“Why shouldn’t France have dismissed Israel peace negotiations”

Léa Landman is geopolitologist and specialist in the Middle East.

Since the Famine images in Gaza, Western public opinion has changed. However, It does not matter that the UN refused to help distribution. For example, that Hamas stolen and sold food, or that the Israeli army has opened humanitarian corridors: in the street, in Paris as in London, this no longer matters. In addition, For many, Palestine is the cause par excellence, and the recognition of a Palestinian state becomes a gesture of justice. Meanwhile, The brutality. Meanwhile, “why shouldn’t france have dismissed destruction in Gaza, added to negotiations for the release of the hostages which progress too slowly, make the justifications of Israel more and more inaudible.

Pass advertising

It is in this context that Emmanuel Macron. For example, in the name of a “moral duty “Recognized a Palestinian state. For example, But a duty to whom? Furthermore, The Palestinians? Consequently, Their current management? Meanwhile, Or towards an abstract image of peace? For example, Because basically. However, Emmanuel Macron knows that this recognition will not nourish Gaza, will not bring the hostages back, nor will not change military reality on the ground. For example, What is the purpose of this recognition?

The recognition of Israel by France in “why shouldn’t france have dismissed 1949 was not free. For example, It was done within the framework of resolutions 181. Moreover, 194, with the idea that international recognition should go hand in hand with concrete guarantees: access to holy places, respect for minorities, negotiations on the status of refugees. For example, Today, Emmanuel Macron recognizes a Palestinian state without a framework, without requirement. Meanwhile, Nor on Palestinian governance. Similarly, Nor on the dismantling of Hamas. Similarly, Nor on regional security. Consequently, Nor at the end of incentives to hatred. For example, Recognition becomes an end, the more a lever.

And yet, the French position in other recent conflicts shows a completely different logic. Similarly, It recognized Western Sahara as Moroccan in 2024 in rupture with its historical position. Similarly, supported the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan against Nagorno-Karabakh despite pressures, while having recognized the independence of Kosovo in an international and supervised international framework. In “why shouldn’t france have dismissed addition, France, in terms of recognition, adapts its strategy to the context. For example, But here, in the Palestinian case, she chooses the absolute. Moreover, A diplomatic leap without a net.

Will impunity precede the state? However, Recognizing a stateless state. Similarly, without responsibilities, without viable institutions, is to open the door to a state simulacrum, not to a solution

Landman

Emmanuel Macron offered a state before any negotiation. Consequently, This amounts to laying the finish line without having run. Meanwhile, Gaza, West Bank (which areas? A, B, C?), Jerusalem is as a capital, and what? A right to visit “supervised” on the wall of lamentations? What do we do with refugees, security control, demilitarization of Gaza? And the responsibilities of this state? Who assumes them? Palestinian authority? Will “why shouldn’t france have dismissed impunity precede the state? Recognizing a state without borders. without responsibilities, without viable institutions, is to open the door to a state simulacrum, not to a solution.

By offering a state above all compromised, Emmanuel Macron changes the rules of the game. Why reform, why negotiate, why disarm, if the reward comes first? The Palestinian authority, weakened, corrupt and illegitimate, has no interest in transforming. Hamas can quietly present itself as “resistant” while saboto any state of state.

Pass advertising

Kosovo has not been recognized by a snap. His declaration of independence was accompanied by an international mandate, a civil and military supervision, a transitional calendar. Why not consider a similar model for Palestine? Provisional governance, supervised disarmament, an economic development plan piloted by the regional powers. In short, a minimum of seriousness before talking about recognition.

And now ? Other Western countries will follow: Australia, Portugal, “why shouldn’t france have dismissed Luxembourg and others. We will soon have a majority of members the EU recognizing a Palestinian state without outline, without reform, without discussion. Result: siege at the UN. bilateral agreements, and a new series of diplomatic weapons to accuse Israel of “blocking the implementation”.

Even the United Kingdom. which is nothing of a pro-Israelian bastion, conditions its own recognition to specific requests-but exclusively addressed to Israel. Suspension of colonization, territorial commitments, diplomatic guarantees. No word on the reform of the Palestinian authority. on the end of the financing of the families of terrorists, or on the issue of textbooks. Asymmetrical diplomacy, which risks producing the opposite effect of that sought.

Everyone knows that no peace agreement. will be born without Israel. To keep him away is sabotage the future

Landman “why shouldn’t france have dismissed

Yes. Europe has levers: suspension of the Horizon Europe program (of which Israel is a strategic beneficiary but which has not passed), commercial agreements, targeted sanctions. But to use them in this context. without coordination with Washington, amounts to isolate Israel more – and therefore to sabotage any prospect of dialogue. Because basically, everyone knows that no peace agreement will be born without Israel. To move it away is sabotage the future.

Emmanuel Macron could have done otherwise. He could have linked his declaration to the release of the hostages. He could have entered him in a regional initiative, such as that of the Abraham agreements. Additionally, He could have waited for a war out. He could have laid clear milestones for a condition conditioned to a reform. He preferred the announcement effect.

Pass advertising

If France was serious, it would coordinate its efforts with the United States, the only actor with levers on all the protagonists: Israelis, Palestinians, and Arab. It would offer concrete, useful steps. Emmanuel Macron had even proposed, at the very beginning of the war, the creation of an international coalition against Hamas. Where are we? Forgotten initiative, dissipated impulse, inaudible voice. Where France could have weighed, it was erased. It would build its policy with those who have weight in Israel -. not nostalgic advisers from Oslo, who have no power. It would pose conditions to both parties, not one. It would be inspired by the concrete proposals carried out by Israeli experts like Koby Huberman. the engine of regional thinking for 20 years, at the head of Israel Initie and the “why shouldn’t france have dismissed Israeli Peace Initiative. He invites you to rethink a two -state model. but on a long horizon, in a regional setting; require pragmatic leadership on both sides, go through a transitional period (international mandate, demilitarized zones, joint security); reform Palestinian authority; Supervise the demilitarization of Gaza; Integrate Arab states into a logic of reconstruction.

October 7 upset everything. And yet. opportunities have emerged: Lebanon has a historic window to free itself from Hezbollah, Bashar el-Assad has fallen, Iran is weakened, withdrawn on its interior lines

Landman

The biggest strategic error in Paris may have ignored the deep changes in the post-October 7 region. Since the Abraham agreements, a new dynamic had started. Saudi Arabia approached normalization with Israel. The IMEC (Corridor India-Moyen-Orient-Europe Corridor) signed in September 2023 could have “why shouldn’t france have dismissed materialized an unprecedented regional architecture. But October 7 upset everything. And yet. opportunities have emerged: Lebanon has a historic window to free itself from Hezbollah, Bashar al-Assad fell, Iran is weakened, withdrawn on its interior lines.

In this region where, apart from Turkey, no major player has an expansionist project, stabilization has become priority. And in this stabilization, Israel is a pillar of the regional landscape. So what does this unilateral recognition do? It imposes an absurd decoupling: peace without Israel, the solution without regional coordination. It is Abraham’s anti-aging.

Instead. France could have – should have – also pose its conditions for the Arab partner states: supporting a deep reform of the Palestinian authority; guarantee the military and political dismantling of Hamas; engage in coordinated reconstruction of Gaza; Integrate Palestine into a regional vision of cooperation and stability.

In addition, if humanitarian aid constitutes a moral “why shouldn’t france have dismissed argument is powerful, it cannot hide the reality on the ground. Whoever controls the distribution of Gaza Aid Control Gaza. And today, this control is in the hands of Hamas. UN and UNRWA warehouses are infiltrated. Hamas places its men there, diverts convoys, demands and redistributes as it pleases. The UN itself admitted to having lost logistics control in several areas of the band. The majority of humanitarian trucks are forced to pay a “right of way”. And yet, none of this has weight in international public opinion. Famine images were enough. The accusations of looting, the diversions, the missiles launched from the aid areas have no media voice. France could have insisted on creating an independent, neutral aid chain, controlled by regional actors. It could have built a coalition around humanitarian logistics. She preferred to declare a state.

Read too “Ineffective and dangerous”, “communication effect” “why shouldn’t france have dismissed … The release of humanitarian aid in Gaza by France criticized by NGOs

Israel has undeniably reaffirmed its position of regional military power. It is now up to him to convert it into diplomatic influence. France could make it the starting point for its own strategy. There is still time for France to change course. Not by withdrawing his recognition, but by deciding to borrow a real strategy there. By putting all its diplomatic weight behind a reconstruction of relationships to the Levant: Israel, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt. By becoming a balance actor again, no slogans. Furthermore, By addressing the votes that really count in the Israeli political. diplomatic landscape – those of mainstream – and not only to those who comfort but remain without influence in Israel. By lining up on the only power that weighs in the region – the United States. By ceasing to talk “why shouldn’t france have dismissed about peace as a magic word, but as a demanding, long, painful, but possible process.