logo
Recognizing Palestine now would only undermine peace

Recognizing Palestine now would only undermine peace

The Hill2 days ago
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emanuel Macron have announced that their nations are considering unilaterally recognizing Palestine. At first glance, this might seem a powerful symbolic move: a gesture to remind Israel's benighted government that the disenfranchisement of millions is morally indefensible and strategically unwise.
But, at this time, the move would be disastrous.
Israelis will not withdraw from any land until Hamas ceases to be a threat — and recognizing Palestine now will strengthen the group, just as most Arab states are finally calling on it to disarm. There can be no more self-defeating action than to perpetuate the presence of this jihadist mafia organization, which has brought disaster upon Palestinians and Israelis both, and which is currently much diminished by the war.
With Gazans suffering immensely, might recognition not spur change? Well, consider the fact that almost 150 countries have recognized Palestine, but that has proven meaningless in the face of a reality in which there is no agreed territory, no settled borders and no unified Palestinian government capable of exercising authority.
Hamas, one of the two relevant Palestinian factions, rejects peace outright and has consistently used terror against Israelis to derail diplomacy. The other, Fatah, which controls the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority, is corrupt and incompetent, but saintly by comparison. Yet Fatah too has failed to embrace peace offers that would have created a Palestinian state on about 98 percent of the territory they seek, the last one coming in 2008.
Israel pulled out of Gaza completely in 2005, and Hamas forcefully expelled the Palestinian Authority from the territory two years later. Hamas has used Gaza ever since as a launching pad for attacks. The Oct. 7, 2023 invasion and massacre was just the most horrifying episode. Sadly, the attack succeeded in derailing what looked like an incipient Israeli-Saudi normalization deal — and has also convinced Israelis that they cannot afford to grant the Palestinians any more land.
Major powers recognizing a Palestinian state now would signal to Palestinians that the most barbaric variant of terrorism pays the highest dividend and has indeed brought them over the line. Support for Hamas would soar, despite the group sparking a war that left much of Gaza flattened, hundreds of thousands displaced and tens of thousands killed.
To imagine Israel then pulling out of the West Bank — with Hamas perhaps primed to take that area over too — is fantasy. This area, where the Palestinian Authority controls pockets of 'autonomy,' borders the very heart of Israel.
Tel Aviv lies just 25 miles from Qalqilya, and Jerusalem is surrounded on three sides. An Oct. 7-style invasion from the West Bank would be exponentially more devastating. Israelis will not and cannot agree to a Palestinian state unless this existential fear is addressed and resolved.
That means one thing above all: Hamas must be gone. Not weakened, not partially sidelined, but gone, at least as an armed outfit, and completely delegitimized. Until that happens, any serious negotiation involving the West Bank is politically impossible in Israel.
Moreover, any future Palestinian state must be demilitarized. That means no armed militias, no rocket factories, no independent chains of command. A future government — presumably a reformed Palestinian Authority — must hold a monopoly on the use of force, just as any legitimate state must. Hamas would never agree to this.
Sidelining Hamas would be also in the interests of Palestinians. Hamas is a theocratic militia that has turned Gaza into a miserable prison and turned Israelis against the two-state solution. The Arab world, if it seeks Palestinian independence, must cut off Hamas's funding, deny it refuge and arrest its leaders-in-exile — and then grant maximal assistance of every kind to Palestinian leaders willing to coexist with Israel.
I say all this not as an opponent of Palestinian independence, but as someone who indeed believes partition is essential to Israel's survival as a Jewish and democratic state.
About 15 million people live between the river and the sea, split roughly evenly between Jews and Arabs. Without partition, Israel will either cease to be Jewish or cease to be democratic.
This would seem to be so obvious that Israelis who support the occupation are caricatured as religious zealots, racists or idiots. But many are none of those things — they're simply scared. They remember the 1990s bombings after the Oslo Accords, the bloodshed of the Second Intifada after the Camp David Summit in the early 2000s, and now the slaughter of Oct. 7. This fear cannot be ignored, even if the occupation is cruel and the Jewish settlements in the West Bank indefensible.
Palestinians deserve dignity, rights and even statehood — if they can agree to demilitarization. But none of that will happen if Hamas remains in place. What is needed now is maximal pressure on Hamas to disarm. A corollary of all this is that Israel's government will in turn have to be pressured to reengage with the Palestinian Authority, which Netanyahu has foolishly demonized. But recognizing Palestine now would probably stiffen right-wing forces in Israel.
Recognition should be used not as a reward for terrorism, but as an incentive to abandon it. The promise of statehood should be conditioned on Palestinian unity under moderate leadership, the dismantling of armed factions and credible steps toward peaceful coexistence. Only then can recognition serve its intended purpose: to support a lasting peace.
France and the U.K. no doubt mean well. And outlining a roadmap would be helpful. But an unconditional recognition would embolden Palestinian extremists, alienate Israelis and make a two-state solution harder to achieve. Macron and Starmer need to think more carefully.
Dan Perry is the former Cairo-based Middle East editor and London-based Europe-Africa editor of the Associated Press, the former chairman of the Foreign Press Association in Jerusalem and the author of two books.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

