How can Western countries back up Palestine recognition with action? Here are 4 ways to pressure Israel

Italian Defence Minister Guido Crosetto said recently^[1] the Israeli cabinet has “lost its reason and humanity” in Gaza, reflecting a widespread view around the world.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s staunch defiance over the Gaza war has led many Western states to recognise the state of Palestine in recent weeks. More could come before the UN General Assembly meeting in September, too.

These Western leaders have used strong words to push for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. As Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong said^[2] when Australia pledged to recognise Palestine:

There is a risk there will be no Palestine left to recognise if the international community don’t move to create that pathway to a two-state solution.

Recognition of a Palestinian state sends a strong message of the world’s revulsion to the Netanyahu government’s actions in Gaza. However, it is unlikely to make much of a difference on the ground without Israel and the United States agreeing to move forward on a two-state solution.

So, how can Western states give teeth to their recent pledges to recognise a Palestinian state? What kind of pressure would actually work?

1. Suspend trade deals and arms exports

Israel is by no means self-sufficient. It is very much dependent on the US for its defence capability and economic and financial wellbeing, as well as military supplies coming directly and indirectly from other Western countries.

Germany has now taken the lead in this respect by suspending^[3] military exports to Israel over its decision to expand the war. Slovenia also banned^[4] all weapons trade with Israel this month.

Other Western nations should be more transparent^[5] about the exports of specific parts to a global supply chain^[6] that Israel can access, such as those for F-35 jets^[7], and be willing to block these.

In addition, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez has advocated^[8] for the European Union to suspend its trade deal with Israel for breaching an article “on respect for human rights and democratic principles”.

Suspending the deal in full would require unanimous agreement among all 27 EU members. A partial suspension^[9] is possible, however, if just 15 EU members agree.

Read more: EU sanctions against Israel: here’s what’s on the table^[10]

2. A strong US stand on a two-state solution

Western states could also put pressure on US President Donald Trump to persuade Israel that its future peace and prosperity depends on a two-state solution.

The US has long supported^[11] a two-state solution as a core policy. However, the US ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, recently suggested^[12] this might be changing. Trump has not endorsed^[13] a two-state solution nor a new US position on it.

Given Netanyahu’s long-held opposition to a two-state solution, this might be a tough sell. However, Trump could be compelled to take a firm stand on the issue, given American public opinion is gradually shifting^[14] against Israel.

This is also reflected in assertions by some key MAGA supporters, such as the strategist Steve Bannon, Congresswoman Margorie Taylor Greene and media personality Tucker Carlson, as well as some far-right podcasters. They have questioned^[15] America’s support of Israel and, in some cases, called for an end to American aid to the country.

Trump is a transactional leader and could be amenable to pressure from his base and outside allies.

3. Push for an oil embargo

An oil embargo on Israel and its supporters is another means of pressure.

Earlier this year, Israel granted exploration licenses^[16] for natural gas deposits off its coast to a consortium of oil companies, including British Petroleum (BP) and Azerbaijan’s SOCAR.

Israel imports nearly three-quarters^[17] of its crude oil from three countries: Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Gabon. It relies^[18] on this crude oil and refined petroleum to fuel its fighter jets, tanks and bulldozers.

Gabon is a member of the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC); Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan are part of an expanded group called OPEC+.

The Organisation of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries (part of OPEC) implemented such an embargo^[19] against the United States and other countries in 1973 in retaliation for supporting Israel in the 1973 Arab-Israeli War and its seizure of Egyptian and Syrian land afterwards. Israel itself was cut off, too.

It proved effective. The embargo prompted Henry Kissinger, then-national security advisor in the Nixon administration, to engage in “shuttle diplomacy^[20]” between Israel, Egypt and Syria. This led to force disengagement agreements in early 1974, and the lifting of the oil embargo.

It also contributed to the diplomatic path that eventually resulted in the Camp David Accords^[21] between Israel and Egypt, with US President Jimmy Carter’s mediation, in 1978.

Under the accords, Israel withdrew from the Sinai Peninsula in return for a peace treaty with Egypt. A framework for Palestinian autonomy and self-government was also agreed to. However, subsequent talks on the path forward broke down^[22] for a number of reasons – among them Israel’s refusal to make concessions on key issues – much to Carter’s fury^[23].

Israel also refused to withdraw from Syria’s Golan Heights, which it later annexed.

4. Move to suspend Israel from the UN

A final option is the threat of suspending Israel from the United Nations. This has been advocated by the UN special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories, Francisca Albanese^[24], and Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim^[25].

Suspending a member from the UN is not easy. It requires^[26] the consent of the General Assembly, as well as the recommendation of the Security Council, which counts Israel’s steadfast ally, the US, as a member.

Nonetheless, the forthcoming UN General Assembly meeting in September would be a suitable time to heighten this threat. The assembly’s resolutions are not binding, but it is still a tool for the international community to apply pressure.

In the 1970s, for example, the General Assembly moved to suspend^[27] South Africa’s membership over its apartheid system of government. Although the Security Council blocked South Africa’s expulsion, it remained suspended in the General Assembly until 1994.

These measures are now needed to maximise the pressure on Netanyahu’s leadership to relent on a two-state solution. Whether Western countries have the political will to go beyond mere recognition and implement them is another question.

References

1. ^{^} said recently (www.thenationalnews.com)
2. ^{^} said (www.theguardian.com)
3. ^{^} suspending (www.aljazeera.com)
4. ^{^} banned (www.aljazeera.com)
5. ^{^} more transparent (www.abc.net.au)
6. ^{^} global supply chain (www.theguardian.com)
7. ^{^} those for F-35 jets (www.bbc.com)
8. ^{^} advocated (www.dw.com)
9. ^{^} partial suspension (www.dw.com)
10. ^{^} EU sanctions against Israel: here’s what’s on the table (theconversation.com)
11. ^{^} long supported (theconversation.com)
12. ^{^} suggested (theconversation.com)
13. ^{^} not endorsed (thehill.com)
14. ^{^} gradually shifting (news.gallup.com)
15. ^{^} questioned (www.afr.com)
16. ^{^} granted exploration licenses (www.euronews.com)
17. ^{^} three-quarters (oilchange.org)
18. ^{^} relies (www.theguardian.com)
19. ^{^} embargo (history.state.gov)
20. ^{^} shuttle diplomacy (history.state.gov)
21. ^{^} Camp David Accords (history.state.gov)
22. ^{^} broke down (www.thecairoreview.com)
23. ^{^} fury (www.democracynow.org)
24. ^{^} Francisca Albanese (www.theguardian.com)
25. ^{^} Anwar Ibrahim (www.scmp.com)
26. ^{^} requires (theconversation.com)
27. ^{^} moved to suspend (theconversation.com)