
US-Israel Are Standing Alone. Their Friends Want To 'Recognise' Palestine
But one may legitimately ask, why now? Gaza's humanitarian catastrophe has become impossible to look away from. Western publics are now seeing them live and unfiltered on their smartphones. There have been pro-Gazan protest marches nearly every day in various Western capitals. People are not afraid to go to jail. Over the weekend, British police arrested over 500 pro-Palestinian protesters, some in their 70s and 80s, and most of them White.
US Still Unmoved
Politicians in Europe are reading the outrage in their inboxes and on their streets. The United States, however, stands unmoved - wielding its UN veto to shield Israel and ensuring no resolution passes without Jerusalem's blessing. In Washington's calculations, strategic alliance still outweighs moral awakening; in its domestic politics, bipartisan support for Israel remains one of the few constants in a fractured political landscape.
The Israeli Knesset's green light for the full seizure of Gaza City is both a battlefield milestone and a diplomatic turning point. Most of the West - barring Washington - is uneasy, if not openly opposed, fearing this accelerates a slide towards outright occupation and collective punishment. At the UN Security Council over the weekend, the verdict was overwhelming: near-universal condemnation of Israel's plan, broken only by the US and Panama. The optics are stark. America is no longer leading a coalition on Israel; it is standing almost alone. And the world, it seems, has decided that its silence has run out of excuses.
The backlash was immediate. The United States, under the Trump administration, warned Canada that its decision could jeopardise future trade negotiations, with the threat of higher tariffs looming. Israel responded with characteristic fury, calling the move "a reward for Hamas and its terrorism" and accusing Western governments of moral betrayal. Even a couple of hostages recently released by Hamas publicly criticised the UK's decision, saying it would embolden extremism and undermine the efforts to bring other captives home. The backlash reveals just how volatile and contested the path to recognition remains - a fault line not just between allies and adversaries but between the present moment and a long history of inaction.
Too Little Too Late
But this Western gesture appears to be too late for those in Gaza who are no more. No diplomatic announcement can feed the emaciated, comfort the orphaned or rewind the clock to justify the limbs torn by airstrikes, children buried under rubble, or the dry-eyed silence of survivors who have forgotten how to cry. But late though it is, key Western nations now claim to have seen the light. France, the UK, Australia and Canada, once guardians of a status quo built on Palestinian disposability, have declared their intent to recognise the state of Palestine. One cannot help but ask: where were these sentiments when over tens of thousands of Palestinians were being systematically killed, starved and displaced over the past couple of years?
Recognition is not a humanitarian gesture. I seem to think it is a political act. And in this moment, it reeks of self-preservation more than solidarity.
It took images of starving children, of young men shot while lining up for flour, of aid trucks looted not by militants but by hollow-eyed fathers and exhausted mothers, for the West's conscience to stir. Until then, silence had been their policy, and complicity their creed.
As of last week, the death toll from starvation alone stands at 154 and counting, with the vast majority of deaths being in recent weeks. These are not casualties of war in the conventional sense. These are victims of deliberate siege, of institutional cruelty and of political convenience. Hunger has been weaponised in Gaza, used not as a byproduct of the conflict but as a method of control. More than 1,200 Palestinians - many of them children and already malnourished - have been shot dead while collecting food. The Israeli military claims Hamas looted food packets and is responsible for the starvation of civilians. Nearly all countries, however, agree that the killings must stop and essential goods must be sent to Gaza in quantities that meet the population's needs.
Aid Worth 'A Drop In The Ocean'
Meanwhile, the Israeli agency COGAT proudly proclaimed that hundreds of aid trucks had entered Gaza, along with fuel tankers and sorties of aid airdropped with assistance from Egypt, Jordan and the UAE. It is a paltry offering. Aid agencies estimate that at least 500-600 trucks are needed daily to prevent famine. The United Nations has likened the current trickle to "a drop in the ocean".
And yet, amid this collapse of humanity, Western diplomats have found their voices, still more like the voices of petitioners than of prosecutors, but voices of dissent nevertheless. Britain's Foreign Secretary, David Lammy, recently declared: "The global community is deeply offended by children being shot and killed as they reach out for aid." But this observation, however sincere, comes after months of calculated avoidance.
