Based on history and looking long term I see three paths out:
1. South Africa / Rhodesia (Zimbabwe) where Palestine and Israel is united leading to an exodus of the former ethno-nationalist "managerial" class.
2. Two-state solution where an acceptance of each other is grown over generations.
3. Continuation of the current genocide of the Palestinian people until they are exterminated from their land. Leading to the isolation of Israel.
For Israel and the Israeli people the only palatable option should be 2, but they seem hellbent on 3 as per how Israeli people post here on HN and the actions of their democratically elected government.
>> but they seem hellbent on 3 as per how Israeli people post here on HN and the actions of their democratically elected government.
Considering how many times Arabs started and lost wars against Israel, how many atrocities they did to Israel people it's not a surprise your #2 is not a popular option there.
Need to mention nothing can justify current levels of destruction in Gaza.
What happened in Rhodesia was very different from the situation in South Africa. Whites are still very influential (especially economically) in SA. Rhodesia -> Zimbabwe is maybe closer to French Algiers.
Serious question: how is declaring “oh wait, Palestine actually exists!” help the plight of the Palestinian people? I really doubt Bibi and his cronies will lose any sleep over a timid declaration in a climate that is increasingly critical of Israel’s actions.
In UK’s case, it seems to me more of the classic Starmer flailing about to recapture the votes of whatever group fared worst in his opinion polls. After appeasing Reform and the Tory voters, he probably feels it’s time to throw a bone to the Corbynites now.
If anyone really cared, there should have been drones from every country flying recon over the place for years now confirming or denying evidence of atrocity
I hope they recognize the stete of Assyrians, aramiac/Syriac, Chaldeans, Yizdi and every other indigenous nation in the middle east.
As an Assyrian, my nation has been getting exterminated by Arabs, Turkish and Kurdish colonialist for millennia. We live in constant fear and I don't think we will exist in the next 30 years
On the contrary: terrorism is the way to make the west make a symbolic political gesture AGAINST you.
Their terrorism looks a bit less barbaric than what Hamas did, but the scale on which it's perpetrated is much larger and the dead babies don't care how it looked when they died.
Hamas barbaric terrorist attack shouldn't give carte blanche for an even worse response
Presumably not what Israel is doing now. I do fully agree with destroying Hamas. How is the current situation going to achieve that?
Either they will have to eliminate the entire population of Gaza one way or the other (I can’t see any country that would be willing to accept all those people..) or as soon as they leave Hamas will get thousands and thousands of new recruits, due to obvious reasons. There is no better way to radicalize someone than blowing up their house and murdering their family..
But in large part the main goal of what is happening now is the preservation of Netanyahu’s political career (and that of his cronies). Just like when he was supporting Hamas to divide the Palestinians.
I see it as Nazi Germany and the de-nazification process. Reconstruction and economic prosperity combined with re-education program lead by the allies occupying the different zones with a clear time-limited mandate. US occupation of Japan after WW2 might also provide some ideas on how it could work.
I don't think letting the Nazi regime or the Japan regime survive the war would have been a great idea. I think the same about Hamas.
I wonder what would have been the views in the West at the time if TikTok existed and people saw the war as vividly. I can only imagine how the Nazi propaganda would have worked out on the US for example.
If a cop shoots at a terrorist through a human shield, the terrorist did not kill anyone. They "win" in this scenario.
This is why the concept of patient de-escalation is consistent across all successful doctrines that combat terrorism. Terror is not defeated if the state copies chaotic strategies, only perpetuated.
No, this is a signal that ignoring the PLO was a humanitarian disaster. Israel was complicit in radicalizing Gaza and they should not be rewarded with Gaza's destruction after adopting indiscriminate terror tactics.
That's plain wrong. The PLO was already there before October 7th. They didn't recognize a Palestinian statehood at that time. This is a victory for Hamas, not for the PLO. The timing is everything.
Today Starmer finalized Yahya Sinwar plan. You can try to blame it on Israel but you're playing a music written by Sinwar.
Hamas exists because Israel chose to support them. They wouldn't be dealing with Sinwar had they not deliberately sabotaged the PLO, so of course we're in this scenario now! You can't get angry at the natural response to subverting democracy, same thing happened after the Iran 1953 coup.
One of the journalists that Wikipedia simply lists as "Killed by Israeli forces", Abdullah Ahmed Al-Jamal, happened to be keeping hostages in his apartment and was killed during their rescue.
I don't have the capacity to investigate all of them. I would be suspicious of lists that include a hostage-keeper, with no mention of his other activities outside of journalism, as well as many purported journalists with no particular affiliation.
Statistically it's all just a long series of one regrettable incident after another that far exceeds the usual death rate of journalists in every other conflict this century.
Masri's body was recovered alongside his camera in an external stairwell at the hospital, from where he had been broadcasting the view across Khan Younis when the Israeli strike hit, Reuters video shows.
A second blast on the stairwell minutes later killed at least 19 people, including rescue workers and four journalists who had worked for outlets including the Associated Press, Al Jazeera and others.
One of the four, Moaz Abu Taha, provided visuals to Reuters and others.
Reuters photographer Hatem Khaled was injured in the second attack while on the stairs filming the aftermath of the first blast.
Israel's military told Reuters on Tuesday that the journalists for Reuters and the Associated Press were not "a target of the strike." Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel deeply regretted what he called the "tragic mishap" at the hospital.
Every individual case of journalists and rescue workers being killed in precision strikes launched with overwatch and followed through on to catch the responders can be quibbled about.
