JUANA SUMMERS, HOST:
This week, the United Kingdom and Canada joined France in recently announcing plans to formally recognize a Palestinian state. These announcements came amid growing international alarm over reports of mass starvation in Gaza, the worst hunger crisis in nearly two years of war between Israel and Hamas. But if these moves were meant to pressure Israel on humanitarian aid or an end to the war, Israel and its closest ally, the United States, both dismissed them as a reward for Hamas. So does this change anything? Let's hear now from Michael Lynk, law professor emeritus at Western University in Ontario. He was also a U.N. special rapporteur for human rights in the occupied Palestinian territory from 2016 to 2022. Thank you for being here.
MICHAEL LYNK: Pleased to be here. Thank you for having me.
SUMMERS: So Michael, just to start - 147 countries, so about three-quarters of the world's countries, already recognize Palestinian statehood. So what does it mean for a country to have relations with what it calls a fellow country of Palestine?
LYNK: What it means is that countries that recognize another country recognize the sovereignty and control that that country has or should have over that territory. So for Palestine, what it would mean is if Canada and France and the United Kingdom now recognize the state of Palestine, they're recognizing its sovereignty over East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza and that they would be opposed to and probably compelled to take diplomatic action in support of Palestinian exercise of its sovereignty over those territories, which, of course, right now, are under the full control of Israel. So it would mean these countries would be opposed to infringements on that sovereignty by the 360 Israeli settlements on that territory and the thousands of Israeli troops on that territory. So it has both symbolic meaning and consequential legal and political meaning, as well.
SUMMERS: Let me ask you this. When we talk about countries like the United Kingdom, Canada and France, they are more influential than a lot of those other 140 some odd nations. These are G7 members that we're talking about, major Western powers to members of the U.N. Security Council. So I wonder, to your mind, what might this mean for diplomacy? Could these moves affect the international balance of power as it relates to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?
LYNK: That's true. And on the positive side, as you said, I mean, now, 3 of the 7 G7 countries recognize Palestine as a state. Thirteen of the 20 members of the G20 recognize Palestinian sovereignty. And 4 of the 5 permanent members of the Security Council of the United Nations now recognize Palestine as a state. But there's also a political reality here, as well - is that there's unlikely to be forward moves to try to change the situation on the ground substantially if the United States is not on board. The United States still holds a veto power over admitting Palestine as a full member at the United Nations. The United States provides much of Israel's weaponry. It provides it with diplomatic shield at the United Nations and in other international forums. So as long as the relationship between the United States and Israel remains as firm and as tight as it is, it's hard to see how we're going to have any substantial moves to change the reality on the ground.
SUMMERS: France, the U.K. and Canada, they've long supported a two-state solution, two separate sovereign states for Israel and for Palestinians, but they have not really acted on that support until now. Why do you think that's happening now?
LYNK: Quite simply, the carnage in Gaza and the repeated Israeli obstruction of a Palestinian state coming into fruition. The Israelis hold most of the cards for the ability of the Palestinians to achieve their freedom and to be able to exercise their rights as a state. And they do that through, obviously, their troops on the soil and their 360 settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, but particularly over the last three to four months, where levels of starvation are heading towards a famine...
SUMMERS: Right.
LYNK: ...And I think have shocked the conscience of the world. So all of this, I think, is meant to tell Israel, change your behavior. I'm afraid it may not happen. This announcement by Canada, the United Kingdom and France certainly will irritate Israel, but I'm not convinced it's going to change their behavior. The only real way for a Palestinian state to come into being is through, I think, a concerted economic boycott or sanctioning of Israel. Only by suspending weapons sales, only by suspending free trade agreements, only by suspending, I think, the sale of Israeli surveillance and technology will Israel feel the political and economic cost of pursuing this path of suffocating the possibility of a Palestinian state. Anything less may be important at a symbolic level, but it's not going to radically change what is going on short of taking decisive action.
SUMMERS: Michael Lynk, a former U.N. independent expert on human rights in the Palestinian territories. Michael, thank you so much.
LYNK: Thank you so much for having me. A real pleasure. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