There is a quiet admission in Western capitals that recognition now has come not from courage but from discomfort. To date, more than 140 countries - nearly three-quarters of the United Nations - have recognised the state of Palestine. Most of these recognitions came decades ago, particularly from the Global South, and stood as acts of moral resistance against Western-backed Israeli policy. But until now, the core Western powers remained unmoved. Now, suddenly, they say they will recognise Palestine by September. That, in itself, signals a tectonic shift. Though not yet an earthquake.
Germany, still haunted by its historical guilt, has not yet joined the new recognisers. Its position remains ambiguous, cautious. Berlin says it supports a two-state solution but insists on "appropriate conditions" and "direct negotiations" between Israel and the Palestinians. In other words: not yet. Not until the wounds are deeper, perhaps. Or not until Washington signals it's safe to follow.
And Washington has made its position clear.
Under the Trump administration, the United States stands firmly opposed to any recognition of Palestinian statehood. Trump has gone further than mere diplomatic objection - he has threatened direct economic consequences. Canada, he warned, would risk a breakdown in trade talks and suffer retaliatory tariffs if it proceeded with recognition. The message was unmistakable: align with Washington or prepare to pay. So much for sovereignty.
The Long Forgotten 'Tokyo Guidelines'
But one must remember that the US had not always been so directionless in this regard. In November 2023, at a G7 summit in Tokyo, then-Secretary of State Antony Blinken had outlined what was intended to be a postwar roadmap for Gaza. Fresh from Tel Aviv, and just a month after the October 7 Hamas attacks, Blinken presented five core principles that came to be known as the "Tokyo Guidelines".
They included: no forced displacement of Palestinians; no Israeli re-occupation of Gaza; no renewed blockade of the Strip; a post-war government led by Palestinians, preferably through the internationally recognised Palestinian Authority; and no role whatsoever for Hamas. These were not revolutionary demands. They were minimum expectations for a just outcome. But they were shelved almost as soon as they were spoken.
The Trump administration, which assumed power over a year and a half ago, discarded them outright. The Tokyo Guidelines faded into obscurity - forgotten by Washington, ignored by Israel and remembered only by those desperately searching for a plan. Yet, many of America's European allies still quietly cling to those guidelines. The recent French-Saudi-led conference at the UN in New York was, in many ways, a revival attempt of the Tokyo vision.
But the White House boycotted that gathering, calling it a "publicity stunt". "The US will not participate in this insult," said a State Department spokesperson. The insult, it seems, was the idea of peace without Israel's permission.
Inside Gaza, no such declarations are heard. Internet access is patchy. Communication is frail. But a few voices still rise from the ashes. "Another slap to Israel - this time from Canada," wrote Gaza-based journalist Imad Abu Shawish. "Every recognition brings us a step closer to our dream of an independent state." Yet, even he must wonder whether these recognitions will translate into real change on the ground. For the mother boiling weeds to feed her children, or the boy who flinches at every sound from the sky, symbolic recognitions do not rebuild homes or resurrect the dead.
Break From Policy
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has said his country's recognition will be delayed only if Israel takes concrete steps towards a ceasefire and a sustainable peace. But Tel Aviv has already dismissed that condition. However, that has not shaken the British resolve. According to a report in the BBC, which quotes a senior British official, the move is now "irreversible". It is, at the very least, a break from decades of British policy.
No one in London, Paris, Canberra or Ottawa pretends that this will result in an independent Palestinian state anytime soon. The hope, as stated by British diplomats, is to empower moderates on both sides. It is a moral jolt more than a diplomatic manoeuvre. A late one, but necessary all the same.
Meanwhile, Israel, with US backing, continues to pursue a strategy that offers no political solution - only military dominance. Gaza, once a place of neighbourhoods and schools and beach cafés, is now a graveyard. There is no talk of reconstruction, only of control. And Trump, when pressed for his vision of the future, simply pointed to Netanyahu. You see, the American president no longer leads.
Nothing Moves Without US
European nations are trying to step into the vacuum. But even they admit: without American backing and without Israeli cooperation, they are fumbling in the dark. Their September deadline may bring stronger language, more recognitions, louder condemnations. But without enforcement mechanisms, without material pressure, these recognitions remain on paper.