A viable Palestinian state remains far off, despite growing international clamor
A viable Palestinian state remains far off, despite growing international clamor

CNN

time2 minutes ago

  • CNN

A viable Palestinian state remains far off, despite growing international clamor

First France, then the United Kingdom, and now Canada. Three of the world's most powerful Western nations have added their economic and geopolitical clout to calls for a Palestinian state, an idea already endorsed by more than 140 other countries. The moves have many motives, from a sense of frustration with Israel, to domestic pressure, to outrage over the images of starving Palestinians. Whatever the reason, Palestinians have welcomed the announcements as a boost for their cause. The Israeli government has rejected the calls, describing them as tantamount to rewarding terrorism. US President Donald Trump meanwhile seems increasingly frustrated with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, particularly over the starvation in Gaza that the Israeli leader denies, but has disturbed Trump. Trump wants regional peace, as well as the accolades – namely a Nobel Peace Prize – for making it happen. He wants Saudi Arabia to normalize relations with Israel, expanding the Abraham Accords he cemented between Israel and several other Arab states during his first term. But Riyadh has been firm that this cannot happen without an irreversible path to a Palestinian state. But the latest moves by US allies France, Britain and Canada – while in many ways largely symbolic – have left Washington increasingly isolated over its backing for Israel. Palestinian statehood could help bring an end to a war that has killed more than 60,000 Palestinians in Gaza since Hamas's brutal October 7 attack killed around 1,200 people in Israel almost two years ago, as well as bring home the hostages still being held in Gaza. But one of the toughest challenges is imagining what it looks like, because a modern Palestinian state has never existed before. When Israel was founded in the aftermath of World War II it quickly gained international recognition. That same period, for Palestinians, is remembered as al-Naqba, or 'the catastrophe' – the moment when hundreds of thousands of people fled or were forced from their homes. Since then, Israel has expanded, most significantly during the 'Six Day War' of 1967, when Israel turned the tables on a coalition of Arab states and gained East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza. Palestinian territory has meanwhile only shrunk and splintered. The closest to what a future Palestinian state may look like was hashed out in a peace process in the 1990s which came to be known as the Oslo Accords. Roughly speaking, the Palestinian state envisaged in Oslo, agreed to by both Palestinian and Israeli negotiators, would be based on Israel's 1967 borders. The broad outline of Oslo was to have some land trades, a little bit given in one place for the removal of an Israeli settlement, in a negotiated process. The historic handshake on the White House lawn by Israel's then Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat hosted by then-US president Bill Clinton remains one of the triumphs of modern diplomacy. Rabin's assassination by a far-right fanatic in 1995 robbed Israel of its peacemaker leader. And while the framework of Oslo lived on in negotiations and academia, there is little initiative now. What was on offer back then is no longer realistic. In recent years, Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank have expanded massively, often with the encouragement of the Israeli government, threatening the chances of creating a contiguous Palestinian state in the region. Then there is the question of who would govern a future Palestinian state. The Palestinian Authority, which governs parts of the West Bank, is distrusted by many Palestinians who view it as weak or corrupt. Even without all these complications, Netanyahu won't accept a Palestinian state, which he has recently claimed would be 'a launch pad to annihilate Israel.' Some members of his cabinet are far more hard-line, not only refusing to countenance an independent state but wanting to annex the territory. These ministers propping up Netanyahu's government have said they would starve Palestinians in Gaza rather than feed them, and would collapse the coalition if he so much as suggested giving in to the growing international pressure on Israel. Netanyahu has shown no intention of backing down, and will wear whatever France, the UK, and any others force on him as a badge of honor. Without a partner in the Israeli government, recognition of a Palestinian state will fall flat, and could even entrench Netanyahu further. It would be a big price to pay if the outcome were Israel making the possibility of a Palestinian state all the more distant. But at the same time, with a growing number of angry ex-partners in the international community who are likely to increase their pressure on Trump to shift his position, it is Israel that may find itself disadvantaged, however strongly it protests.

