The Quest for Palestinian Statehood: What to Know

The Quest for Palestinian Statehood: What to Know

A boy holds a Palestinian flag on top of a mound of rubble in the central Gaza Strip.
A boy holds a Palestinian flag on top of a mound of rubble in the central Gaza Strip. Eyad Baba/AFP/Getty Images

Palestinians have pursued statehood for over a century. As the Israel-Hamas war in the Gaza Strip continues, several countries have recognized the Palestinian territories as a sovereign nation—but many hurdles stand in the way of full independence and UN membership.  

Last updated September 23, 2025 2:25 pm (EST)

A boy holds a Palestinian flag on top of a mound of rubble in the central Gaza Strip.
A boy holds a Palestinian flag on top of a mound of rubble in the central Gaza Strip. Eyad Baba/AFP/Getty Images
Article
Current political and economic issues succinctly explained.

The Palestinian territories have been in a state of political limbo for decades, and Palestinians’ desire for independence and international recognition remains deeply contentious. Since Israel declared its independence in 1948, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank have been at the center of recurring conflict with Israel over competing claims about borders and Palestinian sovereignty. 

More From Our Experts

As the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip continues, several countries—including Australia, Belgium, Canada, France, and the United Kingdom (UK)—have recognized Palestinian statehood ahead of and during the annual UN General Assembly (UNGA). Here’s what this could mean for the region and how it could affect international order and diplomacy in the ongoing war.

More on:

Palestinian Territories

Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Middle East

Wars and Conflict

In his announcement to formally recognize a Palestinian state—although a largely symbolic move—Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said this decision by his country, Canada, and the UK is “part of a coordinated international effort to build new momentum for a two-state solution.” 

Here’s what it could mean for the region and how it could affect international order and diplomacy in the ongoing war.

Why has there been a renewed push toward recognizing a Palestinian state?

The increased calls for statehood have come ahead of September’s UNGA and reflect countries’ increasing concerns over the increasingly dire humanitarian conditions for Palestinians caught in the middle of Israel’s war against Hamas.

More From Our Experts

That war was sparked by Hamas’s October 7, 2023, surprise attack on southern Israel, prompting Israel to launch a military campaign to eradicate the group. Israel’s nearly two-year campaign has destroyed large swathes of Gaza and severely limited aid to the enclave, which aid groups contend has pushed it toward famine. (In August, the UN-backed global hunger monitor declared that an “entirely man-made” famine is occurring in and around Gaza City, the enclave’s largest population center.) 

More than one hundred of these groups have accused Israel of weaponizing aid, pointing to the hundreds of people who they say have died from hunger or been killed while trying to get food. The Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry has put the overall death toll in the enclave at more than sixty thousand out of a population of two million—a figure which Israel challenges.

More on:

Palestinian Territories

Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Middle East

Wars and Conflict

The handful of countries changing their position on statehood—notably close U.S. allies such as Australia, Belgium, Canada, France, and the UK—have cited the deteriorating situation in Gaza as the reason for the shift. France’s foreign minister said in a statement that “after twenty-two months of fruitless attempts, we cannot hope for a lasting ceasefire without sketching out a shared vision for what comes after the war in Gaza.” Likewise, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese justified his country’s push for Palestinian independence as “humanity’s best hope to break the cycle of violence in the Middle East and to bring an end to the conflict, suffering, and starvation in Gaza.” 

The day after Canada formally recognized Palestinian statehood, Prime Minister Mark Carney spoke at CFR about the imperative for a two-state solution, saying the prospect is “receding before our eyes.”  

“We have to push on this now, because, as I say, the possibility—in absolute violation of the UN Charter and an absolute violation of international law—of self-determination for the Palestinian people is being erased,” Carney said.

French President Emmanuel Macron echoed these concerns at UNGA, saying that “we must do everything within our power” to work toward “Israel and Palestine living side by side in peace and security.” 

