Saudi Arabia and France to lead UN push for recognising Palestinian statehood
The conference began on Monday, just days after the French president, Emmanuel Macron, said Paris would officially recognise the Palestinian government in September in an effort to reinvigorate peace talks around a two-state solution that have all but been written off since the deadly Hamas raid and ensuing Israeli military operation that began in 2023.
The French foreign minister, Jean-Noël Barrot, has said that the conference would also serve as a platform for other European countries to recognise Palestinian statehood.
While Barrot did not specify which countries he meant, speculation has focused on the United Kingdom, where Keir Starmer is under increasing pressure from Labour MPs to put pressure on Israel to end the war.
'Only a political, two-state solution will help respond to the legitimate aspirations of Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace and security,' Barrot said at the opening of the talks on Monday. 'There is no alternative.'
Saudi Arabia's foreign minister, Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud, said that the kingdom was seeking World Bank approval to transfer $300m to Gaza and the West Bank to counter the dire humanitarian crisis in the territory.
He said that Palestinians had a 'legitimate right' to the establishment of an independent state along the borders delineated in 1967 'with East Jerusalem as its capital'.
'This is not merely a political stance, but a firm conviction that an independent Palestinian state is the true key to peace in the region,' he said.
The talks are being co-chaired by 16 other countries and delegations, including the United Kingdom, Ireland and the European Union.
The UK does not currently recognise Palestine, but Starmer has come under increasing pressure within Labour to help achieve a diplomatic solution. More than 220 MPs, a third of parliament, signed a letter addressed to Starmer on Friday calling for the UK to recognise a Palestinian state.
'We are expectant that the outcome of the conference will be the UK Government outlining when and how it will act on its long-standing commitment on a two-state solution; as well as how it will work with international partners to make this a reality,' the MPs wrote in the letter.
Starmer will recall his cabinet from their summer break for an emergency meeting on the Gaza crisis this week and government sources have said that formal recognition of Palestinian statehood was a matter of 'when, not if' under the Labour government.
He was also expected to push Donald Trump on the issue of humanitarian aid and a growing crisis of malnourishment and starvation in Gaza. On Monday, two leading human rights organisations based in Israel, B'Tselem and Physicians for Human Rights, were reported to say that Israel was committing a genocide against Palestinians in Gaza and the country's western allies have a legal and moral duty to stop it.
'We need to galvanize other countries in support of getting that aid in, and yes, that does involve putting pressure on Israel, because it absolutely is a humanitarian catastrophe,' said Starmer in remarks alongside the US president on Monday as the two leaders met at Trump's Turnberry golf resort in Scotland to discuss trade and the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
The talks begin just days after Macron said that France would recognise Palestinian statehood in September, saying that the decision would 'ensure its viability, and ensure that by accepting its demilitarisation and fully recognising Israel, it contributes to the security of all in the Middle East'.
Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel's prime minister, condemned Macron's decision, saying that it 'rewards terror' and that a Palestinian state would be a 'launchpad to annihilate Israel'.
Israel also criticised the Saudi-French-led conference on Monday. 'This conference does not promote a solution, but rather deepens the illusion. Instead of demanding the release of the hostages and working to dismantle Hamas's reign of terror, the conference organizers are engaging in discussions and plenaries that are disconnected from reality,' said Danny Damon, the Israeli ambassador to the UN.
The US has echoed the Israeli sentiment and on Monday called the conference 'unproductive and ill-timed.'
'The United States will not participate in this insult but will continue to lead real-world efforts to end the fighting and deliver a permanent peace,' state department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said in a statement. 'Our focus remains on serious diplomacy: not stage-managed conferences designed to manufacture the appearance of relevance.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
What is Yvette Cooper's plan to fast-track asylum claims?
As tensions flare up in the UK over migration, with protests taking place in Newcastle, Manchester and north London, the government is pursuing a new plan to reduce the asylum backlog. The home secretary has said she plans to introduce a fast-track scheme to turn around asylum decisions within weeks, via a 'major overhaul' of the appeal process. The plan is part of a wider attempt to crack down on the number of people crossing the Channel, with Ms Cooper announcing a 'one-in-one-out' returns deal with France earlier this year. But despite their efforts, last week it was revealed that the number of migrants arriving in the UK after crossing the English Channel topped 25,000 in record time, piling pressure on the government to take further action. It is hoped that the new plan will make a dent in the backlog and return people to safe countries faster, reducing the number of asylum seekers who are housed in hotels while awaiting the outcome of a claim or appeal. Here, The Independent takes a look at everything we know about the plan so far and how it will work in practice. How would the fast-track system work? Asylum seekers and their families are housed in temporary accommodation, including hotels, if they are waiting for the outcome of a claim or an appeal and have been assessed as not being able to support themselves independently. But Yvette Cooper has now promised a 'major overhaul' of the appeal process, speeding up the time it takes for decisions on claims and appeals to be made. There are currently limited details on how this system would work, but sources told the Sunday Times it would allow decisions to be taken within weeks, rather than months or even years. Once a decision has been taken, those who have been rejected will be returned to their home country – reducing the number of people housed in temporary accommodation. 'If we speed up the decision-making appeal system and also then keep increasing returns, we hope to be able to make quite a big reduction in the overall numbers in the asylum system, because that is the best way to actually restore order and control,' Ms Cooper said. When will it be implemented? The home secretary has said she will legislate for the changes in autumn, when MPs return from their summer break. But it could take months for any legislation to pass through parliament, meaning we are unlikely to see the fast-track system implemented until the new year. How big is the asylum backlog and why is tackling it a priority? As of the end of March 2025, there were 78,745 asylum applications awaiting an initial decision – an 8 per cent decrease from the end of June 2024 and a 13 per cent decrease compared to the end of December 2024, official immigration statistics show. These outstanding cases related to 109,536 people, including both main applicants and their dependents. Labour has put a pledge to fix the 'broken' asylum system and crack down on the number of people coming to the UK on small boats at the centre of its plan for government. But with boat crossings at a record high, and the asylum backlog still above 75,000, there is mounting pressure on ministers to take more drastic action, a pressure exacerbated by the success of Reform UK in the polls. The government has also promised to end the use of asylum hotels before the end of this parliament, a promise it is unlikely to meet unless the backlog is reduced. Tensions over asylum hotels have flared up in recent weeks, with a protest and counter-protest taking place on Saturday outside the Thistle City Barbican Hotel in north London, and also in Newcastle and Manchester.
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
Saudi Arabia executes eight people in one day
Saudi Arabia has executed eight people in a single day amid a surge in the use of the death penalty for drug-related convictions. Four Somalis and three Ethiopians were executed on Saturday in the southern region of Najran 'for smuggling hashish into the kingdom', the Saudi Press Agency said. One Saudi man was executed for the murder of his mother. Since the beginning of 2025, Saudi Arabia has executed 230 people, according to an AFP tally of official reports. Most of those executions, 154 people, were on drug-related charges. The pace of executions puts the kingdom on track to surpass last year's record of 338 instances of capital punishment. 'War on drugs' Analysts link the spike to the kingdom's 'war on drugs' launched in 2023, with many of those first arrested only now being executed following their legal proceedings and convictions. Saudi Arabia resumed executions for drug offences at the end of 2022, after suspending the use of the death penalty in narcotics cases for around three years. It executed 19 people in 2022, two in 2023, and 117 in 2024 for narcotics-related crimes, according to the AFP tally. Saudi authorities say the death penalty is necessary to maintain public order and is only used after all avenues for appeal have been exhausted. However, activists say the kingdom's continued embrace of capital punishment undermines the image of a more open, tolerant society that is central to Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman 's Vision 2030 reform agenda. 'Disregard for human life' Kristine Beckerle, Amnesty International's Deputy Regional Director for the Middle East and North Africa, has called the trend of executions 'truly horrifying'.
The Guardian
3 hours ago
- The Guardian
If Britain recognises a Palestinian state, it will be a gesture. That doesn't mean it is pointless
The idea that if you really, really believe something you can make it happen seems to be the best explanation for Britain and France's recent statements that they will recognise a Palestinianstate. No matter how fervent Keir Starmer and Emmanuel Macron are, their fervour will not make an impossible thing happen. There is no Palestinian state, and there certainly won't be one by September. For mostly domestic political reasons, they have decided to set aside that fact. Recognition is an understandable gesture, but it will do nothing to solve the current famine, and is doomed in the short term because there is no real state to recognise. But there's also a clear reason why some sort of action – even if it's purely symbolic – is needed. The situation in Gaza is appalling. If Starmer and Macron proceed with recognition, how can we manage the short-term disappointment of recognising a state that does not exist, while moving towards a two-state solution in the long term? In 1933, the Montevideo convention, a treaty signed in the Uruguayan capital by 19 states, all from the Americas, set out criteria that had to be fulfilled when recognising a new state. The criteria were agreed at the international conference of American states but are applied by the whole international community. Although not formal legal requirements, they provide a useful framework when considering whether or not to recognise a state. The three most important are 'people', 'territory' and 'governance'. Is there a permanent population? Does that population occupy a defined territory whose borders it controls? And does it have a single recognised government? The international community has recognised the distinctiveness of the Palestinian people since the 1970s. That's the main reason why 78 countries recognised the state of Palestine within months of the Palestine National Council's declaration of independence in November 1988. But the Palestinians have never controlled their territory. The Oslo accords in 1993 gave full security control to the Palestinians in 18% of the West Bank. Over time, that area was supposed to enlarge. That never happened. And in 2007, Hamas took control of Gaza. The Palestinian Authority (PA), under the control of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO), remained in charge in the West Bank, while Hamas controlled Gaza. Two rival Palestinian administrations remain in place. Widespread international recognition of Palestine has made no difference to the lives of ordinary Palestinians. So far, 147 UN member states have recognised Palestine, including China and Russia. When Ireland, Norway and Spain recognised Palestinian statehood last year, all four governments claimed that recognition sent a signal that couldn't be ignored. But it hasn't helped the Palestinian people one jot. Israel (and the US) barely noticed, beyond saying disobliging things about rewarding a 'death cult'. They didn't change their policy. UK and French action will probably be treated with the same contempt in Jerusalem and Washington. But, despite Israeli denigration of their action, London and Paris won't be able to agree effective measures to penalise Israel, such as sanctions. Both governments still believe in Israel and its right to defend itself. Both still abhor what happened on 7 October 2023, and still see manifest shortcomings in the way the PA is run. Both the UK and France as part of the EU proscribe Hamas as a terrorist organisation. In fact, British and French recognition may make matters worse. Hamas may see advantages in sweeping away the corrupt gerontocracy in Ramallah; it is more popular than the PA in the West Bank these days. Benjamin Netanyahu, who doesn't subscribe to a two-state solution, may step up operations in both Gaza and the West Bank to underline who's in charge, and send a rather more effective message to Britain and France than they send to him. A two-state solution remains the only way to achieve long-term peace, but right now conditions for one could not be more hostile. For that reason, Britain and France recognising Palestine is an empty gesture. But the recognition boat seems to have sailed. Both Britain and France have made forward-leaning statements; governments find it hard to ignore incessant public demands. And public opinion is responding to what Israel is doing in Gaza. Collective punishment is unlawful. What Israel is doing to the population of Gaza because Hamas refuses to hand over 50 hostages (about 20 living and 30 dead) and dismantle its leadership amounts to collective punishment. Israel is not doing nearly enough to prevent starvation. By September, Israel won't have fulfilled the conditions that Starmer has set out to avert recognition. And Israel (and its supporters) will say that's no fault of Israel's. The British government will still have freedom of manoeuvre either to recognise the state of Palestine or postpone recognition. But at that point failing to recognise would look just as weak as I believe recognising looks right now. What to do? The government could recognise Palestine while acknowledging the weakness of doing so. Ministers should go easy on rhetoric claiming it's a historic moment, and focus instead on basic principles and the future. The only way for two peoples to live side by side in peace is for each to have its own state. Israel did not fulfil the criteria for statehood when it was first created. But Israel's friends overlooked its shortcomings, while its foes (such as Stalin) argued that the Jews were not even a people. The unique complexity of Israel/Palestine's history and geography will mean that the state of Palestine, when it's real, is likely to look different from any of the other 193 members of the UN. It might not have an army. It might not have exclusive control over its borders. But it will still be worth it. The Palestinian people deserve better than the fate they have suffered for decades, a fate which has deteriorated horribly since the ceasefire broke down in March this year. We must not forget them. Perhaps the best option in September would be for Britain to embrace the fact that it's making a gesture, and not pretend that gesture had immediate, far-reaching consequences. It would make the gesture recognising that time, hard work and imagination were still needed to reach the ultimate goal of a two-state solution, but that, at this desperate time, such a gesture was the last best hope to keep that solution alive. In diplomacy, it is vital not to mistake activity for effective action. But sometimes activity is all we have to offer. Lord McDonald of Salford was the British ambassador to Israel from 2003 to 2006, and permanent secretary at the Foreign Office from 2015 to 2020. He is now a crossbench peer
