Resistance forces push military regime close to brink in Myanmar

Resistance forces push military regime close to brink in Myanmar
Before the offensive, the military’s control had seemed firmly ensconced with its vast superiority in troops and firepower, and aided with material support from Russia and China. (AP)
Short Url
Updated 28 October 2024

Resistance forces push military regime close to brink in Myanmar

Resistance forces push military regime close to brink in Myanmar
  • Before the offensive, the military’s control had seemed firmly ensconced with its vast superiority in troops and firepower, and aided with material support from Russia and China
  • “To us it doesn’t look like there’s any viable route back for the military to recapture any of the territory that it’s lost”

BANGKOK: Three well-armed militias launched a surprise joint offensive in northeastern Myanmar a year ago, breaking a strategic stalemate with the regime’s military with rapid gains of huge swaths of territory and inspiring others to attack around the country.
The military’s control had seemed firmly ensconced with vast superiority in troops and firepower, plus material support from Russia and China. But today the government is increasingly on the back foot, with the loss of dozens of outposts, bases and strategic cities that even its leaders concede would be challenging to take back.
“The military is on the defensive all over the country, and every time it puts its energy into one part of the country, it basically has to shift troops and then is vulnerable in other parts,” said Connor Macdonald of the Special Advisory Council for Myanmar advocacy group.
“To us it doesn’t look like there’s any viable route back for the military to recapture any of the territory that it’s lost.”
The military seized power from the elected government of Aung San Suu Kyi in February 2021, triggering intensified fighting with long-established armed militias organized by Myanmar’s ethnic minority groups in its border regions, which have struggled for decades for more autonomy.
The army’s takeover also sparked the formation of pro-democracy militias known as People’s Defense Forces. They support the opposition National Unity Government, which was established by elected lawmakers barred from taking their seats after the army takeover.
But until the launch of Operation 1027, eponymously named for its Oct. 27 start, the military, known as the Tatmadaw, had largely been able to prevent major losses around the country.
Operation 1027 brought coordinated attacks from three of the most powerful ethnic armed groups, known as the Three Brotherhood Alliance: the Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army, the Arakan Army and the Ta’ang National Liberation Army. The alliance quickly captured towns and overran military bases and outposts along the Chinese border in northeastern Shan state.
Two weeks later, the Arakan Army launched attacks in its western home state of Rakhine, and since then other militia groups and PDFs have joined in around the country.
Myanmar’s military has been pushed back to the country’s center
A year after the offensive began, resistance forces now fully or partially control a vast horseshoe of territory. It starts in Rakhine state in the west, runs across the north and then heads south into Kayah and Kayin states along the Thai border. The Tatmadaw has pulled back toward central Myanmar, around the capital Naypyidaw and largest city of Yangon.
“I never thought our goals would be achieved so quickly,” Lway Yay Oo, spokesperson for the Ta’ang National Liberation Army, told The Associated Press. “We only thought that we would attack the military council together to the extent we could, but it has been easier than expected so we’ve been able to conquer more quickly.”
Along the way, the Tatmadaw has suffered some humiliating defeats, including the loss of the city of Laukkai in an assault in which the Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army captured more than 2,000 troops, including six generals; and of the city of Lashio, which had been home to the military’s Northeast Command.
“The 1027 offensive was a highly impressive operation, quite complex, and the use of drones played a big role because basically they were able to dismantle the military’s network of fire-support bases across northern Shan,” said Morgan Michaels, a Singapore-based analyst with the International Institute of Strategic Studies who runs its Myanmar Conflict Map project.
“And then, once the military’s artillery support eroded, they were able to overrun harder targets like towns and battalion headquarters.”
A year later, the military is “substantially weakened,” he said, but it’s too early to write it off.
The military has been weakened, but not defeated
The Tatmadaw has managed to claw back the town of Kawlin in the Sagaing region, which had fallen in the first days of the 1027 offensive, stave off an attack by three ethnic Karenni militias on Loikaw, the capital of Kayah state, and has retained administrative control of Myawaddy, a key border crossing with Thailand, after holding off an assault by one ethnic group with the assistance of a rival militia.
Many expect the military to launch a counteroffensive when the rainy season soon comes to an end, bolstered by some 30,000 new troops since activating conscription in February and its complete air superiority.
But at the same time, resistance groups are closing in on Mandalay, Myanmar’s second largest city, in the center of the country.
And where they might be out-gunned, they have gained strength, hard-won experience and confidence over the last year, said the Ta’ang National Liberation Army’s Lway Yay Oo.
“We have military experience on our side, and based on this experience we can reinforce the fighting operation,” she said.
Thet Swe, a spokesperson for the military regime, conceded it will be a challenge for the Tatmadaw to dislodge the Three Brotherhood Alliance from the territory it has gained.
