On July 24, French President Emmanuel Macron announced that France would officially recognize Palestine during the upcoming UN General Assembly meeting in September. While 147 out of 193 UN member states have already acknowledged the Palestinian state, France marks the first significant Western country to take this step.
Just five days later, British Prime Minister Kiel Starmer revealed plans to follow suit in September. The following day, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Kearney echoed this intention, though he and Starmer each included specific conditions. Starmer indicated that the UK would proceed only if the Israeli government took meaningful actions to end the dire situation in Gaza, agreed to a ceasefire, and outlined sustainable peace efforts. He emphasized the need for the UN to resume aid supplies and ensured there would be no annexation in the West Bank.
Starmer also directed a pointed message at Hamas, insisting that they must free all hostages, agree to a ceasefire, disarm, and acknowledge they wouldn’t participate in Gaza’s governance. He stated that in September, the progress of these conditions would be assessed.
Kearney, on his part, highlighted that Canada could no longer overlook the ongoing failures of the Israeli government to address the deteriorating humanitarian crisis in Gaza. He called for Hamas to release all hostages involved in the attacks on October 7, disarm, and emphasized the importance of Palestinian authorities assuming control for future governance. Canada’s recognition of Palestine would depend on reforms by these authorities, particularly in the lead-up to the planned general election in 2026, where Hamas would be barred from participating.
On the same day Starmer released his statement, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) managed to gather support from 27 Democrats for a resolution aimed at blocking the shipment of assault rifles to Israel. Additionally, 24 Democrats backed another resolution to prevent sales of offensive weapons to Jerusalem. Although both resolutions ultimately failed, they underscored increasing discontent in the U.S. regarding Israeli actions.
While Kearney and Starmer insisted on disarming Hamas as a prerequisite for recognition, Hamas member Gazi Hamad dismissed these demands in a recent interview, touting the October 7 attacks as a significant historical victory and urging recognition from key countries. He asserted, “We as Palestinians will not abandon our weapons… not even a blank round.”
Starmer and Kearney’s conditions on Hamas are not isolated demands; the Arab League also convened with the intention of promoting a two-state solution, while urging terrorist groups to disarm in favor of Palestinian authorities. A senior Middle Eastern diplomat suggested that if Netanyahu supports the two-state solution, it could secure Arab backing, diminish Hamas’s influence, and amplify international pressure on the group.
Meanwhile, there’s growing support within Israel for a deal that would release hostages in exchange for a withdrawal from Gaza, irrespective of Hamas’s disarmament status. Notably, on August 1, around 600 former Israeli security officials, including high-ranking figures from intelligence and the military, urged Prime Minister Netanyahu to cease military operations in Gaza, arguing that Hamas no longer poses a significant threat to Israel.
During a meeting with senior officials, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defense Forces Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir reportedly opposed the full occupation of Gaza. Yet Netanyahu has opted instead to push forward with the complete occupation, which many view as a precursor to annexing both Gaza and possibly the West Bank.
Netanyahu’s far-right allies have long advocated for such policies, envisioning the expulsion of all Gazans from their land, a strategy reminiscent of ethnic cleansing attempts in the Balkans during the 1990s.
The international community’s reaction to this decision is expected to be severe. While Washington may strategize to block a UN Security Council resolution condemning Israel, other nations, including the UK, Canada, and the EU (with the exception of Germany), might impose economic sanctions on Israel.
Israel’s economy has already suffered greatly due to almost two years of conflict, and sanctions could exacerbate this situation. Defense analyst Andrew Davidson pointed out that Israel’s military relies on an aggressive strategy designed for prolonged conflict rather than extended warfare. The ongoing struggle against Hamas, combined with the need to patrol borders against Hezbollah, has strained Israel’s reserve forces, which are critical to the economy.
Netanyahu and his far-right associates are jeopardizing the country’s welfare, and something has to give. If more international pressure is necessary to prompt change, then so be it.
