Towards a Just Peace in Gaza and Palestine;

Towards a Just Peace in Gaza and Palestine; The World’s Stance and the Road Ahead

The latest high-level meetings at the United Nations mark a turning point in the long and painful story of Gaza and Palestine. For the first time in years, three major Western nations — the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia — have formally recognized the State of Palestine. This move has been welcomed by much of the Global South, the Arab and Islamic world, and many European countries as a necessary step toward a two-state solution. It reflects a growing consensus that the decades-old conflict cannot be resolved by military means alone.

Israel, on the other hand, has condemned these recognitions, calling them “a reward for terrorism” and warning that such steps undermine its security. Many Israeli leaders fear that recognition without firm security guarantees might legitimize groups such as Hamas, which still hold hostages and refuse to recognize Israel. This stark divergence shows why international diplomacy around Palestine remains so difficult: both sides feel existentially threatened, and both believe their grievances are ignored.

Humanitarian Concerns and Global Reaction

Alongside state recognition, the UN General Assembly’s new New York Declaration calls for an immediate and sustained ceasefire in Gaza, the release of all hostages, and unimpeded humanitarian access. The world is increasingly alarmed at the scale of civilian suffering in Gaza — shortages of food, medical supplies and shelter — and at the psychological toll of repeated cycles of war.

For much of the international community, the priority now is to separate humanitarian imperatives from political disagreements. The idea is simple: protect civilians first, then negotiate politics. However, without a credible path to a Palestinian state, humanitarian aid risks becoming a stopgap rather than a solution.

What This Signals

From these developments, several lessons can be drawn:

1. Recognition is not enough. A Palestinian state on paper will mean little without credible institutions, democratic governance, and a commitment to non-violence.

2. Israel’s security cannot be ignored. Any plan that leaves Israel feeling vulnerable will fail.

3. Hostage releases are essential. If Hamas wants to be part of the political process, it must release all hostages and accept democratic norms.

4. A neutral international mechanism is needed. The UN or a coalition of trusted states should monitor borders, elections, and security arrangements during a transitional period.

What the UN Should Do Next

The United Nations can play a decisive role by:

• Establishing an international monitoring mission to oversee ceasefires, border crossings and the disarmament of militant groups.

• Sponsoring a transitional Palestinian unity government composed of technocrats and elected representatives, with a clear timetable for elections.

• Creating an independent reconstruction fund for Gaza tied to governance reforms and anti-corruption measures.

• Convening regular tripartite talks between the U.S., Israel and the Palestinian Authority to address security guarantees, settlements, and refugee issues.

Bridging U.S., Israeli and Palestinian Concerns

For Washington, the key is to assure Israel of ironclad security while pressing for real Palestinian statehood. This could take the form of a phased plan:

• Stage 1: Immediate ceasefire, hostage release, and humanitarian corridors.

• Stage 2: Deployment of an international peacekeeping force.

• Stage 3: Palestinian elections under UN supervision and recognition of Israel’s right to exist.

• Stage 4: Final-status negotiations on borders, refugees, and Jerusalem.

Such a roadmap would not satisfy every side immediately, but it would give each a stake in a peaceful outcome.

The Role of Hamas

If the world community presents a serious and credible path to an independent Palestinian state, Hamas must release all hostages and accept that power will come only through free elections and a pluralistic political process. This is not just a moral demand; it is a practical necessity for Gaza’s recovery and for international recognition.

Conclusion

The events at the UN show a rare moment of alignment between humanitarian urgency and political will. But symbolism alone will not end the suffering in Gaza or the insecurity in Israel. The international community must match recognition with concrete steps: security guarantees for Israel, democratic governance for Palestine, and an enforceable ceasefire monitored by neutral actors. Only then can both peoples hope to live side by side in dignity and peace.