International Recognition of Palestine

Recognition by individual states is distinct from Palestine's status inside the United Nations. The UN can admit members but does not itself confer bilateral recognition, and full membership requires a favorable Security Council recommendation followed by General Assembly approval.[5][6]

Palestine currently holds non-member observer-state status. It may participate in General Assembly debates and co-sponsor draft resolutions, but it cannot vote or call for a vote and is not a full UN member.[1][7]

On November 29, 1947, the UN General Assembly adopted the Partition Plan for Palestine by 33 votes in favor, 13 against, and 10 abstentions, with one state absent. The resolution recommended independent Arab and Jewish states and a special international regime for Jerusalem. The Jewish population welcomed the decision; the Arabs rejected it, and the resulting violence led into Israel's War of Independence.[8]

The Palestine Liberation Organization received permanent UN observer status in 1974. In 1988, the General Assembly directed that the designation “Palestine” replace “Palestine Liberation Organization” in UN documents, and in 1998 it expanded the delegation's rights to participate in general debates, raise points of order, and co-sponsor draft resolutions.[9]

On November 15, 1988, the Palestine National Council convened in Algiers and declared an independent Palestinian state. It based the declaration on international documents and resolutions and proclaimed a state “on our Palestinian soil, with its capital in Jerusalem.”[10] Algeria became the first country to recognize the declared state that day.[11] A Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs tabulation states that 82 recognitions occurred during November and December 1988.[12]

On December 15, 1988, the General Assembly adopted Resolution 43/177 by 104 votes in favor, 2 against, and 36 abstentions.[6] It acknowledged the proclamation, affirmed the need to enable the Palestinian people to exercise sovereignty over territory occupied since 1967, and decided that “Palestine” would replace “Palestine Liberation Organization” in the UN system while preserving the PLO's observer status.[1] The resolution did not grant UN membership or itself create statehood.[6]

The same JCPA tabulation counts 100 recognitions between February 1988 and November 1995, 11 more from 1996 through 2010, and another 27 from 2011 through 2019.[12] The Soviet Union recognized an independent Palestinian state in 1988; during a 2011 visit to Jericho, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev reiterated support for an independent Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital.[13]

The Palestinian leadership applied for full UN membership in September 2011. The application went to the Security Council's Committee on the Admission of New Members, which could not reach a unanimous recommendation. The bid also lacked the nine affirmative Security Council votes required to advance it and was unsuccessful.[12]

Admission requires at least nine affirmative Security Council votes without a veto from any permanent member, followed by General Assembly approval.[5] The 2011 result demonstrated that the General Assembly could not admit Palestine without prior Security Council action.

On November 29, 2012, the General Assembly adopted Resolution 67/19 by 138 votes in favor, 9 against, and 41 abstentions.[1] The United States and Israel were among the countries voting against it. The resolution changed the PLO's UN designation from an observer “entity” to a “non-member state” designated as “Palestine.”[7]

Palestine retained the ability to participate in General Assembly debates and co-sponsor draft resolutions and decisions.[7] It could not vote or call for a vote, present candidacies to UN bodies, or bring a case to the International Court of Justice in the same manner as a member state.[5] The Congressional Research Service characterized the change as “largely symbolic.”[7]

The resolution's significance for Palestinian statehood remained contested. The UN grants membership rather than creating states, and UN status is distinct from bilateral recognition.[6][12] An Institute for National Security Studies analysis argued that recognition is declarative rather than constitutive and that the General Assembly could not itself create a state, while noting that recognition by important states could have practical consequences for Palestinian statehood and Israel's freedom of action.[14] A JCPA analysis likewise distinguished the 2012 status upgrade from legal or factual recognition of a Palestinian state.[12]

On April 2, 2024, the Palestinian observer asked the UN Secretary-General to resume consideration of the 2011 membership application.[5] Algeria introduced a Security Council resolution on April 18. Slovenia, Sierra Leone, Russia, South Korea, Mozambique, Malta, Japan, Guyana, France, Ecuador, China, and Algeria voted in favor; the United Kingdom and Switzerland abstained, and the United States vetoed it.[5]

U.S. Ambassador Robert Wood said the vote did not represent opposition to Palestinian statehood but reflected the U.S. position that statehood should result from direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.[15] The Palestinian Authority criticized the veto and said it would reconsider its relationship with the United States.[16]

