The UK and France, the two countries most responsible for Israel’s creation, are set to punish Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his government for their abuses in Gaza by recognizing a Palestinian State. Would it make a blind bit of difference to suffering in the Strip, or bring the creation of a Palestinian state any closer? Probably not.
These decisions are not as they are being sold. They are not considered foreign policy measures, crafted to push Israel’s government to end the war, flood Gaza with food and medical aid, and kickstart a political process that would give hope for a future settlement. Suspending military aid to Israel might possibly help with that. Threatening to recognize a state of Palestine would not.
First, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron acted primarily for domestic political reasons. As Pierre Lellouche, a former Cabinet minister in right-of-center French governments, wrote recently in an op-ed for Le Figaro, Macron is a lame duck leader desperate for relevance. He acted in response to a strong pro-Palestinian movement at home and a need to be seen as a player on the global stage.
Starmer was facing rumbles of revolt within the Labour Party that he leads and the makings of a Gaza-fueled insurgency to his left, in the form of a new party created by former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn. Each poses significant political threats to Starmer and his government, and Palestinian recognition is one way to counter them.
As if to redress some of the criticism, Macron on Tuesday joined 14 other countries at the UN — including Canada and Australia — in calling for Palestinian recognition. The preamble hammered Hamas and tried to address some of the obvious obstacles to Israeli agreement. None of those wishes included a means for implementation.
The UK was not a signatory, but unlike Macron, Starmer could say that he gave his decision teeth by making recognition of a Palestinian state contingent: He said he would not take the step if Israel agrees to a ceasefire in Gaza by September. That sounds smart; it uses the threat of recognition as potential leverage to secure a ceasefire and relief for Gaza. However, the UK’s conditions place leverage in the wrong hands.
Hamas has an equal say in any ceasefire. Indeed, it just rejected another deal. And thanks to Starmer, Hamas now has an incentive to make sure there is no truce before September, even if Netanyahu decides to accept one. At that point, Hamas’ refusal to lay down its arms, go into exile or hand over remaining hostages would, indeed, be rewarded — with recognition. A terrorist organization at risk of losing its popular support base, after it deliberately provoked Israel into an invasion that has had only disastrous consequences for Gazans, would be able to point to a political win.
So why not just focus on Hamas instead? Why not offer it British recognition of a Palestinian state if — and only if — it agrees to a ceasefire, and gives up its hostages, weapons and control over Gaza? The reason is that this threat would not solve Starmer’s problem at home, where Israel is seen as the guilty party in need of pressure and punishment. Plus, Hamas does not actually want a two-state solution. Its goal is to eliminate the Jewish state and establish Islamic rule across all of Palestine. Nor does it care about continued civilian suffering, which it has instrumentalized for its jihad.
The bottom line is that recognition would remain little more than gesture politics until the leaders of the Jewish-Israeli and Arab-Palestinian populations negotiate to create the prerequisites of Palestinian statehood. Those are set out by a 1933 convention as defined borders, a permanent population, a government and the ability transact with other states. Palestine does not yet have these. There are already more than 140 countries that recognize it as a state, and there is little cause to think adding a few more would suddenly make that statehood real.
There are, of course, reasons for all the sound and fury. While Europe’s faded empires might not be great powers anymore, the UK and France do carry outsized diplomatic significance for the Levant.
Both countries are traditional allies of Israel and members of the G7, and they are two of just five states that can wield a veto at the UN Security Council. Equally important is that they were the architects of the modern Middle East and its conflicts. The borders of Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan, Palestine and Syria were all largely the products of British and French mapmakers, as they carved up this part of the collapsing Ottoman Empire between them toward the end of World War I.
In addition, the restoration of a Jewish homeland in Palestine was primarily the work of British statesmen, including then-British foreign secretary Arthur Balfour, who set out the principle in a 1917 declaration. The UK went on to run Palestine and hold the ring for Jewish immigration from 1920 to Israel’s formation in 1948.
Even so, what today’s British and French leaders are doing, beyond solving their own domestic political issues, is punishing Netanyahu. There is no doubt he deserves it: He has continued the bloodshed and destruction in Gaza long after it could be legally or morally justified, strategically explained or publicly supported. However, if he does now agree to a ceasefire, it would be despite these threats of recognition, not because of them.
Marc Champion is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering Europe, Russia and the Middle East. He was previously Istanbul bureau chief for the Wall Street Journal.
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
Former Taipei mayor and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) founding chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) was sentenced to 17 years in prison on Thursday, making headlines across major media. However, another case linked to the TPP — the indictment of Chinese immigrant Xu Chunying (徐春鶯) for alleged violations of the Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法) on Tuesday — has also stirred up heated discussions. Born in Shanghai, Xu became a resident of Taiwan through marriage in 1993. Currently the director of the Taiwan New Immigrant Development Association, she was elected to serve as legislator-at-large for the TPP in 2023, but was later charged with involvement
Out of 64 participating universities in this year’s Stars Program — through which schools directly recommend their top students to universities for admission — only 19 filled their admissions quotas. There were 922 vacancies, down more than 200 from last year; top universities had 37 unfilled places, 40 fewer than last year. The original purpose of the Stars Program was to expand admissions to a wider range of students. However, certain departments at elite universities that failed to meet their admissions quotas are not improving. Vacancies at top universities are linked to students’ program preferences on their applications, but inappropriate admission
RSS