At the National Press Club this week, Ben Saul argued that Australia is more than a “modest middle power” and must step up on Palestine.

A repost from 3 October 2025

Australia was among the first countries to recognise Israel and is among the last to recognise Palestine, bringing it into the international mainstream. More than three quarters of the world, over 150 countries, now recognise Palestinian statehood, as does the United Nations.

The momentum is driven by horror at Israel’s excessive destruction in Gaza and impunity in Palestine, the failure of 30 years of negotiations for a two-state solution since the Oslo Accords, Israel’s persistent denial of Palestinian self-determination, de facto annexation of Palestinian land in the West Bank by illegal Israeli settlements, and the unapologetic extremism of the Netanyahu Government.

Recognition is a long overdue circuit breaker, when everything else has failed. The Palestinians were promised a state over a century ago. The 1947 United Nations proposal to divide British Palestine into two states was deeply unfair to Palestinians and failed.

Israel unilaterally declared statehood in May 1948, after an insurgency against the British, terrorism against civilians, and even the assassination of UN officials. It effectively established independence after defeating invading Arab armies and took more territory than even the unfair partition plan gifted it. Australia recognised Israel within six months.

The Palestine Liberation Organisation declared Palestine a state in 1988. International law does not prohibit unilateral declarations, as by Kosovo in 2008, which Australia later recognised as a state, but they do not create a state unless certain legal criteria are met.

Eligibility for statehood

Under customary international law reflected in the 1933 Montevideo Convention, statehood is a test of power, not morality. A state exists if it has a defined territory, a permanent population, an effective government and an ability to enter into independent foreign relations. Some critics, such as former prime minister John Howard and former foreign minister Alexander Downer, object that recognising Palestine is “illegal” because it does not meet these requirements.

This objection does not reflect mainstream legal opinion. There is international consensus that Palestine’s territory is presumptively defined by the pre-1967 war borders, encompassing the West Bank, including annexed East Jerusalem, and Gaza. The precise borders remain to be agreed, but this has never been fatal to the existence of states, many of which have disputed borders.

There is a core national population of Palestinians, potentially supplemented by refugees returning from abroad, and excluding almost 700,000 Israelis living in illegal settlements.

There is a clear capacity to........

© Pearls and Irritations