Western Palestine Recognition: Symbol or Solution?

3 Main Points

- Is the recognition of Palestine a genuine turning point or merely a symbolic political repositioning?

- Recognition signals moral leadership and support for a two-state solution but lacks concrete measures to impact the conflict.

- While diplomatically significant, recognition remains largely symbolic; it can influence negotiations but requires concrete follow-up to affect real change.

About the Authors

Saskia Foulon is pursuing a B.A. in European Studies at Maastricht University (NL).

Alya is a third-year student in International Relations and Organisations at Leiden University, with a binational background—half Iranian and half German. Their commitment to human rights began early, joining PLAN International’s “Youth Advocates” at the age of sixteen to campaign for the rights of young refugees in Germany and across Europe. Academically, Alya has focused on migration and Middle Eastern politics, with particular interest in the roles of ethnic minorities and women in civil conflicts.

Western Palestine Recognition: Symbol or Solution?

Alya Honarpisheh + Saskia Foulon

Introduction

During the one-day summit at the UN General Assembly on 22 September, hosted by France and Saudi Arabia, a number of European countries joined other major western countries in officially recognising the State of Palestine, aiming to pressure the Israeli government and to reinforce support for a two-state solution. Western states such as France, Belgium, Canada, Australia, and the UK announced recognition, marking what many view as a momentum shift in the international community’s reaction to the worsening humanitarian emergency in Gaza.

On the ground, however, the reality remains devastating. In light of the shifting international discourse the Israeli government reacted by closing the Allenby Bridge crossing, the only entry point to the West Bank. Following the closing of the Zikim aid corridor earlier this month Palestinians are, thus, further isolated and limited in their movement and access to the already insufficient humanitarian aid. As of current reporting the Palestinian death toll has climbed to around 66,000 deaths. These developments have sparked debate on whether recognition by Western countries can meaningfully advance peace or if it remains largely a symbolic gesture. Amid these current developments, this article explores a pressing question: Is the recognition of Palestine a genuine turning point or merely a symbolic political repositioning?

2. Why now? The triggers and reinforcing factors

Firstly, it is important to put this ‘sudden’ move for collective recognition into context and analyse possible triggers for this recent shift. The most evident trigger is the escalating humanitarian emergency in Gaza over the past months. The destruction of infrastructure, mass displacement, and rising civilian casualties have made it increasingly difficult for the international community to ignore the immediate situation in Gaza. While debates over the terminology used to describe Israel’s actions are intensifying, a growing number of human rights organisations and legal scholars, have urged for an arms embargo in response to what they identify as a genocide. This position gained further support this September when, a United Nations commission of inquiry concluded that Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. The accumulation of these International findings have fostered substantial pressure on western states to position themselves concretely and to act accordingly.

A second factor relates to rising domestic pressure within European countries. Since October, pro-Palestinian demonstrations have expanded both in scale and frequency, drawing tens of thousands into the streets of Europes capital cities. The intensified pressure due to mass mobilisation has made it counterproductive for governments to remain a stance of unconditional support for the Israeli government, particularly as public opinion polls show increasing criticism of Israel’s conduct of the war.

Nevertheless, the decision to recognise Palestine is not universally accepted and has been resisted by important states such as Germany and Italy, who have historical alliances with Israel, internal political debates, and scepticism about the utility of the recognition at this moment in time. However, the combination of humanitarian urgency and domestic mobilisation has created a normative pressure that made it impossible for the international community to maintain this status-quo. With more international voices urging for sanctions in light of an escalation in humanitarian emergencies and a radical Israeli government, recognition of Palestine has been gaining renewed interest as a diplomatic tool of Western governments.

3. Why recognition? Possible political reasonings behind state recognition

If international positioning is changing because of the above mentioned factors, the key debate is why recognition of Palestine has emerged as the common step forward. On the one hand actors such as the parliamentary committee of the UK have pushed for the recognition “while there is still a state to recognize,” reflecting the idea that recognition could enforce international norms regarding state sovereignty more concretely, creating the chance for new negotiations. From a technical point of view the recognition of Palestinian statehood is crucial by making Palestine a party to a range of international treaties, such as the Rome Statute. It, thus, positions Palestine with more rights as a recognized member within the international legal sphere, preparing the region for a peace process resulting in a two-state solution.

