The West’s Lack of Seriousness About the Two-State Solution

The West’s Lack of Seriousness About the Two-State Solution

    Tuesday, July 29, 2025   No comments

For over three decades, the international community has paid lip service to the idea of a two-state solution as the path to peace between Israelis and Palestinians. Yet, since the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993—which were supposed to pave the way for Palestinian statehood—the West, particularly the United States and its allies, has failed to take meaningful steps toward realizing this goal. Instead, Israel has continued expanding settlements in the occupied territories, undermining any possibility of a viable Palestinian state. The recent announcements by France and the UK to recognize Palestine—met with immediate condemnation by Israel and the U.S.—only highlight how political, rather than principled, the West’s stance has been. If the international community had enforced the Oslo framework and recognized Palestine years ago, the cycle of violence, including the October 7 attack and the current war in Gaza, might have been avoided.

Three Decades of Empty Promises

The Oslo Accords were meant to be the foundation for Palestinian self-governance, with a five-year interim period leading to final-status negotiations on borders, Jerusalem, refugees, and security. Yet, thirty years later, Israel has not withdrawn from the occupied territories, and illegal settlements have only expanded. The West, while rhetorically supporting a two-state solution, has done little to pressure Israel into compliance. Instead, the U.S. and European powers have shielded Israel from accountability, vetoing or blocking UN resolutions condemning settlement expansions and military actions in Palestinian territories.

This lack of enforcement has emboldened Israel’s far-right government, which has openly rejected Palestinian statehood. Just yesterday, Israel announced plans to fully reoccupy Gaza and accelerate annexation in the West Bank—actions that directly contradict the two-state solution. If the West were serious about peace, it would have taken concrete measures long ago, such as recognizing Palestine, halting military aid to Israel until it complies with international law, or imposing sanctions for settlement expansions. Instead, the U.S. and its allies have allowed Israel to dictate terms, ensuring that Palestinian statehood remains out of reach.

Missed Opportunities, Manufactured Conflicts

Israel has had countless opportunities to accept a Palestinian state, which would have provided it with a clearer moral and legal high ground. Once Palestine was recognized, any future attacks from Palestinian territories would be seen as aggression from one state against another, legitimizing Israel’s right to self-defense under international law. Yet Israel has consistently chosen expansionism over coexistence. Just this week, the Israeli government has signaled plans not only to reoccupy Gaza fully but also to assert control over the West Bank—making clear that the goal is not peace, but dominance.

The Abraham Accords, which normalized ties between Israel and certain Arab states, were framed as a diplomatic success. But in reality, they were a workaround—a means to ignore the core issue of Palestinian statehood. Without addressing the root cause, no agreement can bring lasting peace. Recognition of Palestine, not its erasure, is the only path to stability.

If the West genuinely seeks peace in the Middle East, it must move beyond rhetoric. Recognition of the Palestinian state must happen now, and it must be followed by concrete measures to ensure that state’s sovereignty. That includes sanctions against Israel should it unilaterally attack or reoccupy Palestinian territory without provocation. Anything less enables the status quo of violence, displacement, and injustice.

The continued delay in recognition only emboldens the Israeli government to seize more land and entrench a system of apartheid. Western inaction is not neutrality—it is complicity. A principled stance would align with the international consensus and uphold the same values of self-determination and human rights that the West claims to champion.

Global Recognition vs. Western Obstruction

More than 140 out of 193 UN member states already recognize Palestine as a sovereign state. The fact that most of the holdouts are Western nations—primarily the U.S., Canada, Australia, and parts of Europe—demonstrates that their position is driven by geopolitical allegiance to Israel rather than a genuine commitment to peace. When France recently announced its intention to recognize Palestine, only the U.S. and Israel objected. Similarly, when the UK indicated it would recognize Palestine in September, Israel immediately lashed out. These reactions prove that Israel’s government has no intention of allowing Palestinian statehood, and the West’s reluctance to act independently only enables this obstruction.

Had Palestine been recognized as a state under the Oslo framework at any point in the past 30 years, the current crisis could have been averted. A sovereign Palestine would have had diplomatic and legal means to address grievances, reducing the need for armed resistance. There would have been no need for the Abraham Accords—which bypassed Palestinian rights in favor of Arab-Israeli normalization—and no Houthi attacks in the Red Sea in solidarity with Gaza. The West’s failure to act has perpetuated the conflict, not resolved it.

