William Blackstone, who said that “the legislature, being in truth the sovereign power, is always of equal, always of absolute authority: it acknowledges no superior upon earth, which the prior legislature must have been, if it’s [sic] ordinances could bind the present parliament.”
“The principle is more complicated in the United States, where the government is bound by the Constitution and any private contracts into which it enters. But as a general rule, any Congress can reverse the decisions of any past Congress.”
And I would hazard to guess, the Israeli constitution also has a clause against “Knesset entrenchment”.
...does not exist... and that is why Israel have no legally binding borders and why they can at will, go into Palestinian territory and take it for themselves. There was never a plan for a two state solution, from 1948 forward, the plan has always been, and always will be, to take back the land from the Euphrates to the Nile.