SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
france
Postponing the UN 2-State Solution Conference Could Lead to a Better Outcome
This extended window of opportunity gives Palestinian civil society at home and in exile, along with their allies, necessary time to reassert and gain support for their demands.
Jun 17, 2025
At the United Nations 77th Commemoration of the Nakba convened May 15 and 16 in New York, nothing was said about the upcoming Two-State Solution Conference planned at the U.N. from June 17-20, until, at the very end of the event, Riyad Mansour, the beleaguered permanent representative of the Permanent Observer Mission of the State of Palestine lifted the shroud of avoidance by expressing support for the conference based on the framework laid out in France and Saudi Arabia's Two-State Solution Concept Note, intended to define the outcome of the conference. Nick Mottern, of the Weaponized Drone Ban Treaty Campaign, hearing his response, expressed apprehension that France and Saudi Arabia, the conveners of the conference, along with the Palestine Authority, were setting the Palestinian people up for "an ambush."
Also concerned that the Two-State Solution Conference would result in further concessions by the Fatah Party-led Palestinian leadership, 43 Palestinian civil society organizations issued a "Unified Call to Action" on June 13 demanding that the conference focus on 77 years of international law pertaining to the status and borders of Palestine, rather than a vague gathering at which the State of Palestine would not be even recognized.
Given the disastrous outcome of the Oslo Accords of 1993 and 1995, after which nearly half a million settlers flooded into the West Bank and East Jerusalem, there is trepidation that the Palestine Authority will walk away from the negotiations hoodwinked and empty-handed, with no resolution pertaining to the status of Jerusalem, right of return of refugees, or progress made in the payment of reparations as provided for by U.N. General Assembly (UNGA) Resolutions 181 (1947) and 194 (1948).
Moreover, what should be discerned is the viability of a Two-State Solution, given that Israel's settler colonial enterprise has rendered that possibility dead in the water.
On June 12, ahead of the conference planned for June 17-20—now postponed following Israel's unprovoked military attack on Iran—the Palestine Institute for Public Diplomacy in Ramallah issued the clarion call reaffirming demands for a just and lawful resolution grounded in the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people. French President Emmanuel Macron said that the conference was postponed due to the inability of the Palestinian Authority and Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to travel given the military escalation in the region. This extended window of opportunity gives Palestinian civil society at home and in exile, along with their allies, necessary time to reassert and gain support for their demands.
According to the Unified Call to Action:
The upcoming conference could serve as a turning point—but only if it is re-centered on its legal foundation: U.N. General Assembly Resolution ES-10/24, built on decades of existing international law obligations. This resolution welcomed the July 2024 International Court of Justice (ICJ) Advisory Opinion, which called on Israel to comply with international law, including ending its unlawful occupation, realizing the Palestinian people's rights to self-determination and return, and requiring third states to adopt concrete sanctions and accountability measures to uphold international law.
The Unified Call to Action implores all states, institution, and actors engaging with the Two-State Solution Conference to ground all solutions in the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people.
Within this context, the language of France and Saudi Arabia's Concept Note falls short in meeting Palestinian civil society demands. It refers to the conference as geared to implement "the" Two-State Solution, while actually framing negotiations as "a" Two-State Solution. This represents an unauthorized manipulation and flouting of international law pertaining to the established borders of the Occupied Palestinian Territories including East Jerusalem as enshrined in U.N. Security Council Resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973), and 2334 (2016).
Moreover, what should be discerned is the viability of a Two-State Solution, given that Israel's settler colonial enterprise has rendered that possibility dead in the water. Israel has usurped more than 80% of the historic land of Palestine; 21% of Israel is Palestinian; and thorny issues and U.N. Resolutions pertaining to the status of Jerusalem, the right of return of refugees, and reparations remain flouted by Israel and unaddressed for 77 years. In accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, whether a two-state, one-state, or other configuration, the government(s) of the land between the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea must provide for the full human rights and dignity of all.
