The ‘Tsunami’ of Recognition for Palestine: Navigating the Choppy Waters Ahead

Arab observers and public opinion are divided. On one side are the optimistic supporters who view the recent wave of international recognitions of a Palestinian state as a necessary precursor—a leap towards transforming the state from the “ink of resolutions” into a tangible reality. On the other side are the pessimistic skeptics, who see it as a largely symbolic step, arriving far too late to make any real difference in the lives of Palestinians.

More importantly, they argue, these recognitions serve as a substitute for the international community’s failure to stop the massacre, curb Israeli impunity, and assuage its own conscience in the face of nearly two years of relentless killing, terror, and starvation.

Why should we temper our optimism?

In my view, the “truth” lies somewhere between these two positions, and may even be a combination of both. No rational person can be overly optimistic about the outcomes of this “tsunami” of recognition, which has recently swept up three key Anglo-Saxon allies: Britain, Australia, and Canada. This caution can be attributed to four main reasons:

First: “Too Little, Too Late.”
It is “too little” because recognition has not been coupled with stringent punitive measures against Israel—at the very least, to stop the two-year-long slaughter, halt the runaway settlement expansion, and end the rampage of the only rogue state in the region, if not the world. It is “too late” because this recognition comes over a century after the ill-fated Balfour Declaration, which established a state for the Zionist entity on the ruins of the land’s indigenous people. It comes more than three-quarters of a century after that state was founded in defiance of partition plans and UN Resolution 181, over half a century after the occupation of what would constitute this state’s territory—the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem—and more than a third of a century after the Madrid Conference and the Oslo Accords.

Most critically, these recognitions are accumulating while the fascist-right government in Tel Aviv is systematically and methodically destroying any chance for a connected, viable Palestinian state—let alone a sovereign and independent one. “Forced displacement” is a top agenda item for this entity, not only in Gaza but also in the West Bank and Jerusalem. As political science students learn, a state rests on three pillars: land (territory), people, and a political system. Israel spares no moment in its efforts to undermine all three simultaneously.

Second: Recognition Laden with Preconditions.
Many of these recognitions come loaded with preconditions. The recognizing states are competing to draft their own “lists of demands.” Some propose radical reforms to the Palestinian Authority’s structure, always in a way that enhances its security role in service of Israel and targets all forms of resistance to the occupation. Others stipulate the end of Hamas, its removal from governance, politics, and geography, rendering it a forgotten relic. Still others have thrust the issue of the hostages into the mix as a precondition for realizing this recognition, as if the lives of over 11,000 Palestinian prisoners enduring torture, humiliation, and starvation hold no value from the perspective of these so-called “human rights capitals.”

In essence, at least some of these recognitions amount to: We will grant you a state in exchange for remaking your system, your people, your history, your memory, and your future.

Third: A Consequence of Shifting Public Opinion, Not Political Courage.
This series of recognitions would not have occurred without a dramatic shift in global public opinion—a revolt against Israel’s carefully cultivated “imagined” image and its narrative based on myth and legend. While this shift reflects the pragmatism of governing parties in these countries responding to electoral calculations, it also highlights their insistence on avoiding any practical action to stop the barbaric aggression, punish Israel, or impose a boycott. The idea of “compensation” here is more significant than a genuine “awakening of conscience.” This doesn’t diminish the importance of the shift, which may even gain durability from its roots in popular sentiment and a new generation liberated from the spell of Israel’s “moral superiority” and the fear of the “antisemitism” accusation.

Fourth: Vague Borders and Silent Complicity in Settlement Expansion.
Furthermore, many of these recognitions do not define the state’s borders as outlined in the 1988 Declaration of Independence, nor do they take a stance on the existing and future settlements that are devouring its territory and threatening its people. In the end, the idea of a state with compromised sovereignty and geography could be acceptable even to some in the Israeli and American right—a state of bantustans on patches of the West Bank, containing the largest number of people on the smallest amount of land, without challenging the idea of a “united eternal capital” for Israel.

The Palestinians, in their declaration of independence three decades ago, defined their state’s borders as the territories occupied in 1967. Very few of the recently recognizing states have referenced these borders, leaving the file open for future rounds of conflict.

Yes, There is an Opportunity, But!

