Dr. Dalal Erekat: The international conference represents a real test for international and Arab diplomacy, especially in light of Israel’s opposition to the establishment of a Palestinian state

Talal Okal: The West has become more convinced that the continuation of the Israeli colonial project depends on implementing the two-state solution, which is the least costly option.

Nour Odeh: The conference will not bring about change if it is not preceded by actual steps to curb the occupation’s practices and punish it.. and the world has not presented an alternative to the two-state solution

Dr. Ahmed Rafiq Awad: Arab countries have enormous and globally influential pressure tools and can push towards resolving the Palestinian issue and promoting the two-state solution

Dr. Walaa Qadimat: The French-Saudi move is not symbolic, but rather reflects a joint political will and seriousness to create an international movement to promote the two-state solution option

Muhannad Abdul Hamid: France’s non-recognition of the Palestinian state and its ban on solidarity activities with the Palestinian people raise questions about the seriousness of the conference

In light of the ongoing Palestinian-Israeli conflict and the impasse over political solutions, the international conference scheduled for June 2025, led by France and Saudi Arabia and announced by French President Emmanuel Macron, stands out as a true test of international diplomacy. This conference, which comes in response to a UN resolution calling for a two-state solution, holds great hopes for the Palestinians amidst strong Israeli challenges and opposition to any step towards establishing an independent Palestinian state.

In separate interviews with “I”, writers, political analysts, specialists and university professors believe that international efforts led by Paris and Riyadh reflect a growing desire to revive the peace process, as they are based on a broad international consensus that appeared in the UN General Assembly vote with a majority of 157 countries in favor of a peaceful settlement of the Palestinian issue.

Between optimism about the conference and doubts about the possibility of achieving an actual breakthrough, political analysts, specialists and university professors agree on the importance of the Arab role as a pivotal pressure element in these efforts, as the resources of Arab countries, their economic wealth and the interests of countries with them provide opportunities to promote the two-state solution on the international scene, provided that there is a unified political will to transform diplomatic moves into practical steps that confront Israeli challenges and achieve Palestinian aspirations.

Practical steps beyond mere recognition of a Palestinian state

Dr. Dalal Erekat, Professor of Diplomacy and Conflict Resolution at the Arab American University, confirms that French President Emmanuel Macron’s statements regarding France and Saudi Arabia organizing an international conference in June 2025 to establish a Palestinian state reflect the seriousness of international efforts in this direction, especially since it is the result of the UN General Assembly’s vote on a resolution on a peaceful settlement of the Palestinian issue.

Erekat explains that the UN resolution, which was voted on Tuesday by a majority of 157 countries, calls for a two-state solution, and also includes assigning France and Saudi Arabia to lead an international conference to achieve this goal.

Erekat stressed that this decision reflects an unprecedented international consensus to advance the peace process, with the number of countries supporting it increasing, especially in light of the international coalition launched by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in September 2024, which included 94 countries.

Erekat stressed that the conference scheduled to be held next year will be part of international efforts to achieve peace through practical steps that go beyond merely recognizing a Palestinian state, as the conference focuses on fundamental issues such as: ending the Israeli military occupation, defining borders, and addressing the settlement file in translation of what was stated in the recent advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice, which reflects a comprehensive and clear plan to achieve the two-state solution.

She points out that the conference is being held in the context of broad international support led by France and Saudi Arabia, and is a test of multilateral diplomacy towards the Palestinian cause.

Erekat believes that Saudi Arabia's participation in leading the conference gives the Palestinian cause additional momentum, given the pivotal role that Riyadh plays in the Arab and international world.

Erekat explains that the timing of the conference comes months after Donald Trump's return to the White House.

A pragmatic relationship between Trump, Saudi Arabia and the Emirates

Erekat explains that the pragmatic relationship between Trump, Saudi Arabia and the UAE may contribute to strengthening international support for the conference, despite the expected positions of the US administration towards the Palestinian issue, but the common interests between Saudi Arabia and the United States of America are great and important.

She stressed that Saudi Arabia has a clear policy towards the Palestinian issue, which states that any pragmatic agreement with the United States or Israel will not be achieved without reaching a just and comprehensive solution to the Palestinian issue.

