Mixed Palestinian reactions to France's plan to recognise state
Nabil Abdel Razek, a Ramallah resident, expressed cautious hope, saying, 'We hope it will be implemented, and we hope that most or all countries around the world will follow France's lead in recognising the Palestinian people's right to an independent state.' The Palestinian Authority, based in Ramallah, was established under the 1993 Oslo Accords as a step toward statehood.
Newspapers in the West Bank city highlighted Macron's announcement, with political activist Ahmed Ghoneim stating, 'All of these decisions not only affirm the rights of the Palestinian people, but also contribute to changing the violent reality in the region and lead to greater stability.' Ghoneim also hoped France's move would encourage other European nations to follow suit, as 142 UN members already recognise Palestine.
However, analysts remain skeptical. Political commentator Nour Odeh questioned, 'The question for Palestinians is what will France do NOW about Israel starving them in Gaza.' Ines Abdel Razek of the Palestine Institute for Public Diplomacy argued that France should instead address the crisis directly, saying, 'What France should have recognised is the genocide and taken measures to end it and end the occupation.' She urged France to sever ties with Israel and impose trade restrictions.
Despite the symbolic nature of France's gesture, activist Samer Sinijlawi found optimism in Macron's call for Palestinian elections, calling it a 'brings us hope' moment. - AFP
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
37 minutes ago
- The Star
EU chief von der Leyen heads to Scotland for trade talks with Trump
FILE PHOTO: European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen speaks at a press conference following the 25th EU-China Summit in Beijing, China July 24, 2025. REUTERS/Florence Lo/File Photo BRUSSELS/EDINBURGH (Reuters) -EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen headed to Scotland on Saturday ahead of a meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump on Sunday afternoon, commission spokespeople said, as EU officials said the two sides were nearing a trade agreement. Trump, in Scotland for a few days of golfing and bilateral meetings, told reporters upon his arrival on Friday evening that he was looking forward to meeting with von der Leyen, calling her a "highly respected" leader. He repeated his view that there was a 50-50 chance that the U.S. and the 27-member European Union could reach a framework trade pact, adding that Brussels wanted to "make a deal very badly". If it happened, he said it would be the biggest trade agreement reached yet by his administration, surpassing the $550 billion accord agreed with Japan earlier this week. The White House has released no details about the planned meeting or the terms of the emerging agreement. The European Commission on Thursday said a negotiated trade solution with the United States was within reach, even as EU members voted to approve counter-tariffs on 93 billion euros ($109 billion) of U.S. goods in case the talks collapse. To get a deal, Trump said the EU would have to "buy down" that tariff rate, although he gave no specifics. EU diplomats say a possible deal between Washington and Brussels would likely include a broad 15% tariff on EU goods imported into the U.S., mirroring the U.S.-Japan deal, along with a 50% tariff on European steel and aluminum. The broad tariff rate would be half the 30% duties that Trump has threatened to slap on EU goods from August 1. It remains unclear if Washington will agree to exempt the EU from sectoral tariffs on automobiles, pharmaceuticals and other goods that have already been announced or are pending. Combining goods, services and investment, the EU and the United States are each other's largest trading partners by far. The American Chamber of Commerce in Brussels warned in March that any conflict jeopardized $9.5 trillion of business in the world's most important commercial relationship. (Reporting by Andrew Gray and Andrea ShalalEditing by Nick Zieminski)
New Straits Times
4 hours ago
- New Straits Times
Malaysia urges Thailand, Cambodia to resume peace talk
KUALA LUMPUR: Thailand and Cambodia have been urged to hold negotiations to restore peace and stability, in line with the spirit of Asean unity and fraternity. Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Mohamad Hasan said efforts to resolve the ongoing conflict between the two nations must be guided by principles of solidarity and good neighbourliness. He said Malaysia stands ready to play a constructive role, through the Asean Chair's Office, in helping Thailand and Cambodia resume talks and bring an end to the fighting. Mohamad also reiterated Malaysia's call for both countries to exercise maximum restraint and implement an immediate, unconditional ceasefire. "This is to prevent either Thailand or Cambodia from taking any action that may jeopardise peace efforts. "As the Asean Chair for 2025, Malaysia is deeply concerned about the escalating tensions between the governments of Thailand and Cambodia. "The situation has already resulted in rising casualties on both sides, widespread damage to public property, and the displacement of many residents from border areas," he said in a statement. The latest round of clashes between Thailand and Cambodia stems from tensions that began in May, following the death of a Cambodian soldier during an armed confrontation at the border. The 818-kilometre border between the two countries has long been a source of dispute, with both claiming sovereignty over areas demarcated during French colonial rule in 1907. Several ancient temples along the border remain key points of contention, including Prasat Ta Moan Thom and the famed Preah Vihear Temple. International media earlier reported that fighting had entered its third day, although there appeared to be a glimmer of hope, as both sides expressed willingness to seek diplomatic support, claimed acts of self-defence, and called for an end to hostilities through dialogue. At least 30 people have been killed and over 130,000 displaced in what is now the worst conflict between the two Southeast Asian neighbours in 13 years. Thailand's death toll remains at 19 as of today, while Cambodian Defence Ministry spokesperson Maly Socheata confirmed the deaths of five soldiers and eight civilians. In February, the dispute over Prasat Ta Moan Thom, a Khmer temple near the Thai border, flared up further when Thai authorities barred Cambodian tourists from singing their national anthem at the site. The Cambodian government, however, has denied initiating the conflict, stating it only responded after Thai forces launched an armed attack. Both nations have since severed diplomatic ties and continue to blame each other for triggering the violence. Thailand has also announced the closure of all border checkpoints with Cambodia until further notice.