However, many analysts have voiced criticism, highlighting that recognition alone will not improve the tangible realities of Palestinians suffering under Israeli aggression. Interviewed by CCN, Yossi Mekelberg of Chatham House even argues that a Palestinian state is “the furthest it has been from becoming reality” since the Oslo Accords. Importantly, these new recognitions of Palestine, have come with strict conditions put into place by Western powers, determining how a Palestinian state should function. It, thus, becomes evident that beyond humanitarian urgency and domestic pressure, the decision on recognizing a Palestinian state also reflects calculated political considerations.

Importantly, in times of an escalating humanitarian emergency, for European governments, recognition offers a relatively low-cost policy tool: symbolically powerful, yet less politically and economically risky than sanctions or an arms embargo. Therefore, Western states stay aligned with international norms, while avoiding costly and concrete interventions. Moreover, it allows leaders to project themselves as defenders of international law, while preparing for the establishment of a Palestinian state that is based on Western terms, thereby extending their influence within the region and internal Palestinian politics.

4. What are the challenges of palestinian state recognition

The reasons why multiple Western states have recognised Palestine are open to debate. Whether this recognition is merely a politically calculated and symbolic gesture, or whether it genuinely aims to counteract humanitarian emergencies can be analysed by examining the specific measures introduced by the Western states calling for state recognition.

Although widespread recognition of the Palestinian state by other countries is said to be a step towards ending further escalation, this measure faces several challenges in terms of enacting concrete changes. In fact, under international law, state recognition allows for diplomatic relations and participation in international organizations but does not automatically entail military obligations. For example, France's recognition of Palestine on 22 September 2025 did not imply that France was an ally of Palestine. This means that France is not obliged to take measures to defend Palestine against Israel.

Moreover, and underscored by most analysts, for the recognition of Palestine to gain meaning it needs to be followed by concrete measures such as economic sanctions, arms embargoes or suspension of commercial agreements to have a tangible impact. However, the countries who recognized Palestine have failed to take such measures. For instance, Portugal, Luxembourg and Malta, which recently recognised Palestine, did not take concrete economic or military measures to sanction Israel adequately. In fact, while many European countries recognised Palestine, the European Union did not terminate its preferential commercial agreement with Israel as a sanction. Therefore, even though 158 out of 193 UN member states recognise Palestine, the lack of tangible action weakens the impact of the recognition. This is largely due to the refusal of key states such as Germany and the United States to recognise Palestine. Tom Bateman, the BBC's State Department correspondent, claims that “without the US leading the effort, there isn't the same kind of meaningful pressure that only Washington can bring to bear on all sides”. This is significant, as it underlines hesitancy of European states to intervene without the backing of the US.

Moreover, it has been observed that the increased recognition could have an adverse impact on the conflict, albeit unintentionally. For example, in his speech at the UN on 26 September, Benyamin Netanyahu declared that the widespread recognition by France and other countries was 'wrong' and would ‘reward Hamas'. Thus, this move strengthened Israel's opposition to a peaceful resolution to the conflict with a Palestinian state, hindering ongoing negotiations and leading to the closure of the Allenby Bridge crossing. Recognition therefore risks entrenching the political status quo at the United Nations, leading to the humanitarian emergencies to further increase.

This reality is felt even more acutely in the Gaza Strip following the recognition. On Saturday, 27 September 2025 alone, the Israeli army intensified its attacks on Gaza, resulting in over 77 Palestinian casualties. This escalation in violence shows that the recognition risks remaining merely symbolic and having no actual impact on stopping Israeli attacks on the Gaza Strip.

5. Conclusion

Overall, when looking at the question: Is the recognition of Palestine a genuine turning point or merely a symbolic political repositioning? It has been analysed that recent recognitions pose a crucial shift that reflects both the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the increasing domestic public pressure within Western states. Analysts argue that this creates a critical legal foundation to shift peace negotiations. However, it becomes evident that this recognition does not provide tangible solutions nor protection in the face of increasing humanitarian emergencies.

Thus, despite its limited direct impact on the conflict, we can conclude that recognition is a crucial symbolic but potentially strategic move by Western governments. Moreover, it can be viewed as constituting a political tool with low cost, allowing Western states to position themselves as defenders of the international community without risking direct intervention. It ensures that the Palestinian issue remains at the forefront of the political agenda, without crossing diplomatic lines with the US and Israel, while establishing influence in the region.

Lastly, this recognition aims to contribute to the two-state solution promoted by many Western countries. Nonetheless, for this recognition to pose an effective tool for peace, it must be accompanied by concrete measures, such as sanctions, suspension from commercial agreements and coordinated actions by multiple countries. Without these tangible gestures, recognition risks remaining a symbolic move, insufficient to intervene adequately in times of increased loss of civilian lives and destruction of Palestinian infrastructure.