It's a sickening thing to see from a modern military. Quite reminiscent of the Bangladesh genocide, which originally had the tacit approval of Nixon before the damages spiraled into genocide: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh_genocide
They are opposing genocide. Doing nothing would reward what Israel is doing in Gaza now. This has not been about Hamas for a long time. Listen to what Israeli ministers are saying. There are ICC arrest warrants for Israeli leaders for what they did in Gaza. The UN has described their actions as genocide. All of this is happening two years AFTER October 7.
It wasn't a UNSCR resolution or anything, but three individual UN employees whose credibility is debatable. UN employees is a broad category that includes terrorists such as Faisal Ali Musalam Naami.
Since 16–17 September 2025, the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry (created by the Human Rights Council) has issued a formal report concluding that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. That’s a UN investigative mechanism with an official report and UN press release, not a couple of random staffers. Besides that the UN Special Rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territory (an independent mandate holder) reported in March 2024 that there are reasonable grounds the genocide threshold was met. And the International Court of Justice (the UN’s principal judicial organ) ordered provisional measures on 26 January 2024 because at least some rights under the Genocide Convention were plausibly at risk, orders it reinforced in May 2024. You can disagree with these bodies, but they’re real UN mechanisms and courts, not "three employees".
And as to Faisal Ali, separate independent review (the Colonna report) found Israel had not provided evidence of widespread militant infiltration across UNRWA’s workforce. Isolated criminality by individuals doesn’t erase findings by UN investigative mechanisms or the ICJ.
It's an independent commission of inquiry making a report to the HRC. The commission could have reported that the moon is made of cheese, and the HRC wouldn't be able to do much about it, other than politely suggesting that they consider a revision.
Even if HRC did have some kind of oversight, current HRC members include Qatar, Cuba, and DRC for example.
> UN press release
Again "UN" is imprecise; the press release (at least the one I saw) was by OHCHR. Another of their press releases described Israel's hostage rescue operation as "the umpteenth massacre by Israeli forces".
> the UN Special Rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territory
Who has been accused of antisemitism by several countries, and is currently under US sanctions.
The COI issued a 70+ page legal analysis and a formal OHCHR press release summarizing its conclusion that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. You can dislike the HRC, but the COI is a UN mandated investigative mechanism with its own methodology and evidentiary standards.
> "UN" is imprecise
Fair, but OHCHR hosting a press release doesn’t mean "just staff opinion". OHCHR is the Secretariat for HRC mechanisms, it publishes COI materials. The COI reports to the HRC but operates independently under UN rules for commissions of inquiry. These bodies are designed to feed into accountability processes (state action, sanctions and courts), which is why states and tribunals cite them.
> current HRC members include Qatar, Cuba, and DRC for example.
Yes, membership is political, members are elected by the UN General Assembly but that doesn’t erase the COI’s evidentiary record. And the genocide question isn’t hanging only on the HRC, the International Court of Justice (a separate UN organ) has issued multiple provisional measures orders in South Africa vs Israel, finding Palestinian rights under the Genocide Convention plausible and ordering Israel to prevent genocidal acts, ensure aid and (on 24 May 2024) halt the Rafah offensive. Those are court orders, not HRC opinions.
> "the umpteenth massacre by Israeli forces".
That phrasing came from a joint statement by UN human rights experts (Special Procedures mandate holders) about the 8 June 2024 Nuseirat rescue operation, they were independent experts, not the High Commissioner personally or "the UN as a whole". They don’t bind the UN system, but their statements are part of the record governments consider.
> Who is currently sanctioned by the US for her antisemitism.
Judges from ICC are also sanctioned by US, almost anyone being critical about Israel is either condemned, called antisemitic or sanctioned by either US or Israel. I would like to remind you that US (alone) vetoed multiple UN security council resolutions. And US is isolated relative to most of the world (these below are only the ones I found from the last 3 years, there could be more):
UN General Assembly, Dec 12–13, 2023: "Immediate humanitarian ceasefire" in Gaza passed 153–10–23. US voted against, with a tiny minority of 9 other countries (Israel and some irrelevant little islands).
UN General Assembly, May 10, 2024: Resolution ES-10/23 upgraded Palestine’s participation rights and urged the Security Council to admit Palestine. It passed 143-9-25. US opposed and then vetoed the related Security Council membership bid on April 18, 2024.
Jun 12, 2025 Emergency Special Session (ES-10): A/RES/ES-10/27
149-12-19 in favor. Demanded an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire, unhindered aid access, respect for IHL and protection of UN/NGO workers. The UK and many EU states voted yes, US voted no.
Sep 12-13, 2025 Regular session: "New York Declaration" on a two state pathway
142-10-12 in favor. Endorsed a two state framework that condemns Hamas and envisages a PA led governance track (so "Hamas free"). US and Israel were among the 10 no votes.
You don't punish Israel by giving a victory to Hamas. You punish the next victim of terrorism after you recognized that it works to make you obey.
If killing as many palestinians as possible was the intention of the Israel military, they wouldn't need to go into Gaza city, they would bomb it without sending troops on the ground. The only reason for going on the ground and losing soldiers is to go dig out the Hamas.
Having the intention of annihilating Hamas isn't genocidal.
Your whole argument is a copy paste from Isreal propaganda.
They didn’t "give Hamas a victory", recognition is about Palestinians right to self determination and about rescuing a two state horizon that successive Israeli governments have all but buried. That’s exactly how the UK, Australia, and Canada framed it today: "recognition is tied to 1967 borders, a reformed, non Hamas Palestinian government, and reviving a political track", not rewarding terrorism.
And no, this isn’t "ignoring Hamas". The ICC has warrants for Hamas figures and also for Netanyahu and Gallant for crimes during this war. You can reject the court, but the warrants exist and were recently upheld against attempts to quash them. That reflects how the law sees both sides’ conduct, not some applause for Hamas.
