A Palestinian State?
Yet Another Attempt
England, France, and a few other countries have announced that they will recognize a “Palestinian state.” This is diplomatic language to mean they will recognize it as its own country, which it has never been.
The implication is that there will be Palestinian ambassadors and a Palestinian embassy in each of their countries. There are plans to propose the same at the United Nations general assembly in New York this week.
Two problems arise from this, one practical and the other moral.
The practical problem is that a state is usually defined by a territory with more or less stable borders and a government that has control of that territory. That does not exist in regards to something called Palestine, certainly not Gaza. What and who would be recognized?
The moral problem is that this recognition cannot be seen as anything other than a reward for the actions of October 7. No one was talking about granting them this status before they slaughtered and abused so many innocent people. And what about the hostages that remain? The governments of France and England have not made these pronouncements conditional upon release of any hostages.
What is known as a two-state solution—one Israeli state and one Palestinian state—has been tried since 1948. It has never worked. In 1948 the Arab nations attacked Israel to make sure there was only a Palestinian state. The Oslo Accord of 1993 established the Palestinian Authority, which was then used as a base for terrorist attacks on Israel. Likewise, the withdrawal from Gaza in 2005 gave Hamas the ability to plan and execute Oct. 7.
Everyone knows there are practical and moral reasons to oppose a Palestinian state. There are also political reasons to expect it will never happen.
If the proposal for a Palestinian state does make its way through the United Nations this week, it would have to be approved by the Security Council. The United States has a veto on that council, as do all five permanent members (US, UK, France, Russia, and China). They would never let the resolution pass.
But France and England have their own political reasons to go through the motions of doing something that cannot happen. They both have large and restless Muslim populations who have come to support the Palestinian cause even more than the Arab nations in the Middle East do.
A Palestinian state will not be recognized at the United Nations. The danger is that this move might provoke more terrorism from Hamas and other organizations or a war in the Middle East. This is a dangerous move and probably irresponsible.