Further, the Concept Note is flawed pertaining to implementation, putting the onus of the conference's success or failure equally on the Palestinian Authority and Israel, where it states: "It is clear that the primary responsibility for solving the conflict lies with the parties." It continues, "The events of the last few years prove that without strong international resolve and involvement in ensuring they move towards the internationally recognized endgame, the conflict will escalate further and peace will be more elusive than ever." (Note: the words "conflict" and "endgame" are inappropriate in this context.) To state that the primary responsibility for solving the conflict lies with the parties, is to equate a battered woman as having the same power and agency as her brutal husband and his gang of weaponized thugs. If there is no peace in the home, she cannot be held responsible for that.
What is needed now, according to the Palestinian civil society organizations, is to "demand that the UNGA suspend Israel's membership for violating its membership conditions, including non-compliance with Resolution 194" of 1948. Israel is in flagrant violation of hundreds of U.N. General Assembly, Security Council, and Human Rights Council Resolutions, and the time has come for the GA to "support the mandate of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territories and Israel, including by pressuring Israel to grant access to Palestine for independent investigations."
As stated in the demands of the Unified Call to Action, the conference should be based on UNGA Res. ES-10/23 of May 2024 pertaining to International Court of Justice advisory rulings, and UNGA Res. ES-10/24 of September 2024 calling for Israel to, within 12 months, completely withdraw its occupying forces from the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Res. ES-10/24 also opens the door for the possible invocation of Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter against Israel, which could lead to sanctions, suspension from the U.N., the creation of a U.N. peacekeeping mission to protect the Palestinians and ensure the flow of humanitarian aid, etc.
Furthermore, France and Saudi Arabia's Concept Note does not reference the genocide, apartheid, ethnic cleansing, war crimes, crimes against humanity, starvation, etc. being suffered by the Palestinian people. It uses only generalized language such as, on Page 2: "Since the initial moments of the current wave of violence..." Also, on Page 2, Egypt and Qatar, along with the United States, are erroneously credited with having "a major role in negotiating a cease-fire in Gaza." Yet, on June 4, the U.S. used its veto power at the U.N. Security Council to block, for the fifth time, a resolution calling for a cease-fire.
At an emergency session of the U.N. General Assembly on June 12th, a resolution demanding an immediate, unconditional, and lasting cease-fire in Gaza was overwhelmingly adopted. Only 12 countries including the U.S. voted against it. Moreover, the few cease-fires that have occurred ended when the release of the designated number of hostages was secured. On June 11th, President Donald Trump slammed the Two-State Solution Conference warning of consequences for countries "that take anti-Israel actions."
Most concerning is that the conference does not set out to address the dire need to stop the imminent perishing by starvation of 2 million Gazans, nor the ongoing forced displacement and ethnic cleansing of the people of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. In addition, it could potentially generate new U.N. resolutions that shrink Palestine's internationally recognized borders, effectively negating and overriding Security Council Res. 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) borders as well as General Assembly Res. 181 (1947) and 194 (1948) establishing Jerusalem as an international city and enshrining the Palestinian right of return and compensation.
In its press release of May 27, 2025, UNICEF addressed the elephant in the room:
Since the end of the cease-fire on 18 March, 1,309 children have reportedly been killed and 3,738 injured. In total, more than 50,000 children have reportedly been killed or injured since October 2023. How many more dead girls and boys will it take? What level of horror must be livestreamed before the international community fully steps up, uses its influence, and takes bold, decisive action to force the end of this ruthless killing of children?
In the words of Pulitzer Prize-winning Palestinian poet Mosab Abu Toha on X, "Only an international military intervention should stop this mass killing of starved people."
