Which EU countries recognise Palestine amid France's decision?
Macron shared his letter to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in an X post, alongside a statement which read: "The French people want peace in the Middle East. It is up to us, the French, together with the Israelis, the Palestinians, and our European and international partners, to demonstrate that it is possible."
France will become the first G7 country and the first permanent member of the UN Security Council (France, United States, China, United Kingdom and Russia) to recognise Palestine, joining 147 member states of the United Nations that have already done so.
The act of recognition involves acknowledging the sovereignty and independence of Palestine within its pre-1967 Middle East war borders. This includes the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem. The move will also lead to the establishment of full diplomatic relations between France and Palestine.
This decision was taken amid a renewed push in Europe to bring the war in Gaza to an end.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and the EU's chief diplomat Kaja Kallas have called the suffering in Gaza "unbearable" and "indefensible".
Before France, 10 out of 27 EU countries had already recognised Palestinian statehood.
Bulgaria, Cyprus, Hungary, Poland, and Romania recognised Palestine in 1988, well before they became EU member states.
The former country of Czechoslovakia also recognised Palestinian statehood in 1988.
However, after it split into the Czech Republic and Slovakia in 1992, the Czech Republic did not recognise such a state.
"The Palestinian state did not meet the conditions for statehood under international law, of which the Czechoslovak government was fully aware," the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic wrote on its official website in 2020. "The Czech Republic has not yet recognised the Palestinian state."
Meanwhile, Slovakia reconfirmed its recognition of Palestine in 1993.
In October 2014, Sweden became the very first country to recognise Palestine while being an EU member state.
"The purpose of Sweden's recognition is to contribute to a future in which Israel and Palestine can live side by side in peace and security. We want to contribute to creating more hope and belief in the future among young Palestinians and Israelis who might otherwise run the risk of believing that there is no alternative to the current situation," said the then Swedish Minister for Foreign Affairs, Margot Wallström.
Sweden took this step at the height of months-long clashes between Israelis and Palestinians in East Jerusalem.
More recently, on 28 May 2024, Spain and Ireland recognised Palestine as a state, claiming the decision aimed to help Israelis and Palestinians reach peace.
On 4 June 2024, Slovenia also recognised the state of Palestine.
"Slovenia and Palestine have established good relations, which are underpinned by regular political dialogue," Slovenia's official website stated. The two countries also collaborate in education and humanitarian aid, including by implementing a variety of humanitarian projects."
Macron's announcement sparked anger from Israel and the United States. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu condemned the decision, as did US State Secretary Marco Rubio.
"This reckless decision only serves Hamas propaganda and sets back peace. It is a slap in the face to the victims of October 7th," Rubio wrote on X.
Netanyahu lashed out at France's announcement, calling it a betrayal by a close ally and warning it would "reward terror".
"A Palestinian state in these conditions would be a launch pad to annihilate Israel — not to live in peace beside it," he said on X.
What about other EU countries?
Other EU countries have reacted to France's decision, stating that they will not follow these steps.
Despite recent calls for an "immediate ceasefire" and "urgently needed humanitarian aid", Germany has claimed it has no plans to follow France's lead.
Germany has traditionally been a particularly staunch ally of Israel in Europe, with relations rooted in the history of the Holocaust.
It says recognising a Palestinian state should be "one of the concluding steps" in negotiating a two-state solution, and it "does not plan to recognise a Palestinian state in the short term".
Italy is also not planning on recognising the state of Palestine. The country's Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni stated that the recognition "without there being a state of Palestine" would be "counterproductive".
Meanwhile, the Belgian position will be determined by the government in early September.
"I will make a proposal to the government before the UN General Assembly in September so that it can decide on this matter, taking these elements into account," Foreign Minister Maxime Prévot wrote on X.
Behind the recognition of a Palestinian state lies the idea of the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which served as the basis of peace negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians from the Oslo Accords in 1993 up until 2014.
While the Palestinian Authority still advocates for two states, Israel no longer supports this solution to the conflict, nor does its ally, the US.
In fact, settlement activity on the West Bank has further expanded in the past years, rendering the creation of a contiguous Palestinian state impossible.
