Pressure is escalating on Israel and its allies, particularly the U.S., as several nations recognised Palestine as a state this week, just before the commencement of high-level debates at the 80th U.N. General Assembly in New York.
Over the past weekend, the U.K., Canada, and Australia led a fresh wave of Western countries in acknowledging Palestine as an independent nation.
France quickly followed suit, with French President Emmanuel Macron making the declaration on Monday during a high-level discussion about peace in Gaza and implementing a two-state solution.
Over 150 U.N. member states recognise Palestine, with the majority having made their declarations years ago.
However, doubts linger regarding the effectiveness of these actions, specifically whether they will sufficiently increase pressure on Israel and its allies to end the brutal two-year conflict that the U.N. has officially labelled a genocide, and if it will alleviate tensions in a region plagued by conflict for decades.
One of the most urgent questions surrounding the recent widespread recognition of Palestine as a state is whether it will result in the isolation of Israel and the U.S. internationally, and if such isolation will compel these countries to end the conflict.
Annelle Sheline, a research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft who previously worked as a foreign affairs officer in the U.S. State Department's Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor's Office of Near Eastern Affairs, expressed hope that recent moves by the U.K., Canada, Australia, France, and other nations will isolate Israel and the U.S. - something she believes "should have happened a long time ago."
However, she remains sceptical about whether such isolation will actually influence either nation, both of which, she contends, are unlikely to be troubled by this type of diplomatic separation.
"Israel has demonstrated this willingness to commit genocide and face the isolation that that entails," Sheline told Express U.S. at the General Assembly. "And unfortunately, the Trump administration is similarly committed to a policy that has alienated the United States from partners, allies around the world.
"Whether it's tariffs or even things like the recent Israeli strike on Qatar that the United States knew about, this administration seems very unconcerned by something that would have been more of a concern for the Biden administration," she added regarding the Trump administration. "So, although the Biden administration was very willing to support Israel, traditionally, there was still some degree of concern about the way that that would impact other aspects of U.S. foreign policy," she continued.
"And unfortunately, under Trump, that no longer seems to be an issue."
The issue, she explained, is that Israel and the U.S. would find themselves isolated together - and as long as America continues backing Israel, Tel Aviv will be able to depend on Washington's assistance and persist with the genocide, which has, according to the latest figures, led to the deaths of over 65,000 Palestinians - many of whom are women and children.
"I think the big variable here is the U.S. government. Because I think even if other countries, European countries, start to take more stringent measures, I think as long as the U.S. continues to support Israel, traditionally, the Israeli government will say, 'We are going to continue,' because they see the genocide, many of them, as necessary for their ongoing survival of Jewish supremacy," she said.
Sheline contends that Western nations acknowledging a Palestinian state is "largely symbolic" and won't actually bring about a ceasefire or help resolve the conflict - unless those same nations enact "additional measures.
"75% of countries had already recognised the state of Palestine, with no effect," she said of the recent actions by the U.K., Canada, Australia and France.
"I think the recognition of the state of Palestine is a largely empty gesture, and it's part of why we saw these countries selecting this rather than more significant measures," she said.
"So, unless these countries decide that they are willing to take on additional measures - whether it's arms embargos against Israel, not allowing weapons to transit through their ports, requiring Israelis wishing to travel to provide information about their service in the IDF to determine whether or not they may have been engaged in war crimes - those kinds of measures would be more likely to have a deterrent effect, whereas merely recognizing the state of Palestine is a largely meaningless symbolic measure."
She observed that such actions by the previously mentioned Western nations could deliver a substantial blow to Israel, given that the EU represents the nation's biggest trade ally.
"Thus far, the EU has not been willing to take more significant actions, but I do think it's possible that they might, which would be significant," Sheline said.
Furthermore, Western nations vowing to boycott Eurovision, the World Cup and other prominent international competitions if Israel is permitted to compete could achieve the same level of effectiveness as the boycott campaign against South Africa during apartheid, she contended. "I think those are the kinds of things similar to the success, or the eventual success, of the boycott movement against apartheid in South Africa, where you see Israelis themselves starting to feel the effects of their actions as a rogue nation, violating international law," she said.
"Up to this point, Israelis have been largely protected from feeling the effects of what their government and their military are doing," she added. But with such additional measures, that would no longer be the case, she argued.
Many of the conversations at the U.N. General Assembly were slated to focus on the implementation of a two-state solution - one that recognises Palestine as a state but that also recognises Israel, with both expected to coexist peacefully.
Sheline believes a two-state solution could lead to more violence in the region - largely because of Israel's current and past actions against Palestine.
"I mean, Israel has already essentially made any kind of viable state of Palestine impossible, including by determining to build settlements in the E1 district that would bifurcate any kind of contiguous state. And they're doing that punitively in reaction to [Oct. 7]," she said. "There have been some people saying, 'Well, the more you push them, the worse it's just going to get for the Palestinians,' but it's been horrifyingly bad for Palestinians, and Israel engages in these actions regardless of what other countries do."
Establishing a two-state solution will merely enable the current situation to continue, she contended, noting that numerous members of the international community who have spent years analysing the matter are in agreement.
However, a binational or single-state arrangement involving equal rights for both sides won't succeed either, she stated, "given the degree of violence Israel has perpetuated upon Palestinians."