According to Leo Gabriel of the World Social Forum and representative of the Global Solidarity for Peace in Palestine Coalition, "What is needed now is for the U.N. Security Council to invoke Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter to send an emergency Blue Helmets peacekeeping mission to Gaza, as it has done in other parts of the world 72 times since 1948. As the Security Council will be deadlocked by the U.S. veto, it is incumbent upon the General Assembly to invoke GA Resolution 377, also known as the 'Uniting for Peace' option, to establish peace in in the Occupied Palestinian Territories and stop the genocide in Gaza." (The Uniting for Peace option was used by the General Assembly with the deployment of peacekeeping forces to the Sinai Peninsula and Gaza Strip to end the1956 Suez Canal crisis.) "Stopping the imminent starvation to death of 2 million besieged Gazans by operationalizing 'Uniting for Peace' is the last gasp of life and hope in the utility of the U.N. to fulfill its mission," he added.
In addition to foundational problems with the U.N. Two-State Solution Conference, now touted as the "International Conference on the Peaceful Settlement of the Question of Palestine," France and Saudi Arabia have been criticized as lacking the credentials to convene the high-level negotiations. Saudi Arabia is well-known for its abysmal human rights record, decimating Yemen militarily and bringing it to the brink of famine, and violent suppression of dissent such as the assassination and dismemberment of journalist Jamal Khashoggi inside the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul. France, with its extensive legacy as a colonial and neocolonial power, is not an impartial arbiter. It has not recognized Palestine as a state, has implemented sweeping bans on pro-Palestinian protests, sells weapons to Israel, and continuously enables the delivery of military equipment to Israel by air and by sea.
Given the circumstances, postponement of the so-called U.N. Two-State Conference may be best, certainly in the eyes of Palestinian civil society.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Ocean Summit Wake-Up Call on Plastics Treaty 'Only Matters If Countries Back It Up With Action'
Civil society groups responded to the declaration by stressing that the statement must be a "floor, not a ceiling" going into the next round of global plastics treaty talks.
Jun 11, 2025
Nearly 100 countries at the United Nations Ocean Conference on Tuesday issued a joint declaration demanding a bold global plastics treaty ahead of the next round of negotiations—a call that civil society groups welcomed, while also stressing that any strong language must be followed by similar action.
The "Nice Wake-Up Call for an Ambitious Plastics Treaty," named for the French coastal city hosting this week's U.N. summit, says that "we are heartened by the constructive engagement of the majority of Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) members to conclude an effective treaty that is urgently needed, acknowledging the scale of socioeconomic challenges that ending plastic pollution may represent for certain parties."
The declaration focuses on five key points for the next talks, INC-5.2, scheduled for August 5-14 in Geneva, Switzerland:
- We recognize that addressing the increasing and unsustainable levels of production and consumption of plastics is essential;
- We call for a legally binding obligation to phase out the most problematic plastic products and chemicals of concern in plastic products;
- We emphasize the importance of a binding obligation to improve the design of plastic products and ensure they cause minimum environmental impact and safeguard human health;
- We recognize the need for effective means of implementation and accessible, new, and additional financing, noting the special circumstances of least developed countries and small island developing states; and
- We call for an effective and ambitious treaty that can evolve over time and is responsive to changes in emerging evidence and knowledge.
"A treaty that lacks these elements, only relies on voluntary measures, or does not address the full lifecycle of plastics will not be effective to deal with the challenge of plastic pollution," warns the declaration, backed by the European Union and countries including Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, Barbados, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Iceland, Madagascar, Maldives, Marshall Islands, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Switzerland, Tuvalu, United Kingdom, and Vanuatu.
Erin Simon, vice president for plastic waste and business at World Wildlife Fund (WWF), said Tuesday that the statement "sends a positive signal that there is strong collaboration and support to secure a legally binding treaty to end plastic pollution."
"These are the types of priorities we're hopeful will be included in a final treaty," Simon noted. "Millions of people around the world have called for a solution to the plastic pollution crisis and while today is a step in the right direction we must continue to push toward advancing a meaningful and enduring agreement in Geneva."