Add to that US President Donald Trump's recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital in 2017, prompting the US embassy to move there from Tel Aviv. With this in mind, recognising a Palestinian state is largely symbolic and remains unfeasible as things stand on the ground.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
LeMonde
2 minutes ago
- LeMonde
France-UK migrant returns deal takes effect
A "one-in, one-out" deal in which Britain can return some migrants who cross the Channel in small boats back to France came into force on Tuesday, August 5, the UK government announced. The Interior Ministry said that British authorities were "operationally ready" and that migrant detentions were expected to begin "within days" following ratification of the agreement. "Today we send a clear message – if you come here illegally on a small boat you will face being sent back to France," Prime Minister Keir Starmer said in a statement after striking the deal with French President Emmanuel Macron last month. The agreement seeks to curb record levels of irregular Channel crossings that are causing discontent in Britain and helping fuel the rise of the hard-right Reform UK party. Under the arrangement, for now a pilot program set to run until June 2026, irregular migrants arriving on UK shores could be detained and returned to France if they are deemed ineligible for asylum. In exchange, the United Kingdom will accept an equal number of migrants from France who can apply for asylum via an online platform, giving priority to nationalities most vulnerable to smugglers and to people with ties in Britain. The two governments signed the final text last week, with the EU Commission giving its "green light on this innovative approach," Britain's Home Office said in a statement late Monday. "The unscrupulous business model of smugglers must be broken," the European Union's Migration Commissioner Magnus Brunner wrote on X on Tuesday. But refugee charities have criticized the deal, urging the British government to provide more safe and legal routes for asylum seekers instead. The number of migrants making the dangerous journey in flimsy dinghies this year crossed 25,000 at the end of July, the highest tally ever at this point in the year. The rise, which the government has partly attributed to extended periods of good weather, means Labour leader Starmer is struggling to fulfil one of his main pledges before winning last year's general election. Social media ads In recent weeks, anti-immigration protesters and counter-protesters have clashed outside hotels housing asylum seekers in Britain, with some demonstrations turning violent. Starmer has tried to portray the deal as a diplomatic victory after years of faltering cooperation between France and the UK on the politically sensitive issue. "This is the product of months of grown-up diplomacy delivering real results for British people as we broker deals no government has been able to achieve," he said. While the agreement has also met with criticism in northern France, where some officials say the program is too favorable to the UK, Nigel Farage's anti-immigrant Reform UK party says it does not go far enough to secure Britain's borders. Interior Minister Yvette Cooper said Tuesday that she would not put a number on how many migrants would be deported under the deal. "Of course, it will start with lower numbers and then build, but we want to be able to expand it," she told BBC radio. The Home Office this week pledged £100 million ($132 million) for law enforcement, including additional staff and technology, to "tackle" gangs who organize the crossings. Starmer's government also said it would make it an offence to promote on social media dangerous immigration routes into the UK, including via the Channel. Under the new provision, which will be part of a border security bill making its way through parliament, those found advertising such crossings could be fined and face up to five years in prison. According to a Home Office analysis, 80% of migrants arriving via small boats told officials they used social media during the process.
Euronews
33 minutes ago
- Euronews
German officials worry 'trusted flaggers' may curb free speech
More and more lawyers, politicians and journalists are criticising the German government's hotline policy of establishing reporting centres against "hate and agitation on the internet." These centres are often funded by the state or are even state-run. But there are worries that opinion is too often mistaken for hate. In some cases, 6 am police raids have reportedly occurred at the homes of ordinary citizens who posted memes critical of the government ("insulting politicians") during Germany's previous so-called traffic light coalition government. Two such reporting NGOs in Germany are now labelled as so-called "trusted flaggers". As part of the EU's Digital Services Act (DSA) regulation, they are tasked with removing illegal content from the internet. But some legal experts believe that the private reporting centres are too close to politics and fear that content could be reported when it may turn out to be authorised as opinion after all. "Trusted flaggers are controversial because they are semi-governmental organisations that are financed by the state with large sums of money and de facto decide what is legal and what is not," Lawyer Ralf Höcker told Euronews. "It's a form of state censorship, you could call it the Ministry of Truth." According to Höcker, there are now "numerous connections" between the appointed trusted flagger organisations and politics and political parties, adding that "this cannot end well." 