Three Western Powers Push for Palestinian Statehood, Leaving US Isolated Over Israel Support

Canada, following France and the United Kingdom, has joined over 140 other nations in advocating for a Palestinian state. This development adds weight to calls previously made by these influential Western countries.

The impetus behind this move ranges from growing discontent with Israel’s policies, domestic pressure, to public outrage over images of malnourished Palestinians. Regardless of the motivation, the announcements have been met with approval by Palestinians as a significant boost for their cause. Conversely, Israel has dismissed these calls, arguing they equate to rewarding terrorism.

President Trump, on the other hand, appears increasingly displeased with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, particularly over the ongoing crisis in Gaza that Netanyahu denies but has troubled Trump.

Trump’s quest for regional peace and the potential Nobel Peace Prize associated with it necessitates normalization of relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel. However, Riyadh has made it clear that this cannot occur without a definitive roadmap to a Palestinian state.

The recent endorsements by France, Britain, and Canada, while largely symbolic in nature, have left the US increasingly isolated in its continued support for Israel.

A Palestinian state could potentially end a conflict that has claimed over 60,000 lives in Gaza since Hamas’s October 7 attack resulted in approximately 1,200 casualties in Israel nearly two years ago, and bring back the hostages still held captive in Gaza.

However, envisioning what a modern Palestinian state might look like is challenging due to its nonexistence in history. The establishment of Israel following World War II was swiftly recognized internationally, while for Palestinians, this period represents al-Naqba, or “the catastrophe” – the displacement of hundreds of thousands of people from their homes.

Since then, Israel has expanded significantly, notably during the 1967 Six Day War when it seized East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and Gaza from a coalition of Arab states. Conversely, Palestinian territory has fragmented.

The Oslo Accords of the 1990s offer an idea of what a future Palestinian state could resemble. Negotiated by both Israeli and Palestinian parties, this proposed state would be based on Israel’s 1967 borders, with land swaps and the removal of Israeli settlements as part of a negotiated process.

The historic handshake between Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat on the White House lawn, hosted by President Clinton, remains one of the highlights of modern diplomacy. However, Rabin’s assassination in 1995 by a right-wing extremist robbed Israel of its peacemaker leader.

Though the spirit of Oslo lives on in negotiations and academic discourse, there is currently little initiative. What was once on offer no longer appears realistic due to the significant expansion of Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank.

Moreover, the question of governance for a future Palestinian state remains contentious. The Palestinian Authority, which governs parts of the West Bank, is viewed with skepticism by many Palestinians who perceive it as weak or corrupt.

Netanyahu has categorically refused to accept a Palestinian state, recently claiming it would serve as a launch pad for Israel’s annihilation. Some members of his cabinet are even more hard-line, opposing the idea of an independent state and advocating for annexation of the territory.

These ministers propping up Netanyahu’s government have stated they would rather starve Palestinians in Gaza than feed them, and would collapse the coalition if Netanyahu even suggests giving in to international pressure on Israel.

Netanyahu shows no signs of backing down, viewing any external pressures as a badge of honor. However, without cooperation from his government, recognition of a Palestinian state could prove ineffective, potentially strengthening Netanyahu further.

In such a scenario, the price for this inaction could be substantial, potentially moving the possibility of a Palestinian state even farther away. Yet, with an increasing number of disgruntled former allies likely to intensify their pressure on Trump to change his position, it is Israel that may find itself at a disadvantage, despite its firm stance.