‘Recognition of Palestine not enough without sovereignty, justice’

Foreign policy experts say recognition will not matter much without real independence, and territory 

Mushfiq Ahmad

KARACHI, Pakistan (MNTV) — As the international tide continues to shift in favor of Palestinian statehood, prominent voices from the Muslim world are weighing in on what this moment truly signifies — and what challenges lie ahead.

Former Pakistani diplomat Shahid M.G. Kiyani highlighted the growing momentum behind the recognition of Palestine, particularly as several major European powers — including Italy, England, and France — have expressed their intention to recognize the Palestinian state.

“This will create pressure on Israel and its biggest supporter, the United States,” Kiyani noted. “However, even after recognition and possibly gaining a seat in the United Nations, the territory allocated to Palestine is very small, and Palestinians face severe restrictions in accessing it.”

He emphasized that while the two-state solution remains a sound proposal — supported by countries like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, the latter being a leader in the Arab world — the core issue is whether Palestinians will actually receive real autonomy, independence, and territory. “Without these, recognition alone will not matter much,” he added.

Ambassador Kiyani also pointed to the silence of much of the Arab world regarding the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza, while acknowledging Pakistan’s consistent policy on the matter since 1949.

“Pakistan has condemned the atrocities and urged the international community to take notice of the Palestinian cause. But will the Palestinian state ever achieve the kind of sovereignty that Israel currently enjoys?”

He further explained the procedural and political obstacles Palestine faces in gaining full United Nations membership. While observer status has been granted, full membership requires Security Council approval, where permanent members like the U.S. hold veto power — a power historically used to block Palestine’s bid.

“The U.S. initially blocked China’s entry into the UN, only for it to gain membership after a prolonged diplomatic effort. Whether Palestine can achieve something similar remains to be seen,” Kiyani said.

Former ambassador Sarwar Naqvi said the inaction of major powers was distressing and highlighted the broader implications of Australia’s recent shift in position.

He noted that while Palestine may receive support in the UN General Assembly, the Security Council poses a significant hurdle.

“A permanent member of the Council could veto it — we’ve seen this happen before. The U.S. holds veto power, and it does exercise it in favor of Israel.”

Naqvi condemned Israel’s war on Gaza. “Israel is committing one of the worst genocides in modern history, targeting an entire population. This is a huge issue. Nothing is being done against Israel, even though they’re clearly in the wrong.”

He also recognized the increasing global pressure and international efforts gaining momentum in support of Palestine. “There have already been efforts from some countries for quite some time, and now it’s gaining momentum.”

Dr Nausheen Wasi of Karachi University’s international relations department offered a broader geopolitical analysis, suggesting that global public opinion is increasingly influencing political leaders, particularly in democratic and progressive regimes that are now being criticized for their double standards on Palestine and Israel. “They are doing it to placate Palestine supporters in their domestic constituencies,” she said.  

“While authoritarianism is expected from regimes like China and Russia, the West’s image is now deeply compromised. This erosion of credibility is forcing Western powers to reconsider their global strategies,” she said.

Referring to the October 7 Hamas attack, she said that the Western response to the subsequent Israeli military actions turned global public opinion strongly anti-Western, especially due to the scale of Palestinian suffering.

Wasi warned of a broader systemic change in the international order. “If the rules-based global order erodes completely, the question arises: what comes next? This is a concern for scholars and policymakers alike.”

She also stressed the legal complexities around UN membership, echoing Kiyani’s concerns about veto powers and structural imbalances in global governance.

“Even if a people assert their right to self-determination under international law, real authority and recognition remain elusive without political will. Palestine doesn’t automatically gain full membership — and we’ve seen this play out before,” she added.

Finally, she pointed to the changing calculations of developing countries, which no longer see alignment with the West as their only path. “Globalization as we knew it may be ending. Developing countries are now taking a more realist approach — turning to China, the West, or elsewhere, based solely on their national interest.”