RSS
Will France Abandon its Opposition to Unilateral Recognition of a Palestinian State?
France’s President Emmanuel Macron delivers a speech during a tribute ceremony at the Halle aux Grains in Toulouse, southern France, on March 20, 2022. Ludovic Marin/Pool via REUTERS
JNS.org – Will France recognize an independent Palestinian state? That question has taken on an added urgency in the last week after Spain and Ireland, members of the European Union, along with non-E.U. member Norway, announced that they were doing exactly that.
Securing French recognition would be a game-changer in terms of the E.U.’s relationships with Israel and the Palestinians. So far, 10 of the E.U.’s 27 member states have recognized an independent Palestine. However, six countries in that grouping—the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria and Romania—did so long before acceding to E.U. membership, when they were still satellite states under the boot of the Soviet Union; these days, they are visibly more supportive of Israel than the E.U. states in Western Europe. The remainder—Sweden, Cyprus, and now Spain and Ireland—therefore look like a conspicuous minority going against the grain of E.U. policy. If Belgium, Malta and Slovenia also announce recognition, as is expected in the coming weeks, the pro-Palestinian E.U. states will look less isolated, but they will still have a good deal of work to do in terms of changing the bloc’s policy overall.
France, a founding member of the European Union and a heavy-hitter when it comes to foreign and defense policies, would therefore be the feather in the Palestinian cap were Paris to follow the examples of Madrid and Dublin. Certainly, there is growing pressure within France, particularly from its vocal left-wing parties and its growing Muslim community, in favor of recognition. In some ways, the current debate is less about the wisdom of such an action and far more about its timing.
Last week, French President Emmanuel Macron, who was strongly supportive of Israel in the aftermath of the Oct. 7 Hamas pogrom in southern Israel, repeated an earlier claim that recognition of an independent Palestine was no longer a “taboo” for his country. “There are no taboos for France, and I am totally ready to recognize a Palestinian state,” he said during a joint press conference with German Chancellor Olaf Scholtz. But, he emphasized, “I think this recognition must be at a useful moment … I will not do an emotional recognition.”
Separately, France’s Foreign Minister, Stephane Sejourne, made a similar point, but unlike Macron, openly criticized Spain and Ireland, insinuating that both were engaged in grandstanding with little thought for the implications of their decision. France supports a two-state solution to the conflict, Sejourne said, and “the issue of recognition will, of course, come into that.” But, he went on, “the concern now—which I have clearly shared with my Spanish and Irish counterparts—is what happens the day after recognition: How diplomatically useful is it?” France was not willing to indulge what Sejourne termed “political positioning,” exclaiming before an assembled group of reporters: “Tell me, what exactly has the Spanish recognition changed a day later in Gaza? Nothing!”
France is making these calculations on two levels. The first concerns the conflict directly; if two states is the goal, then that should be negotiated rather than cajoled by individual states engaging in unilateral recognition. That is also the position of Germany, the other great power in the European Union, and Berlin, fearful of undermining its post-World War II Staatsräson (“reason of state”) support of Israel, remains reluctant to travel down the Spanish and Irish path. France doesn’t march in lockstep with the Germans, but Macron’s government can be expected to liaise with their German colleagues closely before any change in policy is made public.
The second level concerns France’s place in the world. There has always been tension between its desire for a more integrated European Union, especially on security issues, and its historic emphasis on the importance of national sovereignty. The French desire for independence in foreign policymaking led former President Charles de Gaulle to withdraw from NATO’s command structure in 1966, and it took France more than 40 years to eventually reintegrate. But even within NATO, France makes sure to carve out its own position, as most recently illustrated by Macron’s call for greater support for Ukraine even as other members of the alliance, including the United States, are wary of further antagonizing Russian dictator Vladimir Putin’s regime. In such a context, it’s quite possible that France would recognize an independent Palestine but not in the same manner as Ireland and Spain, perhaps by setting goals for the Palestinian Authority to meet before it does so.