Saying Israel "must" be acting humanely because it risked troops on the ground doesn’t answer the core allegations. International law doesn’t turn on whether an army also undertakes ground ops, it turns on starvation of civilians, collective punishment, disproportionate strikes and incitement. Those are precisely among the acts the ICC cites (starvation as a method of warfare), and why so many governments now insist the political endgame can’t be left to military force alone.
If you want to deter terrorism, you need a credible political alternative that isolates militants rather than letting them claim they’re the only ones "delivering results". Recognition (explicitly conditioned on PA reform and excluding Hamas from governance)does that, it empowers non Hamas Palestinian institutions and puts real stakes on the table for a negotiated peace. That’s not "punishing Israel", it’s trying to prevent the next October 7 and the ongoing mass devastation in Gaza by giving both peoples a political path out.
So recognizing Palestine now isn’t capitulation to Hamas, it’s an attempt to stop a cycle of atrocities that law, courts, and most of the world already recognize as intolerable and to anchor a two state outcome in something more than wishful thinking.
You're arguing as if the debate was about the UK formalizing its intentions to recognize a palestinian transition government that would recognize Israel. It isn't. Otherwise we would probably not have as strong a disagreement.
My disagreement is on the recognition itself at this moment in time, with Hamas still being the strongest military and political force in what could be a Palestinian state in the future.
The conditions are not met, but the recognition is already formalized. Is the plan to rescind the recognition if the PLO don't act or isn't in capacity to act on its promises?
I think it effectively rewards Hamas actions on October 7th even if it isn't the intended purpose.
And when I say that I think it will encourage terrorism, I don't mean only in Israel but in the world. That might well be a possible way out for Israel as you say, but I believe it will become the strongest success for a terrorist organization in a very long time and give ideas to other faction worldwide, especially among jihadists.
All three governments paired recognition with language that explicitly excludes Hamas from any governing role and ties the path forward to PA reform, elections, and 1967 based parameters. Canada spelled out elections in 2026 with Hamas barred and a demilitarized Palestinian state, Australia said plainly "Hamas must have no role in Palestine" the UK framed recognition inside a two state horizon and negotiations, not as an endorsement of whoever currently wields guns in Gaza.
You can recognize a state while withholding recognition and cooperation from a particular authority. That’s what’s happening here: political recognition to salvage a two state outcome while keeping Hamas proscribed and sanctioned. The UK, Australia and Canada continue to list/designate Hamas as a terrorist organization and maintain sanctions, nothing about these decisions lifted that status.
> If conditions aren’t met, what leverage remains?
Plenty. Recognition can be followed by conditional steps (embassies, treaties, budget support, security cooperation) that only move if reforms happen so exactly what Canada, UK and Australia are signaling by tying recognition to PA reform, elections, demilitarization and negotiated borders. If those benchmarks stall, governments can freeze high level engagement, funding and agreements without "rescinding" recognition. The point is to separate Palestinian national rights from Hamas’s fortunes, not fuse them.
It’s an attempt to take the oxygen out of their narrative by decoupling Palestinian statehood from Hamas’s fate and putting the burden on reformed, elected, non Hamas institutions to represent Palestinians. If that path advances, Hamas loses relevance. And as I already mentioned, if it stalls, the recognition still strengthens the legal/political basis for a negotiated two state endgame instead of leaving the field to endless war and maximalists on both sides.
It's very fortunate that they didn't change from being Israel allies to Hamas allies.
However, they recognized a state while the previous position was that they would not recognize one until an agreement is found with Israel.
The Hamas and the people that celebrated October 7th in the West will celebrate this as a victory and for a good reason because of the timing (in fact, they already did...).
You made the best case that I read so far on a recognition though from a diplomatic point of view. I just think it's wishful thinking given the force in presence in the palestinian society, and that it evacuate too casually the optics of a recognition before any condition is met, which will be seen as an unconditional recognition by many (most?) people.
What happens when Hamas or an a similar faction kill any reformist and take back control for example? Not exactly an implausible scenario given the relatively recent history.
I get the optics point but the policy substance is narrower than the headline and there are ways to keep it from becoming the "unconditional victory" you’re worried about. Recognition is not equal to a blank check.
> The Hamas and the people that celebrated October 7th in the West will celebrate this as a victory and for a good reason because of the timing (in fact, they already did...).
Some will. But policymaking can’t be held hostage to who posts what on Telegram. The question is whether the net effect shrinks Hamas’s political space so give non Hamas Palestinians a credible horizon and resources only if they meet benchmarks that Hamas refuses. That’s how you break the militants monopoly on results.
> However, they recognized a state while the previous position was that they would not recognize one until an agreement is found with Israel.
Because the last 30 years show waiting for perfect conditions just entrenches the status quo. Recognition now creates a legal/political anchor (Palestine exists in principle), while the capacity to exercise that sovereignty is earned. It flips the incentive so reformers can tell their own street, "we can actually deliver borders/freedom if we keep Hamas out and meet X, Y, Z..."
> What happens when Hamas or an a similar faction kill any reformist and take back control for example?
Then you haven’t "rewarded" terrorism, you’ve precommitted the world to a two state endgame while keeping teeth so you freeze benefits, tighten sanctions and preserve the political baseline for the day spoilers weaken. That’s still better than the current loop where only hardliners can claim momentum.
So I’m not hand waving the risks. I’m arguing that recognition + hard conditionality + security guardrails gives you a strategy, not a hope. It separates Palestinian national rights from Hamas’s fate, creates leverage over the PA and builds a path where spoilers lose material advantages the moment they act like spoilers.
It's time for the cycle of violence to stop, on both sides. Israel is consciously escalating the conflict to preclude the possibility of peaceful reconciliation. You can't even deny it; Israel built Hamas to kill Palestine.