Leaders have announced their countries’ policy shifts after many faced intense internal pressure from their populations. Each of those countries has constituencies largely critical of Israel, CFR Middle East expert Steven Cook said. “The situation [in Gaza] is really bad. I think leaders feel like they need to do something, so they have decided to recognize a Palestinian state.”

Though humanitarian concerns dominate public rhetoric, some experts suggest domestic politics are the real driver. “Recognition of Palestine is not just, or even mostly, a foreign policy issue in countries like Australia, the UK, or France, where Muslims outnumber Jews by ten to one or more,” CFR Middle East expert Elliott Abrams told CFR. “It is a domestic political move meant to appeal to the Muslim voting block.”

Does the United States recognize Palestinian statehood? 

Each U.S. president since 1993, except Donald Trump, has expressed support for a two-state solution, but it wasn’t formally adopted as U.S. policy until the George W. Bush administration in 2002. Still, no president has committed to unilaterally recognizing an independent Palestinian state before a negotiated Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement is reached. After the outbreak of the Israel-Hamas war, former President Joe Biden declined to definitively support Palestinian statehood, while Trump has opposed it. Meanwhile, a Reuters/Ipsos poll from August showed that nearly 60 percent of Americans believe that all UN members should recognize a Palestinian state.

The Trump administration has rebuked recent efforts to establish two-state solution, calling them “a slap in the face to the victims of October 7 and a reward for terrorism,” and saying it would “not participate in this insult but continue to lead real-world efforts to end the fighting.” In line with this posture, the administration stopped issuing most kinds of visitor visas to Palestinian passport holders starting in August, according to the New York Times. The decision effectively bars Palestinians, including senior officials, from attending UNGA or traveling to the United States for business, education, or medical purposes. A State Department spokesperson said the move was in line with U.S. national security interests, without providing details. 

How many countries recognize a Palestinian state?

As of September 2025, 156 of the 193 UN member states have diplomatically recognized a Palestinian state. A few prominent holdouts include the United States—Israel’s biggest ally—as well as other Group of Seven powers like Germany, Italy, and Japan. 

France was the first country to announce in late July that it would unconditionally recognize a Palestinian state at UNGA in September. This was quickly followed by the UK, then Canada, Australia, and Belgium, each of which attached conditions to their support, including the territories’ demilitarization, promises to hold elections, return of Hamas-held hostages, and the exclusion of Hamas from future governance structures. Meanwhile, another fifteen foreign ministers—including those from Ireland, Norway, and Spain—have expressed interest in reviving a two-state solution. 

Each U.S. president since 1993, except for Trump, has expressed support for a two-state solution, but it wasn’t formally adopted as U.S. policy until the George W. Bush administration in 2002. Still, no president has committed to unilaterally recognizing an independent Palestinian state before a negotiated peace agreement with Israel. Since the outbreak of the Israel-Hamas war, both Presidents Joe Biden and Trump have not taken a definitive stance on supporting statehood. In contrast, a Reuters/Ipsos poll from August shows that nearly 60 percent of Americans believe that all UN members should recognize a Palestinian state.

The Israeli government staunchly opposes the idea, and polling reveals little support among Israel’s population. July 2025 data revealed that only 23 percent [PDF] of Jewish Israelis support a two-state solution compared to 82 percent of Arab Israelis. Similarly, a May 2025 poll by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research found that more than half of Palestinians also oppose the two-state framework.

What’s the history of Palestinian statehood at the United Nations?

In October 1974, the United Nations adopted Resolution 3210 (XXIX) [PDF], recognizing the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as the sole and legitimate “representative of the Palestinian people.” Days later, the General Assembly granted the PLO observer status, allowing it to participate in the assembly and other UN bodies. (Though it’s not formally in the UN Charter, the practice of granting observer status dates to 1946.) 

In 1975, the General Assembly established the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People—composed of twenty-five members and twenty-four observers—to promote Palestinians’ right to self-determination, sovereignty, and national independence. By 1988, following a Palestinian declaration of independence, the designation “Palestine” officially replaced PLO within the UN system.

The Palestinian territories made progress in their bid for membership in 2012 by gaining non-member permanent observer status—the same as that for the Holy See. This status, granted by the General Assembly via majority vote, allows the Palestinian delegation to participate in all UN proceedings and maintain a mission at the UN Headquarters in New York. However, it is still unable to vote on Security Council resolutions and decisions.

Since then, the United Nations has continued to adopt resolutions on the Palestinian territories, including those relating to the advancement of Palestinian rights, the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the broader status of Palestine within the UN system. To date, the Palestinian delegation has joined several core UN human rights treaties, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and is party to major institutions such as the International Criminal Court. But despite overwhelming support for Palestinian statehood in the General Assembly, full UN membership remains out of reach due to opposition within the Security Council—primarily from the United States.

What is the UN process for granting full membership?

A state seeking UN membership must first apply to the secretary-general, who forwards the application to the Security Council. The application needs to obtain affirmation from at least nine of the Council’s fifteen members and avoid a veto from any of the five permanent members. If successful, the application moves to the General Assembly, where a two-thirds majority vote is required for final approval.

In 2011, Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian Authority (PA)—a separate legal institution that primarily administers parts of the West Bank—applied for full UN membership for the Palestinian territories. However, his bid ultimately stalled in the Security Council. The PA renewed its request for membership in 2024, but it failed to advance after the United States vetoed the application. U.S. officials have argued that membership should come only through direct negotiations between the PA and Israel, rather than via unilateral action at the United Nations. Even if the Palestinian territories were to gain independence, that would not automatically grant full UN membership—and vice versa.

Is Palestinian statehood achievable? 

The idea of a two-state solution has long been a central component of peace efforts, primarily through the 1993 Oslo Accords—a series of agreements aimed at creating mutual recognition between Israel and the PLO, establishing self-governance for Palestinians (though the Accords do not mention statehood), and achieving a peaceful resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But experts contend that it will take a lot more than a handful of countries making sweeping announcements supporting statehood for actual independence in Gaza. Another complicating factor is the fragmented state of Palestinian leadership, divided between Hamas in Gaza and the PA in the West Bank, with little sign of a unified political vision. While this division raises doubts about the feasibility of a two-state solution, some analysts argue that it could still serve broader strategic interests, including by helping the emergence of more moderate Palestinian leaders and improving Israel’s long-term security.

Cook sees the new announcements of statehood support as mostly virtue signaling. These countries are facing pressure from domestic constituencies who are against Israel’s war, but their change in policy likely won’t yield a meaningful difference for Palestinians on the ground, he said. “At this moment, there’s very, very little appetite in Israel to have a debate over a two-state solution,” Cook told CFR.

Even if most of the United Nations votes to endorse Palestinian statehood, official recognition still requires Security Council approval, a step many experts agree is unlikely due to current U.S. opposition. If the United States were to vote yes, which Cook says is certainly plausible under another leader, it’s important not to overstate the U.S. influence over Israel.

“I think that if there were a Palestinian state, there would be a broad international effort to help it be successful,” Cook said. But ultimately, “no matter what anyone does, the power lies in the hands of the Israelis.” No external state’s recognition will change the outlook on sovereignty, he said, as “the change has to come within Israeli society—but by that time, it may be too late.”  

Austin Steinhart created the graphics for this article.

Creative Commons
Creative Commons: Some rights reserved.
Close
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) License.
View License Detail
Close

Top Stories on CFR

Syria

Syrian leader Ahmed al-Sharaa makes a crucial first visit to the White House, with the reconstruction of his war-battered country at stake if he is able to persuade U.S. lawmakers to lift sanctions.  

Sudan

CFR President Michael Froman discusses the latest from the civil war in Sudan with Michelle Gavin, senior fellow for Africa policy studies.

United States

The goods trade deficit and most of its alleged negative effects are rooted in domestic policy, not trade. Rules of evidence may limit the Supreme Court to arguments formally presented, but the justices would do the nation an injustice if they did not consider the facts.