Symbolic recognition wins applause but offers Palestinians no state, no safety, and no
sovereignty.
Statehood or Protectorate?
A viable state needs an independent economy, the capacity for self-defense, and territorial
contiguity. Current recognitions arrive with conditions that pre-limit sovereignty: exclude any
Hamas member or associate from politics, demilitarize, deradicalize, downgrade ICC/ICJ cases,
rewrite schoolbooks, and accept security doctrine set abroad—sometimes with outsiders floated
to oversee the project, including Tony Blair as viceroy. This framework recognizes a paralyzed neo-colonial protectorate, not a state that controls borders, airspace, coastline, movement, or
trade.
The Wave of Recognitions
Since Yasser Arafat proclaimed a Palestinian Independence Day on Nov. 15, 1988, 157 UN
member states have recognized Palestine as a state. The newest cluster includes ten U.S.-aligned
governments: the United Kingdom, Canada, Portugal, and Australia; and Andorra, joining
France, Monaco, Luxembourg, Belgium, and Malta. A few Western holdouts—Germany, Italy,
Hungary, Finland, and some Baltics—remain. If several move, as many states will recognize
Palestine as recognize Israel.
Does Recognitions Matter?
These recognitions are declarations, not obligations. They do not halt occupation, lift siege, or
stop mass violence. The same capitals that give a rhetorical nod to Palestinian statehood continue
to arm, train, trade with, and shield Israel diplomatically. “Reviews” of weapons transfers often
leave parts and components flowing through U.S. supply chains; profit and interoperability keep
the relationships intact. Leaders proclaim boldness while avoiding sanctions, embargoes, or
prosecutions. They can recognize a Palestinian state and still enable the killing—through bombs,
spare parts, tactical intelligence, and even “lone soldiers.” Israel’s leadership, for its part, vows to
block every statehood and cease-fire measure, with U.S. backing.
Why the Timing?
Politics, not diplomacy. Street mobilizations—marches, encampments, strikes—raised the cost of
doing nothing as Gaza burned. Recognition became the path of least resistance, a headline-
friendly step that blunts protest without altering policy. Meanwhile, regular airstrikes in Gaza
have killed on the order of 100 people a day.
The Record on the Ground
The same states applauding recognition abet what many experts now call genocide. Regional
governments host U.S. assets and fear a no-holds barred nuclear-armed Israel. From Al-Udeid
Air Base in Qatar, Israeli jets bombed Doha, targeting and missing Hamas negotiators brokering
a hostage deal. Western officials label remaining Israeli soldiers “captives and hostages” while
thousands of Palestinians “prisoners”—including children—endure indefinite administrative
detention, sometimes without charge. Once out of office, the U.S. State Department’s Matt
Miller stated that Netanyahu, not Hamas, repeatedly blocked hostage release deals. In lock step,
Washington vetoed nearly every cease-fire resolution at the UN Security Council.
Losses are staggering. After two years of bombardment Gaza lists at least 67,173 dead and
169,780 wounded, with thousands still under rubble. The Lancet, meanwhile, estimated over
186,000 dead as of November 2024. A leaked IDF memo reported by Israeli magazine +972 put
civilian casualties at 83%. The UN Independent International Commission concluded that Israel
has committed genocide since Oct. 2023, meeting four of five Convention acts (all but
forcible child transfer), with intent reflected in leaders’ statements and military conduct; states
owe a duty to prevent genocide now, not after the ICJ rules. Strikes on IVF clinics and embryos
signal an assault on reproductive capacity and not military targets.
What Remains to “recognize”?
Before the war, 2.3 million people lived in Gaza, one million under 14. Euro-Med Human Rights
Monitor estimates 70,000–100,000 tons of explosives dropped on a captive population with
nowhere to flee. E-SIMs and solar chargers let residents broadcast their own destruction. Anyone
with a phone cannot plausibly claim ignorance of what is happening there. In East Jerusalem and
across the West Bank, settlers enter population centers to “Judaize” land, sometimes moving into
homes as families still occupy them. Women and children appear among political prisoners held
under renewable administrative detention.
Doctrine and Method
Analyst Dan Steibock describes an “Obliteration doctrine”: scorched-earth tactics; collective
retribution that treats all Gazans as guilty; deliberate civilian and infrastructure targeting; and
mass, indiscriminate aerial bombing, now aided by AI-assisted target lists and “kill
probabilities.” Officials and media repeat famine-denial lines—“no famine in Gaza”—that
reinforce historic atrocity playbooks. Humanitarian workers chart three famine waves centered in
the north and cite an internal “generals’ plan” that anticipated epidemics finishing what tanks
could not. The aim: punish, empty, and control by degrading food, health, and energy systems. In
this war, civilians are the pressure point, not collateral.
The Information Battlespace
Younger audiences have watched a war live-streamed from phones while newsrooms circulated
editorial directives to avoid terms like “genocide” or “occupation.” Early in the war, the ADL’s
Jonathan Greenblatt warned that a generation had been lost to TikTok; the platform problem, he
implied, was Palestinians showing the war. At the UN, Netanyahu put it bluntly: “We have to
fight with the weapons that apply to the battlefields in which we’re engaged. And the most
important ones are social media. And the most important purchase that is going on right now
is….TikTok. TikTok number one.” Platform control, sanitized domestic coverage, and both-sides
framing continue to mask state complicity.
Pressure from Below-A Valve from Above
Recognition of Palestinian statehood functions as a pressure valve against surging activism. Last
Friday (Oct. 4) Italian dockworkers and transport unions shut down major cities after Israeli
flotilla raids in international waters. Spain dispatched naval vessels to accompany a flotilla, then
withdrew at 100 nautical miles; Israeli forces boarded the ships anyway. Israel rebranded the
campaign from “Selfie flotilla” to “Hamas flotilla,” invoking terrorism to justify force against
unarmed boats. Such actions, along with campus encampments, helped force recognitions; they
did not, however, change the policy architecture.
The Annexation Test
As Mouin Rabbani argues, the decisive moment will come if or when Israel annexes parts or all
the West Bank with U.S. cover. Newly recognizing states will then be faced with a stark choice:
either impose embargoes and sanctions consistent with their declarations or stall with token
designations while defense and trade continue. Domestic mobilization will determine which path
proves politically cheaper.
The polling inside Israel tells its own story. Recent figures reported in Haaretz show 79%
unconcerned about famine, 82% supporting expulsion, and 64% asserting there are “no
innocents” in Gaza. That climate normalizes “obliteration” and lowers global thresholds for
mass-atrocity warfare. Current recognitions do not counter that shift. Only steps with
consequences—sanctions, embargoes, and legal accountability—can change incentives and make
recognition mean statehood, safety, and sovereignty, rather than a ceremony that leaves the war
untouched.
This is a letter to the editor. Silvia Marsans-Sakly is an Associate Professor of the Practice, History and the Islamic World.
