Some European states declare that not all conditions have yet been met for the recognition of a Palestinian state. Others, who had rejected it until now, have accepted the recognition of the Palestinian state, or they have already taken this step. Their reasoning is supported by the groundbreaking Venice Declaration of the European Community of 1980 (the predecessor of the EU), which for the first time recognized the Palestinian right to self-determination. Later, the EU’s Berlin Declaration from 1999 was added to it, which confirmed “the readiness of the EU to consider the recognition of the Palestinian state.”
There is no doubt that the recognition of the State of Palestine is an important step towards Palestinian self-determination. However, in order to be effective, according to analyst Hugh Lovatt in the article “Recognizing Palestine: How Europeans can support a post-Gaza war political track” written for the European Council on Foreign Relations, it must be accompanied by concrete measures on both the Israeli and Palestinian sides.
Among the most important steps is convincing the Israeli government and public opinion of a two-state solution. In other words, no solution will be viable without a Palestinian state based on the borders of 1967. The absence of negotiations since 2014, when the Oslo I and Oslo II processes were frozen, allows Israeli settlers to implement the concept of the Land of Israel (Eretz Yisrael) stretching from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River instead of the concept of the State of Israel (Medinat Yisrael). According to Hugh Lovatt, this trajectory threatens not only Palestinian national aspirations but also Israel’s future as a democratic state. A two-state solution, on the contrary, would confirm and support the legitimacy of the State of Israel within its internationally recognized 1967 borders.
On the other hand, the international community, or the main actors of the peace process, will have to re-legitimize the Palestinian political system so that the recognition of Palestine leads to real self-determination. The fragile Palestinian Authority has found itself in a difficult situation not only due to Israeli sanctions but also because of the hardliners represented by Hamas, which has growing public support for the armed conflict among Palestinians themselves.
Hugh Lovatt believes that supporting Palestinian domestic reconstruction will require the willingness of European countries to recognize the harsh reality of Hamas. It will probably remain a key part of the Palestinian national movement despite Israel’s efforts to eradicate it. Slovak orientalist Jozef Hudec notes to the author that Hamas is the Palestinian part of the Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwán al-Muslimín) and that several Arab states have already tried to eradicate the Ikhwan, and so far they have failed. The Ikhwan is not only a militant or terrorist structure, but also provides poor Muslims with education in schools and health care in hospitals. This obliges them, and they see it in a positive light.
According to Lovatt, Europe will have to accept that the return of the Palestinian Authority to Gaza, the re-legitimization of Palestinian institutions, and ultimately a lasting peace agreement with Israel will all require some degree of support from Hamas to prevent it from playing a negative role as the spoiler.
From the point of view of these measures, it is possible to assess the states that today are approaching the recognition of the State of Palestine, but also those that have reserved this step for the creation of conditions for their future decision. It is important for the future of the Palestinian state that the recognition should be accompanied by the recognition of the 1967 border, which would not prevent Israel and Palestine from agreeing on possible future adjustments or land exchanges. Otherwise, it will always be symbolic. Without an explicit territorial clause, the recognition of Palestinian statehood loses its legal and political weight. According to Hugh Lovatt, the lack of defined borders could revive Donald Trump’s vision of a Palestinian “state minus” made up of unconnected enclaves in the West Bank and Gaza.