'It's not right to continue down this path' Scepticism is also emerging within the ruling CDU party. "It is absolutely not okay to continue down this path," CDU lawmaker Saskia Ludwig told Euronews. "Commissioning private companies to sift through what is and isn't allowed on the internet, I'm not the only one who is sceptical about this, I know that many in the parliamentary group are too," she pointed out. SPD MP Parsa Marvi explains why his party disagrees. "In our view, the point is that platforms and social media are not a legal vacuum, where justiciable criminal offences take place, such as hate speech, defamation and threats like bullying. All of these things must be taken very seriously," he told Euronews. This is why the European Commission has established the trusted flagger instrument, says Marvi, "to make this illegal, criminal content reportable". "Nothing will be deleted," he emphasised. "The trusted flaggers report on the basis of the guidelines and legislation and the platform decides and checks." But as government-funded NGOs are often seen as "trusted whistleblowers", social media platforms usually react quickly when they flag content or risk penalties. In addition, the reporting centres verify that the online platform has deleted the post following the deletion request. In other words, the pressure on online platforms to press "delete" is very high. At the same time, freedom of expression is a valuable asset in Germany. The highest court therefore often makes the final decision as to whether an opinion is still admissible. The German government has also reintroduced the offence of lèse majesté during the second lockdown in the coronavirus pandemic. The offence means that in certain cases, criticism of the government that constitutes insult or defamation against political figures is subject to criminal prosecution in Germany. Specifically, Section 188 was amended by law, adding "insult" to the offence in addition to "defamation" and "slander". The offence was also extended to include local politicians. During the last federal government, hundreds of complaints were filed by politicians across the party spectrum under the amendment. So much so that initial statistics have already been compiled. Robert Habeck of the Greens, for example, filed 805 criminal complaints. The Greens' Annalena Baerbock filed 513, Marco Buschmann of the FDP 26, and Boris Pistorius of the SPD 10, among others. Politicians from other parties such as the CDU and AfD have also filed criminal complaints against insults from citizens. This includes AfD leader Alice Weidel, who has filed hundreds of complaints for insults online and has also made use of Section 188, even though her party is in favour of abolishing it. CDU leader Friedrich Merz, before he became chancellor, had also filed several criminal complaints for insulting behaviour, which in some cases led to house searches. Former Chancellor Angela Merkel (CDU) did not file a single complaint against a citizen for insulting behaviour during her time in office. Criticism of politicians that is considered offensive is also reported by trusted flaggers. One of these, Respect, passes reports directly to the Federal Criminal Police Office, although this is not required in the DSA. CDU politician Saskia Ludwig is alarmed. "I grew up in the GDR, I'm very sceptical about the fact that portals are being created so that anyone can report anyone. But the trusted flaggers are not controlled, that's not possible," Ludwig said. It suggests that conflict within the German government may be imminent. In the coalition agreement, it was agreed that "false factual claims are not covered by freedom of expression". Germany is further ahead than other countries with Trusted Flagger. 14 EU countries have still not appointed them. Reporting centre receives up to 95% government funding Documents made available to Euronews show that the Respect reporting centre appointed by Germany as a trusted flagger is 95% government-funded, using money from the "Demokratie Leben" programme of the Ministry of Family Affairs. German MEP Friedrich Pürner has requested the documents that prove this from the Network Agency. When asked, the Network Agency explained that "even public or semi-public organisations" can be "approved as trusted flaggers". What's more, government grants "do not prevent certification". Organisations like Respect would be receiving hundreds of thousands of euros in government funding each year. The Baden-Württemberg Youth Foundation will receive €424,562 in 2025, while HateAid will get €424,823 this year. 'Other opinions could be silenced' "It is highly interesting that the 'Respect' reporting centre is predominantly financed by state funds. Only around 5% comes from its own funds," Pürner, who was a member of BSW until this year, told Euronews: The network agency has examined independence from online platforms, but "there was no critical scrutiny of state independence," he added. "My fear is that only opinions or statements accepted by the state and the government will be accepted," Pürner explained. "Statements to the contrary, on the other hand, could be defamed, deleted and thus silenced." This reminds him strongly of his "own experiences during the coronavirus pandemic," Pürner said. Pürner, originally a doctor from Bavaria, headed a Bavarian health authority until the end of 2020, but was then transferred after criticising the coronavirus policy measures. He told the Berliner Zeitung newspaper: "When I criticised the coronavirus measures, I was seconded within a few days with the aim of a permanent transfer."
