Frustration drives 3 Israel allies towards recognising Palestine
While France, Britain and Canada stressed their support for establishing two states with recognised borders as the long-term solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict, they were wary of being seen to reward Hamas, of damaging relations with Israel and Washington, and of squandering diplomatic capital.
"I will not do an 'emo tional' re co gnition," French President Emmanuel Macron said at the time.
But as Israeli restrictions on aid escalated Gaza's humanitarian crisis and a two-month truce ended in March, talks began in earnest that would lead three of the Group of Seven major Western economies to set out plans to recognise a Palestinian state in September.
"The possibility of atwo-state solution is being eroded before our eyes... that has been one of the factors that has brought us to this point to try to reverse, with partners, this cycle," Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said on Thursday.
France and Saudi Arabia formed a plan to have more Western countries move towards Palestinian recognition while Arab states would be pushed to take a stronger line against Hamas.
The pair wanted their proposals to gain acceptance at a United Nations conference in June, but they struggled to gain traction, and the meeting was then postponed due to Israeli airstrikes on Iran and amid intense US diplomatic pressure.
The strikes led to a pause in public criticism of Israel from Western allies, and Arab states were hard to win round, but discussions continued behind the scenes.
Macron, Carney and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer were communicating with each other regularly by phone and texts in June and July, according to a Canadian source with direct knowledge of the events.
Canada was wary of acting alone and Britain wanted to ensure any move would have maximum impact, but Macron was more strident.
Alarm was growing about images of starving children and fears were mounting that Israel's Gaza offensive, combined with settler attacks on Palestinians in the West Bank, would further undermine any chance of creating a sovereign Palestinian state.
On July 24, Macron made a surprise announcement that France would recognise a Palestinian state at the UN General Assembly in September.
Macron spoke with Starmer and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz two days later to discuss a "sustainable route to a two-state solution", according to Starmer's spokesperson, just before the prime minister was due to meet Trump in Scotland.
With Trump, Starmer pressed the case to do more to help Gaza, although, according to Trump, he never explicitly said a recognition plan was on the cards.
However, Trump has since criticised such moves as "re ward i n g Hamas".
With Trump still in Britain on Tuesday, opening a golf course, Starmer recalled his cabinet from their summer break to get approval for his recognition plan.
Britain would recognise a Palestinian state in September unless there was a ceasefire and a lasting peace plan from Israel.
Like Macron, Starmer gave Carney a few hours' warning. Once Britain and France had moved, Canada felt it had to follow suit, according to the Canadian source.
"International cooperation is essential to securing lasting peace and stability in the Middle East and Canada will do its best to help lead that effort," Carney said on Wednesday, six days after Macron's announcement.
More than three-quarters of the 193 members of the UN General Assembly already independently recognise a Palestinian state.
But the opposition of the US, with its veto power on the UN Security Council, means the UN cannot admit Palestine as a full member — a move that would effectively recognise a Palestinian state at global level.
However, Richard Gowan, who is UN director at the International Crisis Group, said the declarations mattered "precisely because we are seeing some big US allies catching up with the bulk of the Global South on the Palestinian question at the UN".
"That makes it a little harder for Israel to write off the pro-recognition camp as irrelevant."
The writers are from Reuters
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
4 minutes ago
- The Star
Oil edges down as traders weigh Trump's latest India threat
NEW DELHI: Oil extended a three-day drop, as investors weighed risks to Russian supplies, with US President Donald Trump stepping up a threat to penalise India for buying Moscow's crude. Brent traded near US$68 a barrel after shedding more than 6% over the previous three sessions, while West Texas Intermediate was just shy of US$66. Trump said he would be "substantially raising' the tariff on Indian exports to the US over the nation's purchases of Russian oil as part of a bid to force Moscow to agree a truce in Ukraine. New Delhi slammed the move as unjustified. Oil has been on a round trip, rising a few dollars above $70 and then falling back, as traders try to gauge whether Trump will follow through on his threats to punish Russian oil buyers. Crude prices have held up in recent months in part because inventory builds haven't appeared near vital pricing points and instead have been concentrated on China. "It's pretty hard to predict what's going to happen between Russian sanctions, Iranian sanctions, Chinese storage, and then the underlying fundamentals of the oil markets," BP Plc Chief Executive Officer Murray Auchincloss said in a Bloomberg Television interview. "It's sanctions on Russia, sanctions on Iran, Chinese behavior on storage. Those are the things that'll drive oil market prices moving forward.' The US president's latest warning to India came ahead of his Aug 8 deadline for Russia to reach a truce with Ukraine. US Special Envoy Steve Witkoff is expected to visit Moscow on Wednesday, Tass reported. India emerged as the biggest buyer of Russian seaborne exports of crude following Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022, soaking up discounted barrels shunned by western nations and ramping up purchases from almost zero to about one-third of imports. China is also a major taker of Moscow's oil. The comments came just days after the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and its allies announced another bumper output hike, fully completing the return of one layer of supply cuts. The group will now have to decide whether to return more barrels in the coming months, despite forecasts of oversupply into the end of the year. Against that backdrop, both BP and Saudi Aramco said Tuesday that oil demand is holding up well so far. Aramco's Chief Executive Officer Amin Nasser said US tariffs are having a limited impact on oil demand, while consumption is being supported by gasoline and jet fuel use in the US and China. - Bloomberg
New Straits Times
4 minutes ago
- New Straits Times
Belgium's airdrop ignites global aerial aid movement for Gaza