The Path to Peace: Recognition and Accountability

If the West truly wants peace, it must take immediate action:

• Recognize Palestine – The UK and France’s steps are positive, but all Western nations must follow. Recognition would force Israel to negotiate in good faith rather than indefinitely delaying statehood.
• Impose Consequences on Israel – If Israel continues annexation or attacks Palestinian territories without provocation, the West must impose sanctions, halt arms sales, and support ICC investigations.
• Enforce International Law – The U.S. must stop vetoing UN Security Council resolutions that hold Israel accountable for violations.

The longer the West delays, the more land Israel takes, and the more violence escalates. The two-state solution is not dead because Palestinians or the international community abandoned it—it is dying because Israel and its Western backers have systematically undermined it. If the West does not act now, the alternative is endless war. The choice is clear: recognize Palestine or bear responsibility for the bloodshed that follows.

If the West fails to act now, the two-state solution will soon become obsolete, leaving only two grim alternatives: perpetual apartheid or a catastrophic, single-state conflict. Israel’s relentless settlement expansion, its stated intent to annex the West Bank, and its ongoing destruction of Gaza demonstrate that it has no interest in allowing Palestinian sovereignty. Meanwhile, the West’s inaction—masked by empty diplomatic statements—has only emboldened Israel’s extremist government to accelerate its colonization of Palestinian land. The consequences of this failure are already unfolding: the October 7 attack, the brutal war on Gaza, and the rising tensions across the region prove that oppression breeds resistance, and resistance begets further violence. Without urgent Western intervention to enforce a political solution, the cycle will only grow bloodier. The next uprising will be more violent, the next Israeli retaliation more devastating, and the next generation more radicalized. The window for a two-state solution is closing rapidly; if the West continues to prioritize Israeli impunity over justice and peace, it will bear responsibility for the explosion of violence that follows.

"Israel Is Meant to Be Jewish and Democratic; It Cannot Be Both"

"Israel Is Meant to Be Jewish and Democratic; It Cannot Be Both"

    Monday, January 27, 2025   No comments

There is no enduring end to cyclical violence without a political solution to the fate of the Palestinians. No one is seriously talking about the day after another Gaza war, unless they talk about political settlement, not security arrangement. The New York Times borrowed a line from John Kerry  who argued that "Israel Is Meant to Be Jewish and Democratic. It Cannot Be Both." The NYT article  interpreted that statement by invoking another maxim: "States Don’t Have a Right to Exist. People Do." Here are some excerpts from the article, referenced by similar views published in global media outlets.

  

Nika Soon-Shiong said LA Times endorsement was blocked over Gaza war support

Nika Soon-Shiong said LA Times endorsement was blocked over Gaza war support

    Sunday, October 27, 2024   No comments

CNN and other media outlets reported that "the daughter of Los Angeles Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong suggested on Saturday that herfather’s decision to block the newspaper’s endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris was made over Harris’ support for Israel’s war in Gaza.

Nika Soon-Shiong, a 31-year-old activist who has no official role at the newspaper but has previously been accused of meddling in its coverage, told The New York Times that she and her father made the decision not to endorse Harris. Nika Soon-Shiong reportedly said:

“Our family made the joint decision not to endorse a Presidential candidate. This was the first and only time I have been involved in the process... As a citizen of a country openly financing genocide, and as a family that experienced South African Apartheid, the endorsement was an opportunity to repudiate justifications for the widespread targeting of journalists and ongoing war on children.”

Before Biden dropped out, it was argued that Gaza Genocide will be for Biden what Covid-19 was for Trump. Harris, not making a clear shift in Biden's policies and approach made her inherit his legacy and that will likely sink her bid for the presidency. Young Americans, especially, are not willing to look past the atrocities in Gaza and now Lebanon happening under Biden's watch and by his support.

Media review: What does CBS's handling of Ta-Nehisi Coates' interview tell us about US media when it comes to telling the story of Palestininas?

Media review: What does CBS's handling of Ta-Nehisi Coates' interview tell us about US media when it comes to telling the story of Palestininas?

    Wednesday, October 09, 2024   No comments

News stories about Palestine cannot be covered by news media like any other news subject. That is the main point of the recent controversy surrounding CBS's interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates.

