
Support for Palestinian statehood gathers momentum
In many European countries, official recognition of a Palestinian state is an excruciatingly slow process, more so than it should be. Despite mounting pressure from parliamentarians, civil society organizations and the wider public, many governments remain cautious, including British and the French authorities who have already expressed support for such a move.
Their caution, even fear, before taking such a crucial decision is harming their own national interests, violates natural justice, and ignores the fact that the promise of the advancement of a peace based on a two-state solution outstrips, by far, any political risks that come with taking the plunge and recognizing Palestine as a state.
Therefore, it was refreshing to hear French President Emmanuel Macron, during his visit to London this month for an Anglo-French summit, tell British parliamentarians: 'With Gaza in ruins and the West Bank being attacked on a daily basis, the perspective of a Palestinian state has never been put at risk as it is (now), and this is why this solution of the two states and the recognition of the state of Palestine is … the only way to build peace and stability for all in the whole region.'
This is a somewhat late realization of something that, had it been done years ago, might have prevented the events of the past two, horrific years. Still, Macron deserves credit for advancing this agenda now and resisting Israeli claims that in the aftermath of Oct. 7, such recognition would be a reward for Hamas and terrorism.
Israel is deliberately advancing this spurious theory that recognition of Palestinian statehood is effectively caving in to terrorism, when in fact the aim of such recognition is to break the impasse in resolving the long-running Israeli-Palestinian conflict peacefully, and actually sideline extremism. If nothing else, recognition would be a step toward redressing the power imbalance between Israel and Palestine, which has become a hindrance to efforts at reaching a peace agreement based on a two-state solution.
Macron's remarks in London created some momentum for Palestinian statehood; immediately after his departure, perhaps inspired and encouraged by his statements, 59 MPs from Britain's governing Labour Party signed a letter addressed to Foreign Secretary David Lammy, calling on him to recognize, 'with great urgency,' the State of Palestine.
Certainly, many of those who signed the letter have for a long time been outspoken proponents of such recognition. But others were new recruits to the idea, who see it not only as an end in itself but also a response to the shocking news coming out of Gaza every day, and to the constant stream of 'novel ideas' that originate from the Israeli government and inflict even more misery on the Palestinian people.
Recognition would be a step toward redressing the power imbalance between Israel and Palestine.
Yossi Mekelberg
Deplorable suggestions from both Washington and senior Israeli officials have also served as a catalyst for the letter from MPs, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's proposal of a 'voluntary migration' of Palestinians from Gaza, and the announcement by Defense Minister Israel Katz of his plan to forcibly transfer hundreds of thousands of Palestinian civilians, if not the entire population of the territory, to a camp in the almost completely destroyed city of Rafah.
The MPs called for action to prevent Katz's sinister plan becoming reality before it is too late. Israel's former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert this week described it as tantamount to the construction of a 'concentration camp.' It is designed to make the lives of those forcibly placed there impossible, while preventing them from leaving unless their destination is outside of Mandatory Palestine.
The British politicians who signed the letter to Lammy consider recognition of Palestinian statehood a priority, but in the meantime they also demanded the removal from the agenda of Katz's draconian proposal to concentrate masses of Palestinians in such a camp, which seems to be more of a transitional facility serving as a precursor to expulsion.
In addition, they urged Lammy to continue to support the work of the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in providing aid to the people of Gaza, while also pressing for the 'full and unhindered resumption of the humanitarian aid,' and efforts to secure the release of all hostages. This is an opportunity for the British government to adopt these recommendations — some would call them demands — and in doing so become an important player in efforts to resolve one of the most intractable conflicts in modern history.
In an ideal world, recognition of the State of Palestine by European nations would come from the EU as a whole and not happen in piecemeal fashion, as has been the case so far with the much-welcomed recognition in May last year by Spain, Ireland, Slovenia, and Norway (the last of which is not a member of the EU). Nevertheless, the need for unanimity in passing such a resolution within the EU makes it almost impossible to achieve, as long as countries such as Austria, the Czech Republic, Germany, and Hungary oppose it.
Therefore, if Paris and London were to announce recognition of Palestinian statehood in tandem — either before or during the upcoming summit of world leaders on the two-state solution, which was postponed by the outbreak of the war between Israel and Iran in June and is now scheduled to convene at the UN headquarters in New York in September — it would send a strong message from two major powers, which are also permanent members of the UN Security Council, in support of what is already the policy of 147 other members of the UN.
The message should be clear: This is not an anti-Israeli act, and most definitely not a reward for terrorism, but instead a positive move toward the peaceful resolution of one of the longest-running disputes in contemporary international politics, stretching all the way back to the beginning of the 20th century. It reaffirms the partition plan of 1947 and many subsequent international resolutions, and follows in the footsteps of diplomatic efforts that began with the Oslo Accords in 1993 and have been negotiated in different rounds of peace talks since then.
