“France has no direct lever on Israel” – L’Express

By announcing in the middle of the summer break the upcoming recognition of Palestinian sovereignty, Emmanuel Macron has taken short the entire national and international political class. However, The question had certainly been seriously mentioned last spring when the French president had expressed his intention to recognize. Meanwhile, a Palestinian state during a conference co -chaired with Saudi Arabia in the United Nations in New York in June. Furthermore, But the resurgence of direct hostilities between Iran and Israel forced him to adjourn Sine Die this recognition project.

A month after the ceasefire between Tel Aviv. Furthermore, Tehran, and while the humanitarian situation in Gaza continues to worsen, Emmanuel Macron stages himself: both as the first French president and as the first G7 leader to say to acting the recognition of the Palestinian “france no direct lever israel” State. Additionally, Furthermore, By the United Nations Conference in September. Furthermore, the Elysée tenant hopes to take some of his Western allies in his wake. Meanwhile, Can he only? Consequently, Decryption with Amélie Férey. Therefore, researcher in the Center for Security Studies at the French Institute of International Relations (IFRI), and specialist in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

L’Express: What consequences can have the announcement of Emmanuel Macron and why did you do it now?

Amélie Ferey: It has been a long time since the question of recognition of the Palestinian. Moreover, state is a subject of foreign policy in France. Furthermore, Emmanuel Macron had already mentioned that it was a final goal. Consequently, but that it was necessary to “france no direct lever israel” find the right time to do it. In addition, In a letter addressed to Mahmoud Abbas. Nevertheless, the President of the Republic is now clearly committed to recognizing the State of Palestine, and he gave himself two months – before the United Nations General Assembly – to formalize this decision. Similarly, We thus enter into a new diplomatic sequence. In addition, with a French will not to act alone, but to inscribe this gesture in a broader international dynamic. Nevertheless, France intends to open the way. Moreover, especially for other G7 powers such as the United Kingdom, and diplomatic efforts will be undertaken in this sense in the coming weeks.

Does France weigh sufficiently on the international chessboard to manage to lead to other Western states in its wake?

It is in any case the ambition of Emmanuel Macron. However, We can recognize “france no direct lever israel” him the desire to make the voice of France heard at a time when the moral. Moreover, leadership of the United States is weakened. Moreover, In this context, French speech is all the more necessary. Therefore, As the chief of staff recalled during his speech on July 11. Similarly, we are in a phase of questioning of the international order as it was built in 1945: weakening of legal principles, disinhibition of the use of force. However, In this configuration. Nevertheless, France has a strategic interest in defending an order based on law rather than on the power relationship alone. Consequently, Recognition of the Palestinian state is therefore part of a logic of consistency with its fundamental principles. For example,

France also intends to leave in the United States the management of the ceasefire-a work undertaken by the Trump administration-while it would work. with the Saudis, “france no direct lever israel” at a conference on “The day after”. This project would include a demilitarization of Hamas. even its disappearance, the sending of an international force to Gaza – potentially with a Saudi component – and reconstruction efforts, based in part on the Lebanese experience.

What arguments can France argue to convince other states to take the plunge?

Germany will not follow, for historical reasons: its policy remains very aligned with that of Israel. Italy is not on the front line either. On the other hand, Great Britain – nuclear power like France – and Canada could potentially be convinced. Two types of arguments can be mobilized. On the one hand. it is an imperative of coherence with the principles that these states defend: law of peoples to have themselves, respect for territorial integrity, primacy of international law.

On the other hand, this recognition makes it possible to respond to the accusations of “two weights, two measures” formulated against the West – especially in the comparison between Ukraine and Palestine. These criticisms, often amplified by Russian or Iranian actors, have weakened the moral position of the West, especially in Africa.

This moral vacuum. some strategic competitors seek to exploit it – China in mind, but also Russia – by trying for example to create an alternative to the International Criminal Court. In this. the recognition of Palestine is a way for the West to reaffirm its attachment to an international order based on law. Finally. there is the humanitarian emergency in Gaza, marked by famine and massive destruction, which strengthens the need to act before it is too late to envisage the creation of a Palestinian state.