Erekat points out that US interests with Saudi Arabia go beyond normalizing relations with Israel, and include areas such as military, oil, and weapons alliances, which gives Saudi Arabia powerful leverage.

Erekat believes that the international conference represents a real test for international and Arab diplomacy, especially in light of the strong Israeli opposition to any step towards establishing a Palestinian state.

She stresses that the Saudi role in this context reflects an important shift, as the Arabs possess effective pressure tools to push the Palestinian issue to the forefront of the international agenda.

Erekat points out that holding the conference in June 2025 could pave the way for a major shift in the course of the Palestinian issue and the possibility of concluding a new peace agreement and settlement with clear features, stressing that this international effort is a historic opportunity that must be invested in to achieve the aspirations of the Palestinian people to establish their independent state with East Jerusalem as its capital.

Failure of attempts to liquidate the Palestinian cause

Writer and political analyst Talal Okal believes that the "Al-Aqsa Flood" attack on October 7, 2023, constituted a significant turning point in the Palestinian and regional scenes, explaining that this development led to the failure of all attempts aimed at liquidating or marginalizing the Palestinian cause, whether by some Arab parties or Western capitalist powers.

Awkal points out that Western countries, which have historically stood by Israel and continued to talk theoretically about the two-state solution, are now more convinced that the continuation of the Israeli colonial project depends on the implementation of this solution.

Awkal explains that for the West, the two-state solution is the least costly option compared to other alternatives, especially with the growing awareness that Israel is unable to secure Western interests on its own, and without continued Western support, Israel's position will be more fragile and weak.

Awkal believes that recent Western moves, embodied by French President Emmanuel Macron’s statements and his call for an international conference on the Palestinian issue, show a degree of seriousness in seeking a sustainable political solution.

According to Awkal, however, these moves remain linked to multiple factors, most notably the nature of the political impasse within Israel, the impact of internal developments there, and the American position, which remains a major determinant in any effective international move.

He stresses that the success of these efforts also depends on the Arab role, as the Arabs possess great strategic capabilities that enable them to influence international policies.

The Two-State Solution Alternative: The Continuing Confrontation

Awkal explains that among these capabilities are: vast energy resources, control over international trade routes, existing peace agreements with Israel, in addition to the possibility of expanding their international options away from American hegemony.

Awkal believes that the two-state solution is still the only viable option on the ground, warning of the disastrous consequences of any other alternative.

Awkal points out that other options mean the continuation of instability in the Middle East region, and the exacerbation of conflicts that will not leave any party immune to their negative effects, stressing that the only alternative to the two-state solution is the option of continued confrontation between Palestine and Israel, which is a scenario that carries long-term risks to regional and international stability.

Awkal points out the importance of activating Arab tools to influence the international scene, as Arab countries are able to use their wealth and economic resources to rearrange international priorities in favor of the Palestinian cause.

Awkal calls for investing in the changes in international equations in favor of achieving a just and comprehensive solution, stressing that Arab options are not limited to submitting to American policies, but rather that sources of economic and political power can be exploited to form real pressure on Israel and its allies.

Awkal believes that the current moment provides a rare opportunity to forcefully re-raise the Palestinian issue on the international stage, provided that there is a unified Arab position and effective political will. Maintaining the current momentum requires working to transform diplomatic moves into practical steps, in a way that serves Palestinian and Arab interests in light of the accelerating regional and international transformations.

The two-state solution is the only internationally agreed solution to end the conflict

Writer and political analyst Nour Odeh, who specializes in diplomatic affairs and international relations, confirms that the two-state solution remains the only internationally agreed-upon solution to end the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

Awda believes that this option enjoys broad legal and international legitimacy, as it is consistent with Security Council resolutions.

But the problem, according to Awda, does not lie in the applicability of the solution, but rather in the absence of international seriousness and practical measures that transform theoretical commitment into a tangible reality.

Awda points out that talk of a two-state solution is often accompanied by expressions of good intentions, but lacks the actions to support these statements.

Awda says: “Implementing the two-state solution requires effective political and diplomatic moves that force Israel to choose between continuing the occupation or establishing normal relations with the world.”

