How has Sweden’s decision and Britain’s debate on recognising Palestine affected Israel-Palestine relations? 

Newly elected Swedish Prime Minister Stefan Löfvan said in his first address to parliament on 3 October 2014 that his country would move towards diplomatic recognition of Palestine, ultimately passing the motion on 30 October. In an unrelated move, the British parliament passed a non-binding vote in favour of recognising Palestine as a state alongside Israel on 13 October. Sweden and the UK have now been added to the list of 134 other countries that have agreed to recognise Palestine adding considerable weight to the issue of Palestinian statehood, as two strong states now standing firm on the issue.

The reaction of commentators and analysts has either praised the symbolism of these actions or has been sceptical of any practical benefits. Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said this will hinder any future negotiations and make a political solution unlikely, while Palestinian sympathisers argue further recognition will force Israel to make more concessions for Palestine and achieve something. It seems hard to find any real joy in between either of the claims, as Israel is clearly still in control of the situation.

The Middle East is currently at a crucial point in its history, with the conflicts in Syria and Iraq causing widespread security and humanitarian concerns. Iran remaining as uncertain as ever, and Egypt is stuck in a painful transition from authoritarian rule to some kind of new form of governance. Meanwhile, the Israel-Palestine conflict continues to play out with sporadic episodes of intense violence, such as the recent launch of Operation Protective Edge. The whole world’s attention turned to Israel during this time. However, reduced attention has been paid to the conflict since the ceasefire in August.

Every flare up of violence in Gaza ends with Israel losing a little more public support from its Western allies. Europe in particular seems to be where public support is declining fastest. While governments may still support Israel, the public are getting tired of the violence and bloodshed. Israel has just shrugged off Europe’s negative public perception because the United States is still standing firmly behind them. Even the UK’s vote on committing the recognise Palestine is non-binding for government policy, as prime minister David Cameron remains committed to support Netanyahu.

Sweden’s decision to recognise Palestine is problematic for advancing the cause of statehood. Being the fifth largest contributor to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), Sweden has tied itself into a contradiction with its recognition of Palestine. The UNRWA is accused of inflating the Palestinian refugee issue, giving them legitimacy for statehood through the aid they are provided. The pro-Israel camp is accusing Sweden of perpetuating the problem at hand by recognising Palestine, claiming they have been given some kind of diplomatic immunity due to this recognition.

However, Israel is still obviously in control of the peace process and, as other events in the Middle East take the attention of the rest of the world, negotiations with the Palestinian Authority will remain on an uneven playing field. Netanyahu may have previously voiced his support for a two-state solution, but his conduct has provided little confidence in his commitment to providing the Palestinian people with a state. The Palestinian Authority has constantly been required to compromise and acquiesce Israel in order to get anywhere with negotiations, only for Israel to remain unmoved.

Without question the Palestinian side has antagonised Israel in the past, the actions of Hamas are the most obvious examples. But even from a societal point of view, the Palestinian attitude towards Israel also prevents progressing towards peace. Public acts such as the celebration of the deaths of Israeli citizens show that Palestine itself still will not accommodate Israel. Nevertheless, Israel still has the legitimacy, being a fully recognised state, and so control the peace process, an opportunity that Palestine will never have.

This is where optimistic comments about recognising Palestine are brought out, claiming Sweden and the UK’s newfound recognition will change the game. There has been a slow and quiet move towards recognising Palestine in Europe for several years. However, most of the time it was just government statements that were never followed up. Despite the UK and Sweden acting on the issue, Palestine’s future will always sit in the hands of Israel, not Europe.

The issue of Palestinian recognition seems to be stemming from a conflation of issues across the Middle East that are not focusing on the real issues for Palestine. The Oslo Accords are effectively redundant in the current political relationship between Israel and the Palestinian Authorities, much to the dismay of the rest of the world, including the US. Secretary of State John Kerry has tirelessly attempted to foster a reconciliatory environment between Israel and Palestine, but the breakdown in relations in April this year seems to have put Kerry off.

The resulting violence in Gaza, and from Operation Protective Edge, further illustrated the end a diplomatic approach to the Oslo Accords. The media coverage definitely contributed to Israel’s lowering support by Europeans, as well as the limited humanitarian assistance provided to the Palestinians. The ceasefire did little to win back any public support, considering the disproportionate number of casualties between the two sides.

And then the issue of the Islamic State seems to be thrown in with the Palestinian issue, mainly because of Kerry’s statement linking his failure to work towards a two-state solution and the rise of the jihadist group. The rise of the Islamic State has more to do with sectarian violence in Syria and Iraq than anything else, it has nonetheless been lumped in with the Palestinian issue. Two Arab groups seeking nationhood, both for entirely different reasons, are seemingly mixed together in some sort of Pan-Arabist cause.

The result of all this confusion and anxiety about the Middle East is to some degree Western guilt for the Palestinians. The sincerity of Sweden and the UK’s commitment to recognise Palestine should not be seen so cynically – the frustration of public opinion, and growing need to reach a political solution, are laden with the guilt of inaction. Sweden and the UK have tried to put the peace settlement on the right path, but they have failed to get to the real heart of the issue.

International recognition of Palestine will benefit their cause in many ways, as Palestine will be able to take part in more international institutions and will be able to pressure Israel further. Crucially, Palestine would be able to formalise its claims to the International Criminal Court against Israel for various mass atrocity crimes. The only problem is that Israel still holds the power in the situation no matter what kind of support Palestine gains. Until Israel recognises Palestine as a state, negotiations will always remain in its favour.

James Turner is managing editor of The Transnational Review and an intern at the AIIA, Queensland.

This article was originally published in the December edition of The Transnational Review. It is republished with permission.