Euronews
2 hours ago
- Euronews
Change blows over the Baltic Sea as Poland bets on offshore wind
The energy transition is one of the most important challenges the European Union is facing. While the goal is clear – to achieve climate neutrality by 2050 – the road to get there is sometimes bumpy. The struggles of the energy transition are particularly evident in the wind energy sector, which, despite its dynamic development, still faces numerous barriers. Poland, being one of the largest CO₂ emitters in the EU, is an example of both the opportunities and the difficulties of this transition. For the first time in history, renewable energy sources (RES) in Poland trumped coal in the national energy mix. This is not a one-off incident, experts say, but a sign of a lasting shift in the country's energy landscape. "Every day, during daylight hours, we have much more energy from RES than from coal," comments Piotr Czopek, vice president at the Polish Wind Energy Association, emphasising that the country is just entering a new chapter in its energy transition. Renewable energy, as the cheapest source available today, can become the foundation for the future competitiveness of Polish industry in the European and global arena. Offshore wind energy plays a special role as a sector that is just coming to life. Poland has significant wind energy potential, especially in Pomerania and the central part of the country. According to the Polish Wind Energy Association (PWEA), the installed capacity of wind farms in Poland exceeded 9 GW at the beginning of 2025. However, the development of onshore wind turbines has been blocked for years by the '10H rule' - a regulation requiring wind turbines to be built no closer than ten times their height from the nearest buildings. Although a 2023 amendment softened these restrictions and gave the sector a much-needed investment boost, experts warn that further reforms are still necessary to unlock the full potential of wind energy. "Offshore wind energy? From the point of view of these renewables, it's the most stable source," says Czopek. "Anyone who has been to the Baltic Sea knows that it always blows properly there." "This makes this power industry very stable, it produces a lot of energy, on top of that, it is far away from human settlements, so no one is bothered by it. Secondly, the Baltic Sea is a relatively shallow sea, which facilitates investment," he adds. Although no offshore wind farm in Poland is yet fully operational, the first turbines are already standing in the Baltic Sea. Construction by the Baltic Power consortium (Orlen and Canada's Northland Power) aims to create a 1200 MW farm. Further projects will start next year, and by 2030, Poland plans to reach 6,000 MW of energy from offshore wind farms. As experts emphasise, this is not only an energy investment – it is also an opportunity for the industry. "We are at the initial, ascending stage. Already today, many large factories are being built in Poland – in Szczecin, in Gdansk and in other cities," Czopek says. Baltic Towers in Gdansk is just one example of a growing manufacturing base. Importantly, Poland is attracting not only domestic companies but also global players who are opening production facilities here. "No one will invest hundreds of millions of euros in Poland if they don't see that they can make money from this business," he emphasises. Offshore wind energy is also an export opportunity, as turbine components, infrastructure, or design services can go to markets all over the world. At the European level, wind energy is also growing in strength. According to WindEurope, EU countries installed a total of 18 GW of new wind capacity in 2024, mainly in Germany, Spain and the Netherlands. However, the EU faces rising component costs, inflation and global competition, above all from China, which dominates turbine production. Brussels plans to counter these trends through the European Act on Carbon Neutral Industries and strategic raw material partnerships. The aim is to increase Europe's technological and energy independence, especially given the ongoing geopolitical crisis. Social challenges are also not insignificant. In many regions – both in Poland and Western Europe – residents are protesting against the construction of wind farms, concerned about noise, landscape aesthetics or the impact on local ecosystems. Social acceptance is playing an increasingly important role, which, as research shows, can be increased through the participation of local communities in investments and a fair distribution of profits. Wind turbines have become a symbol of a green future and the fight against CO₂ emissions. However, questions are increasingly being asked about how much it really costs to build wind farms and whether their carbon footprint contradicts the idea of 'green energy'? The construction of a wind farm – whether onshore or offshore – is a financially intensive undertaking. According to WindEurope, the cost of installing one wind turbine on land ranges from €1.2 to €1.6 million for each megawatt of energy-producing capacity. For offshore or marine farms, the costs are even higher, as much as €3 to €5 million per megawatt. The total cost includes manufacturing and transporting the turbines, the construction of the foundations, network connections (often tens of kilometres of cables), engineering and maintenance work. Experts point out that, although wind energy is 'free', the infrastructure needed to generate it involves huge investment and technical costs. A typical wind turbine requires around 200-300 litres of specialised oil every 1.5-2 years. For offshore farms, the logistics and labour costs can far exceed the price of the lubricant itself. The industry is now looking for ways to reduce oil consumption or change lubrication technology altogether. Ideas are also emerging for the use of greener bio-liquids. On 18-19 November, the largest offshore wind energy conference in Poland, and also the largest in Central and Eastern Europe, will be held in Warsaw. As the organisers, the Polish Wind Energy Association, point out, the event is intended to bring together investors and supply chain companies. "It's a space to discuss investments and to do business – because that's what it's all about, to be able to meet and talk about what we can do together," it says. Poland is at a turning point today. Although only a few years ago coal dominated the domestic energy sector indivisibly, today it is wind, both literally and figuratively, that is blowing in the sails of the transformation. Renewable energy is not only changing the way we produce electricity. It is also changing the way we think about the future – greener, more competitive and more independent.