Coates response to the challenge tells the full story: Dokoupil accusing Coates of leaving some information out is not the real issue. The real issue is that Western media outlets have already set the standard for the plight of Palestinians: They should not be given any space, not an equal space, not enough space... they should be given any space at all. And that is the main point in Coates' response. 

The story of Palestinians is not told enough, and when it is, those attempting to tell it, are accused of "supporting terrorism" and of being anti-Semitic. Even Semitic persons--Jews who survived (or who are children of survivors of) the European crime against humanity inflicted on Jews, who object to a genocide committed in their name or the name of their religion or their identity, are attacked as sympathizers with terrorists.

So Dokoupil was not interested in pushing back against unbalanced "reporting", he pushed back because Coates was telling a story that no one is willing to tell for the reasons that were playing out before him live and where he was living the true experience of doing so. There is no record of Mr. Dokoupil pushing back against those who come to tell the Israeli point of view, telling them that they left out the story of Palestinians being subjected to apartheid system, the stories of Palestinians' rights to self-determination being denied by Israel for more than 75 years...

“Why leave out that Israel is surrounded by countries that want to eliminate it?” Dokoupil asked. “Why leave out that Israel deals with terror groups that want to eliminate it?”

“There is no shortage of that perspective in American media,” Coates replied. “I am most concerned, always, with those who don’t have a voice.”

This exchange says it all.

The Problem is not Netanyahu, it is Israel's next generation of leaders like Bezalel Smotrich

The Problem is not Netanyahu, it is Israel's next generation of leaders like Bezalel Smotrich

    Monday, September 09, 2024   No comments

Hundreds of thousands protest weekly in Israel these days, wanting to bring down Netanyahu and his government, accusing the former of being an obstacle to making a deal that would end the war in Gaza, and saying that he is doing so for purely personal reasons--fear of being charged and convicted with crimes. If that is true, that would make him less dangerous to the region than other members of his government who are against any deals, not for personal reasons, but for ideological and religious reasons. And the future of Israel will be in the hands of people like Bezalel Smotrich, who hold the belief that Israel will be secure only when Palestinians are erased.

“I believe that the village of Hawara should be wiped out, and I believe that the State of Israel should do it, and not, God forbid, private individuals.” These words escaped the lips of Bezalel Smotrich, Minister of Finance and Minister of Civil Affairs in the Ministry of Defense in Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, during a conference organized in Tel Aviv in March 2023 by the Israeli economic newspaper The Marker. 

The minister, who heads the “Religious Zionism” party and is known to be a licensed lawyer and carefully calculates his words, did not expect, in the context of his comment on the settlers’ barbaric campaign against homes and property in the village of Hawara, south of Nablus, (in revenge for the killing of settlers by Palestinians), that this statement would bring upon him the wrath of the US State Department, whose officials called for a boycott of him. The US ambassador to Tel Aviv, Tom Nides, went on to call Smotrich “stupid,” prompting the latter to try to minimize the damage during a televised news program, saying, “Whoever can attribute to me the intention of wiping out the village, that is up to their obsessive mind. The intention is to be more proactive and aggressive in the war against terrorism, because people are being killed here… Perhaps this was said during a fit of emotion… I stumbled over my tongue.” 

But "the cat's out of the bag", and Smotrich’s words and actions, past and present, have come under scrutiny, given that he has been the third pillar of the ruling coalition in Israel since December 2022, after Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Galant, and the guardian of settlement expansion in the occupied West Bank, in its new form.

Smotrich is not an outlier who represents no one in Israel, he has been elected consistently for years. Smotrich entered the Israeli political arena after being elected to the Knesset in March 2015, and was re-elected for five subsequent terms. With the formation of Netanyahu’s sixth government at the end of 2022, Smotrich was given the Finance Minister portfolio, which was previously held by Avigdor Lieberman, controlling the budgets of ministries and state institutions, including the army, in addition to controlling the movement of funds received by the Palestinian Authority under the 1994 Paris Agreement, especially the tax funds that must be handed over to the Authority, known as the clearance revenue, which is considered the backbone of public revenues in Palestine. In addition to this important and sensitive portfolio, another portfolio was added, the Ministry of Civil Affairs within the Ministry of Defense. In addition to the two portfolios, the leader of the Religious Zionism Party, Orit Struck, was appointed Minister of Settlement.

