WIREDGOV

Acknowledging it as a state will not change realities on the ground, but symbolic recognition matters.

The UK, along with France and Canada, plans to recognise Palestine as a state when the UN General Assembly convenes next month. The announcement came days after the last round of ceasefire negotiations stalled, and as images of widespread hunger and starvation in Gaza revealed the unprecedented humanitarian devastation in the Strip. But the recognition decision is one that has long been debated across party lines, hinging on the key question: will it make any difference?

I have spent the last month in the Middle East, witnessing the ever-worsening conditions in the West Bank and meeting with Palestinians, Israelis and internationals to discuss what type of political vision might be possible. From this, it is hard for me to see recognition of Palestine changing facts on the ground, at least in the short term. But even symbolic recognition matters. At the very least, it demonstrates both a moral and diplomatic commitment to Palestinian self-determination at a moment when that vision has never been more threatened.

The Question of Impact

While 147 countries already recognise Palestine, the announcements from France, the UK and Canada mark the first time that any G7 states fully endorse Palestinian statehood. The fact that France and the UK are also permanent members of the UN Security Council also adds to the diplomatic significance of the announcement. Still, full statehood recognition in the UN – where Palestine currently has non-voting observer state status – requires the support of all five permanent members of the Security Council, including the US, which would veto such a measure.

Moreover, the announcements are unlikely to change realities for Palestinians any time soon, at least with the current Israeli government. The war and humanitarian crisis in Gaza continues to grind on, with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu refusing to entertain any realistic plans for ‘next day’ scenarios. At the same time, the Israeli government is considering plans for annexing parts of Gaza, transferring Gazans to other countries, and moving Gazan civilians into a ‘humanitarian city’, which former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert has likened to a concentration camp. Meanwhile, the Israeli occupation in the West Bank has only intensified with forced displacement, land seizures and unsanctioned extremist settler violence. The Knesset, Israel’s parliament, also has voted to explicitly reject any moves towards Palestinian statehood.

But it is largely because of, and not in spite of, these realities that the UK, France and Canada have chosen to act. Indeed, the British and French governments have framed their decisions as crucial for maintaining any viability for a two-state solution to the broader conflict – envisioning a Palestinian state alongside Israel. The announcements also coincided with a three-day conference at the UN led by France and Saudi Arabia to bolster international efforts towards a two-state solution, which saw all 22 members of the Arab League calling on Hamas to disarm to enable the creation of a Palestinian state.

The UK also indicated that it would refrain from recognition if Israel met certain conditions. While two of the conditions focused specifically on Gaza – reaching a ceasefire and addressing the humanitarian crisis – the others related to a two-state vision, including engaging in a sustained peace process and making clear that there would be no further Israeli land annexations in the West Bank. While some criticised Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s decision to introduce conditions, the approach represented an attempt to enhance the immediate impact of the announcement, while also underscoring for both domestic and international observers that the decision aims to bolster rather than shift existing British policies on a Gaza ceasefire and a broader two-state solution.

In reality, neither the UK’s conditions nor the act of recognition will lead to negotiations anytime soon. But recognition will better position Palestinians for any future talks by changing the long-accepted sequence of setting statehood as an endpoint rather than a starting point. Instead of debating steps that may or may not lead to a Palestinian state, negotiations would take statehood as a given, with discussions focusing instead on how the state would be constituted to ensure the dignity and security of both peoples. Such talks, if they happen, are no doubt quite far off, but when the time arrives, international recognition could help assuage the asymmetry that has characterised previous rounds, while in the meantime empowering actors in both communities who are working for a sustained peace.

In the short term, recognition enables states like the UK to pursue short-term measures that demonstrate recognition of statehood beyond the announcement itself. For example, the current Palestinian diplomatic missions to London, Paris and Ottawa can be upgraded to embassies, and the countries can in turn explore ambassador-level representation in Palestine. More substantively, recognising Palestinian sovereignty also provides the UK and other states with a responsibility to firmly reject Israeli settlement expansion and land annexation, and establishes a clear rationale for revisiting trade agreements with Israel that include settlement goods.

Click here for the full press release