“We cannot take it back during one year,” he told the AP in an emailed answer to questions. “However, I hope that I will give you a joyful message ... in (the) coming two or three years.”
Civilian casualties rise as the military turns more to indiscriminate strikes
As the military has faced setbacks in the fighting on the ground, it has been increasingly relying on indiscriminate air and artillery strikes, resulting in a 95 percent increase in civilian deaths from airstrikes and a 170 percent increase in civilians killed by artillery since the 1027 offensive began, according to a report last month by the United Nations’ Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.
The Tatmadaw has been accused of deliberately targeting civilians whom it believes support the resistance militias, a tactic that is only turning more against them, said Isabel Todd, coordinator for the SAC-M group.
“It doesn’t seem to be having the effect that they want it to have,” she said. “It’s making them even more hated by the population and really strengthening the resolve to ensure that this is the end of the Myanmar military as it’s known.”
Military spokesperson Thet Swe denied targeting civilians, saying it was militia groups that were responsible for killing civilians and burning villages.
Hundreds of thousands of civilians have been displaced by the fighting, and there are now more than 3 million internally displaced people in Myanmar overall, and some 18.6 million people in need, according to the UN
At the same time, the 2024 humanitarian response plan is only 1/3 funded, hindering the delivery of aid, said Sajjad Mohammad Sajid, head of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs operation in Myanmar.
“The humanitarian outlook for the next year is grim, and we anticipate that the deteriorating situation will have a massive impact on the protection of civilians,” he said in an interview.
In some areas, however, the offensive has eased pressure, like northwestern Chin state, which borders Bangladesh and India and had previously been the focus of many of the Tatmadaw’s operations, said Salai Htet Ni, a spokesperson for the Chin National Front whose armed wing has been involved in fighting the military.
“In October of last year the military convoys that were going up into the Chin mountains were withdrawn,” he said. “As a result of the 1027 operation there have been almost no major military activities.”
Success brings new tensions between resistance groups
As the front has expanded it has seen militias advancing out of their own ethnic areas, like when Rakhine-based Arakan Army in January seized the Chin town of Paletwa, which has given rise to some friction between groups, foreshadowing possible future strife should the Tatmadaw eventually fall.
In the case of Paletwa, Salai Htet Ni said his group was happy that the AA took it from the Tatmadaw, but added that there should have been negotiations before they began operating in Chin territory and that the AA should now bring Chin forces in to help administer the area.
“Negotiations are mandatory for these regional administration issues,” he said. “But we will negotiate this case through dialogue, not military means.”
At the moment there is a degree of solidarity between the different ethnic groups as they focus on a common enemy, but Aung Thu Nyein, director of communications for the Institute for Strategy and Policy-Myanmar think tank said that does not translate to common aspirations.
Should the Tatmadaw fall, it could lead to the fragmentation of Myanmar unless the groups work hard to resolve political and territorial differences.
“As far as I see, there is no established mechanism to resolve the issues,” he said. “The resistance being able to bring down the junta is unlikely, but I cannot discount this scenario, (and) if we cannot build trust and common goals, it could lead to the scenario of Syria.”
Chinese interests and ties with both sides complicate the picture
Complicating the political picture is the influence of neighboring China, which is believed to have tacitly supported the 1027 offensive in what turned out to be a successful bid to largely shut down organized crime activities that had been flourishing along its border.
In January, Beijing used its close ties with both the Tatmadaw and the Three Brotherhood groups to negotiate a ceasefire in northern Shan, which lasted for five months until the ethnic alliance opened phase two of the 1027 offensive in June, accusing the military of violating the ceasefire.
China has been displeased with the development, shutting down border crossings, cutting electricity to Myanmar towns and taking other measures in a thus-far unsuccessful attempt to end the fighting.
Its support for the regime also seems to be growing, with China’s envoy to Myanmar urging the powerful United Wa State Army, which wasn’t involved in the 1027 offensive or related fighting, to actively pressure the Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army and Ta’ang National Liberation Army to halt the renewed offensive, according to leaked details of an August meeting widely reported by local media.
There is no evidence that the UWSA has done that, however.
“The idea that the northern groups and the Three Brotherhood Alliance etc. are somehow just agents of China is a complete misconception,” Todd said.
“They have their own objectives which they are pursuing that are independent of what China may or may not want them to do, and that’s apparent in the incredible amount of pressure that China has put on them recently.”
Because of the grassroot support for the resistance, it is less vulnerable to outside influence, said Kyaw Zaw, a spokesperson for the opposition National Unity Government.
“No matter who is putting pressure on us, we are winning because of the power of the people,” he said.