Trump recalibrates Gaza stance as humanitarian concerns grow
Trump recalibrates Gaza stance as humanitarian concerns grow

Yahoo

time20 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump recalibrates Gaza stance as humanitarian concerns grow

President Donald Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff and U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee made a rare trip to Gaza on Friday, spending five hours on the ground touring an aid distribution center and vowing to address a humanitarian crisis amid a growing global outcry. 'The purpose of the visit was to give @POTUS a clear understanding of the humanitarian situation and help craft a plan to deliver food and medical aid to the people of Gaza,' Witkoff wrote on X. The visit is emblematic of the ongoing shift inside the White House as Trump, while still supportive of Israel's campaign, has grown increasingly concerned about the humanitarian conditions in Gaza. A White House official, granted anonymity to speak candidly about the president's thinking, asserted that Trump 'hasn't changed his fundamental belief' that Hamas is 'largely' to blame for the protracted conflict. Still, referring to Trump's own comments in recent days, the official acknowledged 'some new concerns.' Those concerns, spurred by photos and accounts of starving children, are echoed within MAGA circles and the broader public. A Gallup poll this week showed that American support for Israel's military action has dropped to 32 percent, a new low. Trump 'calibrates his interactions based on what the issues are. And sometimes people make the mistake of not just listening to the president,' said a senior White House official granted anonymity to discuss the president's thinking. 'He's just straightforward on this stuff. … Like, what's going on with Gaza and Israel. He wants to settle it. Yes, you can't negotiate with Hamas. But, like, he doesn't want kids to starve. He doesn't want that to happen. It's just, that's it. You know, there's not more to it than that.' That doesn't mean Trump is ready to embrace some foreign allies' call to recognize Palestinian statehood — although his opposition may not be quite as firm as it was a couple months ago. Trump earlier this summer privately urged French President Emmanuel Macron against recognizing a Palestinian state, according to two people familiar with the conversation, who were granted anonymity to share closely held details. The call, which has not been previously reported, did not produce the intended result and Macron announced his intention to recognize a Palestinian state last week. But when Trump was asked about it while traveling in Scotland last weekend, he was nonchalant about Macron going ahead with something he'd worked privately to forestall. 'What he says doesn't matter,' the president said. During a meeting with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer on Monday, Trump seemed almost agnostic about Palestinian statehood, leaving his counterpart space to fall in line behind Macron. 'I'm not going to take a position,' said Trump with Starmer seated at his side. 'I don't mind him taking a position.' The White House declined to comment on Trump's conversation with Macron or his overall approach to the situation in Gaza. And on Thursday, press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters that the president has 'expressed his displeasure and disagreement' with both Macron and Starmer, as well as Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, who also indicated support for Palestinian statehood. Trump, Leavitt continued, still opposes recognizing Palestine as a separate state. 'He feels as though that's rewarding Hamas at a time where Hamas is the true impediment to a ceasefire and to the release of all of the hostages,' she said. Even so, Trump has broken with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, not only acknowledging the humanitarian crisis in Gaza but also dispatching top aides to address it. Witkoff's social media post included a picture of him and Huckabee meeting with the Israel-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, to which the U.S. has committed $30 million. Scores of charities and aid groups have criticized the organization for failing to safely distribute aid and said hundreds of Palestinians have been killed trying to access its distribution sites. The Israeli military insists it fires only 'warning shots' and blames Hamas for the violence. Trump on Friday said Witkoff had a "great meeting." "He had a meeting on getting the people fed, and that's what we want,' Trump said. Concern for the plight of the Palestinians is a striking turn for the U.S. president who, just months ago, mused about creating a 'riviera' in the Middle East, a plan that appeared to be centered on forcibly relocating Palestinians into neighboring countries and razing their homes in Gaza. And it was Trump who gave Netanyahu explicit approval, if not outright encouragement, in March to end the fragile U.S. brokered ceasefire after just two months and resume Israel's all-out war and near-total blockade of humanitarian aid. At the time, the president warned Hamas 'THERE WILL BE HELL TO PAY!' if continued to hold hostages and declared he was giving Israel "everything it needs to finish the job.' The senior White House official said Trump just wants the bloodshed to end and is 'not deeply concerned about the details.' 'The president routinely preserves optionality and off ramps,' the official said. 'That's kind of his way — a lot of exit strategies on any given thing that are somewhat acceptable.' Solve the daily Crossword

Republicans are afraid of Mamdani in New York. That's a good thing.
Republicans are afraid of Mamdani in New York. That's a good thing.

