Palestine’s recognition has been a contested topic before. And although it has been declared a state previously, who is doing it now matters more than ever.
In the past two years, a string of countries that had long resisted unilateral recognition — Ireland, Spain, Norway, Slovenia, and now the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Portugal and Malta have broken with decades of Western policy.
France, Luxembourg and Belgium are preparing to follow. For the first time since Oslo, recognition of Palestine has become a mainstream position among core Western allies.
The momentum looks unstoppable. Around 150 UN members already recognise Palestine, most of them in the Global South.
When Washington’s closest partners in Europe and the Anglosphere join that list, it indicates a collapse of the old diplomatic firewall that kept recognition at bay.
Why did the timing change
The United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and Portugal all recognised Palestine on September 21, followed by Malta a day later.
France, Luxembourg and Belgium are preparing to join.
But recognition has been debated in Western capitals for ages.
What made governments move now was a combination of domestic pressure, the grinding war in Gaza, and the expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank.
The images of devastation in Gaza left ruling parties in London, Ottawa and Canberra facing voter discontent and party rebellions.
Recognition offered a way to respond without severing security ties with Israel.
There is also a strategic calculation.
By elevating the Palestinian Authority to the status of a state, governments hope to strengthen moderate Palestinian leadership and sideline Hamas.
Recognition statements from the UK and Canada were explicit: Hamas would play no role in a future government.
In this framing, recognition is not a reward for militancy but an investment in institutional reform.
The United States remains opposed. Washington insists statehood must follow negotiations, not precede them.
But Washington is more isolated than ever on this issue. That isolation is what makes the current wave so important.
What recognition does and does not do
Recognition does not end Israel’s control over the West Bank or Hamas’s rule in Gaza.
It does not move borders or stop the fighting. But it changes the way states interact, and it raises the cost of defiance.
Recognition matters because it creates the conditions for legal challenges in European courts against settlement-linked trade.
It strengthens the case for Palestinian participation in international treaties. And it erodes Israel’s diplomatic shield in the UN General Assembly.
In practical terms, recognition creates leverage. It allows European governments to tie future aid to reforms within the Palestinian Authority.
It creates a legal foundation for restricting trade with Israeli settlements.
And it sets the stage for further votes in the UN General Assembly, where Palestine already commands large majorities.
Israel’s response and the consequences
Israel has condemned the recognitions as rewarding terrorism. Senior ministers have spoken of annexation of parts of the West Bank as a possible counter-move.
But annexation could accelerate the very isolation Israel fears. European sanctions are already drafted.
The Gulf states, especially the UAE and Saudi Arabia, view annexation as incompatible with normalisation.
If annexation proceeds, Europe is prepared to respond. Belgium has already drafted a sanctions package targeting settlement products and potentially arms exports.
The UK suspended some arms licences in 2024 and could go further.
This tit-for-tat escalation has wider implications. Annexation would put the Abraham Accords under strain.
The United Arab Emirates has warned that annexation is a red line. So what was intended as deterrence could end up closing doors that Israel has spent years trying to open.
Who is next?
France is expected to announce recognition at the UN this week. Luxembourg and Belgium are likely to follow, the latter with conditions related to hostages and Hamas.
Smaller European states such as Andorra and San Marino may join as well. New Zealand is reviewing the issue with a decision anticipated soon.
But not every Western state is ready. Germany, Italy and the Netherlands remain on the sidelines for now, arguing that recognition should follow negotiations.
Japan and South Korea are unlikely to move in the near term.
Still, the pattern is clear. What was once confined to the Global South is becoming a position across Europe and the wider West.
Historical echoes and differences
The last major wave of recognition came in the late 1980s, after the Palestine Liberation Organization declared statehood in 1988.
Back then, the recognitions came overwhelmingly from the Global South and the Eastern Bloc.
Western capitals held back, arguing recognition must follow negotiations.
Today’s wave comes from the opposite direction: states at the core of the Western alliance system.
That reversal makes this moment unique. It suggests that the centre of gravity of international legitimacy has moved.
What was once an ideological divide during the Cold War has become a mainstream Western position three decades later.
The wider geopolitical meaning
The recognition wave is about Palestine, but it is also about power and influence, as with every political topic.
For decades, the US could rely on close allies to align with its Middle East policy. And that alignment has cracked.
When three of the “Five Eyes” (the UK, Canada and Australia) openly diverge from Washington on one of the most sensitive files in world politics, the unipolar era looks diminished.
France and Saudi Arabia played a quiet role in choreographing this moment, showing that coalitions of mid-powers can move the diplomatic needle even without US leadership.
That is a lesson that goes beyond Palestine. It hints at a world where the US no longer sets the terms of every negotiation.
Recognition also redefines the two-state solution. For years, it was treated as a distant outcome of talks.
Now recognition comes first, negotiations later.
That reversal may be the only way to keep the idea alive, but it also hardens positions.
Israel sees it as unilateral pressure. Palestinians see it as overdue justice.
A shift in the world order?
Perhaps the sharpest insight is that recognition of Palestine by Western allies is less about borders in the Middle East than about borders in the global order.
It indicates that the unipolar era, where allies followed the US line almost automatically, is slowly fading.
Countries now calculate that divergence from the US carries manageable costs.
For investors, that has a direct implication. Multilateral consensus will be harder to predict.
Policy risks will not be set by Washington alone but by shifting coalitions.
That creates more uncertainty but also more opportunity.
Recognition like these are early marker of a world where middle powers assert themselves more often.
The recognition of Palestine is therefore not only a diplomatic move. It is also a market signal. A signal about the future of geopolitics.
It tells us alliances are loosening, sanctions are broadening, and legal exposure is widening.
Perhaps it indicates a collapse in confidence in the old two-state process. But what is certain is that it is a turning point in how power is distributed.
The post Why the Palestine recognition is rewiring global diplomacy appeared first on Invezz