Have reports of the UN Security Council’s death been grossly exaggerated?

Have reports of the UN Security Council’s death been grossly exaggerated?
Updated 4 sec ago

Have reports of the UN Security Council’s death been grossly exaggerated?

Have reports of the UN Security Council’s death been grossly exaggerated?
  • Critics say the council’s veto-bound structure leaves conflicts unresolved, reforms stalled, and credibility eroding
  • Despite calls for reform, the council’s five permanent members resist changes that might dilute their authority

LONDON: The persistence of wars and conflicts, despite humanity’s best endeavors to eradicate them, is one of the most frustrating and costly aspects of international affairs and human existence.

After the Second World War, the establishment of the UN, and especially the Security Council, its centerpiece for ensuring peace and security, was intended to provide the ultimate answer to war prevention, or at least its quick resolution.

Even if the UN has not entirely failed, it has only partially served its intended purpose. This failure is due to the inherent structure of the international system, of which the primary building block is the nation state, which is reluctant to cede certain aspects of its security to a global collective security body.

A view of the United Nations headquarters in New York City. (Shutterstock)

It is also the structure and mandate of the UN, particularly the Security Council and its exclusive club of five permanent members with the right of veto, that hinder its effectiveness in preventing and resolving conflicts.

Article 2(4) of the UN Charter sets the vision and imperative for all members to refrain from the “threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.” The Security Council was established as the primary universal mechanism to achieve this objective.

The UN founding fathers set themselves a very high bar for norms of behavior in the international arena, aiming to radically reform how political units, mainly states, engage with one another — through diplomacy rather than the use of force or any other act of aggression, which had been the norm from the dawn of history.

To achieve this, states needed to recognize that their national interest is best served through the collective interest of all member states.

However, this lesson has never been learned, and the UN, throughout its existence, has not managed to change that deep-seated modus operandi. As a collective security tool, it is reactive, and crucially, very slow.

In this photo taken during a UN Security Council meeting on February 25, 2022, Russia's ambassador to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia (C) votes on a draft resolution that would condemn his country for invading Ukraine. Under the UN charter, any one of the five permanent council members — Britain, China, France, Russia and the US —  can single-handedly kill a resolution with a veto. (AFP file photo)

The design of the Security Council reflects both the hopeful sentiment prevailing in the aftermath of the Second World War and the prevailing power structure of the time.

The Security Council has five permanent members — China, France, Russia, the UK and the US — collectively known as the P5. Any one of them has the power to veto any resolution brought in front of it.

This privileged status was bestowed on the leading victorious powers of the war and their allies, who reshaped the postwar international order, but it is now widely regarded as archaic and in desperate need of change.

The General Assembly elects the other ten Security Council members for a term of two years, distributed based on geographical rotation, but they are not afforded veto power.

Annalena Baerbock, president of the 80th General Assembly, speaks during the General Debate of the United Nations General Assembly at the UN headquarters in New York City on September 23, 2025. (AFP)

The Security Council’s presidency rotates monthly, enabling the ten non-permanent members, which are elected by a two-thirds vote of the UN General Assembly, to have a say in setting the agenda of this body.

Under the UN Charter, the Security Council was given extensive powers, including the authority to investigate any dispute or situation that might lead to international friction and to recommend methods to resolve or at least mitigate such disputes.

It can also formulate plans to regulate armaments and call on member states to apply economic sanctions and measures, including military action to stop aggression.

One of the Security Council’s main powers is mandating peacekeeping missions with the aim of promoting reconciliation, assisting with the implementation of peace agreements, or performing mediation and good offices, as well as more forceful actions authorized by the charter.

Since its inception, the UN has conducted 38 peacekeeping missions, 11 of which are currently operational in various locations, including the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Western Sahara, and Jammu and Kashmir, where they observe the ceasefire, promote security and stability in Kosovo, and are deployed along the Israeli borders with Syria and Lebanon.

