Two-State Solution or Political Theater? UN Conference Rekindles Rhetoric, But Palestinians Still Wait for Justice
- ATN
- Jul 29
- 3 min read
Updated: Aug 8
By ATN News
UNHQ, NEW YORK: Day 1- As the resumed High-Level Conference on the Question of Palestine unfolds at the United Nations, a familiar pattern plays out: impassioned speeches, solemn condemnations, and lofty promises — all overshadowed by the undeniable weight of inaction.
Originally convened on June 17 but suspended due to deteriorating regional conditions, the conference reconvened this week under Resolution 79/81, with a stated mission to reignite international momentum for a two-State solution. Yet, beneath the formalities and diplomatic protocol, the question remains: is this a turning point, or just more carefully choreographed pageantry?
The meeting, co-chaired by France and Saudi Arabia, arrives amid the ruins of Gaza — a territory battered daily by airstrikes, siege, and a humanitarian collapse of historic scale. In his address, UN Secretary-General António Guterres laid bare the contradictions at the heart of international diplomacy.
“A one-State reality where Palestinians are denied equal rights, and forced to live under perpetual occupation and inequality… is not peace. That is not justice,” Guterres warned, calling for “urgent, concrete, irreversible steps” — language that has become all too common, and results all too rare.
Palestinian Prime Minister Mohammed Mustafa pleaded for this conference to be more than a rhetorical reset. His demands were unambiguous: an end to what he described as a genocide in Gaza, the withdrawal of Israeli forces, and immediate international recognition of Palestinian statehood based on 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as the capital.
“Palestinians are human beings,” he said bluntly, rejecting the notion that the Palestinian people are fated to live — and die — under permanent occupation.
Mustafa also made a bold policy shift, calling for a temporary Arab and international peacekeeping force under UN authorization to stabilize Gaza, suggesting an openness to a multilateral security mechanism — something once considered taboo in Ramallah’s political circles.
But promises of recognition, like that made by French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot, came with delayed timelines. France vowed to formally recognize the State of Palestine in September — two months from now — contingent on a General Assembly platform, not immediate political will. While symbolically powerful, the delay underscores the prevailing diplomatic habit of deferring justice.
Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud echoed the familiar red line: no normalization with Israel absent a sovereign Palestinian state. Yet normalization talks across the region have already advanced in unofficial channels, raising skepticism about how long this position will hold without results.
Several speakers, including Qatar, Jordan, Lebanon, and Egypt, pointed to the deepening tragedy in Gaza — where over two million people face displacement, starvation, and siege — but their words, too, rang like laments rather than levers for policy change. Egypt’s Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty decried the war as one that “exceeded all limits of human imagination,” yet offered no new mechanisms beyond existing Arab League proposals.
Even expressions of solidarity from Brazil, Canada, and the European Union — while notable — followed a familiar rhythm: support for reform within the Palestinian Authority, aid pledges in the tens of millions, and renewed backing for UN resolutions. But nowhere in these pledges was a clear enforcement framework or consequence for continued violations of international law.
Indeed, the term “two-State solution” was invoked dozens of times across the chamber. But critics argue that the phrase has become a kind of diplomatic safe word — repeated to convey commitment while avoiding accountability.
Yassine Fall of Senegal perhaps said it best:
“The two-State solution is not just a political stance; it is a deep expression of justice and humanity. But how long can humanity wait?”
While working groups and roundtables continue behind closed doors over the next two days, history offers a cautionary footnote: countless such conferences have come and gone, while realities on the ground have only grown more entrenched.
If the international community is serious about salvaging the two-State framework, then the time for incrementalism has passed. The Palestinian people — enduring blockade, bombardment, and statelessness — are not asking for patience. They are demanding their rights, long overdue.
Whether this conference marks a course correction or a continuation of empty ritual will be measured not by speeches — but by action.