France and Saudi Arabia will set the tone for next week’s United Nations General Assembly sessions in New York when they co-host a conference Monday on the establishment of a Palestinian state and postwar Gaza reconstruction, among other issues.
A key feature of the conference will be recognition of Palestinian statehood by a number of European and other Western countries, including France, which will become the first permanent member of the Security Council that is also a member of the G7 to do so.
Yet despite the fanfare, the conference will take place at a time when the creation of an independent Palestinian homeland – long the holy grail of international diplomacy – has never seemed more remote.
Why We Wrote This
The French-Saudi initiative at the United Nations next week supporting an independent Palestine, while symbolically important, is not risk-free and is unlikely to lead soon to that long-sought goal. Yet it’s worth it, supporters say, to keep the discussion alive.
Nor is a ceasefire in sight in the nearly two-year-old war in Gaza, sparked by Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attack on southern Israel.
This week, Israel launched a ground offensive into Gaza City, purportedly aimed at rooting out remnants of Hamas in the Palestinian enclave, the practical effect of which is to level what remains of the city. And at an event announcing thousands of new housing units for Jewish settlers in the occupied West Bank, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared, “This land is ours!” and pledged that there will never be a Palestinian state.
Indeed, many seasoned Middle East diplomats and experts who toiled for decades on what the U.N. calls the “Palestinian question” now say the “two-state solution” – with an independent Palestine living alongside Israel in shared peace and security – is all but dead.
And yet, initiatives like the French-Saudi conference keep arising – in part, some regional specialists say, because no one has come up with an acceptable and workable alternative to some iteration of a Palestinian homeland.
“The events next week will have huge symbolic importance but in fact very little practical impact on the ground. If anything, they could be counterproductive in the short term,” says Brian Katulis, a senior fellow at The Middle East Institute in Washington.
“But even if the gap between what’s happening in the hallways of diplomacy and on the ground remains wider than ever,” he adds, “it’s important to keep the discussion alive because that keeps alternatives alive that at some point the parties will have to return to.”
What motivated Macron
French President Emmanuel Macron announced in August that his country would formally recognize a Palestinian state at the General Assembly meetings. The United Kingdom, Belgium, Australia, New Zealand, and others are expected to join France.
Last Friday the General Assembly endorsed by 142 to 10 the French-sponsored New York Declaration calling for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Mr. Macron says he was motivated to act now by the failure to reach a ceasefire in Gaza and by the deepening humanitarian crisis there. He has been further motivated, according to some French analysts, by a realization that the United States under President Donald Trump will do nothing to stand in the way of any Israeli action in Gaza.
The French president is also furious with the U.S. for barring Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and other Palestinian officials from entering the U.S. to attend the General Assembly meetings – a move that also precludes Mr. Abbas’ participation in Monday’s conference.
Last week a U.N. commission of inquiry found Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, a conclusion reached earlier this year in a study by international genocide scholars. Israel rejects that characterization of its war against Hamas.
Regional experts consider Saudi Arabia’s decision to team up with France to host Monday’s conference significant because it signals the kingdom’s unwavering insistence on creation of a Palestinian homeland. Saudi Arabia is considered the big prize in the diplomatic effort begun in Mr. Trump’s first administration to normalize ties between Israel and its Arab neighbors.
Despite the salutary hope-springs-eternal aspect of the Saudi-French push, however, some experts worry that the effort could actually do more harm than good. That view was echoed recently by U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee, who called the wave of Western recognition of Palestine “disastrous” and said it has achieved “exactly the opposite” of what European countries intended.
The danger in the view of some analysts is that such actions further isolate Israel on the international stage, reinforcing a conclusion it has nothing to lose by acting unilaterally and resisting international pressure.
As symbolic as it may be, the international push for recognition of a Palestinian state “runs the risk of provoking an Israeli response that makes getting to a Palestinian state only more difficult,” says Michael Koplow, chief policy officer at the Israel Policy Forum, a group that advocates a two-state solution to guarantee a secure, Jewish, and democratic Israel.
Offering two examples, he says the moves have already stoked calls in Israel for annexation of much of the occupied West Bank, while he worries they could prompt Israel to “intensify pressure on the Palestinian Authority to provoke its collapse.”
On the Palestinian side, the symbolic international gestures “could raise the hopes of Palestinians in ways that backfire,” Mr. Koplow says, “when Palestinians see that the symbolism does nothing to improve their lives.”
Moreover, he says what may appear to be well-meaning gestures are likely to lead to actions that further complicate eventual diplomatic efforts – as for example Spain’s recent move from recognition of a Palestinian state to imposing sanctions on Israel.
“Even if it remains symbolic, there’s a significant chance it’s not cost-free,” he says.
Lack of alternatives
Mr. Katulis of the Middle East Institute says the path forward will depend on whether the key players in the diplomatic efforts – the Europeans and Arab countries – make next week’s actions a one-and-done or a launching pad – for example, for a serious proposal on postwar Gaza.
“It depends on the conversation it sparks and the follow-on efforts in the key power countries,” he says. “We already know that Trump 2.0 will continue to provide the block for Israel, and that Netanyahu will continue to ride Trump like a bus,” he says. “But that opens some space for others to fill the gap.”
What some experts say remains clear – even after the devastating events of the last two years and all the requiems for the two-state solution – is that no alternative exists to some form of a Palestinian state.
“I can understand that the Israelis are not ready to talk about a Palestinian state with the trauma of Oct. 7 still so intense,” says Mr. Koplow. “But eventually when enough time has passed, you will see the Israelis start to come back to the two-state solution. The alternatives,” he says, “are not good for either side.”
