Finland, Gaza and the Politics of Recognition
The Israel–Gaza conflict is one of the most radioactive topics on the internet. No matter what you say, you’ll anger someone. But in Finland—where I live—it’s more than a debate. It’s about what kind of country we want to be, and what values we stand for.
The Push to Recognize a Palestinian State
Across Europe, leaders like Keir Starmer and Emmanuel Macron have condemned Israel and called for the recognition of a Palestinian state. Here in Finland, members of the SDP—the Social Democratic Party—along with other left-leaning parties—are doing the same. They’re pushing for Finland to formally recognize a Palestinian state right now, in the middle of an active war.
Here’s what one Finnish MP recently wrote (translated from Finnish):
“Finland's foreign policy is now expected to have courage and a clear way to act according to its values. Respect for human life, the right of all to live in peace and freedom, are things that must be defended in practical action. Finland cannot stay on the wrong side of history in this regard. Therefore, at yesterday's SDP party council meeting, we presented that: addressing the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the recognition of the Palestinian state must be brought to Parliament.”
At first glance, this might sound like justice. Like compassion—even. But the reality is far more complicated. In fact, it betrays a catastrophic misunderstanding of the situation—on almost every level.
Because by doing what the SDP suggests, we are not ending the conflict. We may actually be ensuring that it lasts forever. Worse, we may be rewarding—and encouraging—the use of terror as a political tool.
The Gaza Withdrawal and the Rise of Hamas
Let’s rewind to 2005. That year, Israel did something drastic: it withdrew entirely from Gaza. Thousands of Israeli settlers—some of whom had lived there for decades—were forcibly removed by their own government. It was painful. Emotional. Controversial. But to many, it was seen as a step toward peace.
The hope was simple: Palestinians would govern themselves. The world would help them build a future. Billions in aid poured in. Infrastructure projects began. For a moment, a kind of de facto state was taking shape—governed by the Palestinian Authority.
But the peace didn’t last.
In 2006, Hamas entered politics and won a surprise victory in the Palestinian legislative elections. It shocked the international community. And then, in 2007, they turned their guns on Fatah—Palestine’s other major political party—and violently seized full control of Gaza in a bloody civil conflict.
That’s when everything changed.
From that point on, Hamas became the uncontested ruler of Gaza. They diverted international aid, stockpiled weapons, and rapidly expanded their tunnel networks. Instead of building a peaceful future with hospitals and schools, they built bunkers and bomb factories. Instead of protecting their people, they used them as shields.
Rocket fire into Israel—which had already existed—skyrocketed after 2007.
Then came October 7th.
The world watched as Hamas launched the deadliest attack on Jews since the Holocaust. Their targets weren’t soldiers. They were families. Children. Festival-goers. Civilians.
And here’s what makes it worse: many of those killed were peace activists. Left-wing Israelis who worked with Palestinians. Some even helped children from Gaza receive medical treatment in Israeli hospitals. They were butchered just like everyone else.
Hamas was so proud of what they had done, they filmed it. Live Streamed it. And after the massacre, they promised to do it again. And again. And again.
This is why Israel is hellbent on destroying them. Ripping out their roots. Burning them out completely.
War, International Law, and the Reality on the Ground
Let’s talk about war.
War is gruesome. No sane person should celebrate it. But unfortunately, we still live in a world where war is sometimes necessary.
After World War II, the international community tried to make war more humane. They established laws to protect civilians, to prevent total destruction.
These rules had to balance two opposing needs:
1 - Minimize unnecessary suffering.
2 - Allow states to defend themselves.
That’s where terms like proportionality come in. If a strike eliminates a valuable military target, some level of civilian harm may be legally tolerated—if it’s not excessive. It’s uncomfortable to talk about. But these are the realities of war.
And these rules only work if both sides follow them.
Hamas does not.
They fire rockets from hospitals and schools. They store weapons under mosques. They dress like civilians. They use ambulances for cover. They embed themselves in apartment blocks.
They do this on purpose—to provoke civilian casualties and turn the world against Israel. Because when Israel strikes back, what the world sees is rubble. What they don’t see are the rocket launchers hidden beneath the rubble. Or the snipers on the rooftops.
And yet, despite these challenges, the IDF often delays strikes. They drop leaflets. They make phone calls. They use roof-knocking bombs and smaller munitions. They risk their own soldiers to avoid civilian casualties. Israel is damned if it does and damned if it doesn’t. When it attacks to eliminate fighters, it’s called genocidal. When it tries to move the population out of harm’s way, it’s called ethnic cleansing. All lies, by the way.
Still, Gaza looks devastated—because Hamas has militarized every inch of it. Apartments and buildings are booby-trapped and riddled with tunnels. Many of these buildings must be demolished.
And yet, even in this hellish environment, Israel’s combatant-to-civilian casualty ratio remains lower than any modern army fighting in dense urban terrain.
Is that a reason to celebrate? No. Every civilian death is a tragedy. But this isn’t genocide. It’s not mindless bombing. It’s war—against a death cult that uses international law as a trap. And it’s one of the most complex, morally exhausting military operations of our time.
Finland’s Role and the Future
This is why I worry when I hear Finnish politicians calling for recognition now.
Because recognizing a Palestinian state while Hamas still controls Gaza would send the worst possible message: that terrorism works. That if you slaughter civilians, use your own people as shields, and hide behind international sympathy—you’ll be rewarded with legitimacy.
That’s not how peace is made. That’s how violence becomes permanent.
Right now, Israel is executing a ground strategy known as Gideon’s Chariot. Unlike previous operations, this one isn’t just “hit and leave.” They are holding territory, creating safe zones, and working to permanently dismantle Hamas’s infrastructure.
For this to succeed, the way aid is delivered must change. Up until now, Hamas has been stealing humanitarian aid and reselling it to its own people at inflated prices. That system cannot continue.
If Israel succeeds, it might be the first real chance for Gaza’s people to rebuild—without the boot of extremism on their necks.
That future isn’t guaranteed. But one thing is clear: Recognizing a Palestinian state now will not bring peace. It will only prolong suffering—for both sides. It will also damage Finland’s ability to help Palestinians in the future.
Israel will see us not as neutral, but as enablers of terror. That’s already happening with Norway, who recently recognized Palestine. It’s done nothing to help Palestinians—and everything to damage relations with Israel.
We all want peace. But peace without truth isn’t peace. It’s theatre.
And in Finland—a country that values order, truth, and moral clarity—we should know better.