By John Q. Hosedrinker 
International pressure is mounting to recognize the state of Palestine, with France explicitly stating its intention to do so. The UK, having suspended trade talks with Israel over its blockade of Gaza aid, is now engaged in high-level discussions regarding Palestinian statehood. This comes amidst a UN-sponsored conference and concerns over potential loopholes in the UK’s arms export ban to Israel, prompting parliamentary investigations into a significant increase in approved military equipment licenses. The possibility of recognition raises questions about its implications for businesses operating in the occupied territories and the need for reciprocal Israeli recognition, currently deemed unfeasible.
Read the original article here
Talks to start on recognition of state of Palestine by western states are fraught with complexities. The very notion of what constitutes a “state” in this context is highly debated. Defining the borders and identifying the legitimate governing body poses immense challenges, given the deep divisions and ongoing conflict.
Many believe Western powers are motivated by a sense of moral obligation, eager to establish a Palestinian state to alleviate guilt over past injustices. However, this well-intentioned impulse overlooks the reality that neither Israelis nor Palestinians wholeheartedly desire a state existing directly adjacent to the other.
The potential for a hastily formed Palestinian state, propped up by foreign intervention, is a significant concern. Such a scenario could see Fatah, perhaps installed by Western and Arab powers, attempting to govern, while Hamas retains considerable influence and power. Crucial groundwork – educational reform, deradicalization, civil society building – would be bypassed in the rush to create a state. The result would likely be an unstable entity lacking the internal capacity for effective governance.
The lack of commitment from pro-Palestinian nations to provide security assistance further exacerbates the risk. Without external military support, the new Palestinian government would be exceptionally vulnerable to internal threats. The influx of Gazans into the West Bank, coupled with the potential for Hamas infiltration, could trigger significant internal conflict and violence. Furthermore, the absence of strong leadership, coupled with the immense challenge of providing adequate medical care and social services to a traumatized population, creates a perfect storm for instability.
The forced imposition of a two-state solution, ignoring the deep-seated trauma in Gaza and the cultural differences between the West Bank and Gaza Strip, is another major problem. The separation, coupled with the difficulty of establishing viable trade routes, would hinder governance and economic development. This artificial unity could create deep resentment and further instability, possibly fueling further conflict.
Hamas, regardless of its formal position, might exploit the situation, leveraging its established brand recognition and network to re-emerge as a powerful force. The lack of genuine internal stability could lead to a new round of conflict with Israel, potentially undermining the entire endeavour and culminating in the destruction of the new state. A failure to build a resilient and stable Palestinian state before the onset of climate change would only deepen the humanitarian crisis.
The question of which government to recognize is critical. Recognizing Hamas, given its history of terrorism, is politically untenable for most Western nations, yet ignoring their de facto control of Gaza leaves a significant gap in the diplomatic approach. Recognizing only the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank would leave a substantial portion of the Palestinian population outside the recognized entity. This will not lead to lasting peace.
The recognition of a Palestinian state may be viewed cynically as a superficial gesture, devoid of real commitment to long-term peace. Previous examples, like Spain’s recognition without establishing an embassy in Ramallah, illustrate the difficulties and potential futility of such acts.
Many believe that unless the underlying issues of governance, security, and reconciliation are addressed effectively, any hastily formed state will be doomed to fail. The absence of meaningful dialogue and a genuine desire for peaceful co-existence will continue to hinder any progress towards a lasting solution. A rushed attempt, without proper groundwork, would likely result in a more perilous situation, exacerbating the conflict rather than resolving it. A more sustainable approach, focused on nation-building and reconciliation, would be required for a truly viable Palestinian state.