Smotrich first ran for the 18th Knesset in 2009, coming in ninth place on the National Union list. According to the Knesset Elections Law, he was exempted from serving in the IDF for three months, after which he returned to complete his service. At first, Smotrich opposed entering politics, but he did so on the instructions of his elders - headed by Rabbi Haim Druckman - who decided that this was a necessary step.

On June 23, 2019, he was appointed Minister of Transportation and a member of the Political-Security Cabinet in the transitional government.

Ahead of the 24th Knesset elections, he split from the Yamina list, according to him, against the backdrop of Naftali Bennett's willingness to enter the government in cooperation with left-wing parties. Smotrich ran as head of the "Religious Zionism" list in the technical bloc of the National Union parties: "Takuma", "Otzma Yehudit" and "Noam". The list won 6 seats in the elections, 4 of which went to Smotrich's party.

Where did this settler, haunted by the doctrine of "religious Zionism", come from?

His biography published on social media platforms says that he was born in 1980 in the settlement of "Haspin", built on the ruins of the village of "Khasfin" in the southern occupied Syrian Golan, to a Ukrainian family of religious nationalist zealots. In the settlement of "Beit El" north of Ramallah, he grew up in schools that combine the Jewish religion and Zionist thought.

Smotrich is the son of a settlement rabbi. He was born in one settlement, raised in another, married and lived in a third, from the Golan Heights to Hebron in Kiryat Arba, and then to Kedumim near Nablus. When he was 28, Smotrich volunteered in the Israeli army, and served for a year and a half in the central square in the operations department of the General Staff, a special period of service for religious people.

A leader for the future who is putting roots settlements he is determined to expand

Although he holds a bachelor’s degree in law and is licensed to practice law, Smotrich does not believe in international law, peace agreements with neighboring countries, or any Israeli laws that contradict the “Greater Israel” doctrine that aims to impose sovereignty over all of the Palestinian territories and parts of Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon.

The man currently lives with his settler wife and seven children in the Kedumim settlement, built on Nablus land in the northern West Bank, after he seized private Palestinian land and built his home on it without a permit even from the occupation authorities.

The Israeli investigative website "Shomrim" revealed some features of the doctrine of "religious Zionism" and its impact on Smotrich's statements and speeches, in a report published by the Arabic version of the "Madar" website on September 4, 2023.

The report says: Regarding the conflict with the Palestinians, Smotrich often repeats phrases: There is no such thing as "two states for two peoples" and "The land of Israel is ours, and what is ours cannot be stolen," and another refrain that clearly reflects his quest for a single state or the implementation of a transfer. In 2015, he said in a speech he gave before the Knesset General Assembly: "There is only one state here, a Jewish state, and there will never be a Palestinian state alongside it. Whoever wants to live with us is welcome, but whoever does not want to either leave or we will see him in the crosshairs" (rifle aim). A year later, Smotrich wrote on Twitter (then X now): “All that remains now is to move from words to deeds: turn off the lights in the Palestinian Authority, impose sovereignty, and do everything that any self-respecting independent state would do.” As for the idea of ​​voluntary transfer, Smotrich calls it “encouraging immigration,” explaining that “those who do not want or cannot put aside their national aspirations will receive assistance from us to immigrate to an Arab country or to any other destination in the world.” This is not immigration on rickety boats, but rather the modern phenomenon of immigration on a plane to an organized future. 

Smotrich: My life’s mission is to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state

Smotrich has declared just this week that his life mission is to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state. Smotrich, leader of the Religious Zionism party, made these remarks via social media, further emphasizing his commitment to expanding Israeli control over the occupied West Bank.

Smotrich stated, “My life’s mission is to build the Land of Israel and thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state that would endanger the State of Israel.” He framed this goal as not merely political but “national and existential,” highlighting the deep ideological commitment that drives his agenda.

Smotrich also highlighted his policies to entrench Israeli control in the occupied West Bank. “This is why, in addition to my role as Finance Minister, I took on the responsibility for civilian affairs in Judea and Samaria (the Israeli biblical name for the West Bank),” he added, reinforcing his intent to expand and support illegal settlements.

