Connect with us

Politics

Australia to recognize Palestinian state, but conditions must be met: PM – National TenX News

Published

on


Australia will recognize a Palestinian state, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said Monday, joining the leaders of France, Britain and Canada in signaling they would do so.

His remarks followed weeks of urging from within his Cabinet and from many in Australia to recognize a Palestinian state and amid growing criticism from officials in his government over suffering in Gaza, which Albanese on Monday referred to as a “humanitarian catastrophe.”

Australia’s government has also criticized plans announced in recent days by Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu for a sweeping new military offensive in Gaza.

Albanese says conditions must be met for Palestine recognition

Albanese told reporters after a Cabinet meeting Monday that Australia’s decision to recognize a Palestinian state will be formalized at the United Nations General Assembly in September. The acknowledgement was “predicated on commitments Australia has received from the Palestinian Authority,” Albanese said.

Story continues below advertisement

Those commitments included no role for Hamas in a Palestinian government, demilitarization of Gaza and the holding of elections, he said.

“A two-state solution is humanity’s best hope to break the cycle of violence in the Middle East and to bring an end to the conflict, suffering and starvation in Gaza,” Albanese said.


Click to play video: 'Canada recognizing Palestinian state might not be right move: expert'


Canada recognizing Palestinian state might not be right move: expert


“The situation in Gaza has gone beyond the world’s worst fears,” he said. “The Israeli government continues to defy international law and deny sufficient aid, food and water to desperate people, including children.”

Get the day's top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day.

Get daily National news

Get the day’s top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day.

Netanyahu rebuked Australia before the announcement

Ahead of Albanese’s announcement, Netanyahu on Sunday criticized Australia and other European countries that have moved to recognize a Palestinian state.

“To have European countries and Australia march into that rabbit hole … this canard, is disappointing and I think it’s actually shameful,” the Israeli leader said.

Story continues below advertisement

Australia has designated Hamas a terrorist entity and Albanese repeated Monday his government’s calls for the group to return Israeli hostages held since Oct. 7, 2023.

The Australian leader last week spoke to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, whose authority administers parts of the occupied West Bank, supports a two-state solution and cooperates with Israel on security matters. Abbas has agreed to conditions with Western leaders, including Albanese, as they prepared to recognize a Palestinian state.

“This is an opportunity to deliver self-determination for the people of Palestine in a way that isolates Hamas, disarms it and drives it out of the region once and for all,” Albanese said. He added that Hamas did not support a two-state solution.


Recognition is growing, but is largely symbolic without the U.S.

Nearly 150 of the 193 members of the United Nations have already recognized Palestinian statehood, most of them decades ago. The United States and other Western powers have held off, saying Palestinian statehood should be part of a final agreement resolving the decades-old Middle East conflict.

Recognition announcements are largely symbolic and are rejected by Israel, and by the United States — the only country with any real leverage over Netanyahu. Israel’s leader said this month that he would not accept Palestinian Authority involvement in a government for Palestine.

A two-state solution would see a state of Palestine created alongside Israel in most or all of the occupied West Bank, the conflict-ravaged Gaza Strip and annexed east Jerusalem, territories Israel seized in the 1967 Mideast war that the Palestinians want for their state.

Story continues below advertisement

Albanese dismissed suggestions Monday that the move was solely symbolic.


Click to play video: 'What are the political implications of Canada’s intent to recognize Palestinian state?'


What are the political implications of Canada’s intent to recognize Palestinian state?


“This is a practical contribution towards building momentum,” he said. “This is not Australia acting alone.”

Albanese had discussed Australia’s decision with the leaders of Britain, France, New Zealand and Japan, he said. He also had a “long discussion” with Netanyahu this month, he added.

In neighboring New Zealand, Foreign Minister Winston Peters said Monday his government “will carefully weigh up its position” on recognizing a Palestinian state before making a formal decision in September.

