Why Singapore Should Not Yet Recognise Palestine 

At the next United Nations General Assembly in September 2025 ,  France, the United Kingdom, and Australia, have indicated that they will recognise Palestine. Around the world, there is increasing pressure on governments to recognise Palestine immediately. Pro Palestine groups insist it is a matter of moral clarity, of solidarity with the oppressed, of standing on what they call “the right side of history.

In Singapore, these calls have begun to surface as well. Singapore, together with Japan and South Korea, are a small group of nations in Asia that have yet to recognise Palestine. But for a small state, our fate is secured through hard choices, not easy gestures.

Not a functioning state

Palestine today has no features of a functioning state. It has no unified government, no control of borders, no functioning security system. To recognise it now would not create sovereignty where none exists. It would simply elevate symbolism over substance.

Recognition under such conditions is merely performative. And in international politics, performative acts are a luxury small states cannot afford.

Rewarding Extremism

A more dangerous consequence is that recognition now would reward Hamas. This is an organization that has turned the suffering of civilians into a deliberate political weapon — sacrificing innocents in order to provoke outrage abroad. To grant Palestine recognition under these circumstances would hand Hamas a victory. It would normalise terror as a path to legitimacy.

Big powers may indulge in such symbolic politics and bear the consequences. Small states cannot. For Singapore, a multiracial city-state whose security depends on delicate cohesion and vigilance, that precedent could be fatal.

The right side and the global context    

One often hears the refrain that recognition would place Singapore on the “right side of history.” But history is written by survivors. In 1965, when Singapore faced independence alone, our very survival was in question. Larger neighbors were hostile. We had no army, no defenses. It was Israel that trained our armed forces, supplied us weapons, and helped craft the doctrines that still underpin our national defense. That is history, too. And the right side of it, for Singapore, has always been the side that ensures our survival.

We cannot ignore the global context – our prosperity rests on an American-led order. Today, under President Trump, Washington’s stance is crystal clear: there will be no recognition of Palestine outside a negotiated settlement. It would be folly for a small-state – especially one with  close military and economic ties with America – to go against this. 

Substance over Form

Some argue that recognition would at least be a powerful symbol. But symbols do not keep shipping lanes open, defend airspace, or deter aggression. They do not feed us or protect us. Larger powers can afford to indulge in gestures because their existence is not at stake. For Singapore, symbols that carry existential costs are not symbols at all — they are liabilities.

Singapore’s position has always been principled, but never divorced from reality. We support a two-state solution — but one that is negotiated, durable, and real. In principle, Singapore has always been prepared to recognise Palestine. We have even trained Palestinian officials in governance, and maintained warm diplomatic relations even without official recognition. 

But recognition now, without a negotiated solution, changes nothing in reality. It is not principle; it is posturing. It rewards extremism, undermines our long-time allies, and thus jeopardises the very foundations of our security.

Survival of small states

Some may dismiss this as cold or unfeeling. But Singapore does not have the luxury of sentiment. Our foreign policy is written in the hard logic of survival, and survival demands that we reject the dangerous temptation of symbolic politics. 

Small states that forget this disappear from the map.

Singapore has to remember.