Awda believes that the international conference scheduled to be held next June, despite its importance, will not bring about change if it is not preceded by actual steps to curb the occupation’s practices and punish it for its crimes, stressing at the same time that the world has not provided a real alternative to the two-state solution, and she says: “Whoever wonders whether the two-state solution is still valid must provide us with another option.”

Awda believes that the international community, despite its clear rejection of the Israeli apartheid and colonial system, is still not prepared to deal with radical alternatives that mean dismantling the entire Israeli system. Therefore, the two-state solution remains the only possible solution, if there is real political will to implement it.

Awda sharply criticizes countries that declare their commitment to the two-state solution, but at the same time turn a blind eye to Israeli policies that undermine this option, saying: “These countries are partners in aborting the two-state solution through their contradictory positions.”

Awda stressed that achieving the two-state solution requires practical measures and not just political statements, pointing out the importance of having real pressure on Israel to stop its violations, including settlements and massacres committed against the Palestinians.

Awda believes that some Arab countries have significant leverage, but she questions the extent to which these governments are prepared to use their political and economic power to confront the occupation.

Awda believes that one of the most important obstacles to achieving real progress in the Palestinian cause is the absence of a unified Palestinian vision capable of drawing a roadmap to push the world towards implementing the two-state solution, stressing that “the absence of Palestinian unity makes it easy for everyone, whether Arabs or the international community, to evade their duties.”

Multiple reasons may cause the conference to fail

Writer and political analyst Dr. Ahmed Rafiq Awad believes that French President Emmanuel Macron’s announcement to hold an international conference chaired by France and Saudi Arabia in June 2025, regarding the establishment of a Palestinian state, reflects the importance of Saudi and French efforts to keep the Palestinian issue present on the international scene.

Awad points out that this step raises fundamental questions related to the suffering of the Palestinian people and the continued arrogance of the Israeli occupation and its violation of international laws.

Awad believes that such conferences, despite their symbolic and diplomatic value in keeping the Palestinian issue in the international spotlight, often fail to achieve tangible results for several reasons.

Awad explains that these conferences usually lack actual pressure on Israel, and lack American support or seriousness, which is a decisive factor in any international move aimed at resolving the conflict. Israel also categorically rejects these conferences and their results and does not deal with them seriously.

Awad points out that these conferences do not provide practical steps capable of curbing settlement expansion or ongoing Israeli violations.

Dr. Awad talks about the decline of the two-state solution, which was once the focus of international efforts to resolve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, believing that this solution is practically completely behind us, due to Israeli practical practices that undermine the two-state solution.

Awad explains the reasons that led to this decline, including that Israel is clearly working to annex areas classified as “C” in the West Bank through its settlement expansion and expulsion of Palestinians, and Israel is systematically seeking to weaken the Palestinian Authority and reshape it to be less than an authoritarian entity.

According to Awad, among the reasons for this decline is that Israeli policy is moving towards dividing Palestine into separate geographical blocs, which makes the establishment of a geographically contiguous Palestinian state almost impossible. The Israeli street, in its various categories, also rejects the idea of establishing a Palestinian state and prefers the continuation of the occupation despite its costs. In addition, international momentum for the two-state solution has declined, especially with the absence of clear American support.

Awad believes that the US administration is no longer seriously talking about the two-state solution, but rather is referring to “other solutions” that are vague and unclear, which weakens the chances of achieving this solution in the near future.

Awad believes that Arab countries have enormous pressure tools that can effectively influence the international political scene, push towards resolving the Palestinian issue and promoting the two-state solution.

Awad lists the most prominent of these tools, including economic pressures that could be an influential factor, as Arab countries possess natural resources and huge markets that enable them to reconsider their relations with the West to pressure Israel.

Among these tools, according to Awad, are pressures to boycott Israeli goods and products of countries that support it, changing the currency used in economic transactions from the dollar, and preventing Israeli and Western ships and planes that support it from using Arab roads and ports, which could change the form of global trade and transportation.

In addition to economic pressures, Awad points to political pressures represented by a diplomatic boycott of Israel, a refusal to normalize relations with it, and a halt to security cooperation with Israel, whether overt or covert, as a practical step to weaken my family’s position.