New Straits Times
4 hours ago
- New Straits Times
ICJ advisory gives legal firepower to climate activists
THE world's top court may not be able to compel polluting states to halt planet-warming emissions, but experts say its momentous climate decision gives potent legal and political firepower to countries and campaigners on the frontlines. An advisory opinion like the one issued by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) last week is not binding and so is not directly enforceable, but that does not mean it has no weight. By saying that all countries are firmly bound to a swathe of legal obligations under existing laws and treaties, experts say the ruling will influence courts, climate negotiations and policy decisions across the world. The ICJ "couldn't have been clearer" on the binding nature of a range of climate duties, said Cesar Rodriguez-Garavito, professor of law and director of the Climate Law Accelerator at New York University. He said the ruling, which was responding to questions on countries' climate responsibilities from the UN General Assembly, was "as strong as we could have imagined". "The consensus among the judges is fully behind the conclusion that international law establishes clear and binding obligations for states not to cause massive harm to the environment in general and not to harm the climate system in particular," he said. These included ensuring national climate plans reflect the highest possible ambition to stay within the Paris agreement's safer global warming cap of 1.5°C above pre-industrial times — a level that the world could reach this decade. If those obligations are not met, the court said states may be obliged to repair damaged infrastructure or ecosystems — and if that is not possible, they could face compensation claims. This will ripple into future litigation, said Markus Gehring, professor of European and international law at the University of Cambridge. "We are a far cry from a contentious case between two countries, where someone is demanding liability for past and present climate change damage, but in theory, the court lays out an avenue towards such claims," he said. Major petrostates like the United States may take little heed of the court's warning that expanding production of oil, gas and coal could constitute an "internationally wrongful act". But Gehring said countries could choose to ignore ICJ advisory opinions "at their peril". He cited the court's 2019 advice that the United Kingdom should end its occupation of the Chagos islands. After Britain initially rejected the ruling, a UN General Assembly resolution demanded it cede the islands to Mauritius, which it eventually did last year. Gehring said that while the court's climate decision is not directly binding on individual states, it would be indirectly binding through subsequent domestic or international court action and through UN institutions. The move by US President Donald Trump to withdraw from the Paris deal also would be unlikely to absolve the country from its duties, Gehring added, because the obligation to address climate change is now "crystal clear in international law". "So, even leaving the Paris Agreement and the climate treaty regime does not eliminate those obligations," he said. ICJ judge Sarah Cleveland said countries' "significant responsibilities" to protect the climate system may also affect interpretation of international investment law. The ruling was "a decisive legal vindication" for Vanuatu — which spearheaded the push for an ICJ opinion — the country said in a legal analysis of the decision. The Pacific island nation, which is at risk from rising seas, said the court's conclusions would strengthen its hand in global climate negotiations, helping it demand greater climate ambition and attract financial support for countries suffering climate loss and damage. It could also open the way for legal action against countries and possibly companies that have by their actions and omissions caused climate harm, the statement said. "For Vanuatu, the opinion is both shield and sword: a shield affirming its right to survival and a sword compelling the world's major emitters to act in line with science and justice," it added. Manuel Pulgar-Vidal, former president of the UN COP20 climate conference in Peru and now WWF Global Climate and Energy lead, said he expects the ICJ ruling to "move the needle strongly". "The timing is so fantastic because we are in difficult times in the climate debate, so to have that opinion in the current time, it is showing that we should never lose our hope," he said.
