The Media Line: European Recognition of Palestinian State Seen as Symbolic, Not Real, Experts Tell TML 

Audio By Carbonatix

Enlarge

European Recognition of Palestinian State Seen as Symbolic, Not Real, Experts Tell TML 

Prof. Robbie Sabel: ‘There would need to be agreed borders and effective governance, and at the moment, neither exists.’ 

By Giorgia Valente / The Media Line 

European capitals are considering the recognition of a Palestinian state, with Spain and France signaling support, Canada expressing alignment, and the United Kingdom weighing a conditional approach. The discussion comes as the war in Gaza continues with no clear end in sight, prompting growing international calls for a political response. Yet legal and political experts caution that recognition alone may remain largely symbolic, and the path to actual statehood is fraught with challenges. 

Prof. Robbie Sabel, a scholar of international law at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, noted that statehood under international law depends on specific conditions that remain unresolved in the Palestinian case. “A state has to fulfill certain conditions to be regarded as a state,” he told The Media Line. “It must have an effective government and a clearly defined territory. Many of the Palestinians’ powers are controlled by Israeli authorities. They cannot enter or leave without Israeli oversight, and Israel controls the air and communications,” he added. 

Sabel emphasized that recognition, while politically significant, does not automatically create a state. “These are statements of aspiration,” he said. “Western states would like to see a Palestinian state, but stating that doesn’t make it a state. For that to happen, there would need to be agreed borders and effective governance, and at the moment, neither exists.” He also underlined that such recognition “would in no way serve Hamas’ interests or agenda,” noting that Western governments are unlikely to extend legitimacy to the group through any political gesture. 

Amjad Salfiti, a London-based human rights and international law lawyer, described the recent momentum in similar terms. “The media makes it sound as if these countries are declaring a real Palestinian state with sovereignty and borders,” he said to The Media Line. “No, it’s purely symbolic—an act of solidarity, tapping someone on the shoulder and saying: we are with you. But on the ground, it remains academic until the occupation ends or the international community enforces change,” he added. 

Both experts pointed to the complex realities that hinder state formation. The Palestinian territories are fragmented: Gaza is under Hamas control, the West Bank under limited Palestinian Authority administration, and East Jerusalem has been annexed by Israel. Sabel explained that fragmentation alone is not disqualifying—“a state can have separate parts, like Alaska and the United States”—but he noted that effective control is absent. “Clearly, the Palestinian Authority does not have that in Gaza,” he said. 

Salfiti stressed that territorial and demographic changes have compounded the problem. “The map looks like a leopard pattern,” he said. “Israeli settlements and the forced displacement of Palestinians are reshaping the territory in a way that destroys the idea of a permanent population and a connected state. Under the Geneva Convention, you cannot expel people or implant your own population. Israel is doing both, creating a situation where the legal foundations of statehood are deliberately weakened,” he added. 

The question of how Jewish settlers in the West Bank and Arabs in East Jerusalem would fit into any future arrangement adds another layer of complexity. Sabel said that the presence of minority populations does not preclude statehood. “States can and do have minorities,” he said. “If there were a Palestinian state, it would be for the Palestinian Authority to decide whether Jews in the West Bank could become residents or citizens. Their presence does not make statehood impossible,” he added. 

Salfiti countered that settlements create a deeper structural issue, blurring sovereignty. “Israel behaves as if its settlements are extensions of its state, with full security and freedom of movement,” he said. “That’s like an octopus stretching arms into someone else’s territory. It’s very hard to call that land the foundation of a sovereign Palestinian state,” he added. 

European recognition, both experts agreed, also carries a potential pressure dimension. Sabel said that if recognition coincides with European perceptions of Israeli violations, diplomatic or economic measures could follow. “There’s a lot of Western anger about Israeli activities in Gaza,” he said. “On that front, they may take action, possibly through sanctions or legal measures, especially if they frame Israeli operations as inconsistent with international law.” 

Salfiti noted that recognition also touches the principle of self-determination and may become politically contentious if conditioned on excluding Hamas. “If recognition is tied to removing a major political faction from the Palestinian landscape, it raises doubts about whether this is truly about the Palestinian people’s national rights, or primarily about meeting Israel’s security concerns,” he said. He added that any such moves would likely be uneven across the continent. “Europe is not uniform,” he said. “Spain or Ireland may push for measures against Israel, while Germany or Britain remain more cautious. Recognition could be the prelude to pressure, but whether it translates into real punishment depends on political will.” 

Sabel reiterated that international statements do not create new obligations under law. “Recognition by European countries would not create new legal obligations for Israel,” he said. “It still requires two to tango. Israel and the Palestinian Authority would have to negotiate powers and borders, and that has not happened yet.” 

Both experts expressed concern that symbolic gestures, without follow-up, could erode the credibility of diplomacy. Salfiti warned that “if the world recognizes Palestine and does nothing, that will be the end of the diplomatic route. It would crucify international law. Imagine a world where occupation and expulsion are normalized—we would return to the instability of the pre-World War II era.” 

Sabel sees negotiations as the only path to a lasting solution. “International pressure on Israel may increase, but the only way this can happen is to sit and negotiate,” he said. “Without agreed borders and effective governance, recognition remains symbolic.” 

Salfiti, while similarly aware of the limits, said that even symbolic moves can have value. “Symbolic recognition is still positive,” he said. “When you have nothing, anything can be something. But without concrete steps, we remain in a stalemate that erodes hope, law, and global stability.”