First France, then the UK, and now Canada…more Western countries are reportedly considering recognising the State of Palestine at the UN General Assembly this September. Perhaps they are trying to save face in front of their increasingly pro-Palestinian publics. But the United States, where pro-Israel sentiment has sunk to a record low of 32%, according to Gallup, still shows no sign of reconsidering Palestinian statehood.
Donald Trump, in response to Macron’s stance on the matter, remarked mockingly: “What he says doesn’t matter. It’s not going to change anything.” And indeed—does it?
As an onlooker, one might conclude that what matters most now is whatever annoys Israel. Israeli officials have come out one after another to rebuke these moves. But could anything else matter—like the statehood of Palestine itself? Is it even possible? What is this all about?
The State of Palestine
Since the UN-backed establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, Palestinians have been striving to reclaim their land and, in modern terms, to be recognised as a sovereign nation-state, with borders, institutions, and diplomatic standing.
In 1988, the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), the foremost Palestinian political movement, formally declared the establishment of the State of Palestine, covering the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip. Not “from the river to the sea,” but based on the internationally accepted 1967 borders. In essence: 78% to Israel, 22% to Palestine.
Back in 1988, 78 countries immediately recognised the State of Palestine. By October 7, 2023, that number had risen to 138 out of 193 UN member states, and by 2025, it stands at 147.
The OIC and the Arab League have long lobbied for Palestinian statehood. Many countries in South America, Africa, and Asia have also recognised Palestine. Still, the world's key political and economic powers remain hesitant. They seem to await a green light from Israel, which remains firmly opposed to recognising such a state.
If France proceeds, it will be the first G7 country to do so. Before October 7, fewer than half of the G20 recognised Palestine. And even though China and Russia, two of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, recognise it, the U.S. remains an unflinching veto-holder.
So what exactly does Israel want?
Although the assassinated Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin signed the Oslo Accords in 1993, the first Israeli leader to publicly entertain the idea of a “Palestinian state” was Ariel Sharon in 2003. But Sharon’s version was one with “temporary borders” and completely demilitarised with no right of return for Palestinians displaced in 1948 and 1967. In other words, a vulnerable entity subject to Israeli encroachment.
Israel’s longest-serving prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has openly said that a Palestinian state poses a danger to Israel. Recently, however, he has softened that rhetoric slightly, floating the idea of a “demilitarised” state where Israel maintains overriding security control. In effect, a pseudo-state with no real autonomy, reminiscent of the colonial protectorates of the early 20th century. Anyone who thinks this is a fair solution should look closely at how Israel has been treating Syria in recent times.
And this, apparently, is what the Western powers are waiting for: a nod from Israel that all is well.
A glance at Latest events
Meanwhile, as these countries mull recognition of Palestine, something even more ironic is happening. Just a week ago, the Israeli parliament voted 71–13 in favour of annexing the West Bank.
In the midst of it all, the European Union and several OIC countries are pressing HAMAS, Palestine’s most prominent political and military force, to lay down its arms and surrender Gaza’s administration to the Palestinian Authority (PA), which currently “administers” the West Bank.
As September approaches, we may see more negotiations unfold. Mahmoud Abbas’s PA may be pressured into accepting Israel’s interpretation of the so-called “two-state solution.” This would finally pave the way for wider recognition of a Palestinian state, maybe eventually by the United States.
But here’s the real implication: a Palestine recognised in such terms—essentially a puppet state under Israeli control—would no longer see armed resistance. That means Western governments would no longer have to deal with pro-Palestinian protests on their streets. The situation would be declared “peaceful” in Western eyes, simply because Israel would have sole control over the narrative and the violence. Settlements would expand, dissent would be silenced, and critical media would be banned or marginalised, as they have done to outlets like Al Jazeera in the West Bank.
Anyone daring to speak of a genuinely free Palestine would be labelled a terrorist or accused of instigating another catastrophe. Israel would regain its standing in the “good books.” The Abraham Accords would be finalised. And maybe, if not Netanyahu, then Trump could take the credit. Perhaps even a Nobel Prize?
One thing is for sure: it is not the Palestinian state of our dreams!
*The views expressed in this content are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of İdrakpost.
0 Comment