On May 10, 2024, the General Assembly adopted a resolution by 143 votes to 9, with 25 abstentions. It determined that the State of Palestine was qualified for membership and recommended that the Security Council reconsider its application favorably.[17][5]

The resolution did not grant full membership or a General Assembly vote. It preserved Palestine's non-member observer status while granting additional procedural rights, including a seat among member states, the ability to submit proposals, and participation in UN-agency and committee forums.[5][16]

The United States opposed the resolution, arguing that Palestinian statehood should result from a negotiated two-state solution and that the Palestinian Authority did not yet meet the UN's statehood criteria.[16] The source also reported uncertainty over whether the General Assembly could grant an observer rights associated with full membership. World Jewish Congress President Ronald S. Lauder called the vote premature and argued that a two-state solution should result from direct negotiations rather than external imposition.[17]

Norway, Ireland, and Spain announced recognition of a State of Palestine on May 22, 2024, with recognition formalized on May 28.[18] A Jewish People Policy Research report described these coordinated moves as a possible turning point in international diplomacy.[19]

Spain described the recognized entity as a unified state comprising the Gaza Strip and the West Bank — known by its original, indigenous Jewish name of Judea and Samaria — with East Jerusalem as its capital and the Palestinian Authority as its governing authority. Ireland announced plans for full diplomatic relations and an embassy in Ramallah.[20] Ireland's then-prime minister, Simon Harris, said recognition “gives hope” that a two-state solution will eventually be implemented.[21]

Slovenia followed on June 4. Its parliament voted 52-0 for recognition after opposition members left the session, producing 38 abstentions in the 90-member legislature.[22] Armenia recognized Palestinian statehood on June 21, becoming the fifth country to do so in 2024 and, according to the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, the 145th overall.[18] Armenia linked its decision to General Assembly resolutions calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza. Israel summoned Armenia's ambassador for a reprimand and characterized the move as a reward for terrorism after the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack; the Palestinian Authority and Hamas welcomed it.[18]

Mosaic observed that the 2024 recognitions did not end the Israel-Hamas war, improve Gaza's humanitarian situation, or produce a noticeable change in Palestinian political arrangements.[21]

A further Western recognition wave occurred around the 80th session of the General Assembly in September 2025. In July, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced that the United Kingdom would recognize a Palestinian state at the session unless Israel took substantive steps to address the situation in Gaza, agree to a ceasefire, and commit to a sustainable peace process. French President Emmanuel Macron, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, and Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese were also identified as leaders moving toward recognition.[19]

Britain, Canada, Portugal, and Australia announced recognition on September 21.[4] France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, and Andorra followed on September 22 during a conference associated with the France-Saudi declaration on implementing a two-state solution.[4] A separate JCPA account also listed San Marino among the September 2025 recognizing states.[23]

The Jewish Virtual Library reported that the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia recognized before the conference, while Andorra, Belgium, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Portugal, and San Marino did so during it. It counted 157 of the 193 UN member states as recognizing Palestine in September 2025.[2] On September 26, Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan gave a figure of 159.[4] An AFP tally reported by the Times of Israel counted at least 145 as of September 22, illustrating variation by methodology and reporting date.[11]

The recognitions followed a July 28–30 New York conference co-chaired by France and Saudi Arabia and associated with a declaration on implementing the two-state solution.[23] Supporters argued that recognition could help preserve the possibility of a negotiated two-state solution.[24]

Recognition has developed in several waves rather than through a single uniform process. A JCPA tabulation places 82 recognitions in November and December 1988, with the Soviet Union among the states recognizing Palestine that year.[13][12] Another 27 countries were counted as recognizing Palestine between 2011 and 2019.[12]

Latin American states adopted differing formulations. Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador, and Paraguay referred to borders existing before the 1967 Six-Day War, while Chile and Peru said borders should be resolved by Israelis and Palestinians. Uruguay communicated recognition without specifying borders so as not to prejudge an issue requiring bilateral agreement.[25] Peru separately recognized Palestine as “free and sovereign” without specifying borders.[13]

Russia has continued the Soviet recognition and has voiced support for Palestinian statehood. The more recent change has involved Western European and English-speaking states. The 2024–2025 recognizers included Ireland, Norway, Spain, Slovenia, the United Kingdom, France, Canada, Australia, Belgium, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal, and several smaller European states.[2][19] The United States and Germany did not join those recognition waves.[4]

Israel opposes unilateral international recognition of Palestinian statehood. In February 2024, the Knesset endorsed the government's position by 99 votes to 11, stating that a permanent settlement should be reached through direct negotiations. The resolution argued that unilateral recognition after the October 7 Hamas terrorist attack would reward terrorism and undermine a future peace settlement.[3]

Israel has also responded diplomatically to individual recognitions. After Armenia's June 2024 decision, Israel summoned the Armenian ambassador for a reprimand.[18] The Israeli position is that recognition outside negotiations removes incentives for Palestinian leaders to reach a bilateral agreement.