ON August 4, 2025, as part of a coordinated humanitarian mission, the Belgian Air Force dropped 15 tonnes of food and medical aid over Gaza, followed by another 16 tonnes the next day. It was the first European nation to boldly participate in this form of direct aerial aid to the besieged Palestinian enclave — without waiting for Israel's green light or America's diplomatic blessing. This airdrop shattered the illusion that nothing could move into Gaza without Israel or US approval. What followed was just as remarkable. Inspired by Belgium's courage, a number of countries quickly followed. France began its own airdrops, delivering over 40 tonnes of aid. Germany, Spain, and Italy joined with commitments and logistical coordination. Jordan, acting as a central hub, helped facilitate these missions, while the UAE and Egypt also pledged and executed deliveries. The United Kingdom announced its intent to begin airdrops, and Saudi Arabia is reportedly preparing its entry into the mission. In total, over a dozen nations are now either actively participating or making logistical arrangements to deliver aid from the skies to a population pushed to the brink of starvation. What makes this different from earlier "statements of concern" is that these actions are material, not symbolic. They directly bypass the decades-long stranglehold that Israel and the US have exerted over humanitarian corridors to Gaza. Belgium's decision didn't come with a negotiated corridor, but with a moral one: the belief that starving people do not need permission slips for mercy. In terms of international relations, this moment could signal the slow dismantling of US-Israeli impunity. For decades, Israel has maintained that any uncoordinated delivery into Gaza is a violation of its sovereignty. The US has echoed that position while shielding Israel from global accountability. But now, as countries like Belgium, France, and Spain take matters into their own hands, that consensus is breaking down. Even in the US, there is growing frustration. The American public is beginning to question why their tax dollars fund weapons but not food. And the same Congress that routinely rubber-stamps military aid to Israel is now watching European nations act with moral clarity. The more countries join this momentum, the harder it becomes for Israel to justify the continued strangulation of 2.3 million civilians. And the harder it becomes for the United States to maintain its credibility as a defender of international law while standing by a partner accused of war crimes. What if the Muslim world now followed suit — not just with speeches and resolutions, but with economic action? If the 57 Muslim-majority countries were to impose a complete embargo on imports from and exports to Israel and the United States until the siege is lifted and a ceasefire implemented, the financial impact would be staggering. Based on conservative trade data from 2024, Muslim countries import approximately US$290 billion worth of goods and services annually from the United States and US$23 billion from Israel. In return, they export around $190 billion to the U.S. and $15 billion to Israel. This results in a total bilateral trade volume of approximately $480 billion with the United States and $38 billion with Israel. If even a partial embargo were enacted — on petroleum, consumer goods, technology, or financial services—the ripple effect could hit supply chains, energy markets, and corporate interests in both countries. Oil exports alone could be used as leverage against US support for continued Israeli aggression. Trade redirection toward pro-Palestinian allies, or toward neutral trading blocs, could shift global economic balances. The Muslim world can also reward those who stand up for justice. Belgium, for example, could be granted Most Favoured Nation (MFN) status among OIC member states. Similar preferential treatment could be extended to France, Germany, and any country that dares to take humanitarian action where superpowers have failed. A reward-based system would reshape international diplomacy — where moral courage earns access and political cowardice invites isolation. What's especially powerful — and painful — is that this initiative has come not from the Islamic world but from Christian-majority European nations. While Muslim governments have delivered strong words, they have stopped short of concrete action. Belgium did not. Neither did Spain or France. Their aid drops have reached Palestinian children before many Muslim leaders even held emergency summits. Yet it's not too late. Imagine a unified Muslim airlift: planes from Turkiye, Pakistan, Indonesia, Malaysia, Qatar, and Egypt dropping food and medicine directly into Gaza, without seeking Israeli clearance. Imagine a simultaneous suspension of trade with the United States and Israel. The political impact would be seismic. It would demonstrate that the Muslim world is not merely a collection of markets and oil wells but a bloc capable of coordinated, morally driven global action. Belgium has done what much of the world failed to do — show up. Not with drone strikes or naval blockades, but with parachutes and provisions. Not with threats, but with compassion. In defying silence and cowardice, Belgium has reminded the world what moral clarity looks like. It has reopened the sky—not just above Gaza, but above all of us.
Malay Mail
34 minutes ago
- Malay Mail
Trump administration to impose up to US$15,000 visa bond for travellers from ‘high overstay' countries
WASHINTON, Aug 5 — The US State Department said yesterday that some visa applicants will soon be required to pay bonds of up to US$15,000 to discourage visa overstays as part of President Donald Trump's crackdown on migration. Starting later this month, the pilot program will require applicants from certain countries to pay a sum of 'no less than US$5,000' as collateral for the issuance of their visa. The funds will be returned if the applicant complies with all visa terms. If the applicant remains in the United States past the deadline, the funds will be forfeited. 'Consular officers may require covered nonimmigrant visa applicants to post a bond of up to US$15,000 as a condition of visa issuance,' the agency said in a notice to be published Tuesday in the US Federal Register. The 12-month program would only affect foreign nationals from countries considered to have 'high visa overstay rates' based on a 2023 Department of Homeland Security report, the notice said. Bond payments will also be required by applicants from countries 'where screening and vetting information is deemed deficient,' the notice added, as well as those who were granted citizenship without a residency requirement. 'The pilot reinforces the Trump Administration's commitment to enforcing US immigration laws and safeguarding US national security,' a State Department spokesperson said in response to an AFP inquiry. Neither the notice nor the spokesperson specified which countries would be impacted by the new rule. The program, which will begin on August 20, will apply to B-1 or B-2 nonimmigrant visas, and those asked to pay bonds will have to enter and depart from the United States from a list of pre-selected airports. Since returning to the White House in January, Trump and his administration have cracked down on migration to the United States. The State Department justified the launch of the pilot program by calling it 'a key pillar of the Trump Administration's foreign policy to protect the United States from the clear national security threat posed by visa overstays.' — AFP
