British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron recently made a symbolic gesture regarding Palestine that may appear significant at first glance. However, it may not be the most strategic decision. Their move seems to emphasize the vulnerabilities of the Israeli government, particularly in relation to the millions of disenfranchised individuals across the region.
Yet, the potential fallout from this action could be severe.
Currently, Israel is unlikely to relinquish any territory until Hamas is no longer seen as a threat. They are primarily focused on disarming Hamas. I mean, it’s hard to see how perpetuating a group that has caused extensive harm to both Palestinians and Israelis is a wise approach—it just feels like a misstep.
Consider the suffering in Gaza; it’s so profound that, perhaps, their perspective isn’t likely to change anytime soon. While nearly 150 countries acknowledge Palestine, this recognition seems to mean little in the absence of agreed-upon borders and a unified Palestinian government that can effectively exert its authority.
On one side, you have Hamas, which has categorically rejected peace initiatives and has, let’s say, a knack for using fears of Israel to obstruct diplomatic efforts. The other side is Fatah—although they manage the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, they are marred by corruption and inefficiency. Interestingly, they also turned down a peace offer back in 2008 that would have ceded around 98% of the land they claim.
Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, only to see Hamas push the Palestinian Authority out two years later. Since then, Hamas has essentially used Gaza as a base for its attacks. The horrifying events of October 7, 2023, marked a troubling new chapter. This incident disrupted what seemed to be a budding normalization agreement between Israel and Saudi Arabia. I suspect that the Palestinians aren’t in a position to cede land to Israel any time soon.
If a significant power were to recognize a Palestinian state, it might inadvertently indicate to Palestinians that pursuing terrorism is yielding results. This could lead to increased support for Hamas, a situation that has already caused immense suffering, resulting in hundreds of thousands being displaced and tens of thousands killed.
Envisioning a scenario where Israel vacates the West Bank, only for Hamas to seize control, feels more like wishful thinking. The areas under Palestinian Authority rule are close to Israel’s heart—Tel Aviv is only 25 miles from Kalkilya, and Jerusalem is virtually surrounded. An invasion from the West Bank would, I believe, be catastrophic, and Israel will not enter negotiations over a Palestinian state without addressing these existential fears.
The implication here is clear: Hamas needs to be dismantled. The organization can’t just be weakened; it must be entirely stripped of its military capacity before Israel can seriously consider negotiations regarding the West Bank.
Moreover, any future Palestinian state would need to be demilitarized—no armed militias, no rocket production, and a single command structure must be in place. It’s essential for any legitimate government to maintain a monopoly on force, something Hamas has shown no willingness to accept.
This reliance on Hamas is unproductive for the Palestinians. It’s ironic—Hamas has turned Gaza into a grim environment while complicating the path to a two-state solution. If the Arab world genuinely desires Palestinian independence, it will need to stop funding Hamas, extradite its leaders, and lend robust support to Palestinian leadership that is willing to work with Israel.
I say this not out of opposition to Palestinian independence, but because I genuinely believe that divisions are vital for Israel’s survival as both a Jewish and democratic nation.
With around 15 million people living between the river and the sea—divided almost evenly between Jews and Arabs—without some form of separation, Israel risks losing its identity.
It may seem clear-cut to label pro-occupation Israelis as extremists or bigots, but in reality, many are simply fearful. They have vivid memories of bombings in the 1990s following the Oslo Accords, the violence of the Second Intifada after the Camp David Summit in the early 2000s, and now the horrors of October 7. This fear is deeply rooted and can’t simply be brushed aside.
Palestinians deserve dignity, rights, and a state of their own, but this won’t materialize while Hamas remains in place. What’s crucial now is the pressure on Hamas to disarm. This would inherently require the Israeli government to reconsider its relationship with the Palestinian Authority—a relationship tarnished by Netanyahu’s previous demonization of it. However, recognizing Palestine might also consolidate right-wing power in Israel.
Recognition shouldn’t just be a reward for terrorism; it ought to serve as a motivating factor for abandonment of such violence. The possibility of a state should hinge on tangible steps towards Palestinian unity, dismantling armed factions, and ensuring peaceful coexistence under moderate leadership. Only then can genuine support for lasting peace be expected.
The approaches taken by France and the UK could provide valuable insights moving forward. Still, an unconditional recognition risks inflaming Palestinian extremism, further alienating Israelis, and complicating the two-state solution. Macron and Starmer will need to proceed with caution.
