The two-state solution is farther than ever before
At a United Nations gathering in New York, seventeen Arab nations joined a rare coalition to demand what regional politics had long made unspeakable: that Hamas disarm and yield Gaza's governance to the Palestinian Authority. The declaration, co-chaired by France and Saudi Arabia, marked the first time Arab states publicly condemned both Hamas and the October 7 attacks, signaling a potential realignment of regional allegiances and a renewed, if fragile, commitment to Palestinian statehood through negotiated means. Yet the architects of this diplomatic moment confronted a sobering paradox — the two-state framework they sought to revive may have already been rendered geographically impossible by twenty-one months of war, relentless settlement expansion, and Israeli annexation ambitions.
- For the first time, Arab nations publicly condemned Hamas and the October 7 attacks, breaking a long-held silence that had complicated any regional consensus on Palestinian governance.
- The declaration demands Hamas surrender its weapons and relinquish control of Gaza to the Palestinian Authority — a call that carries historic weight but no enforcement mechanism.
- Britain signaled it could recognize Palestinian statehood as early as September, contingent on Israel implementing a ceasefire and allowing adequate humanitarian aid into Gaza.
- UN Secretary-General Guterres warned the conference that the two-state solution is more distant than ever, as settlements expand and Israeli officials openly discuss annexation of occupied territory.
- Israel and the United States were absent from the conference entirely, leaving the declaration's signatories to chart a course without the two parties whose cooperation any resolution ultimately requires.
At the United Nations in New York, an unusual coalition gathered to demand something that would have seemed impossible just months ago: Arab nations openly calling for Hamas to disarm and surrender Gaza's governance to the Palestinian Authority. Seventeen countries — among them Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt — joined the European Union and the Arab League in endorsing a seven-page declaration that its brokers described as a historic turning point in regional politics.
The language was unambiguous. Hamas must end its rule over Gaza and hand its weapons to the Palestinian Authority with international backing. What gave the declaration its weight was who was saying it — Arab states with long, complicated ties to Palestinian militant movements. France, co-chairing the conference alongside Saudi Arabia, called the moment unprecedented: for the first time, Arab governments were publicly rejecting both Hamas and the October 7 attacks that ignited the war, and signaling openness to normalizing relations with Israel.
The declaration also endorsed the possible deployment of international stabilization forces once hostilities end, and Britain announced it might recognize Palestinian statehood in September if Israel agreed to a ceasefire and permitted sufficient humanitarian aid into Gaza — a conditional but notable diplomatic step.
And yet the conference exposed the widening gap between diplomatic ambition and ground reality. Over twenty-one months of war have killed tens of thousands of Palestinians and gutted Gaza's infrastructure. Israeli settlements continue to expand across the West Bank while Israeli officials openly discuss annexation. Secretary-General Guterres told the gathering plainly: the two-state solution is farther away than it has ever been.
Most telling was who was missing. Israel and the United States — the two parties without whom no resolution can actually take hold — did not attend. What the conference produced was a portrait of international consensus in search of leverage: a declaration of what the world believes should happen, suspended in the space between aspiration and the far harder work of making it real.
At a United Nations conference in New York, an unusual coalition assembled to demand something that would have been unthinkable months earlier: Arab nations publicly calling for Hamas to disarm and surrender control of Gaza. On Tuesday, seventeen countries—including Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt—joined the European Union and the Arab League in endorsing a seven-page declaration that represented, by the measure of those who brokered it, a historic shift in regional politics.
The declaration was explicit. Hamas must end its governance of Gaza and hand over its weapons to the Palestinian Authority, with international support, the text read. This language mattered because it came from Arab states that have long maintained complex relationships with Palestinian militant groups. France, which co-chaired the conference alongside Saudi Arabia, called the moment unprecedented. For the first time, a French official noted, Arab countries were publicly condemning Hamas, explicitly rejecting the October 7, 2023 attacks that triggered the war, and calling for Hamas's exclusion from any future Palestinian government. The subtext was even more significant: these nations were signaling openness to normalizing relations with Israel.
The declaration followed a Palestinian delegation's own call at the UN for both Israel and Hamas to withdraw from Gaza, leaving the Palestinian Authority to administer the territory. It also endorsed the possible deployment of international stabilization forces after hostilities end—a mechanism that would require UN Security Council authorization and regional support. Britain went further, announcing it might recognize Palestinian statehood in September if Israel met specific conditions: implementing a ceasefire in Gaza and allowing sufficient humanitarian aid into the enclave.
Yet the conference revealed how far the two-state solution has receded from possibility. More than twenty-one months of war have killed tens of thousands of Palestinians and destroyed most of Gaza's infrastructure. Meanwhile, Israeli settlements continue expanding in the West Bank, and Israeli officials have openly discussed annexing occupied territory. UN Secretary-General António Guterres told the conference that the two-state solution is farther away than ever. The declaration, for all its diplomatic weight, was attempting to resurrect a framework that may have already become geographically impossible to implement.
Notably absent from the conference were Israel and the United States, its closest ally. The declaration thus represented a diplomatic moment without the two parties most central to any actual resolution. What emerged instead was a statement of what the international community—particularly Arab states—believed should happen: Hamas disarmed, the Palestinian Authority governing Gaza with international assistance, and a pathway toward Palestinian statehood. Whether any of it could be achieved remained an entirely different question.
Citações Notáveis
Hamas must end its rule in Gaza and hand over its weapons to the Palestinian Authority, with international engagement and support, in line with the objective of a sovereign and independent Palestinian State— The UN conference declaration
The two-state solution is farther than ever before— UN Secretary-General António Guterres
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why does it matter that Arab countries are the ones calling for Hamas to disarm? Couldn't any country say that?
Because for decades, Arab states have been the political cover for Palestinian armed groups. If Saudi Arabia or Qatar says Hamas needs to go, it changes the calculation inside Palestinian politics in ways that Western pressure never could.
So this is about isolating Hamas?
It's about isolating Hamas while also signaling something else—that these Arab governments are willing to move toward Israel. The disarmament demand is real, but it's also a way of saying we're done with this chapter.
The declaration mentions international forces in Gaza. Who would that be?
That's deliberately vague. It would need UN approval and regional agreement. But the idea is peacekeepers or stabilization troops to prevent the territory from becoming a failed state or a haven for other armed groups.
Britain said it might recognize Palestine. Why is that conditional?
Because recognition without a ceasefire and aid flowing in would look like theater. Britain is saying: we'll move if you move. It's leverage dressed as principle.
But the UN Secretary-General said the two-state solution is farther away than ever. So what's the point of all this?
That's the tension at the heart of it. Everyone knows the geography is getting harder. But you still have to try to build the framework for when—if—the fighting stops. Otherwise there's nothing to build on.