A patrol unit of the United Nations peacekeeping force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) is stationed in the southernmost Lebanese town of Naqura by the border with Israel, as talks on maritime borders between the two countries, still technically at war, are set to resume under UN and US auspices, on May 4, 2021. (AFP)

Beyond these relative successes of peacekeeping operations, there have been marked failures. Most notoriously, UN peacekeeping operations failed to prevent the Rwandan genocide in 1994, as well as the one occurring in the town of Srebrenica in eastern Bosnia in 1995.

In most cases, due to the limited mandate of these operations, their successes or failures depend on the will of the antagonistic sides to maintain the peace or, at the very least, not to renew hostilities.

Criticism has been directed at the Security Council in particular for its failure to prevent conflicts or bring them to an immediate end and for the lack of agility to take the necessary actions in resolving long-running conflicts.

Such examples include the dispute between India and Pakistan over Kashmir, or the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which, despite numerous resolutions, continues due to the non-compliance of the main protagonists and lack of enforcement by the international community.

In the case of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it is the US which blocks most resolutions that are critical of Israel, such as a call for a ceasefire in the current war in Gaza, or the recognition of a Palestinian state.

Ambassador Robert Wood, alternate representative of the US in the UN, raises his hands to veto a draft resolution during a United Nations Security Council meeting on the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question at the UN headquarters on November 20, 2024 in New York City. (AFP file photo)

The act of aggression by a permanent member of the Security Council, Russia, against its Ukrainian neighbor came as a particularly hard blow to the credibility of this institution and a clear illustration of how the veto power has been abused.

Also on issues such as the COVID-19 pandemic or climate change, the Security Council has been found wanting in providing answers to urgent global challenges.

Despite these failures, neither the UN nor its Security Council has been adequately reformed. As a result, it is increasingly seen as anachronistic, with hierarchical structures represented by the non-democratic powers of the permanent members’ ability to veto.

Indeed, this can hardly be justified in an organization whose charter promotes the principles of “equal rights” and “sovereign equality” when at the same time it maintains the power of the Global North and marginalizes the Global South.

Years of criticism led the General Assembly in 2007 to establish what is known as the “intergovernmental negotiations” to advance the question of equitable representation, increase the membership of the Security Council, and to ensure more accountability and transparency.

Despite endless rounds of negotiations, the membership issue remains unresolved as the P5 oppose losing their privileged position.

The odds of a meaningful reform of the Security Council are slim because amending the UN Charter requires the support of the General Assembly, followed by ratification by two-thirds of UN member states, in addition to the consent of all the Security Council’s permanent members.

Hence, the main reforms focus on increasing transparency and procedural matters.

For now, the Security Council remains the main UN organ for discussing issues of peace and security, and the robust debates and resolutions that emerge are affecting how individual countries behave in their bilateral and multilateral engagements, including the exertion of their influence.

Yet, the criticism of not adding more members from Africa, Asia and Latin America, as well as the overuse of the veto power, need to be addressed.

If the Security Council is to remain relevant and fulfil its mission as set out in the UN Charter in the 21st century, these issues cannot be ignored, and would not be impossible to achieve.
 

 


Russia accuses Ukraine of blowing up ammonia pipeline

Updated 10 min 15 sec ago

Russia accuses Ukraine of blowing up ammonia pipeline

Russia accuses Ukraine of blowing up ammonia pipeline
The incident took place near the frontline village of Rusin Yar in Ukraine’s eastern Donetsk region
“The pipeline was blown up, resulting in the release of ammonia residues through the damaged section,” the Russian defense ministry said

MOSCOW: Russia accused Ukraine on Thursday of rupturing a now defunct pipeline used to transport Russian ammonia into Ukraine for export, releasing toxic gas into the air.
The incident took place near the frontline village of Rusin Yar in Ukraine’s eastern Donetsk region, Russia said.
“During Ukraine’s retreat from the area at around 1:05 p.m. (1005 GMT) on October 9, 2025, the pipeline was blown up, resulting in the release of ammonia residues through the damaged section,” the Russian defense ministry said, accusing Kyiv of trying to slow its advances.
It posted a video showing what appeared to be clouds of a chemical compound spewing out from a source in the ground.
The military administration in Ukraine’s Donetsk region confirmed on Telegram that the pipeline had been “damaged” without indicating the reason.
The authorities said the incident did not present a “menace to the lives of people” living nearby.
Ammonia is used to make fertilizer.
Before the war, the Tolyatti-Odesa pipeline transported millions of tons of the chemical compound from the Russian city of Tolyatti to Black Sea ports in Ukraine.
It ceased operations shortly after Moscow launched its 2022 offensive.
Both Russia and Ukraine have accused each other of rupturing the pipeline before, in 2023.

