French President Emanuel Macron must be feeling particularly good this week seeing nations of the world following one of his country’s most honored traditions: surrender.
Macron announced that he intended to recognize “Palestine” at the U.N. General Assembly next month. Immediately following Macron were British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney. Several other countries have indicated their inclination to do so as well.
The Macron, Starmer, and Carney ideological surrender is akin to recognizing Nazi controlled Vichy France. Mon Dieu! It not only does not bring peace any closer but, it hardens the position of the terrorists and emboldens and rewards their aggression. That has been clear as Hamas has continued to entrench its intransigence any time serious talks of a cease fire and hostage release get close.
There’s something else critical to “recognize” in the announcement of the intent to recognize “Palestine.” Among other things, Starmer made clear threats to Israel that he would follow through to recognize Palestine if Israel “takes substantial steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza, agree to a ceasefire, and commit to a long term sustainable peace, renewing the prospect of a two-state solution.”
Starmer’s “message to the terrorists in Hamas is unchanged and equivocal.” Hamas “must immediately release all of the hostages, sign up to a cease fire, disarm, and accept that they will play no part in the government of Gaza.”
His threats to Israel are clear. His nonsensical “message” to Hamas is meaningless. They are not running to London, the U.N., or anywhere else to lay down their arms, and are not going to release the hostages without maximal pressure. Does Starmer’s conditional nature of the intent to recognize “Palestine” also require Hamas to disarm and release the hostages? Do they need to post on their social media “In the Name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, Most Merciful we will not play a part of the government of Gaza?”
British-Israeli former hostage Emily Damari, who was kidnapped on October 7, 2023, and released after 471 days in captivity Gaza, used her own social media to condemn Starmer’s announcement. “I am deeply saddened by Prime Minister Starmer’s decision to recognize Palestinian statehood. This move does not advance peace — it risks rewarding terror. It sends a dangerous message: that violence earns legitimacy.” In another post, Damari wrote: “Prime Minister Starmer is not standing on the right side of history. Had he been in power during World War II, would he have advocated recognition for Nazi control of occupied countries like Holland, France or Poland? This is not diplomacy — it is a moral failure. Shame on you, Prime Minister!!!!!!!”
In announcing his country’s intent to recognize “Palestine,” Canadian Prime Minister Carney also made this conditional. He said it is “predicated on the Palestinian Authority commitment to much needed reform including… to hold elections in 2026 in which Hamas can play no part, and to demilitarize the Palestinian state.” He added that “Hamas must immediately release all hostages taken in their terrorist attack of October 7,… must disarm... and play no role in the future governance of Palestine.”
His language is troubling on many levels, but the premise is absurd. What if, in his Never-Never Land of diplomacy, the Palestinian Authority did hold elections, and what if a rebranded Hamas were to win? What if the PLO were to win, and then be summarily ousted in a coup in 2027, by Hamas, now in control of “Palestine?” Would “Palestine” be required to maintain Carney’s standards or risk Canada withdrawing its recognition?
If any of these leaders were really sincere about recognizing “Palestine,” they would just do so and not need to announce their intentions to do so, or with all these impossible to realize conditions.
If I were a Palestinian Arab who believed that I had a right to live in an independent “State of Palestine,” rather than celebrating in the streets, I would be offended by the provisional nature of recognizing what I would believe as the occupation of my country. Those who advocate the purported right of Palestinian Arabs to have an independent state should be up in arms (pun intended) that their “rights” are conditional.
What’s interesting in the context of a war against Hamas that is now entering its 22nd month since the Hamas attack and massacre on Oct. 7, 2023, there is widespread agreement from most of Israeli society, on the right and on the left of the political spectrum, that the Macron, Starmer, and Carney’s announcements are treachery. While there may be differences on the conduct of the war and priorities or imperative to get the remaining 50 hostages released, there is uniformity in their condemnation of this intended move.
Multiple voices throughout Israel, not just the government and not just on the right, have voiced their outrage, even harsh denunciation.
The Hostages and Missing Families Forum is not an echo chamber for the Israeli government, and has largely been more critical of the government and its policies related to the hostages. But on this, there is widespread agreement. “Recognition of a Palestinian state while Hamas holds 50 hostages isn’t just a step away from peace, it is a blatant violation of international law and a dangerous moral and political violation that bestows legitimacy to horrifying war crimes.”
“The international community — if it wants peace — must join the efforts of the US and demand, before all else, the release of the hostages and then the end of the fighting.” The Forum represents most of the hostages’ families, and advocates a deal with Hamas to return all the hostages in exchange for an end to the war and the release of Palestinian Arab terrorists.
“Abducting men, women, children and babies, and holding them in tunnels against their will, amid starvation and physical and mental abuse, cannot — must not — be the grounds for establishing a state,” they added.
“The recognition of a Palestinian state before the return of the hostages will forever be remembered as a shameful, antisemitic step that renders terror acceptable as a legitimate means of achieving political goals.”
Unilaterally recognizing a Palestinian state, enables terrorism and deprives Israel of leverage amid efforts to secure the hostages’ release. It also goes against the terms of the Oslo Accords to which France, the UK, and Canada all subscribed, requiring actual negotiations and not unilateral actions by all parties. These and other countries recognition of “Palestine” will not only not bring peace closer, it will harden the position of the terrorists and prolong the war.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member