Conversely, the excessive optimists go so far as to call this a “historic day,” claiming the Palestinian cause will never be the same. They bet heavily on these transformations, citing several reasons:

1. It elevates Palestine’s status from mere missions and representative offices to full-fledged embassies with diplomatic privileges, after gaining recognition from nearly 80% of the world’s countries—more than those recognizing Israel.

2. It creates a situation of a “state under occupation” instead of a “people under occupation,” although the previous status of an “authority under occupation” did not improve Palestinian conditions but rather worsened them. No one can guarantee their situation will be different if the optimists’ wishes come true.

3. The “tsunami” of recognition will deepen Israel’s isolation, and by extension, that of its chief protector, the United States. It will eventually force them to bow to the international storm, especially with growing global exasperation at the war of extermination, cleansing, displacement, and the well-documented war crimes.

The Reality: A Step in the Right Direction That Must Be Seized

The truth is, we must acknowledge that what is happening is a “step in the right direction.” It must be followed by further steps. It represents a positive development that reveals an “opportunity” which must be invested wisely. This requires a comprehensive political, diplomatic, legal, and resistance-based strategy that must first credit the true authors of this shift.

The primary credit goes to the people of Gaza, who have withstood two years under conditions that would break mountains. The credit belongs to the blood of over a quarter of a million martyrs, wounded, missing, and prisoners. The credit is due to the resistance fighters who refused to raise the white flag and remained steadfast despite the firestorm engulfing them and the vast power imbalance. Only after that does the role of diplomacy and diplomats come in. Imagine the scenario if Gaza had fallen in the early days of Netanyahu’s iron swords, or if its people had succumbed to the displacement plan—what could diplomacy have achieved then?

Investing in the Opportunity: The Required Shifts

Firstly, from the Palestinian Arena: The crumbling Palestinian system cannot be a lever for realizing the state; it risks making it more elusive. The required reform must stem from Palestinian national priorities, not from the desires and orders of donor states dictated by an Israeli “list of conditions.” The Authority’s performance, its unilateralism, exclusionary practices, tendency to adapt to the Israeli solution, and its excessive reliance on “external” rather than “internal” forces do not suggest the “Palestinian factor” is helping to seize the moment.

Here, we must specifically note that Hamas, in particular, needs to reassess its position and role in this new Palestinian phase once the war ends. It is difficult to expect major shifts from the movement that launched the “Al-Aqsa Flood” firstly because the war is not over, and secondly, because the security constraints surrounding the movement and its leadership complicate internal deliberations and reviews. However, this is a pressing task, whose importance transcends the future of Hamas itself to the future of the Palestinian people and their cause. We are eager to see how the movement thinks about the post-war phase—a task that exceeds individual intellect and requires a collective Palestinian effort.

Secondly, from the Arab Arena: The official Arab system has failed the “Doha test” of effective response. It is now time to build on this international awakening to present a model for dealing with the “rogue state” through practical steps: ending free normalization, closing airspace to the enemy, and imposing sanctions and a boycott on the apartheid, genocidal entity of ethnic cleansing and “transfer.” This is not the time for the petty competition filling screens about which capital prompted the “recognition tsunami”—a distorted replay of the rivalry over which capital sent the most aid to Gaza. There is no time for blame games, only for coordinating efforts among active states to isolate Israel, make it pay the price, and ensure it does not escape punishment. That is the shortcut to transforming a “symbolic achievement” into reality. Otherwise, we will be facing yet another wasted opportunity.

Finally, on the International Stage: Investing in this “opportunity” must start with breaking the effect of the American veto—used six times to block a ceasefire. The focus should shift to the UN General Assembly through the “Uniting for Peace” mechanism, striving for a resolution that recognizes Zionism as a form of racism and racial discrimination. Israel is replicating the history of the South African apartheid regime with greater barbarity and must be consigned to the same dustbin of history.

Support Dawat Media Center

If there were ever a time to join us, it is now. Every contribution, however big or small, powers our journalism and sustains our future. Support the Dawat Media Center from as little as $/€10 – it only takes a minute. If you can, please consider supporting us with a regular amount each month. Thank you
DNB Bank AC # 0530 2294668
Account for international payments: NO15 0530 2294 668
Vipps: #557320

  Donate Here