Good morning. Canada’s recognition of Palestine is a political message in search of a peace plan – more on that below, along with a cabinet minister’s hot-mic moment and Jimmy Kimmel’s return. But first:
Today’s headlinesOpen this photo in gallery:
French President Emmanuel Macron and Saudi Arabian Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan shake hands at the UN General Assembly yesterday.Spencer Platt/Getty Images
Middle EastRecognition meets reality
After months of closed-door diplomacy from French President Emmanuel Macron and Saudi officials, roughly a dozen countries – including Canada, Britain, France and Australia – formally recognized Palestinian statehood yesterday at the United Nations General Assembly. “A solution exists to break the cycle of war and devastation,” Macron told the conference. “The time for peace has come.”
Prime Minister Mark Carney said that recognizing Palestine “doesn’t legitimize terrorism,” pushing back against the accusations of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and U.S. President Donald Trump. But whether the gesture will shift anything on the ground is far less clear. To better understand what’s behind this diplomatic step – and what it might mean for Gaza, Israel and Washington – I spoke with Thomas Juneau, an associate professor of public and international affairs at the University of Ottawa who specializes in Middle East security.
How should we understand the move by Canada and its allies to recognize Palestinian statehood?
It’s the product of several converging trends. One is impatience with the current Israeli government, which is continuing its war in Gaza. There’s a growing despair at the prospects for a two-state solution, which remains, in the eyes of Canada and its allies, the only plausible solution to achieve peace and security for Israelis and Palestinians. Part of the rationale of this announcement is to try to support the Palestinian Authority and reinforce its role in an eventual peace process.
Is the Palestinian Authority – led by Mahmoud Abbas for the past two decades – a credible partner for peace?
The Palestinian Authority has officially been the partner for peace for Israel since the Oslo process in the 1990s. There has been an international push for reform in the Palestinian Authority, but it has been very timid, and it has not worked. Part of the challenge is that the Palestinian Authority is weak. It is fragmented. It is corrupt and it suffers from a heavy legitimacy crisis in the eyes of Palestinians themselves. But there’s no alternative. If there is to be a peace process between Israel and the Palestinians, it has to be with the Palestinian Authority, as flawed as it is.
Does recognizing Palestinian statehood lead to new obligations for Canada when it comes to Israel’s actions in Gaza or the West Bank?
There’s a lot of fuzziness as to what exactly the legal obligations would be for countries that recognize Palestine. I think that states like Canada will maintain the flexibility that suits them in terms of managing whatever obligations there could be. And I think the reality is that, at least for now, these obligations will be very limited.
So the impact is muted. Last week, a UN inquiry found that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. Is there still a place for symbolic gestures?
On the ground, there is no concrete impact. And states that recognized Palestine have acknowledged that. So it does raise the obvious question: What’s the point, then? Isn’t it just performative? If this gesture is not accompanied with a serious push for a broader peace process, then it will have been nothing more than symbolic. The challenge is that as long as Israel and the U.S. are not on board with a two-state solution, and as long as Hamas remains potent enough to play the role of violent spoiler, the chances of success are limited.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks at a press conference in Jerusalem last week.Nathan Howard/Reuters
Is the U.S. inclined to get on board? Trump seems pretty laissez-faire about Israel’s conduct, even though Netanyahu bombed Iran without Washington’s initial buy-in and gave it little warning before attacking Hamas leadership in Qatar.
As is often the case with Trump, his perspective on this issue defies easy categorization. He has, by and large, been very pro-Netanyahu. That said, since Trump has been back in power, he has also openly expressed irritation with Netanyahu. And there have been some media reports that Trump was annoyed with those attacks. Is that enough to think that Trump could seriously push the Netanyahu government to invest in a peace process? I’m not optimistic. But if the rumours are true that Trump desperately wants a Nobel Peace Prize, this would really be his shot.
Absent Trump’s desire for a Peace Prize, what constraints are on Netanyahu?
There’s a lot of talk in Europe right now of adding sanctions on Israel, perhaps even threatening to suspend some trade agreements or boycott products produced in occupied territories. For now, I’m skeptical much of that will happen, because politically, it has already been quite an investment just to come up with recognition of a Palestinian state. Germany and Italy in particular are opposed to any kind of sanction on Israel.
Domestically, Netanyahu leads a coalition government that includes two far-right extremist parties who have very clearly said that if there is a ceasefire in Gaza – let alone a peace process and any prospect of a Palestinian state – they will leave the government. That would cause his coalition to fall, which would then expose him to his corruption trials. Netanyahu probably does believe, to some extent, that there shouldn’t be a two-state solution. But there’s a good case to be made that he doesn’t really have any ideology beyond his own political survival.
What will you watch for next?
We need to watch Israel’s reaction and whether there will be retaliation toward states that recognize Palestinian statehood. I will be watching very closely – not just in the short term – for reforms in the Palestinian Authority. And then: How will the U.S. react towards Canada for recognizing Palestine? If there’s an angry tweet from Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Canada can absolutely manage that. But if the American reaction starts having material implications, then a very difficult calculus comes up for us.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
The Shot‘We’re kinder to each other. Our relationship is deeper.’Open this photo in gallery:
The McDougall Creek wildfire spread in West Kelowna, B.C., two years ago.DARREN HULL/Getty Images
Over the summer, Canadian wildfires chewed through an area the size of New Brunswick. Survivors of past blazes – from Fort McMurray to Lytton to Jasper – spoke with The Globe about what they learned from the devastation.
The WrapWhat else we’re following
At home: Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree – recorded this weekend calling the Liberals’ gun policies politically motivated and unenforceable – now says his comments were “misguided.”
Abroad: Donald Trump advised Americans not to take Tylenol while they’re pregnant, though there’s no clear link between its use and rising autism rates.
Back on: ABC announced that Jimmy Kimmel will be back on the air tonight after a brief suspension that prompted a serious backlash.
Knocked off: If the Labubu craze seems to be cooling, counterfeit toys (known as “Lafufus”) could be to blame.
In transit: Montreal bus and subway service could be disrupted for the next two weeks as maintenance workers go on strike.
In trouble: Restaurants across Canada are under financial pressure from rising costs and fewer people dining out.