Hostage families in Gaza and a freed captive have publicly criticized the United Kingdom and France for their decision to recognize a Palestinian state, which they believe could undermine the efforts to secure the release of hostages still held by Hamas. Families of the captives argue that recognizing a state while the fighting continues in Gaza is a dangerous step that legitimizes the actions of the terrorist group, which has held 50 individuals for 663 days without a ceasefire or significant progress in resolving the conflict.
The backlash follows statements by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who announced that the UK will formally recognize a Palestinian state at the UN General Assembly in September, provided Israel agrees to a ceasefire, halts hostilities, and commits to a sustainable two-state solution. France has also moved to recognize Palestine with similar conditions, prompting several other countries—including Malta, Andorra, and New Zealand—to declare their support for the initiative. The Netherlands, which has traditionally been Israel’s most supportive ally in the EU, has also signaled a shift in its position.
Emily Damari, a former captive who survived Hamas captivity, expressed her deep disappointment with Starmer’s decision, warning that such recognition sends a message that violence and terror can lead to statehood. She emphasized that hostages, still suffering from the effects of Hamas’s captivity, should not be used as a foundation for establishing a new state. The Hostages and Missing Families Forum, representing the families of those still held, has also condemned the recognition, calling it a ‘dangerous moral and political failure’ that violates international law and encourages further conflict.
In addition, President Donald Trump has not endorsed the recognition plan, suggesting that it is a political decision rather than a step toward peace. U.S. diplomat Dennis Ross has also warned that recognizing a state without clear conditions could lead to instability, emphasizing the need for leaders committed to coexistence, non-violence, and the recognition of historic Jewish ties to the land.
The international response to these recognition efforts has been mixed, with critics claiming it risks prolonging the conflict rather than resolving it. The ongoing situation in Gaza continues to raise questions about the effectiveness of diplomatic initiatives, especially when the immediate goal—securing the release of hostages—remains unaddressed.
Meanwhile, the recognition of a Palestinian state by the UK, France, and other nations has sparked concerns among some policymakers that these efforts may not address the core issues in the region. Critics argue that without a resolution to the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, including the release of all hostages and a ceasefire, any recognition of statehood would be seen as an endorsement of the current situation, rather than a step toward peace. The international community now faces the challenge of balancing diplomatic recognition with the urgent need for humanitarian aid and political reconciliation.
As the situation continues to evolve, the pressure on both Israel and Hamas to engage in meaningful negotiations grows. The recognition of Palestine by multiple countries could influence how the international community approaches the conflict in the coming months, but it also highlights the growing divide in how different nations view the potential for peace and the role of statehood in resolving the Israel-Palestine conflict.
With the U.S. remaining divided on the issue, and the European Union showing signs of divergence, the global response to the recognition of Palestine remains a focal point of ongoing political and diplomatic discussions. The question of whether this recognition will lead to a lasting resolution or further entrench the conflict remains an open one, as the world watches the situation in Gaza unfold.