Even if Israel halts its offensive in Gaza and stops the genocide, the trauma of these events will poison relations between both groups for generations to come.
They will be incapable of coexisting peacefully, she explained.
"To then ask Palestinians to live with those that committed genocide against them is equivalent to asking the surviving victims of the Holocaust to go back to the communities where they were killed and turned in by their neighbors," she said. "The world rejected that and instead established the state of Israel."
Among the primary reasons tensions persist and violence continues to erupt between Israel and Palestine is that Palestinians are denied equal rights or land claims under Israeli governance, Sheline contends.
This, she explained, represents one of the key factors that led to the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas assault that killed 1,200 Israelis.
"I think as long as Israel maintains its occupation and does not grant equal rights to Palestinians, they are going to continue to face security threats," Sheline said.
"But unfortunately, because of this inordinate U.S. support, that has not been made clear to Israelis," she added. "And even Oct. 7 itself didn't make clear that the ongoing occupation is itself the primary source of insecurity.
"And so to address that would be to finally put this conflict to rest."
Much of the regional bloodshed, she argued, stems from America's involvement and its status as the dominant military power in the area.
"If the United States were to take a backseat - which presidents from Obama, Trump, Biden, Trump again, have said they want to do to reduce the resources the United States spends on a region that is no longer so strategically important - [then] we could see possibly a Middle East security architecture that was inclusive, whereby you have Iran, Turkey, Israel, all the Arab states, committed to each other's mutual security," she said. The cost, however, would be establishing the state of Palestine - which, Sheline contends, "would address Israel's stated security concerns."
The issue is that Israel has become obsessively focused not merely on destroying Hamas but on eliminating all Palestinians, she explained - concepts that are distinct but have become merged in the Israeli government's perspective.
"I fear that, at this point, the Israeli government views its security as tied to the eradication of Palestinians, and therefore, even this sort of agreement that would address their stated security concerns would not actually meet their real objective, which is the elimination of Palestinians," she said.
"In many ways, I think that now, you have an Israeli society and Israeli government that are revisionist, expansionist, determined to pursue this vision of an Israel where Palestinians are eradicated," she added. "And now, that is their goal, rather than actual security."
The sole method to shatter that mentality - or at minimum, the initial step toward achieving that - would be to completely exclude the U.S. from the situation.
American backing for Israel, which Sheline described as "inordinate," is blocking the nation from recognizing the fundamental source of its security challenges.
"Moving forward, I think the world is going to have to figure out how to have international institutions without the U.S. leading or providing significant amounts of funding," she said.
Populations are pushing governments to do more - but government actions are 'too little and too late'
A key driver behind several Western nations' decisions to acknowledge a Palestinian state stems from their citizens "pushing their governments to do more," Sheline explained.
"I think that is why you're seeing them even taking this step, as largely symbolic and empty as it is. And you do have more countries beginning to take more significant steps," she said.
However, she emphasised, "it continues to be too little and too late."
This pressure is also mounting in the U.S., she noted - though she fears that by the time the 2026 midterms conclude, no one may remain alive in Gaza to benefit from new pro-Palestinian policies.
The incoming administration, whether Democratic or Republican, would likely need to implement measures ending aid deliveries to Israel, she contended, something she believes they might pursue as public sentiment "has really shifted on this issue.
"For a politician to do well, electorally, they are going to have to adopt a stance on Palestine that reflects where the majority of Americans are, which is they don't want to continue to fund Israel's genocide," she said.
"I do think that increasingly, you have many members of Trump's own base that are questioning simply the amount of resources the U.S. pours into [Israel], and Israeli society, where people have better quality of life and cheaper housing and cheaper healthcare than Americans do," she added. "And so, the broad premise of 'America first' doesn't work. It actually is Israel first."
She expressed concern that Trump and his administration might disregard internal dissent unless it fractures the MAGA movement to such an extent that even his own party opposes him and prevents him from implementing policies favouring Israel and supporting ongoing military operations in Gaza.
"My main fear would be that, even though the American people would vote with their feet and would simply vote for politicians who were committed to a new set of policies on this, that we would see our Republican Party and the Trump administration not allowing that to move forward," Sheline voiced.
"At the same time, I do think that eventually this will change," she continued. "It's just a question of who's going to be left alive in Gaza and what will remain of the West Bank by the time American policies catch up to where American public opinion is."
Sheline argued that many countries are refusing to acknowledge a Palestinian state due to fears of being hit with trade tariffs by the Trump administration.
"I think much of the world has been hesitant to adopt more stringent concrete measures to signal their opposition to Israel's genocide because of the threat of tariffs or other punishments from the United States," she stated.
"So, many countries that would otherwise condemn genocide are afraid of the 500-pound gorilla of the U.S. and, understandably, I think, view Israel's actions and U.S. support for them as not necessarily their problem and that it's not worth sinking their own economies over, especially if to do so would merely hurt them without having a significant impact, more broadly."
Simultaneously, she contended that the entire world joining forces against Israel and the U.S. could deliver a "significant" blow and persuade those nations still hesitant to acknowledge Palestine and potentially escalate matters further through the previously mentioned boycotts or sanctions.
The U.N. General Assembly this week might serve as the ideal platform for such action to unfold, she suggested.
"I think that that level of isolation would be impactful," Sheline said. "So, I hope that increasingly we will see that - an international community united against America's and Israel's genocide."