It could be a game-changer, allowing the Palestinians to negotiate with the Israelis as equals. As long as this does not happen, the asymmetry in the balance of power between the two protagonists remains a major obstacle, and it is one Israel is unfairly using during negotiations to demand concessions their Palestinian interlocutors cannot deliver, or to cause crises in the discussions. This effectively allows Israel to postpone indefinitely any agreement based on a two-state solution, while also creating a situation on the ground that is prohibitive to the establishment of a territorially contiguous independent Palestinian state.
Recognition of a Palestinian state would send a clear message from the international community to those who are hell-bent on annexation of the occupied West Bank and the building of Israeli settlements there. Whatever the setbacks along the way, the only viable and long-term sustainable solution to the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians remains a two-state solution. The letter from British MPs is, therefore, a welcome contribution to the efforts to advance this cause, and the British government must heed its recommendations.
• Yossi Mekelberg is a professor of international relations and an associate fellow of the MENA Program at Chatham House. X: @YMekelberg
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Arab News
5 hours ago
- Arab News
European powers plan fresh nuclear talks with Iran
BERLIN: European powers plan fresh talks with Iran on its nuclear program in the coming days, the first since the US attacked Iranian nuclear facilities a month ago, a German diplomatic source told AFP on Sunday. Britain, France and Germany, known as the E3, 'are in contact with Iran to schedule further talks for the coming week,' the source said. The trio had recently warned that international sanctions against Iran could be reactivated if Tehran does not return to the negotiating table. Iran's Tasnim news agency also reported that Tehran had agreed to hold talks with the three European countries, citing an unnamed source. Consultations are ongoing regarding a date and location for the talks, the report said. 'Iran must never be allowed to acquire a nuclear weapon,' the German source said. 'That is why Germany, France and the United Kingdom are continuing to work intensively in the E3 format to find a sustainable and verifiable diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear program,' the source added. Israel and Western nations have long accused Iran of seeking to develop nuclear weapons, a charge Tehran has consistently denied. On June 13, Israel launched a wave of surprise strikes on its regional nemesis, targeting key military and nuclear facilities. The United States launched its own set of strikes against Iran's nuclear program on June 22, hitting the uranium enrichment facility at Fordo, in Qom province south of Tehran, as well as nuclear sites in Isfahan and Natanz. Iran and the United States had held several rounds of nuclear negotiations through Omani mediators before Israel launched its 12-day war against Iran. However, US President Donald Trump's decision to join Israel in striking Iranian nuclear facilities effectively ended the talks. The E3 countries last met with Iranian representatives in Geneva on June 21 — just one day before the US strikes. Also Sunday, Russian President Vladimir Putin held a surprise meeting in the Kremlin with Ali Larijani, top adviser to Iran's supreme leader on nuclear issues. Larijani 'conveyed assessments of the escalating situation in the Middle East and around the Iranian nuclear program,' Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said of the unannounced meeting. Putin had expressed Russia's 'well-known positions on how to stabilize the situation in the region and on the political settlement of the Iranian nuclear program,' he added. Moscow has a cordial relationship with Iran's clerical leadership and provides crucial backing for Tehran but did not swing forcefully behind its partner even after the United States joined Israel's bombing campaign. Iran and world powers struck a deal in 2015 called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which placed significant restrictions on Tehran's nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief. But the hard-won deal began to unravel in 2018, during Trump's first presidency, when the United States walked away from it and reimposed sanctions on Iran. European countries have in recent days threatened to trigger the deal's 'snapback' mechanism, which allows the reimposition of sanctions in the event of non-compliance by Iran. After a call with his European counterparts on Friday, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the Western allies had 'absolutely no moral (or) legal grounds' for reactivating the snapback sanctions. He elaborated in a post to social media Sunday. 'Through their actions and statements, including providing political and material support to the recent unprovoked and illegal military aggression of the Israeli regime and the US... the E3 have relinquished their role as 'Participants' in the JCPOA,' said Araghchi. That made any attempt to reinstate the terminated UN Security Council resolutions 'null and void,' he added. 'Iran has shown that it is capable of defeating any delusional 'dirty work' but has always been prepared to reciprocate meaningful diplomacy in good faith,' Araghchi wrote. However, the German source said Sunday that 'if no solution is reached over the summer, snapback remains an option for the E3.' Ali Velayati, an adviser to supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said last week there would be no new nuclear talks with the United States if they were conditioned on Tehran abandoning its uranium enrichment activities.