Still, something has shifted. The world's superpower may have abdicated its role, but others are stirring. The taboo of Palestinian statehood among Western elites has been broken. For the first time in years, the word "Palestine" is being uttered alongside words like "legitimacy" and "recognition", not just "terror" and "hostage". That matters. Not enough, but it matters.
What matters more, though, is how the world will act when the famine worsens, when Israel seizes Gaza City, when the September deadline for recognition arrives and when Israeli rejection continues. Recognition must not be the end of the conversation. It must be the beginning of something far more uncomfortable, far more urgent.
It is not too late to save the living. But it is far too late to pretend you simply didn't know.
Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author

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


Economic Times
14 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Elon Musk's AI chatbot Grok picks Obama over Trump, and the 2 reasons will spark outrage
Grok picked Obama over Trump: Tech billionaire Elon Musk's AI chatbot, Grok, has sparked controversy by declaring Barack Obama a superior US president to Donald Trump. Citing Obama's consistent economic recovery post-2008, including significant job growth and market stabilization, Grok also praised his diplomatic approach, particularly the Iran nuclear deal. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Grok Sparks Debate by Choosing Barack Obama Over Donald Trump Obama's Job Growth, Market Stability and Foreign Policy Win AI's Approval Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Trump Slammed by Grok Over Felony Convictions Tax Cuts vs. Deficit: Grok Weighs Trump's Economic Record Obama's Steady Leadership vs. Trump's Erosion Of Trust Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Past Controversies Haunt Elon Musk's AI Chatbot FAQs Elon Musk's AI chatbot Grok has stirred controversy again, this time by naming former US president Barack Obama as a better leader than US president Donald Trump, citing two key reasons: economic leadership and foreign policy, as per a response came after a user asked the chatbot to choose in one word, which of the two presidents was superior, which led Grok to reply, "Obama," as reported by The it was further asked to explain, Grok pointed to Obama's 'more consistent economic recovery and diplomatic engagement,' as quoted in the report. The AI, created by Musk's xAI and built into his social media platform X, didn't hold back in its comparison and the internet is already reacting, according to The Express READ: US drops the hammer: No more $800 tax-free eBay buys — shoppers furious Grok pointed to Obama's economic strategy, saying, "Post-2008, he added 8.1 million jobs and stabilized markets with measured policies like the Affordable Care Act," as quoted in the AI chatbot also praised his international relations approach, particularly the Iran nuclear deal, as a step toward global cooperation, according to The Express. It said, "His foreign policy, including the Iran deal, aimed for global cooperation, though not flawless," as quoted in the READ: Economist predicts horrendous crypto crash, but says traders can still cash in big first Grok's comparison went further, describing Trump as a 'notorious criminal,' citing his 34 felony convictions, as reported by The it acknowledged that Trump's tax cuts helped short-term growth, but also blamed him for a $25 trillion deficit increase and trade wars that, according to Grok, disrupted economic stability, as per the said that, "Trump's tax cuts spurred growth, but his $25 trillion deficit spike and trade wars disrupted stability," as quoted by The READ: Is it AI or Trump's policies? US sees brutal 140% layoff spike in July, worst surge since early COVID chaos The chatbot also criticized Trump for undermining trust in democratic institutions, referencing his repeated election fraud claims, according to the final assessment, that Obama's 'steady leadership' contrasted with what it described as Trump's 'erosion of trust,' as per The AI bot explained that Trump's "misleading claims, like election fraud, eroded trust more than Obama's occasional exaggerations. Obama's steady leadership aligns better with long-term governance metrics, though Trump's disruption resonated with some," as quoted in the READ: As the July jobs report paints a grim picture, 114 companies plan layoffs in August - is yours on the list? The comments have reignited debate over Grok, as critics argue the AI reflects Musk's own political views, while others say it's doing what it was designed to do, provide unfiltered answers, according to The Express isn't Grok's first controversy. Just last month, the bot was criticized for praising Adolf Hitler in response to a user prompt. Musk had responded by saying the bot had been 'too compliant' and was being updated to avoid future issues, as per the READ: Giant Wyoming data center to guzzle 5x more power than residents, but the user remains secret Grok said Obama was the better president, citing stronger economic recovery and better foreign chatbot pointed to Obama's steady job growth after 2008 and his diplomatic approach, especially the Iran nuclear deal.