I think i should clarify what angers and dismays me the most about the current Israel palestine discourse.
First of all the consistent effort by the media and other groups and bodies to link the fate of palestinians to that of the PLO, Hamas and Hezbolla, who of course are spectacularly poor representatives. Part of this is the inability to bring forth any moderate pro semitic, pro peace palestinian voices.
Secondly the tendency to blame Israel for any and all actions they take with no consideration to how they can protect themselves against palestinian terror and on the flipside the inability to acknowlegde the palestinians have any ability to stop or responsibility for the atrocities that get commited in their name. Again it ties
into my previous point about their unwillingness to recognise any palestinian voice who is against violence.
Third and the one i have the strongest feelings about: the 75 year long history of denying palestinians any rights that is not connected to the land they were displaced from. Of all the many refugee groups they are the only one that is forced into the hellish state of perpetual refugee status. One which is wholly encouraged by UNWRA whose only motivation is to ensure that they will never not be refugees. This double standard is infuriating and dehumanising. No country is willing to take in palestinian refugees on account of the claim this will result in ethnic cleansing. A treatment, like i said which is applied to no other group. The only parallel i can think of this, the attachment of identity and rights to a specific piece of land is serfdom.
Finally the deplorable and self destructive attitude of palestinians themselves. The most damming indictment of the palestinians i can bring is the fact that after Oct7 Hamas is easily the most popular political group among them and according to the BBC the person most of them want to be their president is Barghouti, currently in Israeli jail. The most senior terrorist still alive and one of the architects of the second intifada. If that's not enough he comes from the most spectacularly murderous family among all the palestinians.
What is needed is a major cultural shift among palestinians and the international treatment of them. The only positive effort in that direction in the last 30 or 40 years has been the Abraham Accords, a process which i hope will continue, Trumps greatest foreign policy achievement and something which deserves far more support and recognition.
(edit: removed quoted sentence and added paragraph)
>And they think this is a good opportunity to recognise a state?
narrator: yes.
because this is not about recognizing palestine, it's about punishing Israel (and making some people happy internally). UK openly said 2 months ago, "unless Israel does following things, we will recognize Palestine".
Exactly it's pure politics. I'm sure all the people getting blown up in Gaza city and who have lost everything appreciate this gesture.
It's not at all cowardly and disingenous of the UK to link their recognition of a palestinian state to Israels actions. It really shows how deeply they believe in this cause. Also well done for starmer for coordinating this with everyone else so the UK wouldn't be singled out by trump.
But i have to hand it to France and Macron for being the most disingenous and cowardly of the lot. They spearheaded this effort and are bravely waiting to see what Trump will do before putting their money where their mouth is.
You needn't use your real name, of course, but for HN to be a community, users need some identity for other users to relate to. Otherwise we may as well have no usernames and no community, and that would be a different kind of forum. https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...
Labour is down really bad in the polls [1] and they need to score political points at least with left-wing voters who are currently split. This doesn't actually change anything on the ground especially as the UK is still arming Israel [2].
In the end, they might just end up tanking more in the polls as they end up having no consistent values.
FWIW: Polling showed American support for interracial marriages was still underwater in 1992, decades after the Loving ruling. Majortity support only happened on the mid-to-late 90s
When you look at an old version of a wikipedia article it still displays the current version of images. That's why in your link the image legend has eg
>[light green] Countries that have announced their impending recognition of Palestine (Australia, France, Malta, and San Marino)
but Australia is dark green in the current image (France still light green and I can't be bothered zooming to see the small ones)
Just browsing history on MediaWiki will probably show the old tex with recenn image. If you want full article, you'd have to use web.archive.org, archive.is or somethinglike that.
Based on history and looking long term I see three paths out:
1. South Africa / Rhodesia (Zimbabwe) where Palestine and Israel is united leading to an exodus of the former ethno-nationalist "managerial" class.
2. Two-state solution where an acceptance of each other is grown over generations.
3. Continuation of the current genocide of the Palestinian people until they are exterminated from their land. Leading to the isolation of Israel.
For Israel and the Israeli people the only palatable option should be 2, but they seem hellbent on 3 as per how Israeli people post here on HN and the actions of their democratically elected government.
>> but they seem hellbent on 3 as per how Israeli people post here on HN and the actions of their democratically elected government.
Considering how many times Arabs started and lost wars against Israel, how many atrocities they did to Israel people it's not a surprise your #2 is not a popular option there.
Need to mention nothing can justify current levels of destruction in Gaza.
They are quite literally doing the thing they condemn Germany for doing. It’s just industrial scale murder at this point.
They are quite literally doing nothing of the sort.
10% of population has been killed or injured. They are in 1940 not 1944/45.
What happened in Rhodesia was very different from the situation in South Africa. Whites are still very influential (especially economically) in SA. Rhodesia -> Zimbabwe is maybe closer to French Algiers.
Neither is comparable to Israel since there's no home country for most Israelis to return to.
If a person's great-grandparent is the colonizer can you really say they have a "home country" beyond the one they were born in?
> does nothing to stop the suffering of innocent people caught in this war
No shit. You are welcome to go further. Why people would use this as an argument against recognizing statehood baffles me.
they would do anything but concrete steps to help
First step is acceptance?
Serious question: how is declaring “oh wait, Palestine actually exists!” help the plight of the Palestinian people? I really doubt Bibi and his cronies will lose any sleep over a timid declaration in a climate that is increasingly critical of Israel’s actions.
In UK’s case, it seems to me more of the classic Starmer flailing about to recapture the votes of whatever group fared worst in his opinion polls. After appeasing Reform and the Tory voters, he probably feels it’s time to throw a bone to the Corbynites now.
