By Sardar Khan Niazi

In recent years, the call for the recognition of Palestine as an independent state has grown louder from corner to corner of the international stage. With over 140 countries acknowledging Palestinian statehood by this time, the symbolic and diplomatic momentum continues to build. However, what would wider recognition of Palestine truly mean–not just in theory, but also in practice–for both Palestinians and Israelis? For Palestinians, broader recognition carries immense symbolic value. It validates their national identity, affirms their right to self-determination, and offers a degree of dignity long denied by occupation and dispossession. After decades of being viewed through the lens of conflict and statelessness, international acknowledgment of their nationhood represents a crucial step toward political normalization and self-agency. In practical terms, formal recognition by more Western powers–for the most part influential ones such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union–would shift the diplomatic narrative. It would create pressure on Israel to revisit its policies in the occupied territories and could potentially open new doors for Palestine at international forums, including a full seat at the United Nations. This growing recognition also strengthens the legal and diplomatic case against continued Israeli occupation. After all, another cannot legally occupy a state without consequence. With more countries recognizing Palestine as a sovereign entity, Israel’s settlement expansion, land annexations, and military operations in the West Bank and Gaza would face greater international scrutiny and possibly stronger legal challenges. Yet, recognition alone cannot replace the need for a viable, negotiated two-state solution. Without control over borders, airspace, and internal security, statehood remains symbolic. The recognition must be accompanied by tangible steps to end the occupation and allow for the creation of a contiguous, functional Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital. For Israel, wider recognition of Palestine presents a dual challenge: diplomatic and ideological. On one hand, it erodes the longstanding status quo that allows Israel to occupy Palestinian land while negotiating on its own terms. On the other, it forces Israel to confront the international community’s growing impatience with its policies. While some Israeli leaders dismiss recognition as empty gestures, others understand its cumulative effect. It isolates Israel diplomatically, particularly when allies begin to shift their positions. Even countries that have historically supported Israel are now openly questioning the sustainability of a policy that denies basic rights to millions of Palestinians under occupation. Israel’s reaction to recent recognitions–such as those by Spain, Ireland, and Norway–was swift and furious, including recalling ambassadors and threatening diplomatic reprisals. This response signals just how seriously Israel takes the symbolic and legal weight of international recognition. It also reflects fears that such moves could pave the way for stronger legal action against Israel in international courts, including the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice. Moreover, broader recognition undermines the Israeli narrative that statehood must only come through bilateral negotiations, negotiations that have been frozen for over a decade. In reality, the power imbalance between Israel and the Palestinians renders these talks inherently unequal. Recognition levels the playing field, at least diplomatically. Still, for both sides, recognition should not be the end goal–it must be the beginning of renewed political engagement. The tragedy of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict lies not just in its history of violence and displacement, but also in the decades of lost opportunities for peace. The road ahead requires more than flags and declarations. It demands accountability, compromise, and a genuine commitment to justice. Nevertheless, if wider recognition can tilt the diplomatic balance and rekindle hope in a just resolution, it is a step worth taking.