Gaza aid flotillas to continue: Brazilian activist

Gaza aid flotillas to continue: Brazilian activist
Updated 24 min 32 sec ago

Gaza aid flotillas to continue: Brazilian activist

Gaza aid flotillas to continue: Brazilian activist
  • “As long as there is no justice for the Palestinian people, the flotilla will continue,” Avila said
  • He was one of 13 Brazilians aboard Gaza flotilla of 45 vessels intercepted by Israel last week

GUARULHOS: Brazilian activist Thiago Avila, one of the main organizers of the international aid flotilla to Gaza, said Thursday that the movement to get life-saving relief to the devastated Palestinian enclave would continue, after a ceasefire was announced between Israel and Hamas.
“There is nothing in the ceasefire agreements to indicate that the illegal blockade of Gaza by Israel, the United States, or any other nation will end,” he told reporters upon his return to Brazil.
“As long as there is no justice for the Palestinian people, the flotilla will continue.”
Avila was one of 13 Brazilians aboard the Global Sumud Flotilla of 45 vessels intercepted by Israel last week.
Israel detained and deported more than 470 people aboard the boats, including Swedish climate campaigner Greta Thunberg.
Israel has blocked several international aid flotillas in recent months from reaching Gaza, where the United Nations says famine has set in after two years of a devastating Israeli military offensive.
Israel enforces a blockade on the territory, and has slashed the amount of humanitarian aid allowed into the enclave while the war has raged.
Several activists on board the flotilla reported mistreatment in detention, which Israel denied.
“Obviously, there were violations that will be the subject of complaints in international courts, but they are nothing compared to what the Palestinians are suffering,” said Avila.
He reported cases of “physical violence” and “forced interrogations” of activists.
“Diabetics have gone three days without access to insulin,” he said.
Israel and Hamas on Thursday agreed a ceasefire deal after more than two years of war sparked by Hamas’s October 2023 attack on Israel.
Israel’s retaliatory campaign has reduced much of Gaza to rubble — including schools, hospitals and basic infrastructure — and killed at least 67,194 people, according to the territory’s health ministry.


France awaits new PM to end political crisis

France awaits new PM to end political crisis
Updated 47 min 37 sec ago

France awaits new PM to end political crisis

France awaits new PM to end political crisis
  • Macron has yet to make any public comment on the political chaos after Lecornu’s resignation
  • Macron could reappoint Lecornu, or name the eighth premier of his presidency, in a bid to resolve months of deadlock over next year’s austerity budget

PARIS: France on Thursday awaited in suspense over who would be its next prime minister as a deadline ticked down for President Emmanuel Macron to name a new premier after Sebastien Lecornu’s resignation threw the country further into political turmoil.
Macron has yet to make any public comment on the political chaos after Lecornu’s resignation early Monday. But his office said Wednesday evening a new premier would be named within 48 hours, an announcement that for now lessened the chance of early elections being called.
Macron’s choice is more likely to be divulged Friday, after he was busy Thursday afternoon making remarks at talks in Paris to help Palestinians after the Gaza war, and later in the evening speaking at a ceremony honoring a late justice minister who ended capital punishment.
Macron could reappoint Lecornu, or name the eighth premier of his presidency, in a bid to resolve months of deadlock over next year’s austerity budget.
The president’s office said on Wednesday evening that he would “name a prime minister within 48 hours,” and that a “path was possible” to agree a budget by the end of the year.
Lecornu told French television that he expected a new premier to be named, rather than early legislative elections or Macron’s resignation.

- ‘Roll up its sleeves’ -

Lecornu’s two immediate predecessors were ousted by the legislative chamber in a standoff over the spending plan.
The escalation of the crisis has turned into the worst political headache for Macron since he came to office in 2017, with close allies deserting a head of state who now appears increasingly isolated.
Former premier Edouard Philippe said that Macron himself should step down and call snap presidential polls.
But Lecornu insisted the president should serve out his mandate until 2027, saying it was “not the time to change the president.”
Suggesting that a more technocratic government could be named, Lecornu said people in a new cabinet should not have “ambitions” to stand in the 2027 presidential elections.
“We need a team that decides to roll up its sleeves and solve the country’s problems until the presidential election,” he said.
Rumours swirled on Thursday on who could be prime minister.
A person close to the president, asking not to be named, said Jean-Louis Borloo, a former minister under right-wing presidents Jacques Chirac and Nicolas Sarkozy, could be a potential candidate.
But the 74-year-old centrist said he had heard nothing of it and had “zero” contact with the president’s office.
Lecornu said on French television, he was “not running after” the job but conspicuously did not rule out being reappointed in what would be a new twist after several days of drama.
Whoever is named the new premier will likely face the same problems encountered by Lecornu and his two immediate predecessors, Michel Barnier and Francois Bayrou, who were both toppled by parliament.

- ‘Listen to the country’ -

After losing their majority in 2022 elections and ceding even more seats in snap polls last year, Macron’s centrists have governed in a de facto coalition with the right-wing Republicans.
But even this combination is a minority in parliament, and any premier risks being voted out again if the left teams up with the far-right.
Left-wing political leaders on Thursday urged Macron to include their Socialist, Greens and Communist parties in government to help “build majorities in parliament.”
“Listen to the country,” said Socialist leader Olivier Faure, Communist chief Fabien Roussel and Greens boss Marine Tondelier in a joint statement.
This “failure of successive governments is nothing more than the refusal to change policy” according to the aspirations of voters, they said.
A coalition of left-wing parties — including the hard left — won the most seats in the polls last year, but fell short of an absolute majority.

Marine Le Pen, whose far-right party declined to take part in talks with Lecornu this week, said Wednesday she would thwart all action by any new government and would “vote against everything.”
Le Pen’s anti-immigration party senses its best ever chance of winning power in the 2027 presidential elections, with Macron barred from running having served two terms.


Macron warns Israeli settlements threaten Palestinian state

Macron warns Israeli settlements threaten Palestinian state
Updated 37 min 53 sec ago

Macron warns Israeli settlements threaten Palestinian state

Macron warns Israeli settlements threaten Palestinian state
  • Macron hailed ceasefire deal in Gaza as “great hope” for the region
  • He said Israeli settlement “fuels tensions, violence, and instability”

PARIS: French President Emmanuel Macron warned Thursday that expanding Israeli settlements threatened a Palestinian state and US-led peace efforts, as France hosted Arab and European ministers to find ways to boost the Palestinians after a Gaza ceasefire deal was announced.

Macron hailed the ceasefire deal as a “great hope” for the region, but said the “acceleration” of settlement construction in the occupied West Bank was an “existential threat” to a Palestinian state.

It was “not only unacceptable and contrary to international law” but “fuels tensions, violence, and instability,” he said in opening remarks to the meeting in Paris.

“It fundamentally contradicts the American plan and our collective ambition for a peaceful region.”

Israel and Hamas earlier agreed a Gaza ceasefire deal to free the remaining living Israeli hostages held by the Palestinian militant group.

It is being seen as a major step toward ending a war that has killed tens of thousands of people and unleashed a humanitarian catastrophe.

The deal brokered through indirect talks in the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh came two years after the October 7, 2023 attack by Hamas on Israel, which triggered a relentless retaliatory assault on Hamas-ruled Gaza.

While Europe has strongly supported the ceasefire efforts led by US President Donald Trump, Washington and several European countries are at odds over whether it is the right moment to recognize a Palestinian state.

Macron, in a September 22 speech at the United Nations, recognized a Palestinian state on the heels of similar announcements by Canada, Portugal and the United Kingdom.

The Paris meeting brought together the top diplomats of five key Arab states — Egypt, Jordan, , Qatar and the United Arab Emirates — with European counterparts from France, Italy, Germany, Spain and the United Kingdom.

Turkiye and the European Union were also represented.

‘Unnecessary and harmful’

“A ceasefire is not yet a lasting peace,” said French Foreign Minister, Jean-Noel Barrot. “It is the first step on a long road to a political solution that will guarantee Israel’s security while recognizing the legitimate rights of the Palestinians to a state.”

France is hoping that backing up its recognition of a Palestinian state by discussing what happens the “day after” the war ends can boost the prospects of a two-state solution, which Paris still regards as the sole chance for long-term regional peace.

The ministers discussed participating in the International Stabilization Force evoked by Trump as part of his peace plan and support for the Palestinian Authority which runs the occupied West Bank.

Before the ceasefire deal was announced, the Paris meeting had angered Israel, further straining French-Israeli relations in the wake of Macron’s recognition of a Palestinian state.

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar had in a message on X denounced the “unnecessary and harmful” meeting “concocted behind Israel’s back” at the sensitive moment of the negotiations in Sharm el-Sheikh.