It’s better than the alternative, which is to NOT recognise Palestine.
For whom and how it’s better?
If anyone really cared, there should have been drones from every country flying recon over the place for years now confirming or denying evidence of atrocity
We don’t need drones for that. There’s plenty of Jordanian airdrops that confirm the destruction just fine:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/aug/05/wasteland-rubb...
If anyone really cared, they would have pushed out Hamas years ago.
I think a more correct title would be they recognized the potential of a Palestinian state.
I think a more correct title would be anything not containing "Candada" :)
save me Candaddy from geopolitical feuds
> I state clearly, as Prime Minister of this great country…
> That the United Kingdom…
> Formally recognises the State of Palestine.
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-statement-on-the-r...
I hope they recognize the stete of Assyrians, aramiac/Syriac, Chaldeans, Yizdi and every other indigenous nation in the middle east.
As an Assyrian, my nation has been getting exterminated by Arabs, Turkish and Kurdish colonialist for millennia. We live in constant fear and I don't think we will exist in the next 30 years
[flagged]
On the contrary: terrorism is the way to make the west make a symbolic political gesture AGAINST you.
Their terrorism looks a bit less barbaric than what Hamas did, but the scale on which it's perpetrated is much larger and the dead babies don't care how it looked when they died.
Hamas barbaric terrorist attack shouldn't give carte blanche for an even worse response
Do you think Israel need to destroy Hamas after October 7th?
If you do, what is your magical way to destroy Hamas without killing any civilian?
Presumably not what Israel is doing now. I do fully agree with destroying Hamas. How is the current situation going to achieve that?
Either they will have to eliminate the entire population of Gaza one way or the other (I can’t see any country that would be willing to accept all those people..) or as soon as they leave Hamas will get thousands and thousands of new recruits, due to obvious reasons. There is no better way to radicalize someone than blowing up their house and murdering their family..
But in large part the main goal of what is happening now is the preservation of Netanyahu’s political career (and that of his cronies). Just like when he was supporting Hamas to divide the Palestinians.
I see it as Nazi Germany and the de-nazification process. Reconstruction and economic prosperity combined with re-education program lead by the allies occupying the different zones with a clear time-limited mandate. US occupation of Japan after WW2 might also provide some ideas on how it could work.
I don't think letting the Nazi regime or the Japan regime survive the war would have been a great idea. I think the same about Hamas.
I wonder what would have been the views in the West at the time if TikTok existed and people saw the war as vividly. I can only imagine how the Nazi propaganda would have worked out on the US for example.
Hamas is killing babies (human shields, hiding weapons and sometimes just for pure propaganda).
They’ve been plotting this for 20 years. Everything they do is 100% from insurgency textbook.
If a cop shoots at a terrorist through a human shield, the terrorist did not kill anyone. They "win" in this scenario.
This is why the concept of patient de-escalation is consistent across all successful doctrines that combat terrorism. Terror is not defeated if the state copies chaotic strategies, only perpetuated.
This is a maximalist war, started by the neighboring government led by Hamas. This is not a police action.
You forget that these are hamas children, not israeli. They obviously protect their own.
Hamas is killing babies (human shields, hiding weapons and sometimes just for pure propaganda).
No, this is a signal that ignoring the PLO was a humanitarian disaster. Israel was complicit in radicalizing Gaza and they should not be rewarded with Gaza's destruction after adopting indiscriminate terror tactics.
That's plain wrong. The PLO was already there before October 7th. They didn't recognize a Palestinian statehood at that time. This is a victory for Hamas, not for the PLO. The timing is everything.
Today Starmer finalized Yahya Sinwar plan. You can try to blame it on Israel but you're playing a music written by Sinwar.
Hamas exists because Israel chose to support them. They wouldn't be dealing with Sinwar had they not deliberately sabotaged the PLO, so of course we're in this scenario now! You can't get angry at the natural response to subverting democracy, same thing happened after the Iran 1953 coup.
The only way to legitimize terrorism worldwide is to let Israel persist unpunished. Precision-striking civilians cannot be the basis for future conflict: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_journalists_killed_in_...
The link listing journalists killed by Israel is crazy. Some recent examples:
> Killed when Israeli forces struck a tent sheltering Palestinians.
> Killed by an Israeli airstrike on his home.
> Killed by drone fire while collecting water near the Hamad Towers in Khan Yunis.
> Killed along with her husband and children after Israeli forces shelled a residential apartment.
> Shot by Israeli forces.
> Killed in her home by an Israeli airstrike along with her two brothers.
> Killed by an Israeli helicopter strike, along with three of his relatives.
> Killed in an Israeli airstrike along with her husband and four of their children. She was also pregnant at the time of her death.
One of the journalists that Wikipedia simply lists as "Killed by Israeli forces", Abdullah Ahmed Al-Jamal, happened to be keeping hostages in his apartment and was killed during their rescue.
No comment on the other 260+ deaths? You seem to be missing the forest for the trees.
I don't have the capacity to investigate all of them. I would be suspicious of lists that include a hostage-keeper, with no mention of his other activities outside of journalism, as well as many purported journalists with no particular affiliation.
Statistically it's all just a long series of one regrettable incident after another that far exceeds the usual death rate of journalists in every other conflict this century.
~ https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/obituary-huss...Every individual case of journalists and rescue workers being killed in precision strikes launched with overwatch and followed through on to catch the responders can be quibbled about.
Overall - it's a shameful pattern.
It's a sickening thing to see from a modern military. Quite reminiscent of the Bangladesh genocide, which originally had the tacit approval of Nixon before the damages spiraled into genocide: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh_genocide
They are rewarding and encouraging terrorism by doing this at this very moment.