The United States has expressed a related position. In treaty-accession objections, it stated that it did not believe the “State of Palestine” qualified as a sovereign state, did not recognize it as such, and did not consider Palestine a UN member.[26] During the September 2025 wave, the United States described recognition as a “reward for Hamas,” while the secretary of state argued that recognition without negotiations could undermine negotiated agreements.[4]

Germany argued that a two-state solution could be achieved only through negotiations. France, by contrast, presented recognition as an effort to prevent further civilian deaths, displacement, annexation, hostage deaths, and an irreversible situation on the ground.[4]

The Montevideo Convention's commonly cited statehood criteria are a permanent population, defined territory, government, and capacity to enter relations with other states. Recognition by states, UN observer status, and full UN membership remain separate legal and political questions.[12]

The constitutive theory holds that recognition by other states creates statehood, while the declaratory theory treats recognition as acknowledgment of an existing factual and legal situation. A JCPA legal analysis states that international practice predominantly follows the declaratory theory.[27] An INSS analysis similarly argued that the 2012 General Assembly decision could not create a state, although recognition by important states could have practical consequences.[14]

The 2012 designation of Palestine as a non-member observer state therefore upgraded its representation but did not constitute full membership or the legal equivalent of bilateral recognition.[12] A May 11, 1948 U.S. State Department memorandum had framed recognition as a separate decision, concluding that Arab and Jewish communities could proclaim states and organize governments in areas they occupied and that the United States would be free to recognize them, while neither community could proclaim a unitary state for all Palestine without the other's consent.[28]

Widespread recognition does not by itself resolve questions of territorial control, borders, effective government, or the relationship between Gaza and the Palestinian Authority. The Palestinian Authority does not control Gaza, while its statehood claim encompasses both territories.[5][12]

A Jewish People Policy Research report published after the September 2025 General Assembly session noted that several Western allies of Israel and the United States had recognized a Palestinian state. Supporters argued that recognition could preserve the possibility of a two-state solution, while Israel and the United States opposed the move.[24]

Among British Jews, support for the proposition that a two-state solution is the only way Israel will achieve peace with its neighbors fell to 49% in 2025, from 54% in 2024 and 78% in 2010.[29] The report places the recognition debate within this broader decline in confidence.

The inclusion of the United Kingdom, France, Canada, and Australia broadened recognition among Western allies. JPR described the earlier 2024 shift toward recognition as a possible turning point in international diplomacy.[19]

The count of recognizing states varies by date and methodology. A 2017 JCPA analysis reported 136 UN members plus two non-member states.[27] A later JCPA article referred to 147 UN countries as “ostensibly” recognizing Palestine.[12] The Foundation for Defense of Democracies counted 145 overall after Armenia's June 2024 recognition, while the Jewish Virtual Library reported 157 UN members in September 2025.[2][18] Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan gave a figure of 159 on September 26, whereas an AFP tally reported by the Times of Israel counted at least 145 on September 22.[11][4]

The effect of recognition on negotiations is also disputed. Israel and the United States argue that unilateral recognition after the October 7 Hamas terrorist attack rewards terrorism, reduces incentives to negotiate, and prejudges issues reserved for bilateral agreement.[3][4] Supporters, including several European governments, argue that recognition affirms the viability of a two-state solution and creates diplomatic pressure for negotiations.[20][24]

Recognizing states have not used a uniform legal formulation. Some referred to pre-1967 lines; others left borders for negotiations. Spain identified the Palestinian Authority as governing authority for a unified state encompassing Gaza and the West Bank, although the territories are controlled by rival Palestinian authorities.[20][25]

The May 2024 General Assembly resolution was additionally criticized on the ground that the Assembly might lack authority to grant an observer rights associated with full membership. The same source reported that the United States opposed the measure on both legal and policy grounds.[16]