Smotrich’s rhetoric, which explicitly rejects Palestinian statehood, further highlights the ongoing challenges Palestinians face under Israeli occupation. His pledge to protect the “half a million settlers on the frontline, under fire,” is seen as a direct message to Palestinians threatening of subjecting them to ethnic cleansing.

Recently, Israeli settlers in the West Bank have escalated their violent attacks on native Palestinians, emboldened by Israeli leaders like Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir.

Senior Israeli military officials have even accused Smotrich and Ben Gvir of fueling unrest and “provoking a regional war.” According to reports in Israeli media, their extreme policies are seen as the “direct cause” of what is described as an increase in Palestinian resistance across the West Bank.

Smotrich also said that while the Israeli political leadership aims to control the aid entering Gaza, the Israeli military refuses to take responsibility for managing it.

The minister’s insistence on Israeli control over aid comes at a time when the besieged Gaza Strip is suffering from an Israeli-made famine and humanitarian crisis.

 Smotrich's Messianic "Revolution"

“A few weeks ago, I met with one of the settler leaders in the West Bank, a Likudman. I asked him what grade he would give Smotrich and Ben-Gvir. The man said, ‘I’m disappointed with Ben-Gvir. He talks more than he does. I’m very satisfied with Smotrich,’” Yedioth Ahronoth political analyst Nahum Barnea wrote in his report on the radical changes that Finance Minister and Defense Minister Smotrich have brought about in the West Bank. Although the report did not provide anything new in this regard, it explained, in some detail, how the extremist minister, founder of the Regavim movement, was able to bring about a qualitative shift in the settlement project in the West Bank towards actually annexing the latter to Israel, which enabled him to obtain the “mark” he deserved. 

According to Israeli law, the army is the supreme authority or sovereign in the West Bank, “but in reality, Israel’s sovereignty in Judea and Samaria was handed over to a closed, extremist political sect, which obeys the command of one person and advances according to one messianic plan,” according to Barnea, who adds that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “supports that sect or does not obstruct it. What it currently lacks is completed by the government revolution within the Green Line, with weak opposition from the army.” 

The writer explains that Smotrich took control of the West Bank using a pincer tactic, the first jaw of which is represented by his position as Minister of Finance, and the second by his powers derived from his position as Minister of Defense, adding that “the goal he set in the decisive plan he published in 2017 has not changed: to cause the collapse of the Palestinian Authority, prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state, and present the seven million Arabs living between the Jordan River and the sea with one of these options: death in battle, emigrate abroad, or remain second-class citizens forever.” In this context, Smotrich froze or delayed the transfer of clearance revenues that Israel collects on behalf of the Palestinian Authority from customs and taxes, in order to pay the salaries of its employees. 

Not only that, but he also activated “Article B of the Terror Victims Compensation Law,” which was approved last June at the behest of Justice Minister Yariv Levin and the chairman of the Constitution and Law Committee, Simcha Rothman. It stipulates that “any person injured in a terrorist act who sustains a permanent disability is entitled to compensation of up to five million shekels,” which is the money that Israel deducts from the clearance revenues, and is equivalent to the allocations that the Palestinian Authority pays to the families of Palestinian martyrs and prisoners. 

According to the new law, Israel can deduct it twice. Also, since October 7, the issuance of work permits within the Green Line has been suspended; Barnea points out here that “the Shin Bet, which feared the consequences of the economic crisis and its impact on the escalation of resistance operations, prepared a plan for the supervised entry of a portion of the workers into permanent workplaces,” while “the army supported this plan, but Smotrich and his colleagues exerted pressure that led to its rejection, and the Palestinian population was left with no choice but to rely on foreign aid, including money sent by Iran to the Hamas and Islamic Jihad movements.”

The second arm of the “Smotrich empire” is Hillel Rot from the Yitzhar settlement, who, after being appointed deputy head of the Civil Administration for Civil Affairs by Smotrich, became the de facto governor of the West Bank. In this context, Barnea quotes Professor Dan Turner, a settler in the Kfar Adumim settlement on the Jerusalem-Jericho road, as saying that “all the powers of the head of the Civil Administration were given to Rot, who is subordinate to the Settlement Administration, a political body in Smotrich’s ministry in the Ministry of Defense.” 