Do it before October 7th and that's another subject. Do it after Hamas has surrendered and that's also another subject.
They chose to do it precisely now, giving Hamas the victory they desired.
They are opposing genocide. Doing nothing would reward what Israel is doing in Gaza now. This has not been about Hamas for a long time. Listen to what Israeli ministers are saying. There are ICC arrest warrants for Israeli leaders for what they did in Gaza. The UN has described their actions as genocide. All of this is happening two years AFTER October 7.
> The UN has described their actions as genocide.
It wasn't a UNSCR resolution or anything, but three individual UN employees whose credibility is debatable. UN employees is a broad category that includes terrorists such as Faisal Ali Musalam Naami.
Since 16–17 September 2025, the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry (created by the Human Rights Council) has issued a formal report concluding that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. That’s a UN investigative mechanism with an official report and UN press release, not a couple of random staffers. Besides that the UN Special Rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territory (an independent mandate holder) reported in March 2024 that there are reasonable grounds the genocide threshold was met. And the International Court of Justice (the UN’s principal judicial organ) ordered provisional measures on 26 January 2024 because at least some rights under the Genocide Convention were plausibly at risk, orders it reinforced in May 2024. You can disagree with these bodies, but they’re real UN mechanisms and courts, not "three employees".
And as to Faisal Ali, separate independent review (the Colonna report) found Israel had not provided evidence of widespread militant infiltration across UNRWA’s workforce. Isolated criminality by individuals doesn’t erase findings by UN investigative mechanisms or the ICJ.
https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/09/israel-has-c...
https://www.unrwa.org/sites/default/files/unrwa_claims_vs_fa...
https://www.timesofisrael.com/unrwa-review-israel-hasnt-prov...
https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/t...
It's an independent commission of inquiry making a report to the HRC. The commission could have reported that the moon is made of cheese, and the HRC wouldn't be able to do much about it, other than politely suggesting that they consider a revision.
Even if HRC did have some kind of oversight, current HRC members include Qatar, Cuba, and DRC for example.
> UN press release
Again "UN" is imprecise; the press release (at least the one I saw) was by OHCHR. Another of their press releases described Israel's hostage rescue operation as "the umpteenth massacre by Israeli forces".
> the UN Special Rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territory
Who has been accused of antisemitism by several countries, and is currently under US sanctions.
> widespread militant infiltration
I wasn't claiming this.
The COI issued a 70+ page legal analysis and a formal OHCHR press release summarizing its conclusion that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. You can dislike the HRC, but the COI is a UN mandated investigative mechanism with its own methodology and evidentiary standards.
> "UN" is imprecise
Fair, but OHCHR hosting a press release doesn’t mean "just staff opinion". OHCHR is the Secretariat for HRC mechanisms, it publishes COI materials. The COI reports to the HRC but operates independently under UN rules for commissions of inquiry. These bodies are designed to feed into accountability processes (state action, sanctions and courts), which is why states and tribunals cite them.
> current HRC members include Qatar, Cuba, and DRC for example.
Yes, membership is political, members are elected by the UN General Assembly but that doesn’t erase the COI’s evidentiary record. And the genocide question isn’t hanging only on the HRC, the International Court of Justice (a separate UN organ) has issued multiple provisional measures orders in South Africa vs Israel, finding Palestinian rights under the Genocide Convention plausible and ordering Israel to prevent genocidal acts, ensure aid and (on 24 May 2024) halt the Rafah offensive. Those are court orders, not HRC opinions.
> "the umpteenth massacre by Israeli forces".
That phrasing came from a joint statement by UN human rights experts (Special Procedures mandate holders) about the 8 June 2024 Nuseirat rescue operation, they were independent experts, not the High Commissioner personally or "the UN as a whole". They don’t bind the UN system, but their statements are part of the record governments consider.
> Who is currently sanctioned by the US for her antisemitism.
Judges from ICC are also sanctioned by US, almost anyone being critical about Israel is either condemned, called antisemitic or sanctioned by either US or Israel. I would like to remind you that US (alone) vetoed multiple UN security council resolutions. And US is isolated relative to most of the world (these below are only the ones I found from the last 3 years, there could be more):
UN General Assembly, Dec 12–13, 2023: "Immediate humanitarian ceasefire" in Gaza passed 153–10–23. US voted against, with a tiny minority of 9 other countries (Israel and some irrelevant little islands).
UN General Assembly, May 10, 2024: Resolution ES-10/23 upgraded Palestine’s participation rights and urged the Security Council to admit Palestine. It passed 143-9-25. US opposed and then vetoed the related Security Council membership bid on April 18, 2024.
Jun 12, 2025 Emergency Special Session (ES-10): A/RES/ES-10/27 149-12-19 in favor. Demanded an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire, unhindered aid access, respect for IHL and protection of UN/NGO workers. The UK and many EU states voted yes, US voted no.
Sep 12-13, 2025 Regular session: "New York Declaration" on a two state pathway 142-10-12 in favor. Endorsed a two state framework that condemns Hamas and envisages a PA led governance track (so "Hamas free"). US and Israel were among the 10 no votes.
There is an obvious pattern here.
You don't punish Israel by giving a victory to Hamas. You punish the next victim of terrorism after you recognized that it works to make you obey.
If killing as many palestinians as possible was the intention of the Israel military, they wouldn't need to go into Gaza city, they would bomb it without sending troops on the ground. The only reason for going on the ground and losing soldiers is to go dig out the Hamas.
Having the intention of annihilating Hamas isn't genocidal.
Your whole argument is a copy paste from Isreal propaganda.
They didn’t "give Hamas a victory", recognition is about Palestinians right to self determination and about rescuing a two state horizon that successive Israeli governments have all but buried. That’s exactly how the UK, Australia, and Canada framed it today: "recognition is tied to 1967 borders, a reformed, non Hamas Palestinian government, and reviving a political track", not rewarding terrorism.