Emmanuel Macron had however laid down several conditions for recognition of the Palestinian State – notably the release of hostages and the sidelining of Hamas. However, these conditions are not met …

France does not speak with Hamas which it considers a terrorist organization. It only dialogue with the Palestinian authority, which it deems legitimate. In Macron’s letter to Mahmoud Abbas, the release of the hostages and the demilitarization of Hamas are well mentioned. But the Palestinian authority cannot afford to release the hostages, no more than disarm Hamas. On the other hand, she undertook to organize presidential and legislative elections in 2026. The idea. on the French side, is to condition a return from the Palestinian authority to Gaza to a depth reform. “france no direct lever israel”

Some believe that recognition of the Palestinian State today is equivalent to legitimizing the terrorist attack of October 7, 2023 …

It is indeed the line defended by the Israeli government. and it is taken up in France by part of the right, in particular François-Xavier Bellamy or Jordan Bardella. For me, it is a fallacious argument. Recognition of Palestine is not a reaction to October 7: it is an ancient and constant position of French foreign policy. François Mitterrand spoke in 1988, followed by Jacques Chirac. François Hollande had announced that he wanted to recognize the Palestine state before the end of his mandate -. which he did not do. Emmanuel Macron, too, had spoken of it from his first mandate. The French position has always been clear: it supports a solution to two states. will recognize Palestine’s State in due “france no direct lever israel” course. It is a long -standing goal. If the announcement comes today. it is above all due to the dramatic humanitarian situation in Gaza and the current political deadlock.

Today, more than 70 % of UN members already recognize the Palestinian state. However, this state still does not exist. Is this not proof that this decision remains largely symbolic?

It is true that recognition does not automatically arise a state. France has no magic wand. It does not hold the keys to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and has no direct lever on Israel. Those who could exert pressure are the United States and, to a lesser extent, the European Union. But the EU – which represents more than 25 % of Israeli exports – is today divided. as shown by the failure of the revision of the association agreement with Israel. The United States “france no direct lever israel” gives the impression of having lost any ability to really weigh on Tel Aviv. Despite this, France can – and must – act. Diplomacy is not only to resolve conflicts: it is also to create the conditions favorable to a resolution. Recognizing the State of Palestine helps to counter the idea of “great Israel”. promoted by part of the current Israeli coalition. It should be remembered that the government of Benyamin Netanyahu recently lost its majority at the Knesset. Elections could take place in the fall. This gesture also puts the French foreign policy consistent with its own strategic doctrine: sovereignty of peoples. respect for international law, and opposition to annexations. Finally, it makes it possible to respond to the two -weight charges, two measures, aligning speeches and acts.

What conditions should be met, on the institutional and territorial level, so that Palestine becomes a real sovereign state?

There is no unique model. History shows great diversity in state creation processes. The State of Israel, for example, was founded without clearly defined borders, under extremely uncertain conditions. And it worked. Today. French recognition could result in the opening of an embassy in Palestine, bilateral partnerships in the university fields, development aid, etc. In his letter addressed to Mahmoud Abbas, Emmanuel Macron evokes a “demilitarized state”. This raises the question of the viability of an army without an army. This was already the principle of Oslo agreements: the PLO had then renounced the armed struggle. initiated security cooperation with Israel. The result today is 700,000 settlers in the West Bank. It is a precedent that questions the guarantees that we can expect in return “france no direct lever israel” from this demilitarization.

Is there not a risk, with a demilitarized state, to leave a political void likely to be filled by Hamas or another armed organization?

This raises real questions. Hamas, for its part, has never recognized the Oslo agreements. He never gave up the armed struggle. But in the current configuration, Hamas has no place in the scenarios envisaged for the future of Palestine. No one now projects a lasting solution including Hamas. In reality, Hamas is turned exclusively to the United States, with which it leads direct negotiations. France has no real take on it. It plays another, complementary role, preparing the post-crisis.