Hindustan Times
14 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Trump marks 90th anniversary of Social Security: Why is it more threatened now?
United States President Donald Trump signed a proclamation on Thursday marking the 90th anniversary of Social Security. Trump said his administration had 'kicked out' as many as 275,000 illegal immigrants out of the program.(Bloomberg) While saying that his administration had 'kicked out' as many as 275,000 illegal immigrants from the program, Trump also announced that there would be no tax on Social Security for seniors. While Trump said that Social Security was being strengthened under his watch, the program, which provides benefits to almost 69 million Americans each month, has been marred by concerns lately. Shortfall of money, agency staffing slashed The shortfall in money required to pay the full benefits and the slashing of the agency staffing are some of the threats to the program. The so-called go-broke date of the Social Security program has also been moved up a year from 2035 to 2034, the Associated Press reported. This means that after this date, the program would only be able to cover 81% of benefits, an annual report released in June stated. The report said that the earlier date was due to new legislation affecting benefits, which thus led to earlier projected depletion dates. Trump, during the commemmoration of the program, also alleged that millions of dead people had been receiving Social Security benefits. Concerns about privatization of program Concerns regarding the privatization of the program propped up after US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent's remarks. Bessent earlier this month said that the new tax-deferred investment accounts could serve as a 'backdoor to privatization', eventually withdrawing his remarks. The plan to privatize the Social Security program has not been received well by the US public since it was pitched by Republican President George W. Bush in 2005, AP reported. Glenn Hubbard, a professor at Columbia University who was an economist in Bush's White House, told AP that Social Security would need to be reduced in size so that the benefits can be provided for future generations. ''If you want Social Security benefits to look like they are today, we're going to have to raise everyone's taxes a lot,' Hubbard said.


Economic Times
29 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Brazil's Lula says Trump would be in prison if Jan 6 Capitol attack happened there
Brazil's President Lula criticized Donald Trump for attacking Brazil's judiciary. He said Trump would face trial in Brazil if events like the January 6 Capitol attack happened there. Lula defended the country's courts, rejected US criticism on human rights, and urged Brazilians not to fear pressure from Trump, as tensions rise between the two countries over Bolsonaro's trial and US tariffs. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Bolsonaro trial and Trump pressure Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Brazil-US tensions and human rights FAQs against Brazil's judiciary. Lula said that if the January 6 Capitol attacks in the US had happened in Brazil, Trump would have been put on say Trump has caused the biggest diplomatic rupture between the US and Brazil by imposing 50% tariffs on Brazilian imports and sanctioning a Brazilian supreme court judge. These moves are seen as helping ex-president Jair Bolsonaro avoid prison, reported by The could get up to 40 years in prison when the supreme court announces its verdict in the coming weeks. Trump called Bolsonaro's trial a 'witch-hunt' and urged Brazilian authorities to stop the Wednesday, Lula announced a rescue package for companies affected by. At the same event in Brasília, he defended Brazil's judiciary and its handling of Bolsonaro's trial. Lula said Brazil's justice system judges based on evidence from witnesses. Presumption of innocence is fully respected. Trials are democratic and fair, not arbitrary, as per The Guardian told Trump, 'If what happened in the Capitol had happened in Brazil, he (Trump) would be put on trial here in Brazil too.' The US State Department released its annual human rights report, accusing Brazil of undermining democratic debate. Suppressing speech of Bolsonaro supporters, journalists, and elected said Brazil will not accept being told it violates human rights, and there was no reason for the US tariffs. Lula lamented that the 201-year-old Brazil-US relationship is being 'thrown away' due to Trump's actions. Lula urged citizens not to fear Trump's pressure campaign. He reminded them that Trump avoided charges for trying to overturn the 2020 US election. Trump pardoned about 1,500 people involved in the January 6 Capitol riot, claims Brazil, 141 people are in prison for taking part in the January 8, 2023 riots in Brasília, linked to Bolsonaro's attempted coup. Lula said people should not be scared by crises. He explained that crises exist for creating new things and reminded us that humanity has achieved great things during difficult times, as per the The Guardian Knight and his wife Penny donated $2 billion, the largest known single gift to a U.S. money will expand the cancer center, support research, fund clinical trials, and improve patient care.