Arab News
9 hours ago
- Arab News
Recognized, independent Palestinian state could unlock disputed gas wealth, expert says
LONDON: Official recognition of a Palestinian state would end legal ambiguities over the Gaza Marine gas field and secure the Palestinian Authority's right to develop its most valuable natural resource, according to energy expert Michael Barron. Barron, author of 'The Gaza Marine Story,' estimates the field could generate $4 billion in revenue at current prices, with the PA reasonably earning $100 million annually for 15 years, The Guardian reported on Sunday. 'The revenues would not turn the Palestinians into the next Qataris or Singaporeans, but it would be their own revenue and not aid, on which the Palestinian economy remains dependent,' he said. Gas was discovered in 2000 in the Gaza Marine field, a joint venture between BG Gas and the Palestinian Consolidated Contractors Co. Despite initial hopes of ending energy shortages in the Gaza Strip, the project has been repeatedly stalled over ownership disputes, lack of sovereignty, and political instability. 'The Oslo Accords agreed in 1993 clearly give the Palestinian National Authority jurisdiction over territorial waters, the subsoil, power to legislate over oil and gas exploration and to award licenses to do so,' Barron said. 'Control over natural resources was an important element of (the) state-building agenda of the Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. Israeli exploitation of Palestinian resources was and remains a central part of the conflict,' he added. Israel has historically blocked development over concerns that revenue could reach Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip. An Israeli court once ruled the waters a 'no-man's water' due to the PA's lack of sovereignty, and Israel has long claimed any license 20 miles off the Gaza coast should be seen as a gift, not a right. Barron said that if Palestine were recognized as a state, particularly by countries where major oil firms are based, it would 'effectively end the legal ambiguity' and allow the PA to develop the field and achieve energy independence from Israel. A separate controversy has emerged over Israeli-issued gas licenses in a disputed area known as Zone G. Lawyers acting for Palestinian human rights groups recently warned Italian energy firm Eni not to proceed with exploration, saying 'Israel cannot have validly awarded you any exploration rights and you cannot validly have acquired any such rights.' Eni has since told Italian campaigners that 'licenses have not yet been issued and no exploratory activities are in progress.' Activist group Global Witness also argues the East Mediterranean Gas pipeline, which passes through waters claimed by Palestine, is unlawful and does not provide any revenue to the PA. The 56-mile pipeline transports gas from Ashkelon in Israel to Arish in Egypt for export. The issue has gained new attention following a UN report by Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese. She warned corporations of their potential legal liability for supporting Israel's occupation of Palestinian territory, citing international court rulings. Her report concluded companies have a 'prima facie responsibility 'to not engage and/or to withdraw totally and unconditionally from any associated dealings with Israel, and to ensure that any engagement with Palestinians enables their self-determination.'' Israel has rejected the report in full. Barron argues that, with Israel now self-sufficient in gas, 'so long as a Palestinian state with unified governance is recognized, Israel will have no motive or legal right to block Palestine exploiting its single greatest natural resource.'


Arab News
12 hours ago
- Arab News
Modi to visit London this week as India-UK trade pact nears signing
New Delhi: Prime Minister Narendra Modi will visit the UK this week, the Indian government said on Sunday, as the countries prepare to formally sign a long-pending bilateral free trade agreement. Modi's two-day trip on the invitation of his British counterpart, Keir Starmer, will start on Wednesday. 'During the visit, the two sides will also review the progress of the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership (CSP) with a specific focus on trade and economy, technology and innovation, defence and security, climate, health, education and people-to-people ties,' the Indian Ministry of External Affairs said on Sunday. Launched in January 2022, the FTA negotiations between India and the UK were set to conclude the same year, but despite more than a dozen formal rounds, talks have stalled over issues like tariffs, rules of origin and mobility for services professionals. A deal-in-principle was announced by Modi and Starmer in May, and India's Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal was in London last month, with his office saying the visit aimed at charting out a 'clear, time-bound road map for its finalization and implementation.' At the same time, India is in ongoing talks with the US, which is seeking broader access to several key sectors, including agriculture, automobiles, steel, and aluminum — a concession New Delhi resists. Without a deal, Indian exports could face a 26–27 percent 'reciprocal' tariff imposed by President Donald Trump's administration starting Aug. 1. The FTA with the UK could offer India more predictability in economic matters, according to Prof. Harsh V. Pant, vice president of the Observer Research Foundation. 'This is going to be an important marker in the India-UK relationship, and India signaling to the world, particularly in the age of Trump — where there is so much unpredictability and volatility — that any kind of predictability that comes in with other partners is a benefit for every side,' he told Arab News. 'In this case, the UK and India would be hoping that this gives them greater predictability in their economic partnership, thereby reducing some of the challenges that continue to emanate from Washington.' The pact would also signal to other partners that India is willing to engage on economic matters. India is also in talks with the EU to conclude a comprehensive FTA by the end of 2025. 'This is a very important signal to other interlocutors, including the EU and US, that India will be willing to engage creatively on concluding these FTAs,' Pant said. 'This FTA is also crucial for a post-Brexit UK that is trying to retain its economic relevance around the world.'