Recognition Without Rules: Europe’s Double Standard on a Palestinian State ~ Elder Of Ziyon

Thursday, September 25, 2025

Recognition Without Rules: Europe’s Double Standard on a Palestinian State

In December 1991, the European Community - today’s EU - adopted a landmark declaration on recognition of new states. It was written for the post-Communist world, but its principles were supposed to be universal: recognition was not automatic, but conditional. To be recognized, a state had to prove it was democratic, respected minorities, settled disputes peacefully, accepted existing borders, and contributed to regional stability.

Those weren’t abstractions. They were applied in practice. Croatia, for example, desperately wanted European recognition in 1991. The EC held back until Croatia amended its constitution to guarantee minority rights, specifically protections for its Serb population. Europe insisted: no guarantees, no recognition.

Fast forward to 2024–2025. Several EU states are rushing to recognize a “State of Palestine.” And how many conditions did they impose?

None. Not one.

The EC Guidelines vs. “Palestine”

EC Guideline (1991)	Where “Palestine” Fails
Must be “constituted on a democratic basis, with respect for the rule of law, democracy and human rights.”	No national elections since 2005/2006; Gaza ruled by Hamas after a violent coup; both PA and Hamas are cited for human-rights abuses.
Guarantees for minorities (CSCE standards).	No enforceable protections; reports of persecution of critics, women, religious minorities, and LGBT persons.
Respect for frontiers, changed “only by peaceful means and by common agreement.”	Borders remain unsettled; recognition today presumes “1967 lines” (really 1949 armistice lines from Arab war of aggression) without agreement.
Commitment to settle disputes by negotiation/arbitration.	Oslo explicitly reserves final status for negotiation, yet recognition rewards avoiding negotiations.
Acceptance of disarmament and regional stability.	Hamas maintains a private army of rockets and tunnels, openly committed to ongoing war.
Commitment “in good faith” to a peaceful process.	One faction (PA) negotiates; the other (Hamas) categorically rejects coexistence.
“Will not recognize entities … result of aggression.”	Gaza’s rulers came to power through violent seizure in 2007 and continue to rule by force.
No territorial claims or hostile propaganda against neighbors.	Palestinian law and media still assert a “right of return” that would dissolve Israel, and hostile propaganda is routine.
Take account of effects on neighbors.	Recognition destabilizes Israel’s security and weakens incentives for negotiated peace.
Recognition must follow “normal standards of international practice.”	Palestine lacks unified, effective territorial control and constitutional order.

The missing conditions

Croatia was forced to prove it could safeguard its Serb minority before recognition. The Baltic states had to demonstrate functioning democratic institutions. Armenia and Azerbaijan were judged on their willingness to resolve disputes peacefully.

With “Palestine,” the opposite approach prevails: recognition is given up front, unconditionally, despite the absence of elections, the split between West Bank and Gaza, the dominance of an armed faction in Gaza, the lack of settled borders, and ongoing rejection of Israel’s legitimacy by one (really, both) of the two governments in power.

Europe once declared recognition was a reward for good behavior. Today, when it comes to the Palestinians, recognition is offered as a consolation prize for bad behavior - and as a weapon against Israel.

That is the point. The EU’s 1991 Guidelines were meant to prevent recognition from becoming a political gimmick. Yet when it comes to the Palestinians, the very same states that once forced Croatia to rewrite its constitution now don’t even bother to ask for elections, human-rights guarantees, or peaceful commitments.

Recognition without conditions isn’t just hypocrisy. It is the abandonment of the very standards Europe once claimed were essential for peace.

This isn't "pro-Palestinian." It doesn't help any Palestinians, or even Gazans, one bit, and arguably makes things worse. Like the entire "pro-Palestine" movement, it isn't pro-Palestinian at all - just anti-Israel.

(h/t Irene)