Canada, France, UK Wrongly Recognize ‘Palestinian State’

France, Canada and the UK have become ruinous bedfellows as they have simultaneously announced that they will acknowledge the ‘State of Palestine’ as a Member State of the United Nations, a designation reserved solely for nations at the globalist organization.

The announcements come as a move to recognize Palestinian autonomy and secure a ‘two-state-solution.’

To date, about 144 of the 193 UN member states have recognized a Palestinian state, including most of the global south as well as Russia, China and India. Only a handful of the 27 EU countries do so, mostly former Communist countries as well as Sweden and Cyprus. Spain, Ireland, Norway and Slovenia announced their recognition last year.

But, for every action there is a reaction and for these unilateral actions to validate “Palestine,” is it as if these nations are lining up to reward terrorism whilst bypassing the most crucial requirement of direct negotiation.

The three countries’ determination on this front comes after the UN’s education arm, UNESCO, was called out by the United States for their admittance of the ‘State of Palestine’ as a Member State. Seeing this, it was most likely the last straw for the United States who moved swiftly to issue a statement through the State Department, removing themselves and their funds from the stupidity of an agency.

Rewarding Terrorism Over Diplomacy

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has accurately referred to this move as “rewarding terror,” with the argument that it will make a Palestinian state “a launchpad to destroy Israel.”

Additionally, acknowledging “Palestine” today without the removal of Hamas’s grasp on Gaza sends a signal to terror groups that terrorism will pay dividends politically. This policy runs contrary to decades of Western foreign policy, and for Canada’s as well, which insists Palestinian statehood emanates from direct negotiations with Israel and not from proclamations.

Furthermore, the Oslo Accords in 1993 and 1995 established the Palestinian Authority (PA) as an interim, rather than a state, entity, awaiting a final accord to manage borders, security, and recognition by one another. Undermining this system is a disrespect to the peace process it was meant to initiate.

Undermining Israel’s Security

Israel, the reliable friend of Western nations and the island of democracy in the Middle East, is challenged with existence daily. Granting state status to Palestine within the UN without borders or security guarantees could encourage parties such as Hamas, which actively deny Israel any right to exist.

The events of October 7, 2023, in which 1,200 were murdered and 251 taken captive by Hamas attacks, clearly showed the dangers in a Palestinian state under or controlled by such actors.

Canada’s policy, established by Global Affairs Canada, favors a two-state solution but insists that Palestinian recognition “should come at the moment most conducive to lasting peace.” This is based on the fact that a Palestinian state must accept the existence of Israel and ensure its security, and when one understands the motivators behind the mission of Hamas, this will never happen. In the UK’s announcement, a similar statement was also made.

France’s unilateral move, along with Canada and the UK’s coercive tactics, are an abandonment of their fundamental principles which will only usher in further destabilization in the region.

The Folly of Unilateral Recognition

The quest for recognition, such as France’s commitment to make it official at the UN General Assembly in September 2025, ignores the intricacies of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The borders of a future Palestinian state remain uncertain, and disagreement on the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza remains. Accepting a state without defined borders risks legitimizing a ruptured entity with no ability to govern, as with the PA’s thin grip over Gaza, where Hamas governs.

Additionally, America, Israel’s most intimate friend, has actively resisted the “two-state solution,” with Secretary of State Marco Rubio calling it “reckless” and a “slap in the face” to the October 7 attack victims.

The U.S. has consistently vetoed Palestinian UN membership on the basis of direct negotiations, and whilst Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney has taken the same line, abstaining on a 2024 UN Palestinian membership motion to avoid killing off the two-state solution, she has ultimately chosen to follow France’s lead.

The Path Forward

Instead of rushing to recognize a Palestinian state, Canada, France and the UK should concentrate on renewing the peace process. This entails calling for direct talks that consider Israel’s security, draw distinct borders, and envisage a demilitarized Palestinian state that will accept Israel. The 1993 Oslo Accords and the Quartet Road Map still remain the best models for this.

France’s action, whilst framed as a moral stance against Gaza’s tragedy, runs the risk of isolating Israel and emboldening its adversaries. As for Canada? It mustn’t go down that path, joining allies like the U.S. in rejecting unilateral measures. This way, Canada can uphold its values of democracy and security so that the future Palestinian state comes from a process that will bring peace to Israelis and those in Palestine.

In short, to accept Palestine as a UN member state at the moment is not a peaceful move but an act of retreat. It cuts short the relentless work of diplomacy, diminishes Israel’s security, and rewards terrorism.

These three nations dictating to Israel their desire for a “two-state solution” isn’t about “peace in the Middle East,” it’s about bolstering their approval ratings.

Thank you for your support.

If you appreciate the work we do to spread the good news of Jesus Christ, please consider giving a gift to help us continue this work. Maranatha!