“New Zealand has been clear for some time that our recognition of a Palestinian state is a matter of when, not if,” Peters said in a statement.

Australian Jewish and Palestinian groups criticized the move

Story continues below advertisement

After Albanese’s announcement Monday, Israel’s envoy to Australia said the move undermined Israel’s security.

“By recognising a Palestinian state now, Australia elevates the position of Hamas, a group it acknowledges as a terrorist organisation,” Amir Maimon posted to X.

“This commitment removes any incentive or diplomatic pressure for the Palestinians to do the things that have always stood in the way of ending the conflict,” spokesperson for the Executive Council of the Australian Jewry Alex Ryvchin said in a statement.

Meanwhile, President of the Australia Palestine Advocacy Network Nasser Mashni decried Albanese’s recognition as too late and “completely meaningless” while the country continues to trade with Israel.

He told reporters in Melbourne on Monday that the move would do nothing to end the “ongoing genocide in Gaza which has been live streamed for the entire world for two years.”

&copy 2025 The Canadian Press



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

Canada talks trade with Qatar as Carney touches down in Doha – National TenX News

Published

on


Prime Minister Mark Carney arrived in Doha on Saturday as part of a push to attract foreign investment and deepen Canada’s economic partnerships beyond its traditional allies.

Carney’s visit comes on the heels of his visit to China and follows the recent presentation of a new federal investment budget aimed at positioning Canada as a stable, attractive destination for global capital.

In a news conference on Saturday, Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne said Canada is working to broaden its economic relationships as global trade patterns shift.

Qatar is viewed by Ottawa as a strategic partner, with officials pointing to the country’s significant investment capacity and growing influence on the global stage.

For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen.

Get breaking National news

For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen.

“We need to reduce our dependence and increase our self-reliance to find a strategic path forward,” Champagne said.

Story continues below advertisement

“Engaging with the Middle East and China is necessary for Canada, just like our European partners have done,” Champagne added.  “We buy more from the U.S.A. than anywhere else, but the trading climate right now is different.”

The conference highlighted Canada’s industrial capacity and trade advantages as key selling points for potential investors.

Champagne also said international engagement is critical as Canada works to raise its profile among global investors.

“We are one of the G7s with very big industries. We build cars, planes, ships, we have an abundance of energy, and we are the only one with free trade with all G7,” Champagne said. “With the way the world is changing, you better diversify, supply chain is changing and we need to adapt.”

Prime Minister Carney is expected to meet with senior Qatari officials, including Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, as well as representatives of the Qatar Investment Authority.

His office says the talks will focus on expanding trade access and forging partnerships in artificial intelligence, infrastructure, energy and defence.

The visit comes amid heightened geopolitical tensions in the region, though officials say the schedule remains unchanged.


&copy 2026 Global News, a division of Corus Entertainment Inc.



Continue Reading

Politics

How could Canada, EU, NATO respond to a U.S. takeover of Greenland? – National TenX News

Published

on


The possibility of a forceful U.S. takeover of Greenland is raising many unprecedented questions — including how Canada, the European Union and NATO could respond or even retaliate against an ostensible ally.

A high-level meeting between Greenlandic, Danish and U.S. officials this week did not resolve the “fundamental disagreement” over the territory’s sovereignty but did set the stage for more talks. The White House made clear Thursday that U.S. President Donald Trump’s desire to control Greenland has not changed after the meeting.

“He wants the United States to acquire Greenland. He thinks it’s in our best national security to do that,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said.

Denmark and European allies are sending more troops to the territory in a show of force and to display a commitment to Arctic security.


Click to play video: 'Trump says ‘not a thing’ Denmark can do if Russia or China wants to ‘occupy’ Greenland'


Trump says ‘not a thing’ Denmark can do if Russia or China wants to ‘occupy’ Greenland


Experts say there are other, non-military measures available in the event of a U.S. annexation or invasion of Greenland, or which could at least be threatened to try and get Trump to back down.