And no, this isn’t "ignoring Hamas". The ICC has warrants for Hamas figures and also for Netanyahu and Gallant for crimes during this war. You can reject the court, but the warrants exist and were recently upheld against attempts to quash them. That reflects how the law sees both sides’ conduct, not some applause for Hamas.
Saying Israel "must" be acting humanely because it risked troops on the ground doesn’t answer the core allegations. International law doesn’t turn on whether an army also undertakes ground ops, it turns on starvation of civilians, collective punishment, disproportionate strikes and incitement. Those are precisely among the acts the ICC cites (starvation as a method of warfare), and why so many governments now insist the political endgame can’t be left to military force alone.
If you want to deter terrorism, you need a credible political alternative that isolates militants rather than letting them claim they’re the only ones "delivering results". Recognition (explicitly conditioned on PA reform and excluding Hamas from governance)does that, it empowers non Hamas Palestinian institutions and puts real stakes on the table for a negotiated peace. That’s not "punishing Israel", it’s trying to prevent the next October 7 and the ongoing mass devastation in Gaza by giving both peoples a political path out.
So recognizing Palestine now isn’t capitulation to Hamas, it’s an attempt to stop a cycle of atrocities that law, courts, and most of the world already recognize as intolerable and to anchor a two state outcome in something more than wishful thinking.
You're arguing as if the debate was about the UK formalizing its intentions to recognize a palestinian transition government that would recognize Israel. It isn't. Otherwise we would probably not have as strong a disagreement.
My disagreement is on the recognition itself at this moment in time, with Hamas still being the strongest military and political force in what could be a Palestinian state in the future.
The conditions are not met, but the recognition is already formalized. Is the plan to rescind the recognition if the PLO don't act or isn't in capacity to act on its promises?
I think it effectively rewards Hamas actions on October 7th even if it isn't the intended purpose.
And when I say that I think it will encourage terrorism, I don't mean only in Israel but in the world. That might well be a possible way out for Israel as you say, but I believe it will become the strongest success for a terrorist organization in a very long time and give ideas to other faction worldwide, especially among jihadists.
They recognized a state, not Hamas.
All three governments paired recognition with language that explicitly excludes Hamas from any governing role and ties the path forward to PA reform, elections, and 1967 based parameters. Canada spelled out elections in 2026 with Hamas barred and a demilitarized Palestinian state, Australia said plainly "Hamas must have no role in Palestine" the UK framed recognition inside a two state horizon and negotiations, not as an endorsement of whoever currently wields guns in Gaza.
You can recognize a state while withholding recognition and cooperation from a particular authority. That’s what’s happening here: political recognition to salvage a two state outcome while keeping Hamas proscribed and sanctioned. The UK, Australia and Canada continue to list/designate Hamas as a terrorist organization and maintain sanctions, nothing about these decisions lifted that status.
> If conditions aren’t met, what leverage remains?
Plenty. Recognition can be followed by conditional steps (embassies, treaties, budget support, security cooperation) that only move if reforms happen so exactly what Canada, UK and Australia are signaling by tying recognition to PA reform, elections, demilitarization and negotiated borders. If those benchmarks stall, governments can freeze high level engagement, funding and agreements without "rescinding" recognition. The point is to separate Palestinian national rights from Hamas’s fortunes, not fuse them.
It’s an attempt to take the oxygen out of their narrative by decoupling Palestinian statehood from Hamas’s fate and putting the burden on reformed, elected, non Hamas institutions to represent Palestinians. If that path advances, Hamas loses relevance. And as I already mentioned, if it stalls, the recognition still strengthens the legal/political basis for a negotiated two state endgame instead of leaving the field to endless war and maximalists on both sides.
It's very fortunate that they didn't change from being Israel allies to Hamas allies.
However, they recognized a state while the previous position was that they would not recognize one until an agreement is found with Israel.
The Hamas and the people that celebrated October 7th in the West will celebrate this as a victory and for a good reason because of the timing (in fact, they already did...).
You made the best case that I read so far on a recognition though from a diplomatic point of view. I just think it's wishful thinking given the force in presence in the palestinian society, and that it evacuate too casually the optics of a recognition before any condition is met, which will be seen as an unconditional recognition by many (most?) people.
What happens when Hamas or an a similar faction kill any reformist and take back control for example? Not exactly an implausible scenario given the relatively recent history.
I get the optics point but the policy substance is narrower than the headline and there are ways to keep it from becoming the "unconditional victory" you’re worried about. Recognition is not equal to a blank check.
> The Hamas and the people that celebrated October 7th in the West will celebrate this as a victory and for a good reason because of the timing (in fact, they already did...).
Some will. But policymaking can’t be held hostage to who posts what on Telegram. The question is whether the net effect shrinks Hamas’s political space so give non Hamas Palestinians a credible horizon and resources only if they meet benchmarks that Hamas refuses. That’s how you break the militants monopoly on results.
> However, they recognized a state while the previous position was that they would not recognize one until an agreement is found with Israel.
Because the last 30 years show waiting for perfect conditions just entrenches the status quo. Recognition now creates a legal/political anchor (Palestine exists in principle), while the capacity to exercise that sovereignty is earned. It flips the incentive so reformers can tell their own street, "we can actually deliver borders/freedom if we keep Hamas out and meet X, Y, Z..."
> What happens when Hamas or an a similar faction kill any reformist and take back control for example?
Then you haven’t "rewarded" terrorism, you’ve precommitted the world to a two state endgame while keeping teeth so you freeze benefits, tighten sanctions and preserve the political baseline for the day spoilers weaken. That’s still better than the current loop where only hardliners can claim momentum.
