MUHAMMADIYAH.OR.ID, YOGYAKARTA – The Palestinian issue became the main focus of the largest multilateral event, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) session on September 23–24, 2025. This attention arose because several influential countries such as the United Kingdom and France — two of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council with veto power — finally recognized the State of Palestine.
Yasmi Ardiyansyah, Vice Chair of Department of International Relations and Cooperation (LHKI) of Central Board (PP) of Muhammadiyah, stated that from a diplomatic perspective, it was a historic moment — even though one that came far too late. He noted that the “Two-State Solution,” often promoted by many countries, especially in the West, as the path to peace, had been proposed as early as 1947 when the UN issued the “Partition Plan.”
“In simple logic, if the UN had already issued a partition plan, both Palestine and Israel should have received international recognition since that year,” Yasmi emphasized on Wednesday (24/9).
Why have these leading Western nations waited until now to recognize Palestine? It’s important to remember that this decision was made only after massive public pressure back home — especially once over 65,000 people — primarily women and children — in Gaza had died or starved in what Yasmi has termed genocide by Israel over the last two years.
The crucial question is: Will recognition of Palestine — now by about 150 countries — lead to the rescue of Palestine, and more specifically, Gaza? “The answer is clear: it is a utopia. The genocide and starvation in Gaza will continue,” Yasmi said.
In terms of a peaceful utopia for Palestine, the main barrier is obvious: Israel. What makes things worse is that Israel enjoys nearly unconditional backing from the United States, which remains the dominant global power. As Yasmi put it, “this means Palestine is up against Israel and the U.S. Support for Palestine from many countries tends to be mere talk. Even by the numbers, even extending forever, Palestine is unlikely to win.”
Even more troubling, support for Palestine from various countries is mostly diplomatic, while Israel receives economic, political, diplomatic, and even military support — not only from the US but also from allies like France, the UK, Germany, and others. In contemporary international politics, only Russia and China consistently take a critical stance toward “Uncle Sam.” However, defending Palestine to the point of full independence is not a priority of their national interests.
Yasmi added that people should not be complacent with the recognition granted to Palestine. “The increase in the number of countries recognizing Palestine is a diplomatic achievement. However, we should not expect the situation in Palestine — especially Gaza — to change anytime soon. Achieving full Palestinian independence requires multiple factors,” Yasmi said.
In addition to diplomatic support, measures like boycotting key products and excluding Israel from international forums are necessary. Yasmi emphasized that boycotts or marginalization serve as sanctioned international tools. Cutting diplomatic ties also adds pressure on Israel.
Another crucial ingredient for securing Palestinian independence is the backing of civil society. The Global Sumud Flotilla movement and massive protests in many countries in support of Palestine—especially Gaza—mark a truly historic turning point. “Grassroots solidarity feels much more real than global speeches condemning injustice but lacking tangible results,” Yasmi observed.
The decisive means for Palestinian independence is having a strong enough military force—one that could rival or even defeat Israel Defense Forces (IDF). If all other efforts fail, armed resistance, especially by Palestinians in Gaza, is viewed as the only remaining path.
“History shows that a nation’s independence is usually achieved through armed struggle. Peace negotiations are usually complementary,” Yasmi concluded.