Despite the capabilities of the Arab countries, Awad points out that the absence of political will and a collective Arab position constitute a major obstacle to achieving actual results, stressing that these two factors put the Arab world in a state of extreme weakness, which exacerbates Palestinian suffering and increases Israel’s intransigence. He stresses the importance of international conferences as a symbolic diplomatic effort, but they will not be sufficient to bring about radical change in the absence of actual pressures and practical mechanisms to implement the decisions.

Awad believes that the future of the Palestinian cause depends on a radical change in Arab and international positions, away from traditional solutions that have proven their failure over the past decades.

A broader international trend that includes European countries that support the two-state solution

Writer and political researcher Dr. Walaa Qadimat confirms that the recent French move towards playing a pivotal role in the Middle East stems from a clear desire to contribute effectively to resolving regional issues, most notably the Palestinian issue.

Qadeem believes that the Saudi-French partnership to hold an international conference next year on establishing a Palestinian state constitutes a qualitative development that reflects a common political will to promote the two-state solution option, which is considered the main gateway to reviving the peace process in the region.

Qadimat points out that France seeks to strengthen its influence in the Middle East, and this cannot be achieved without taking clear positions on the Palestinian issue. As for Saudi Arabia, its position on the Palestinian issue has remained firm, which it translated through its presentation of the Arab Peace Initiative in 2002, which clearly called for the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.

Qadeemat explains that the recent moves between Paris and Riyadh come within the framework of a broader international trend that includes many European countries that support this option.

Qadeemat believes that the French-Saudi move is not merely a symbolic step, but rather reflects a clear seriousness in creating an international movement aimed at reviving the two-state solution option. She cites statements by French President Emmanuel Macron, who confirmed his readiness to recognize the Palestinian state, but linked this to the “right time,” which reflects France’s traditional positions that combine support for the Palestinians with ensuring Israeli security.

Qadeem believes that the continuation of the two-state solution option depends on the ability of the Arab and international systems to transform it into a tangible reality.

Qadeemat points out that the current transformations in the international system, including the competition between the major powers, cast a shadow over the Palestinian issue and place restrictions on the chances of achieving this solution.

Regarding the potential for Arab pressure, Qaddimat points out that the current Arab situation is suffering from great exhaustion as a result of the political and economic crises that Arab countries are going through, noting that the transformations in the regional arena, such as the developments in Lebanon and Syria, reflect a complex reality that imposes great challenges on any Arab efforts to support the Palestinian cause.

Qadeemat explains that the current regional environment has imposed major obstacles on Saudi efforts to revive the two-state solution. However, Saudi Arabia’s insistence on partnering with France to hold an international conference on the establishment of a Palestinian state in 2025 confirms its firm commitment to playing a pivotal role in this file.

Qadimat stresses the importance of Palestinians investing in this international movement, and says, “The Palestinian reality requires us to seize any initiative and work to invest in it, especially in light of the current circumstances that are characterized by complexity and challenges.”

Qadeem believes that the Saudi position of adhering to supporting the two-state solution reflects a sincere desire to achieve a breakthrough in the Palestinian issue, stressing that the attempt will not cost the Palestinians much, while Qadeem indicates that this movement comes in the context of Saudi Arabia’s efforts to strengthen its regional role, and is a constant in its foreign policy towards the Palestinian issue.

Qadeemat confirms that the Saudi-French move reflects a genuine desire to mobilize international support for the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.

She believes that current initiatives may open the door to new paths to achieve progress in the Palestinian cause, despite the major challenges imposed by regional and international reality.

In view of all this data, Qadeemat confirms that the Saudi-French move represents an opportunity for the Palestinians to work seriously towards investing in this international movement and transforming it into practical steps that contribute to achieving the aspirations of the Palestinian people to establish their independent state.

The danger of the extreme nihilistic policy led by the Netanyahu government

Journalist Muhannad Abdul Hamid explains that the “Al-Aqsa Flood” operation, the “war of extermination” that the occupying state is still waging, the support war initiated by Hezbollah and in which factions from Iraq and Yemen participated, and the unprecedented popular and elite movement in all parts of the world, all of this has revealed the danger of the extremist nihilistic policy led by Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, and has revealed the foolishness of the fascist solution proposed by the new priesthood to the conflict.

Abdul Hamid points out that this policy led to ignoring the solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, and to placing the Palestinian issue on the margins of international and regional interest.

He says: “Netanyahu’s efforts to impose a fascist solution to the conflict through forms of ethnic cleansing and apartheid have destabilized the peoples and countries of the region, opened the door to chaos, turned Israel into a pariah state, and exposed the value system of countries that support a state that practices a war of extermination.”

Abdul Hamid points out that many countries, institutions and leaders have learned their lesson and have re-proposed the two-state solution, which means establishing a Palestinian state, as the only and necessary solution, as it meets the interests of the Palestinian people and the interests of the peoples and countries of the region and the world in stability, calm and coexistence.

Abdul Hamid confirms that for this reason the international coalition to establish the Palestinian state was launched, which includes Arab, Islamic, European and international countries. He also notes that within the framework of this coalition, the convictions of countries vary between those who are enthusiastic and those who are dismissive.

Abdel Hamid stresses that France, under Macron’s leadership, was not as enthusiastic as it was in previous eras. Macron’s leadership, along with Saudi Arabia, in the conference scheduled to be held next June was surprising, and raises question marks about Macron’s seriousness, especially since France continues not to recognize the Palestinian state and continues to ban activities in solidarity with the Palestinian people.

“France did not recognize the Palestinian state, as did Spain, Norway, Scotland and others,” Abdel Hamid says. “His government banned many solidarity activities with the Palestinian people, and, along with Germany, adopted a strange concept of anti-Semitism that mixes hostility to Jews with criticism of the occupying state and its racist and colonial policies. He also shirked his country’s commitment to the International Criminal Court’s decision calling for the arrest of Netanyahu and Galant. These policies raise a question mark about Macron’s seriousness.”

Abdul Hamid believes that according to the characteristics of the conflicting poles, there is no solution other than the two-state solution, and there is no possibility of one party eliminating the other. Israel has tried and is still trying, from its position as the stronger party, to eliminate the Palestinian state and self-determination, including eliminating the rights of refugees, at a time when the official Palestinian institution has retreated from the absolute right to its historical homeland in favor of the relative right represented by a state within the borders of June 4, in harmony with international legitimacy.

Abdul Hamid explains that the overwhelming majority of the world's countries are in favor of this solution, compared to a small international minority that does not exceed 15-20 countries, led by Israel and America. This minority practiced the most heinous forms of tyranny and dictatorship, as it did not respect the positions of the vast majority of the world's peoples and countries to resolve the Palestinian issue, when it thwarted all attempts to implement international resolutions regarding the solution of establishing a Palestinian state.

Abdul Hamid believes that the situation will remain the same as long as Israel is granted the monopoly right to prevent a solution with open American support, and as long as international resolutions remain piled up in the archives and mere ink on paper, and no pressure is exerted and no sanctions are imposed on the occupying state.

Preventing the establishment of a Palestinian state means the continuation of the occupation

Abdul Hamid believes that whoever says that settlements have destroyed the two-state solution, and whoever agrees with that, is accepting the colonial facts that must be retracted and dismantled by Palestinian, Arab and international will.

Abdul Hamid asserts that preventing the establishment of a Palestinian state means the continuation of the occupation indefinitely, and the continuation of the occupation leaves devastating effects on Palestinian society inside and outside Palestine, and produces Israeli fascism and a theocratic state, and Arab societies and countries are not immune from its effects.

Abdul Hamid says: “The reality of the common interest in ending the occupation and its disastrous transformations must be defined and explained. On the basis of recognizing the common interest, it is easy to develop a vision and means of pressure, in terms of pressuring Israeli interests as an alternative to reward, as happened in the Abraham Accords, and exchanging American and European interests in the Arab countries for removing the American and European cover that enables Israel to escape punishment and accountability.”

Abdul Hamid asserts that the apartheid regime in South Africa did not retreat without pressure, sanctions, siege and isolation, and the same applies to Israel. The Arab-Israeli agreements are supposed to prevent the violation and transgression of international law and resolutions, specifically in the area of settlement expansion, piracy of Palestinian resources and ethnic cleansing. When Israel feels that it cannot combine peace, settlement and war, it will be forced to retreat.