Talk:Foreign relations of Palestine


140

It's not 140 of 193 UN members. It's 138 of 193 UN members plus 2 non-UN members (Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic and Vatican City) Please, correct it. Fernan860 (talk) 18:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AJ says it is 139 and a quick search shows other sources also saying 139, you provided no source, why do you think it is 138? Selfstudier (talk) 18:20, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the article International recognition of the State of Palestine there are two tables. One table shows (one by one) the UN full member states that recognize Palestine (138) and another shows the UN full member states that do not recognize Palestine (55), which adds up to 193, which are the full member states of the UN. The fact that the Vatican City/Holy See (a UN observer state but not a full member and, therefore, not included in those 193 mentioned) and the Sahwari Republic (partially recognized state and not UN member) recognize Palestine creates confusion about the number in some media.
139 UN States recognize Palestine but not 139 of 193, but rather 138 of 193 + 1 "extra" member (Vatican City/Holy See). On the UN website (https://web.archive.org/web/20180927134802/http://palestineun.org/about-palestine/diplomatic-relations) it can be seen that in 2018 there were 137 States of the UN (including the Vatican City/Holy See). After recognition by Colombia and Saint Kitts and Nevis (which do not appear on that UN list because it is not updated), there are 139 UN States (138 of the 193 full members plus the Vatican City/Holy See)
Additionally, If you add the Sahrawi Republic there are 140 States, but by no means 140 of 193, but 138 of 193 + Vatican City/Holy See + Sahrawi Republic.
In the next links (among others), figure 138 of 193:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-67231803https://www.visualcapitalist.com/recognition-of-palestine-map/
Fernan860 (talk) 18:30, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP is not a source so can't go by that. The BBC attributes that statement to someone called Walker. The last one might be useful as it gives a list of 55 states not recognizing Palestine. I wonder if the problem might be Mexico, there seems to be some doubt about that one.
El Pais says 139
So does DW and NPR
Maybe we still have some work to do to reconcile this. Selfstudier (talk) 18:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the UN link (https://web.archive.org/web/20180927134802/http://palestineun.org/about-palestine/diplomatic-relations) is the best source. As I said, it can be seen that in 2018 there were 137 UN States (including Vatican City/Holy See). After the recognition of Colombia, Saint Kitts and Nevis and now, Barbados (which do not appear on that UN list because it is not updated), there are 140 UN States (139 of the 193 full members plus Vatican City/Holy See)
The New York Times says " 138 countries and the Holy See have recognized the State of Palestine." (before Barbados' recognition) (see https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/18/world/middleeast/palestinian-statehood-un-veto.html) Fernan860 (talk) 20:04, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 February 2025

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. – robertsky (talk) 14:29, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Foreign relations of the State of PalestineForeign relations of Palestine – Almost a month ago, the then-State of Palestine page has been renamed and moved to Palestine. This one should follow suit. Also, the existing template page should also be renamed and moved to Template:Foreign relations of Palestine. 2001:4456:1FF:4D00:C090:ED6E:A2C3:C6FE (talk) 12:47, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support per WP:CONSISTENT Yeshivish613 (talk) 22:14, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Jeffrey34555 (talk) 01:01, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 September 2025

5.123.134.90 (talk) 23:29, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: No edit request made. LizardJr8 (talk) 00:35, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request 1 October 2025

Description of suggested change: I think that the map (and the table) on this map are quite outdated. Diplomatic relations (at least mutual diplomatic missions) exist between Palestine and, Belgium,[1] Austria,[2] Canada-Palestine relations, Cameroon, Croatia, Denmark, Eritrea, [3] Estonia, [4] Finland, Germany, Greece, Israel (disputed?), Italy, Japan,Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Singapore,[5] South Korea and the United States at least according to the table on international recognition of Palestine.

My request is to add these countries into the table and the map, using the same format used in the rest of the table.

This would look like the following for Austria: (but would be repeated for all the countries in the list)

|- |135 |{{flag|Yemen}} |Unknown
+
|- |135 |{{flag|Yemen}} |Unknown |- | |{{flag|Austria}} |Unknown

Also generally, I feel like this article has a lot of overlap with the recognition of Palestine page. (This is not a merge request, more a “food for thought” kind of thing)

References

  1. ^ "Development cooperation". Consulate General of Belgium in Jerusalem. 31 August 2022. Retrieved 28 September 2025.
  2. ^ "Die Anerkennung der PLO durch Österreich" [Recognition of the PLO by] (PDF) (in German). 1 September 1980. Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 7 May 2011.
  3. ^ "Palestinian UN Bid for Independence and Eritrea". 22 September 2011. Archived from the original on 8 March 2021. Retrieved 16 October 2017.
  4. ^ Government of Estonia. "Diplomatic relations". Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Archived from the original on 2 January 2011. Retrieved 20 November 2010.
  5. ^ "Vivian Balakrishnan meets Palestinian leaders, expresses S'pore's deep concern about dire situation in Gaza". The Straits Times. 20 March 2024. Retrieved 14 May 2024. Noting Singapore's "good and strong" relationship with the Palestinian Authority,...

Slomo666 (talk) 16:56, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

yes i agree it need to be updated Turtle03thegreycat (talk) 20:48, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Many of these countries do not recognize Palestine let alone have diplomatic relations with the state. They may have relations with PNA or PLO but not with e state. Semsûrî (talk) 20:57, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
but recently The UK and France had reconize them Turtle03thegreycat (talk) 21:06, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
diplomatic relations and recognition are not the same thing buddy. Underdwarf58 (talk) 23:04, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How it isn't? Turtle03thegreycat (talk) 23:05, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Recognition is the acknowledgement of a state's or government's existence and legal standing in the international community, whereas diplomatic relations are the official, established relationships between states, generally involving embassies and ambassadors. The first step is recognition, which confirms a state's sovereignty and ability to sign agreements and join groups. This position is actively implemented through diplomatic ties, which promote reciprocal advantages like trade, information sharing, and amicable partnerships. Underdwarf58 (talk) 23:09, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ah i see then Turtle03thegreycat (talk) 01:51, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Be nice please. I know this is difficult for many people. (I assume confusions like these are also what lead to the current state of the article) Slomo666 (talk) 23:23, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean "be nice"? I did not say any slurs or insults. Underdwarf58 (talk) 23:31, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Buddy" is just a friendly term. Underdwarf58 (talk) 23:32, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I interpreted it as belittlement. Slomo666 (talk) 23:54, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Engvar consistency

@Timrollpickering: I am afraid the article is not quite as consistent (yet) as your edit would appear to imply. I think we should have a short discussion about this to implement {{Use British English}} or another template achieving a similar goal of clarifying the variant on this page, alongside a short purge through the page of all the bits that do not conform to the chosen variant.

(I’ve done this before at Talk:International Criminal Court, if you want to see how I did it in the past)


Thank you, happy editing

Slomo666 (talk) 00:59, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]