Story continues below advertisement

Whether those economic measures are actually used is another matter, those experts say.

“I think it remains highly unlikely that we’ll get to that point where we have to seriously discuss consequences for a U.S. move on Greenland,” said Otto Svendsen, an associate fellow with the Europe, Russia, and Eurasia Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

“So it remains contingency planning for a highly unlikely event. That being said … Denmark would certainly do everything in its power to rally a very robust European response.”

Here’s what that could entail.

EU trade, tech disruptions?

Experts agree the biggest pressure points that can be used in the U.S. surround trade and technology.

The European Parliament’s trade committee is currently debating whether to postpone implementing the trade deal signed between Trump and the EU last summer to protest the threats against Greenland, Reuters reported Wednesday.

Story continues below advertisement

Many lawmakers have complained that the deal is lopsided, with the EU required to cut most import duties while the U.S. sticks to a broad 15 per cent tariff for European goods.

Get the day's top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day.

Get daily National news

Get the day’s top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day.

An even bolder move would be triggering the EU’s anti-coercion instrument — known as the “trade bazooka” — that would allow the bloc to hit non-member nations with tariffs, trade restrictions, foreign investment bans, and other penalties if that country is found to be using coercive economic measures.

Although the regulation defines coercion as “measures affecting trade and investment,” Svendsen said it could feasibly be used in a diplomatic or territorial dispute as well.

“EU lawyers have proven themselves to be very creative in recent years,” he said.

However, David Perry, president of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute, said in an email that economic measures against the U.S. are unlikely “given the massive asymmetry in the defence and economic relationship between the U.S.” and other western nations.

“Any kind of sanction against the U.S. doesn’t make sense for the same reason they can impose tariffs on others: they have the power,” Perry added.


Click to play video: 'Denmark, U.S. still disagree on Greenland’s future after White House talks'


Denmark, U.S. still disagree on Greenland’s future after White House talks


Target U.S. tech companies?

The likeliest — and potentially least harmful — scenario for retaliation in the event of an attack on Greenland, Svendsen said, would be fines or bans against U.S. tech companies like Google, Meta and X operating in Europe.

Story continues below advertisement

That’s because the Trump administration has taken particular focus on preventing what they call “attacks” on American companies by foreign governments seeking to regulate their online content or tax their revenues, which has led to calls on Canada, Britain and the EU to repeal laws like digital services taxes.

“I think that would be a really smart and targeted way to get to economic interests very close to the president, while minimizing the direct impact on the on the European economy,” Svendsen said, calling such a move “low-hanging fruit.”

He also compared a future U.S. tech platform ban to how Europe moved to wean itself off Russian gas after the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

“If you told anyone back then that Europe would basically rid itself of its dependence on Russian gas basically within a two-year period … that would have been considered completely impossible,” he said.

“Weaning the European economy off of U.S. tech would certainly be painful in the short term, but they’ve proven that they can get off those dependencies quickly if there is political will behind it in the past.”

A U.S. hostile takeover of Greenland would mean the “end” of the NATO alliance, experts and European leaders have said.

Story continues below advertisement

Trump himself has acknowledged it could be a “choice” between preserving the alliance or acquiring Greenland.

There is no provision within the NATO founding treaty that addresses the possibility of a NATO member taking territory from another, and how the alliance should respond to such an act.

A NATO spokesperson told Global News it wouldn’t “speculate on hypothetical scenarios” when asked how it could potentially act.


Click to play video: 'NATO countries concerned about Arctic security as Trump pushes for Greenland ownership'


NATO countries concerned about Arctic security as Trump pushes for Greenland ownership


“None of this would be actionable in a NATO sense,” Perry said. “It’s an alliance that’s organized to bind the U.S. to European security, and revolves around the U.S. So there’s no scenario of NATO doing that to the U.S.”

Denmark and other European nations could move to reduce or close U.S. military bases in their countries as a possible response, experts say.

Story continues below advertisement

Balkan Devlen, a a senior fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute and director of its Transatlantic Program, said in an interview that a U.S. annexation of Greenland would force Canada to focus entirely on boosting its defences in the Arctic.

That may include trying to decouple from NORAD, the joint northern defence network with the U.S., in favour of a purely domestic Arctic command, he said — although that process would take years and require Canada to increase defence spending even further.

“Never mind five per cent (of GDP) — we will probably need to go like seven, eight, nine per cent on defence spending to be able to do anything of that sort,” he said. “It’s not even clear that we’ll be able to have enough people to do that.”

Devlen added that any retaliatory action, whether military or financial, needs to be targeted and proportionate to what the U.S. does.

“The problem with nuclear options is that once you use it, it’s gone,” he said. “And if it doesn’t do the damage or make the change of behaviour on the other party, you’ve basically lost a lot of leverage and you might actually sustain a lot more loss yourself.”




Continue Reading

Politics

Louvre raises ticket prices for non-Europeans, hitting Canadian visitors TenX News

Published

on


A trip to the world’s most-visited museum is about to cost Canadians significantly more.

France has hiked ticket prices at the Louvre by 45 per cent for visitors from outside the European Union, a move that is fuelling debate over so-called dual pricing and the growing backlash against overtourism.

Starting this week, adult visitors from non-EU countries, including Canada, must pay €32 to enter the Paris landmark, up from €22. That’s an increase from about $35 to $52 Canadian.


Click to play video: 'French police arrest 5 more suspects in Louvre heist investigation'


French police arrest 5 more suspects in Louvre heist investigation


Visitors from EU countries, as well as Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway, will continue to pay the lower rate.

Story continues below advertisement

The price hike comes as the Louvre grapples with repeated labour strikes, a high-profile daylight jewel heist last October that prompted a costly security overhaul, and years of chronic overcrowding. The museum attracts roughly nine million visitors annually.

For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen.

Get breaking National news

For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen.

Some Canadian tourists told Global News they feel unfairly targeted.

“We didn’t cause the robberies or some of the other issues that happened and we are paying the consequences,” said Allison Moore, visiting Paris from Newfoundland with her daughter. “[In] Canada we don’t discriminate over pricing like that.”

Others argue tourists already shoulder higher costs simply by travelling long distances.

“In general for tourists, I think things should be a little cheaper than for local people, because we have to travel to come all the way here,” said Darla Daniela Quiroz, another Canadian visitor. “It should be equal pricing, or a little bit cheaper.”


Click to play video: 'Louvre slammed for spending money on art instead of security in years before heist'


Louvre slammed for spending money on art instead of security in years before heist


Even some Europeans question the two-tiered system. A French tourist interviewed outside the museum said there was “no reason” to charge non-Europeans more and that the fee should be the same for everyone.

Story continues below advertisement

Tourism experts say the Louvre’s financial pressures help explain the decision.

“The Louvre is really cash-strapped right now and needs to do something,” said Marion Joppe, a professor at the University of Guelph. “It can’t really look to the government, which is already struggling with its own budget.”

The move also reflects a broader global pushback against mass tourism. Anti-tourism protests have spread across parts of Spain, New Zealand has increased its entry tax, and the United States recently raised national park fees for foreign visitors.

“You take Paris — it gets about 50 million tourists a year,” said Julian Karaguesian, an economist at McGill University. “That’s roughly a million a week. The city simply wasn’t built for those kinds of numbers.”

Despite the higher price, many visitors say they will still line up to see the Mona Lisa and other of the museum’s famous artworks.

“It’s one of the main attractions. It’s on everybody’s list,” Moore said. “We’re still going to go, and hopefully it will be worth it in the end.”


&copy 2026 Global News, a division of Corus Entertainment Inc.



Continue Reading

TRENDING

Copyright © 2022 TenX News Network