What does the recognition of the Palestinian state mean?

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer announced that in September the UK recognizes the Palestinian state if Israel does not meet certain conditions, including agreeing to cease the fire and revival the perspective of the two-state decision.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu fiercely responded to the announcement, saying that the decision had awarded Hamas’s “horrific terrorism”.

What would it mean if the recognition would go forward and what difference he would make?

Palestine is a condition that does and does not exist.

It has a great degree of international recognition, diplomatic missions abroad and teams that compete in sports, including the Olympics.

But because of the long dispute of the Palestinians with Israel, he has no internationally coordinated borders, nor the capital and there is no army. From the military occupation of Israel, on the Western Bank, the Palestinian authorities, created as a result of peace agreements in the 1990s, not in full control of their land and people. Gaza, where Israel also occupies power, is in the midst of a devastating war.

Given its status as a quasiista, recognition is inevitably somewhat symbolic. This will be a strong moral and political statement, but it will change little on earth.

But symbolism is strong. Foreign Minister David Lami noted during his speech to the UN on Tuesday, “Britain has a special burden for supporting a two -state decision.”

He continued to quote the Balfur Declaration in 1917 – signed by its predecessor by Foreign Minister Arthur Balfur, who first expressed support for the UK “the creation of a national house for the Jewish people in Palestine.”

But this declaration, Lami said, came with a solemn promise:

Israel’s supporters often say that Lord Balfur did not refer to the Palestinians and said nothing about his national rights.

But the territory, which was previously known as Palestine, which Britain ruled through the mandate of the League of Nations from 1922 to 1948, has long been considered an unfinished international business.

Israel joined in 1948, but efforts to create a parallel state of Palestine were founded for many reasons.

As Lami said, politicians “used to say the words” two -state decision “.

The phrase refers to the creation of the Palestinian state, together with Israel, on the western shore, including the eastern Jerusalem and Gaza strip, wide along the line that existed before the Arab-Israeli War of 1967.

But international efforts to bring a two -state decision came to nothing, and the colonization of Israel in most of the Western shore, illegal international law, has transformed this concept into a largely empty slogan.

At present, Palestine is recognized as 147 UN member states.

In the UN, he has the status of a “permanent state of observer”, which allows to participate, but not the right to vote.

France also promises recognition in the coming weeks and believing that the UK continues to recognize, Palestine will soon receive the support of four of the UN Security Council (the other two – China and Russia).

This will leave the United States, the strongest ally of Israel, to date, in the minority.

Washington has recognized the Palestinian administration currently headed by Mahmoud Abbas since the mid-1990s, but stopped in recognizing a true state.

Several US presidents expressed support for the possible creation of a Palestinian state. But Donald Trump is not one of them. According to two administrations, the US policy was very leaning against Israel.

Without the support of the closest and most powerful ally of Israel, it is impossible to see a peace process that leads to a possible two -state decision.

Consistent British governments spoke about the recognition of the Palestinian state, but only within the peace process, ideally in combination with other Western allies and “at the time of maximum impact”.

Make it just as a gesture, believed that governments would be a mistake. It may make people feel virtuous, but nothing would actually change anything on earth.

But the events clearly made the current government’s hand.

The scenes of creeping hunger in Gaza, the emergence of anger over the Israeli military campaign and a serious shift in British public opinion – all this influenced the thinking of the government.

The noise among the deputies and even the front bench of the closet became deafening.

Last week, Lami was covered with questions from all sides, as the UK still does not recognize the Palestinian state on all sides.

Health Minister Wes -Strengin summed up many MPs when he called on the government to recognize Palestine, “while Palestine remains to admit.”

But the UK not just followed the leader of France Emanuel Macron last week or the governments of Ireland, Spain and Norway last year.

Sir Keir decided to make his key condition: Britain will act if the Israeli government does not take decisive steps to stop the suffering in the gas, to reach the ceasefire, refrain from the annexation on the west shore – it is symbolically threatening Israel’s parliament last week – and carried out a peace process.

Downing -Rate knows that in the next six weeks there is practically no chance of committing itself. He repeatedly excluded the creation of a Palestinian state.

Thus, Palestine’s British recognition is certainly going on.

For all non -fictional opposition, Netanyahu Sir Keir hopes that this is really a “moment of maximum impact”.

But Britain in 2025 was not Britain in 1917, when the Balfur Declaration was signed. His ability to bend others to his will is limited. It’s hard to find out what will be influenced now.