Among these powers is the appointment of department heads in the Civil Administration; Rot “appoints activists in the Religious Zionism Party to it, and thus an engineer from the Revava settlement was recently appointed director of the planning office in the Civil Administration, which is the highest authority in the field of planning and construction (in the West Bank).” The “Smotrich revolution” also affected the “legal advisor for Judea and Samaria,” who is subordinate to the military prosecution; He was fired and his department was closed, while “Smotrich appointed more than 20 lawyers whose mission is to quickly change the regulations to allow the development of the area for Jews only,” according to Turner, who explains that “everything is managed by civilian officials, politicians. Civilizing services is one of Smotrich’s means of freeing himself from the control of the army and implementing de facto annexation.” 

He explains that “over the past year and a half, there has been no planning for the 300,000 Palestinians living in Area C, and they have not been granted a single building permit, while demolitions, including the demolition of water wells and schools, have become routine.” In contrast, the declaration of lands as “state land” has quadrupled, as have building permits, and the establishment of unauthorized outposts has accelerated. According to Turner, “There are more than 100 small outposts and farms on Palestinian pastures. 

Unauthorized construction by Jews is not enforced, with Smotrich’s encouragement.” For its part, the “Judea and Samaria Police are acting in accordance with the policy of (National Security Minister Itamar) Ben-Gvir; they refrain from stopping Jewish violence and terrorism. If a settler is arrested, he is immediately released.” In fact, all of the above “will not help us in the court hearings against us in The Hague,” according to Turner, which intersects with what Barnea reported from Israeli security officials, who expressed their fear of “the impact of Kahanist measures (terrorism derived from the doctrine of Rav Meir Kahane, founder of the terrorist Kach movement) in the West Bank on the escalation of terrorism (resistance operations), and of a ruling that may be issued by the two international courts in The Hague.” 

According to Barnea, what is happening in the West Bank “seems to be a convenient pretext for issuing arrest warrants for government ministers, including its prime minister,” and “the American administration is concerned about the changes taking place in the West Bank, no less than it is concerned about the stagnation in Gaza. What happens in the West Bank does not stay in the West Bank.” Yesterday, Smotrich renewed his defense of what he is doing in the West Bank in a post on X, saying that “my life’s mission is to build the Land of Israel and thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state that would endanger the State of Israel. 

This is not political, but rather national and existential. That is why I have taken upon myself, in addition to my position as Minister of Finance, responsibility for civil affairs in Judea and Samaria.” He added, “(I) will continue to work with all my might so that the half a million settlers living on the front lines and under fire enjoy the rights of every citizen of Israel, and to establish facts that prevent the establishment of a Palestinian terrorist state, which will be (…) an Iranian forward base for the next massacre in Kfar Saba, Raanana and the entire center of the country.”

...

  These are not the views of an outlier, Israel's leaders are elected, and Bezalel Smotrich was not elected once or twice, he was elected many times and he, like leaders of other Zionist parties, represent a majority of the Israeli society, which means it represents the popular view of Israel. When Western governments, and Arab leaders address the place of Hamas and other religious groups in Palestinian societies, they often say, Hamas does not represent the Palestinians. The problem for Western leaders, is, what do you say about the Israeli Hamas-like, based on Western reasoning, like the groups that elect Bezalel Smotrich, who represent the majority of society, and are calling for genocide, forced population transfer, and ethnic cleansing? Does their being elected make them less subject to the principles of justice upon which the Palestinian claim to statehood is based?

  

Media review, compiled by Ali Hafez, B. Hamoud et al.

Should European nation-states be praised for finally recognizing a Palestinian state?

Should European nation-states be praised for finally recognizing a Palestinian state?

    Wednesday, May 29, 2024   No comments

 Given that 147 out of the 193 UN member states already recognize Palestine, European governments should not receive praise simply for now considering recognition. In fact, those European states that still do not recognize the State of Palestine share responsibility for the decades of violence and oppression faced by Palestinians.

When the French President urges President Mahmoud Abbas to “initiate vital reforms” in the Palestinian Authority in preparation for “recognition of a Palestinian state,” this shifts blame away from France’s own historical support of colonialism and its role in denying Palestinians their right to self-determination. It implicitly holds Palestinians responsible for their own emancipation, while glossing over external conditions and external responsibility.

Countries that recognize the State of Palestine (green) and countries that don't: