Realising the Palestinian state remains a complex challenge

India is steady in backing for the two-state solution.

Spurred by the declaration of French President Emmanuel Macron in early July, a host of Western powers are lining up and promising to recognise the State of Palestine next month, coinciding with the 80th session of the UN General Assembly. Following similar announcements by Britain and Canada, an Australian minister remarked that his country’s recognition was a matter of “when, not if”.

Currently, European nations such as Ireland, Norway, Spain and Sweden have already recognised the State of Palestine. The Gaza crisis and the escalating humanitarian catastrophe — widely feared to lead to mass starvation — are prompting many to push for the only viable option on the table: the two-state solution.

In cooperation with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, France convened a meeting in New York with the participation of key Western (Canada, Britain, Japan, and Spain), Arab (Egypt, Jordan and Qatar), Islamic (Indonesia and Türkiye) and Global South (Brazil and Senegal) powers. Much of the globe has already endorsed the New York Declaration, which outlines the contours, rationale and roadmap for a two-state solution. However, two notable dissenters remain: Israel and the United States. Israel has criticised Macron’s recognition plan as a ‘reward’ for Hamas. Despite his frustration with Benjamin Netanyahu over delaying the Gaza ceasefire deal, the Trump Administration is reportedly fuming over Western powers taking the lead and has even threatened to punish Canada for its recognition decision.

Recognition of the State of Palestine is largely a political act with legal implications. It assumes that the entity in question satisfies international criteria regarding territory, population, government, and, crucially, sovereignty. Countries only grant recognition after being satisfied that these conditions are met. As a sovereign decision, recognition is often used by countries to gain diplomatic leverage and strategic advantages. For instance, the US took more than two decades to accept the People’s Republic of China and support its admission to the United Nations in 1971. For similar reasons, a vast number of countries—including some even today—have not recognised the State of Israel, despite it meeting all the criteria of an independent sovereign entity decades ago.

Like many others, India adopts a cautious approach when recognising and accepting a newly emerged entity into the international community. This caution was evident in its stance towards the then East Germany, which it recognised only in 1972, shortly before the latter joined the United Nations in September 1973. At the same time, India’s immediate recognition of Bangladesh on 7 December 1971—amidst the war with Pakistan—paved the way for the latter’s international acceptance.

The same caution and legal considerations informed India’s approach towards Palestine. Despite its longstanding support for the Palestinian cause dating back to the early 1920s, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru refrained from recognising the hastily formed and short-lived All-Palestine Government announced in the Gaza Strip in 1948. As global opinion began to coalesce around an independent Palestinian leadership under the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), New Delhi initiated engagement with Yasser Arafat.

In the wake of the 1973 oil crisis and the sudden rise in political clout of key oil-exporting nations— particularly Iraq and Saudi Arabia — the regional stance towards the Palestinian leadership began to shift. At the Rabat Arab Summit in October 1974, the Arab League recognised the PLO as the ‘sole and legitimate’ representative of the Palestinians. This led India to sign a formal agreement with the PLO in January of the following year, soon after which an independent PLO office began functioning in New Delhi.

Following her landslide victory in the 1980 Lok Sabha elections, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi extended full diplomatic recognition to the Palestinian mission in March, granting it all diplomatic privileges and immunities on par with United Nations missions.

The first Intifada prompted the PLO to accept the UN’s partition plan for Palestine — albeit four decades late — indicating its readiness to coexist with the State of Israel. Consequently, India became one of the first countries to recognise the State of Palestine on 18 November 1988. The Palestinian mission in New Delhi was upgraded to a full-fledged embassy. At that time, the Israeli consulate in Mumbai remained limited in function and jurisdiction, primarily serving the state of Maharashtra.

Since then, India has hosted both Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas as heads of state. The last such visit occurred in May 2017, when Prime Minister Modi hosted Abbas. Following the Oslo Accords, India also opened a diplomatic mission in Gaza City, which was later relocated to the West Bank due to worsening security conditions, which also forced Arafat to move his headquarters to Ramallah.

India’s support for the two-state solution has remained consistent, vocal and unwavering. Even after the Hamas-led attacks on Israel on 7 October 2023, India reiterated its backing for the two-state framework. During a detailed media briefing on 12 October, the MEA spokesperson reaffirmed India’s consistent support for “a sovereign, independent, and viable state of Palestine, living within secure and recognised borders side by side at peace with Israel.”

Despite growing normalisation and deepening strategic ties with Israel, India’s commitment to the two-state solution remains resolute. The rising support among key Western powers only reinforces the strength and vision of India’s long-held position. Yet, without active American support and endorsement, France and its European and Arab allies may struggle to realise Palestinian statehood — and this remains a major hurdle.

(The writer teaches contemporary Middle East at Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi)