Could Australia recognising a Palestinian state tip the balance?

Australia faces a decisive understanding of its foreign policy. The recognition of the Palestinian state is more than a symbolic gesture; This is a principled decision that confirms the devotion of Australia to the superiority of the law under the UN charter and the right to self -determination.

The recognition of the Palestinian state has been in production for a long time. The 1993 and 1995 Oslo agreements, which led to the formation of the Palestinian authority (PA) with limited civil judicial authority, had to serve as a stepstand to the state. However, while the Israeli-Palestinian talks have been standing for decades, Israel expanded its illegal settlements in the West Bank and is constantly and systematically disintegrated in the region under the authority of PA.

Dynamic has changed significantly in recent months. Israel’s reaction to Hamas’ October 7 attack was largely disproportionate. Israel flattened the Gaza Strip with dense popular population and brought to the total blockade that prevented the supply of basic food, water and medicine to the population that has fallen to Gaza. In an ironic twist of history, Israel’s decision to maintain its military campaign to challenge the global public opinion and the security of the security of a population under its rule, which has a great negligence of its legal duties, turned into disbelief in Israel. The world had enough.

Prime Minister Anthony Albania said that recognizing the Palestinian state was designed to end the war. The two -state solution has been a long -standing policy in Australia. However, a negotiation of Israel and PA on the possibility of a future Palestinian state had been committed to a peace process that required mutual consent. The political leadership in Israel, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, has made it clear that they are not interested in a dominant Palestinian state over the borders of Israel. This offers a diplomatic dilemma because it makes a future Palestinian state dependent on the goodwill of the occupation power.

The emergency effect of Palestine on the hunger gazan population will be minimum beyond a moral increase. Israel continues to act with unpunished because it prevents the delivery of foundations to Gaza and is preparing to force the local population forcibly, which is seen as ethnic cleaning.

This behavior is activated by the United States. Washington protected Israel against international criticism and used the veto power in the UN Security Council (ENC) to reduce the hostile decisions. Only in very rare cases, Washington allowed the element to work on Israel to the public. In 2016, the United States refrained from voting to vote for the ENC decision, which stopped the expansion of the Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank and called them illegally and calls them an “ugly violation of international law.

This abstainer was characterless for the United States, and he reflected President Obama’s desire to make politics more compatible with international expectations, and at that time he saw Netanyahu’s settlement expansions as harmful to peace expectations in the Middle East.

Australia’s announcement that it recognizes the Palestinian province will not be welcomed in Washington. Australia’s position is an important separation from US policy, but it is unlikely to disrupt the alliance. The alliance with the United States is based on a common global strategic perspective and value set. President Trump shook global confidence in the US commitment to the values of democracy and the superiority of law, which serves as the basis of the Liberal World Order, but the damage cannot be returned. More importantly, the United States and Australia look at the eye at the Indo-Pacific. It is likely that the perceptions of common threats in the region will invalidate any dispute over Israel and Palestine.

The United States decides on the future of Palestine. The future state needs the approval of the ENC and the UN General Assembly in order to participate in the United Nations as a dominant being and to enjoy all state rights and responsibilities. The 140 UN member states already acquaintance with the Palestinian state and the US partners and Western allies – for example, in France, Ireland, Norway and Australia – Washington marginalizes itself by declaring their plans to recognize Palestinian state at the September UN General Assembly.

Australia’s coordination of participation in the choir in Palestine gives more power to international justice demand and can prove the needle -cancellation needle. Political attitudes on Israel have changed in Washington, and President Trump can be convinced that continuing with this agenda at the expense of alienation of the world can be a very high price.

As Foreign Minister Penny Wong pointed out, he was among those who first voted for the creation of a state for Australia, Jewish people and Palestinians. It is appropriate for Australia to follow the devotion of two states by recognizing the sovereignty of the Palestinian state and presenting the case to Washington.