So I’m not hand waving the risks. I’m arguing that recognition + hard conditionality + security guardrails gives you a strategy, not a hope. It separates Palestinian national rights from Hamas’s fate, creates leverage over the PA and builds a path where spoilers lose material advantages the moment they act like spoilers.
> You punish the next victim of terrorism
We already do that supporting Israeli doctrine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahiya_doctrine
It's time for the cycle of violence to stop, on both sides. Israel is consciously escalating the conflict to preclude the possibility of peaceful reconciliation. You can't even deny it; Israel built Hamas to kill Palestine.
Candada? really?
I think i should clarify what angers and dismays me the most about the current Israel palestine discourse.
First of all the consistent effort by the media and other groups and bodies to link the fate of palestinians to that of the PLO, Hamas and Hezbolla, who of course are spectacularly poor representatives. Part of this is the inability to bring forth any moderate pro semitic, pro peace palestinian voices.
Secondly the tendency to blame Israel for any and all actions they take with no consideration to how they can protect themselves against palestinian terror and on the flipside the inability to acknowlegde the palestinians have any ability to stop or responsibility for the atrocities that get commited in their name. Again it ties into my previous point about their unwillingness to recognise any palestinian voice who is against violence.
Third and the one i have the strongest feelings about: the 75 year long history of denying palestinians any rights that is not connected to the land they were displaced from. Of all the many refugee groups they are the only one that is forced into the hellish state of perpetual refugee status. One which is wholly encouraged by UNWRA whose only motivation is to ensure that they will never not be refugees. This double standard is infuriating and dehumanising. No country is willing to take in palestinian refugees on account of the claim this will result in ethnic cleansing. A treatment, like i said which is applied to no other group. The only parallel i can think of this, the attachment of identity and rights to a specific piece of land is serfdom.
Finally the deplorable and self destructive attitude of palestinians themselves. The most damming indictment of the palestinians i can bring is the fact that after Oct7 Hamas is easily the most popular political group among them and according to the BBC the person most of them want to be their president is Barghouti, currently in Israeli jail. The most senior terrorist still alive and one of the architects of the second intifada. If that's not enough he comes from the most spectacularly murderous family among all the palestinians.
What is needed is a major cultural shift among palestinians and the international treatment of them. The only positive effort in that direction in the last 30 or 40 years has been the Abraham Accords, a process which i hope will continue, Trumps greatest foreign policy achievement and something which deserves far more support and recognition.
(edit: removed quoted sentence and added paragraph)
>And they think this is a good opportunity to recognise a state?
narrator: yes.
because this is not about recognizing palestine, it's about punishing Israel (and making some people happy internally). UK openly said 2 months ago, "unless Israel does following things, we will recognize Palestine".
Exactly it's pure politics. I'm sure all the people getting blown up in Gaza city and who have lost everything appreciate this gesture.
It's not at all cowardly and disingenous of the UK to link their recognition of a palestinian state to Israels actions. It really shows how deeply they believe in this cause. Also well done for starmer for coordinating this with everyone else so the UK wouldn't be singled out by trump.
But i have to hand it to France and Macron for being the most disingenous and cowardly of the lot. They spearheaded this effort and are bravely waiting to see what Trump will do before putting their money where their mouth is.
Yet another flagged post, this should be unflagged and returned to the default homepage.
Apparently pointing out the ethnic cleansing against Palestinians is not allowed here.
Plenty of commenters have been making that case in plenty of threads on this site.
p.s. Could you please stop creating accounts for every few comments you post? We ban accounts that do that. This is in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
You needn't use your real name, of course, but for HN to be a community, users need some identity for other users to relate to. Otherwise we may as well have no usernames and no community, and that would be a different kind of forum. https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...
practically means little
however a clear display of the end of the US soft power, after an interesting 6 months of foreign policy
Labour is down really bad in the polls [1] and they need to score political points at least with left-wing voters who are currently split. This doesn't actually change anything on the ground especially as the UK is still arming Israel [2].
In the end, they might just end up tanking more in the polls as they end up having no consistent values.
[1] https://www.politico.eu/europe-poll-of-polls/united-kingdom/
[2] https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-...
Macron wants France to recognize a palestinian state as well.
His party lost the last legislative elections. Polls show 78% against recognizing palestinian statehood NOW and without conditions.
He is totally illegitimate in doing so.
He's still going to do it.
That's not what illegitimate means. Polls are no legitimate basis for policy.
No, but losing the legislative elections does.
The polls just reinforce the issue.
Which polls ?
This one from june[0]. 78% that are against recognizing a Palestinian state now, emphasis on now.
0: https://www.lepoint.fr/monde/exclusif-reconnaissance-d-un-et...
FWIW: Polling showed American support for interracial marriages was still underwater in 1992, decades after the Loving ruling. Majortity support only happened on the mid-to-late 90s
You do what you want in the US, but I prefer my country to be a democracy.
Last month the Wikipedia article for "International recognition of Palestine" had these countries in dark green, what am I missing?
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=International_rec...
When you look at an old version of a wikipedia article it still displays the current version of images. That's why in your link the image legend has eg
>[light green] Countries that have announced their impending recognition of Palestine (Australia, France, Malta, and San Marino)
but Australia is dark green in the current image (France still light green and I can't be bothered zooming to see the small ones)
If you're talking about the image, I think you need to look at the image history itself:
https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Palestine_recognit... (“File History”)
Just browsing history on MediaWiki will probably show the old tex with recenn image. If you want full article, you'd have to use web.archive.org, archive.is or somethinglike that.
Thank you very much, this is the answer.
They already announced they intended to do this a month ago