Graham Forbes, Greenpeace USA's global plastics campaign lead and head of the group's delegation for the treaty talks, said that "the Nice declaration, signed by an overwhelming majority of countries, is the wake-up call the world needs. Governments are finally saying the quiet part out loud: We cannot end plastic pollution without cutting plastic production. Full stop."
Forbes continued:
The Nice Declaration tackles the root cause of the crisis, which is the ever-growing, reckless production of plastics driven by fossil fuel giants. The message to industry lobbyists is loud and clear: The health of our children is more important than your bottom line.
We welcome the call for a legally binding global cap on plastic production, and real rules to phase out the most toxic plastic products and chemicals. For too long, treaty talks have been stuck in circular conversations while plastic pollution chokes our oceans, poisons our bodies, and fuels the climate crisis.
But this statement only matters if countries back it up with action this August in Geneva at INC-5.2. That means no voluntary nonsense, no loopholes, and no surrender to fossil fuel and petrochemical interests. We need a treaty with teeth—one that slashes plastic production, holds polluters accountable, and protects people on the frontlines.
Greenpeace and WWF's global groups are part of a coalition of over 230 civil society organizations and rights holders focused on the plastics treaty—which responded to the new declaration by emphasizing that it must be a "floor, not a ceiling."
🚨Today, +230 civil society organizations welcome the renewed commitment of +90 countries to forge a binding global treaty to end plastic pollution and protect human health and the environment by addressing the full life cycle of plastics 🌍✊www.breakfreefromplastic.org/2025/06/11/n...
[image or embed]
— Break Free From Plastic (@breakfreefromplastic.org) June 10, 2025 at 1:10 PM
"The Nice declaration is a welcome step, but words must be followed with actions if we are serious about protecting the rights and health of all. Member states must show decisive leadership at INC-5.2 and deliver a strong, legally binding plastics treaty that leaves no one behind," said Juressa Lee, co-chair of the International Indigenous Peoples' Forum on Plastics, a coalition member.
"Communities on the frontlines, including Indigenous Peoples, are bearing the brunt of plastic pollution at every stage of its toxic lifecycle: from oil and gas extraction, to plastic production, to waste dumping, and the challenging process of environmental remediation, including the restoration of contaminated sites and the recognition of those who have protected these oceans and territories for millennia," Lee added. "We need action, not delay, to safeguard the ocean and the communities that depend on them."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Analyses Expose Ocean Protection Failures Before UN Summit on 'Unprecedented Crisis'
"Conserving 30% of our ocean by 2030 is not just a target—it's a lifeline for communities, food security, biodiversity, and the global economy," said one advocate.
Jun 05, 2025
Ahead of the third United Nations summit on oceans, scheduled for next week, multiple analyses have highlighted how humanity is failing to address the multipronged emergency faced by the world's seas.
"The ocean is facing an unprecedented crisis due to climate change, plastic pollution, ecosystem loss, and the overuse of marine resources," Li Junhua, secretary-general for the 2025 United Nations Ocean Conference (UNOC3), told U.N. News.
UNOC3 is co-chaired by Costa Rica and France, and set to be held in the French coastal city of Nice June 9-13. Its theme is "accelerating action and mobilizing all actors to conserve and sustainably use the ocean."
"Only $1.2 billion of finance is flowing to ocean protection and conservation—less than 10% of what is needed."
One of the new analyses—The Ocean Protection Gap: Assessing Progress Toward the 30×30 Target—was commissioned by the Bloomberg Ocean Fund and produced in partnership with nature groups, including WWF International.
The report, released Thursday, focuses on the 30×30 goal from the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, which is a commitment to conserve at least 30% of the world's land and ocean by 2030. The document warns that right now, "just 8.6% of the ocean is protected, with only 2.7% assessed and deemed effectively protected—a far cry from the 30% target."