USA Today

time33 minutes ago

  • USA Today

Republicans are afraid of Mamdani in New York. That's a good thing.

Republicans think Zohran Mamdani will turn NYC into a socialist mecca because they forgot what a functioning government looks like. We're a few months out from New York City's municipal election, and Democratic nominee Zohran Mamdani is still the frontrunner in the mayoral race. It's a positive sign for progressives who want to see democratic socialists transform the party. In a July poll by Zenith Research and Public Progress Solutions, Mamdani received 50% of support while the rest of the candidates trailed behind. Former Democratic governor Andrew Cuomo, who is now running as an independent, received 22% of support, followed by Republican Curtis Sliwa at 13%. Current Mayor Eric Adams, who is also running as an independent, received just 7% support. Mamdani may be polling well, but his path to victory in November is anything but smooth. There are already five anti-Mamdani PACs that have formed since the primary, backed by business moguls and real estate tycoons who warn that the Democratic nominee would be bad for the city's economy. He's also having to answer for some of his previous posts about 'defunding the police' and comments on Israel. Republicans criticizing Mamdani for 'defund police' comment are hypocritical The biggest criticism of Mamdani has come from his previous comments about the New York City Police Department. In the wake of George Floyd's murder in 2020, Mamdani posted to X that the NYPD was 'racist, anti-queer & a major threat to public safety' and called for defunding the force. Mamdani has also proposed creating a Department of Community Safety separate from the police department, which would respond to mental health calls. But the Democratic nominee is attempting to distance himself from these previous claims, calling the posts 'out of step' with his current stance on public safety. He recently met with the family of Officer Didarul Islam, one of the four people killed in a recent shooting in Midtown Manhattan. Republicans criticizing him seem more than willing to ignore the way President Donald Trump pardoned Jan. 6 rioters who attacked police officers, or his own criminal convictions. But he is the "law and order" president, for sure. And the GOP is the "law and order" party, right? Voters are increasingly agreeing with Mamdani on Gaza Another criticism from the right is that Mamdani is too critical of Israel. Fox News recently resurrected a clip of Mamdani from a 2024 panel where the mayoral candidate claimed, 'Israel is not a place, it is not a country.' Mamdani seems to be taking these attacks to heart. He recently said he would not use the phrase 'globalize the intifada,' and would also discourage others from using it. Mamdani had previously refused to condemn the phrase. On the other hand, Mamdani's criticisms of Israel proved to be popular with voters in the Democratic primary. A poll from Data for Progress and the Institute for Middle East Understanding Policy Project found that his 'support for Palestinian rights' was important for 96% of his voters, while his 'willingness to criticize the Israeli government' was important to 88% of his voters. Opinion: People are starving in Gaza. Why are we so comfortable just letting that happen? While conservatives are trying to attack Mamdani for his previous stances on Israel and his sympathy for the Palestinian people, it doesn't seem like it'll work. Democrats should listen to their voters, not conservatives, to know how to approach this issue. Only 8% of Democrats support Israel's actions in Gaza, according to a recent Gallup poll, while 71% of Republicans support it. Some Republicans are even breaking with the party to denounce mass starvation in the region, including Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Georgia, who recently called the crisis a "genocide." Republicans are afraid of what Mamdani stands for. Good. Mamdani won the primary largely thanks to his mobilization of young voters. It worked out for him: voters under 40 made up 40% of early voting turnout. Now, the question is whether they'll turn out for the general election. I'm hopeful that they will. I have personally seen the way my generation has reacted to Mamdani's campaign. There is a palpable excitement reminiscent of Barack Obama's first run for the presidency, an excitement fueled by the idea that the Democratic Party can change, in spite of itself. Opinion: Zohran Mamdani rallied Gen Z voters. We can't abandon him now. The reasons conservatives are criticizing Mamdani are the reasons people my age voted for him. We believe in moving funding from the NYPD into areas like mental health care and community building. We support Palestinian rights. We want to see that working-class New Yorkers can remain in this city. We see taxing corporations and the wealthy as a good thing. Some may call these things unrealistic, and they may have a point. There's no way New York City becomes a socialist utopia if Mamdani is elected, since he must work with the city council, state and national governments to achieve many of his campaign priorities. But his very election could signal to the Democratic Party that they should run to, not from, progressive politics. Mamdani's path to victory is not an easy one. He will continue to face criticism from the right throughout the next few months. But if polling is any indication, he's still likely to be the next mayor of the largest city in the United States. Follow USA TODAY columnist Sara Pequeño on X, formerly Twitter, @sara__pequeno

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store