Yet the French debate isn’t restricted to the corridors of power or the think tanks issuing position papers on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Like his U.S. counterpart Joe Biden, Macron has tried to steer a middle path between a democratic state, and a gang of rapists and murderers seeking its destruction. Both leaders have achieved the same result: an Israel increasingly tired of second-guessing their next moves, and large swathes of the Arab world demanding more punitive action, such as an arms embargo, condemnation at the United Nations, and, of course, recognition of Palestine. And both leaders are facing loud calls from legislators and sections of public opinion to bolster the pressure on Israel.
Since Oct. 7, Paris and other cities in France have witnessed large pro-Hamas demonstrations in the streets and on campuses with all their attendant problems: genocidal calls for Israel’s destruction, and attacks on Jews and Jewish-owned property. The day after the Spanish and Irish recognition announcement, far-left members of the French parliament brandished Palestinian flags and demanded that France sever commercial ties with the Jewish state. One of them—David Guiraud, who earlier this year shared antisemitic memes on social media—even went as far as physically assaulting a pro-Israel Jewish Parliament member, Meyer Habib, calling him a “pig in the mud of genocide” for good measure.
Should this agitation continue, Macron may feel obliged to echo Biden in trying to mollify the pro-Hamas mob. The French government will also be aware that ministers meeting at the most recent session of the European Union’s Foreign Affairs Council warned Israel that it could face sanctions if it continues its operation to destroy Hamas in Rafah—a statement that Ireland’s foreign minister found most satisfying. If France does waver, then Israel will be more reliant on Germany, Italy, Greece and the Eastern European states to fight its corner within the European Union, its largest trading partner.
The United States could make an important contribution to these deliberations by explicitly stating that recognition of an independent Palestine is both a reward for the atrocities of Hamas and a major blow to a negotiated settlement. But that, sadly, is unlikely for as long as the Biden administration continues with its strategy of slowly chipping away at Israel’s ability to defend itself, politically and diplomatically.
The post Will France Abandon its Opposition to Unilateral Recognition of a Palestinian State? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Syria’s Sharaa Says Talks With Israel Could Yield Results ‘In Coming Days’
Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa speaks at the opening ceremony of the 62nd Damascus International Fair, the first edition held since the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, in Damascus, Syria, Aug. 27, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Khalil Ashawi
Syria’s President Ahmed al-Sharaa said on Wednesday that ongoing negotiations with Israel to reach a security pact could lead to results “in the coming days.”
He told reporters in Damascus the security pact was a “necessity” and that it would need to respect Syria’s airspace and territorial unity and be monitored by the United Nations.
Syria and Israel are in talks to reach an agreement that Damascus hopes will secure a halt to Israeli airstrikes and the withdrawal of Israeli troops who have pushed into southern Syria.
Reuters reported this week that Washington was pressuring Syria to reach a deal before world leaders gather next week for the UN General Assembly in New York.
But Sharaa, in a briefing with journalists including Reuters ahead of his expected trip to New York to attend the meeting, denied the US was putting any pressure on Syria and said instead that it was playing a mediating role.
He said Israel had carried out more than 1,000 strikes on Syria and conducted more than 400 ground incursions since Dec. 8, when the rebel offensive he led toppled former Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad.
Sharaa said Israel’s actions were contradicting the stated American policy of a stable and unified Syria, which he said was “very dangerous.”
He said Damascus was seeking a deal similar to a 1974 disengagement agreement between Israel and Syria that created a demilitarized zone between the two countries.
He said Syria sought the withdrawal of Israeli troops but that Israel wanted to remain at strategic locations it seized after Dec. 8, including Mount Hermon. Israeli ministers have publicly said Israel intends to keep control of the sites.
He said if the security pact succeeds, other agreements could be reached. He did not provide details, but said a peace agreement or normalization deal like the US-mediated Abraham Accords, under which several Muslim-majority countries agreed to normalize diplomatic ties with Israel, was not currently on the table.
He also said it was too early to discuss the fate of the Golan Heights because it was “a big deal.”
Reuters reported this week that Israel had ruled out handing back the zone, which Donald Trump unilaterally recognized as Israeli during his first term as US president.
“It’s a difficult case – you have negotiations between a Damascene and a Jew,” Sharaa told reporters, smiling.
SECURITY PACT DERAILED IN JULY
Sharaa also said Syria and Israel had been just “four to five days” away from reaching the basis of a security pact in July, but that developments in the southern province of Sweida had derailed those discussions.
Syrian troops were deployed to Sweida in July to quell fighting between Druze armed factions and Bedouin fighters. But the violence worsened, with Syrian forces accused of execution-style killings and Israel striking southern Syria, the defense ministry in Damascus and near the presidential palace.
Sharaa on Wednesday described the strikes near the presidential palace as “not a message, but a declaration of war,” and said Syria had still refrained from responding militarily to preserve the negotiations.
RSS
Anti-Israel Activists Gear Up to ‘Flood’ UN General Assembly
US Capitol Police and NYPD officers clash with anti-Israel demonstrators, on the day Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses a joint meeting of Congress, on Capitol Hill, in Washington, DC, July 24, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Umit Bektas
Anti-Israel groups are planning a wave of raucous protests in New York City during the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) over the next several days, prompting concerns that the demonstrations could descend into antisemitic rhetoric and intimidation.
A coalition of anti-Israel activists is organizing the protests in and around UN headquarters to coincide with speeches from Middle Eastern leaders and appearances by US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The demonstrations are expected to draw large crowds and feature prominent pro-Palestinian voices, some of whom have been criticized for trafficking in antisemitic tropes, in addition to calling for the destruction of Israe.
Organizers of the demonstrations have promoted the coordinated events on social media as an opportunity to pressure world leaders to hold Israel accountable for its military campaign against Hamas in Gaza, with some messaging framed in sharply hostile terms.
On Sunday, for example, activists shouted at Israel’s Ambassador to the UN Danny Danon.
“Zionism is terrorism. All you guys are terrorists committing ethnic cleansing and genocide in Gaza and Palestine. Shame on you, Zionist animals,” they shouted.
BREAKING: PRO-PALESTINE PROTESTORS CONFRONT “ISRAELI” AMBASSADOR DANNY DANON AT THE UNITED NATIONS
1/5 pic.twitter.com/4G1VYEMGzV
— Within Our Lifetime (@WOLPalestine) September 14, 2025
The Combat Antisemitism Movement (CAM), warned on its website that the scale and tone of the planned demonstrations risk crossing the line from political protest into hate speech, arguing that anti-Israel activists are attempting to hijack the UN gathering to spread antisemitism and delegitimize the Jewish state’s right to exist.
Outside the UN last week, masked protesters belonging to the activist group INDECLINE kicked a realistic replica of Netanyahu’s decapitated head as though it were a soccer ball.
US activist group plays soccer with Bibi’s mock decapitated HEAD right outside NYC UN HQ
Peep shot at 00:40
Footage posted by INDECLINE collective just as UN General Assembly about to kick off
‘Following the game, ball was donated to Palestinian Genocide Museum’ pic.twitter.com/TQ84sgZhKr
— RT (@RT_com) September 9, 2025
Within Our Lifetime (WOL), a radical anti-Israel activist group, has vowed to “flood” the UNGA on behalf of the pro-Palestine movement.
WOL, one of the most prolific anti-Israel activist groups, came under immense fire after it organized a protest against an exhibition to honor the victims of the Oct. 7 massacre at the Nova Music Festival in southern Israel. During the event, the group chanted “resistance is justified when people are occupied!” and “Israel, go to hell!”
“We will be there to confront them with the truth: Their silence and inaction enable genocide. The world cannot continue as if Gaza does not exist,” WOL said of its planned demonstrations in New York. “This is the time to make our voices impossible to ignore. Come to New York by any means necessary, to stand, to march, to demand the UN act and end the siege.”
Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) and Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM), two other anti-Israel organizations that have helped organize widespread demonstrations against the Jewish state during the war in Gaza, also announced they are planning a march from Times Square to the UN headquarters on Friday.
“The time is now for each and every UN member state to uphold their duty under international law: sanction Israel and end the genocide,” the groups said in a statement.
JVP, an organization that purports to fight for “Palestinian liberation,” has positioned itself as a staunch adversary of the Jewish state. The group argued in a 2021 booklet that Jews should not write Hebrew liturgy because hearing the language would be “deeply traumatizing” to Palestinians. JVP has repeatedly defended the Oct. 7 massacre of roughly 1,200 people in southern Israel by Hamas as a justified “resistance.” Chapters of the organization have urged other self-described “progressives” to throw their support behind Hamas and other terrorist groups against Israel
Similarly, PYM, another radical anti-Israel group, has repeatedly defended terrorism and violence against the Jewish state. PYM has organized many anti-Israel protests in the two years following the Oct. 7 attacks in the Jewish state. Recently, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AK) called for a federal investigation into the organization after Aisha Nizar, one of the group’s leaders, urged supporters to sabotage the US supply chain for the F-35 fighter jet, one of the most advanced US military assets and a critical component of Israel’s defense.
The UN General Assembly has historically been a flashpoint for heated debate over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Previous gatherings have seen dueling demonstrations outside the Manhattan venue, with pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian groups both seeking to influence the international spotlight.
While warning about the demonstrations, CAM noted it recently launched a new mobile app, Report It, that allows users worldwide to quickly and securely report antisemitic incidents in real time.
RSS
Nina Davidson Presses Universities to Back Words With Action as Jewish Students Return to Campus Amid Antisemitism Crisis
Nina Davidson on The Algemeiner’s ‘J100’ podcast. Photo: Screenshot
Philanthropist Nina Davidson, who served on the board of Barnard College, has called on universities to pair tough rhetoric on combatting antisemitism with enforcement as Jewish students returned to campuses for the new academic year.
“Years ago, The Algemeiner had published a list ranking the most antisemitic colleges in the country. And number one was Columbia,” Davidson recalled on a recent episode of The Algemeiner‘s “J100” podcast. “As a board member and as someone who was representing the institution, it really upset me … At the board meeting, I brought it up and I said, ‘What are we going to do about this?’”
Host David Cohen, chief executive officer of The Algemeiner, explained he had revisited Davidson’s remarks while she was being honored for her work at The Algemeiner‘s 8th annual J100 gala, held in October 2021, noting their continued relevance.
“It could have been the same speech in 2025,” he said, underscoring how longstanding concerns about campus antisemitism, while having intensified in the aftermath of Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel, are not new.
Davidson argued that universities already possess the tools to protect students – codes of conduct, time-place-manner rules, and consequences for threats or targeted harassment – but too often fail to apply them evenly. “Statements are not enough,” she said, arguing that institutions need to enforce their rules and set a precedent that there will be consequences for individuals who refuse to follow them.
She also said that stakeholders – alumni, parents, and donors – are reassessing their relationships with schools that, in their view, have not safeguarded Jewish students. While supportive of open debate, Davidson distinguished between protest and intimidation, calling for leadership that protects expression while ensuring campus safety.
The episode surveyed specific pressure points that administrators will face this fall: repeat anti-Israel encampments, disruptions of Jewish programming, and the challenge of distinguishing political speech from conduct that violates university rules. “Unless schools draw those lines now,” Davidson warned, “they’ll be scrambling once the next crisis hits.”
Cohen closed by framing the discussion as a test of institutional credibility, asking whether universities will “turn policy into protection” in real time. Davidson agreed, pointing to students who “need to know the rules aren’t just on paper.”
The full conversation is available on The Algemeiner’s “J100” podcast.