Additionally, "only $1.2 billion of finance is flowing to ocean protection and conservation—less than 10% of what is needed," the report notes. It urges governments behind the framework to boost funding, including honoring their pledge to "provide at least $20 billion by 2025 and $30 billion by 2030 in international biodiversity finance to developing countries."
Calling the analysis "a wake-up call," Pepe Clarke, oceans practice leader at WWF, stressed that "we have the science, the tools, and a global agreement, but without bold political leadership and a rapid scaling of ambition, funding, and implementation, the promise of 30×30 will remain unfulfilled. Conserving 30% of our ocean by 2030 is not just a target—it's a lifeline for communities, food security, biodiversity, and the global economy."
🚨In a timely comment piece in @nature.com ahead of #UNOC3, leading ocean scientists make the case for protecting the High Seas from all extraction. @profcallum.bsky.social @ubcoceans.bsky.social @marklynas.bsky.social www.nature.com/articles/d41...
[image or embed]
— Deep Sea Conservation Coalition (@deepseaconserve.bsky.social) June 4, 2025 at 12:07 PM
Another new report, released Thursday by the U.S.-based Earth Insight in partnership with groups from around the world, details "the global expansion of offshore and coastal oil and gas development and its profound threats to marine ecosystems, biodiversity, and the livelihoods of coastal communities—drawing on regional case studies to illustrate these threats."
The analysis found significant overlap between fossil fuel blocks—sites where exploration and production are permitted—and coral, mangroves, sea grass, and allegedly protected areas. It calls for halting oil and gas expansion, retiring blocks not already assigned to investors, ending financial support for coastal and offshore fossil fuel development, investing in renewables, ensuring a just transition, restoring impacted ecosystems, and strengthening legal, financial, and policy frameworks.
Last week, Oceana released another analysis of fishing in France's six Marine Nature Parks in 2024. The conservation group found that over 100 bottom trawling vessels appeared to spend more than 17,000 hours fishing in these "protected" spaces.
"Bottom trawling is one of the most destructive and wasteful practices taking place in our ocean today," said Oceana board member and Sea Around Us Project founder Daniel Pauly in a statement. "These massive, weighted nets bulldoze the ocean floor, destroying everything in their path and remobilizing carbon stored in the seabed. You cannot destroy areas and call them protected. We don't need more bulldozed tracks on the seafloor. We need protected areas that benefit people and nature."
Nicolas Fournier, Oceana's campaign director for marine protection in Europe, urged action by French President Emmanuel Macron.
"This is a problem President Macron can no longer ignore," said Fournier. "France needs to go from words to action—and substantiate its claim of achieving 30×30 by actually protecting its marine treasures from destructive fishing."
As #UNOC3 approaches, it's clear: a #FossilFreeOcean is no longer optional, but a moral and legal imperative. The fight for our oceans is urgent! Read more: bit.ly/3HtViJl
[image or embed]
— Center for International Environmental Law (@ciel.org) June 5, 2025 at 11:02 AM
Greenpeace has also recently called out the "weaknesses" of French marine protections—and then faced what the group condemned as retaliation from the government: Authorities blocked its ship, Arctic Sunrise, from entering the port of Nice.
"Arctic Sunrise had been invited by the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs to participate in the 'One Ocean Science Congress' and in the ocean wonders parade taking place right before the U.N. Ocean Conference," the group explained in a Tuesday statement. "Greenpeace International had intended to deliver the messages of 3 million people calling for a moratorium on deep-sea mining to the politicians attending the conference."
Greenpeace International executive director Mads Christensen denounced the "attempt to silence fair criticism" before UNOC3 as "clearly a political decision" and "utterly unacceptable."
"France wants this to be a moment where they present themselves as saviors of the oceans while they want to silence any criticism of their own failures in national waters. We will not be silenced," Christensen declared. "Greenpeace and the French government share the same objective to get a moratorium on deep-sea mining, which makes the ban of the Arctic Sunrise from Nice even more absurd."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular