Some experts call it apartheid, most Israelis disagree (and Israel officially disagrees). [1]
> If it is, is there a justification for implementing it? Or maybe I’m missing your point.
Well, yes. That's exactly the other side of the issue, and is exactly what a real journalist talking about the Israel/Palestine situation should ideally explore.
This is an HN comment, not exactly the place for the history of the relations between the West Bank and Israel, but the short version is - most of the measures taking place in the WB are a direct result of terror attacks committed by the Palestinians, as a means of securing Israel from future attacks. You can see that relations were much better 40 years ago, it's not like Israel set out to have some kind of apartheid regime over the WB - people from Israel used to go far more freely into the WB, Palestinians used to work far more freely in Israel.
But as more and more attacks happened, Israel implemented various measures to stop terror - including the infamous checkpoints, including various border walls, including limiting work permits for Palestinians.
Looking at a snapshot of the WB now is looking at the end result of worsening relations over many years, with many of the things that seem "cruel" being direct measures to prevent terror attacks; and to prevent things like October 7th happening on a far larger scale, as would happen if it happened from the WB.
Most Israelis believe, probably correctly, that without these security measures, tens of thousands of Israelis would be killed. That would cause almost any country to do whatever it can to secure its "border".
[1] I personally don't care much for battles over semantics; if people agree on what is actually happening in the WB, then whether to call it apartheid or not seems irrelevant to me. There are lots of differences from the situation in South Africa, and lots of similarities.
I think it's worth keeping in mind that Palestinians are not Israeli citizens, and ostensibly the leadership of the Palestinians, which has a limited government role over the WB, is aiming to become a separate state; those circumstances make it seem, to me, that wondering why Palestinians don't have the same rights as Israelis is a category error, like wondering why Mexicans don't have the same rights as Americans.
Then again, it's also worth keeping in mind that whatever the goals of the Palestinians, in some respects Israel does, in fact, have control over the people of the WB, so in practice there are real problems here.
