What Will The Future Hold For Palestine in 2025?

In 2024, there were a host of startling developments occurring in the Middle East and the wider world that impacted Palestine, most of them unforeseen 12 months ago: the continuation of the unrelenting Israeli genocide in Gaza, the battlefield defeat of Hezbollah and the devastation in Lebanon, the overthrow of Bashar Assad in Syria, the isolation of Iran, the election of Donald Trump, and a series of seminal rulings by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the International Criminal Court (ICC).

All of these seismic events make the assignment of imagining what Palestine’s future will be in 2025 a precarious task. Yet, with caution thrown to the wind, we can make some educated guesses on six leading features.


Leading scenarios for Palestine’s future

Donald Trump’s return to the US presidency will certainly encourage Israel’s accelerating subjugation of the Palestinians. His major appointments on the Middle East – including his secretary of state, his ambassador to Israel, and his two regional envoys – are all diplomatic gifts to Israel’s far-right nationalist government. His political instincts are all about respecting the strong and disparaging the weak. The only restraint that Trump may impose on Israel would result from his quest for a substantive deal with Saudi Arabia, which is publicly demanding a credible path to Palestinian statehood.

A genuine Palestinian state is further away than ever. In 2025, more Palestinian land will be confiscated, more illegal Israeli settlements will be built, and settler violence, already at record levels, will only intensify. While Trump might restrict Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from formally annexing parts of the West Bank, de facto Israeli annexation will continue unabated. The ability of the Palestinian Authority to shape events in its favor will likely shrink even further. As for the comatose peace process, the Palestinians long ago arrived at a traffic intersection, and the red light never changed. It remains red today, its only color.

The genocidal war on Gaza will finally end with a formal ceasefire, the release of Israeli hostages, and some Palestinian detainees. However, the unimaginable toll of deaths and suffering among the Palestinian civilians in Gaza will continue, as starvation, infectious diseases, a decimated economy, and a devastated landscape afflict the population. Hamas won’t be completely defeated, but it has suffered a grievous blow in the short run. Israel will push hard to build settlements in the north and for clan warlords to run the rest of Gaza, which Trump might allow. Another great test will be the raising of the $40-60 billion needed for the reconstruction of Gaza; this will create tension between Trump and his Gulf states allies, who will resist paying the lion’s share of the consequences of a war they opposed.

Will the international community face the Palestine issue in 2025?

Respecting Palestine, the United Nations will face some of its most perilous challenges in 2025. The one-year deadline set by the General Assembly for Israel to completely end its occupation of Palestine arrives next September, with Israel and the US committed to defying the obligation. In addition, Israel – with Trump’s backing – is seeking to dismantle UNRWA, the UN agency that delivers education, health, and social services to Palestinian refugees in the Levant. The challenge for Europe and the Arab world will be whether they will defend the UN, its core commitment to successfully resolving the oldest item on its political agenda (Palestine), and the preservation of its largest agency.

Israel’s diplomatic isolation will continue, even as its relationship with its superpower patron will deepen. Its outlier status at the United Nations – particularly at the General Assembly and the Human Rights Council – will see even more lopsided votes against its 57-year-old occupation, its denial of Palestinian self-determination, and its abuse of international law. The arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court against Benjamin Netanyahu and his former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant will make him politically radioactive, with heads of state and government that have signed the 1998 Rome Statute refusing to meet him. Pressure will grow within Europe to rethink various trade and cooperation agreements with Israel as a reaction to the war and its horrendous humanitarian consequences.


Role of international law more important for Palestine than ever

The role of international law in pronouncing on the question of Palestine will become even more momentous in 2025. After the signature rulings by the ICJ and the ICC in 2024, we are likely to see a growing movement to insist upon a rights-based approach to peacemaking in Palestine, replacing the discredited (but still very much alive) realpolitik approach of the Oslo process.

The momentum created by the recent genocide reports by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch will continue to echo through UN corridors and foreign ministries. But there are also headwinds: Republicans in the US Senate are determined to sanction the ICC for issuing the arrest warrant against Netanyahu, meaning that the viability of the court will require a stout defense by the 124 members of the Rome Statute, particularly from Europe.

As we learned from the past year, there will almost certainly be unexpected surprises in 2025. And while there will continue to be dark times for the Palestinians in the year ahead, the war in Gaza has also sparked a global movement of solidarity – particularly among the young – that will continue to inspire courageous thinking and bold acts. Its lasting impact should never be underestimated.

Michael Lynk he author is a professor emeritus of law at Western University, London, Ontario, Canada. He served as the 7th United Nations special rapporteur for human rights in the occupied Palestinian territory between 2016 and 2022. Opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Anadolu’s editorial policy.

CrossFireArabia

CrossFireArabia

Dr. Marwan Asmar holds a PhD from Leeds University and is a freelance writer specializing on the Middle East. He has worked as a journalist since the early 1990s in Jordan and the Gulf countries, and been widely published, including at Albawaba, Gulf News, Al Ghad, World Press Review and others.

Related Posts

The US General Who Swallowed His Own Truth

By Jassem Al-Azzawi

General Dan Kaine, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, delivered a confidential warning to President Trump with the utmost candor—the kind of candor that democracies rely on and empires routinely ignore. He said: “We don’t have enough ammunition to win this war. It’s not going to be pretty.” This warning wasn’t born of cowardice; it was the last vestige of institutional integrity that still flickers within the halls of American military power.

Trump’s response was that of a circus clown, not a commander-in-chief. Through his “Truth Social” platform—that distorted mirror of American political life—he dismissed the warning with the arrogance of a street vendor, saying: “Oh, no, no, no. If we do it, we’ll win easily.” Thus, a sober assessment became mere publicity, and caution a lie.

But the biggest lie came later. When Kaine’s warning leaked, Trump not only rejected it but completely reversed it. With the confidence of a man who has never been held accountable for anything, he told the American public the general had said the exact opposite—that the United States had plenty of missiles, munitions, and everything else. “That’s not what he said at all,” Trump declared, putting words of false victory in the mouth of a man who had offered only warnings.

And General Cain remained silent

This silence is not just a footnote in this story; it is the story itself. By remaining silent, Cain allowed the American public to absorb the falsehood as truth. He did not say: “No, Mr. President, that’s not what I said.” He did not invoke his oath, nor the soldiers who would pay with their lives for the gap between political rhetoric and logistical reality. He chose the safety of silence over the danger of truth, and in doing so, he betrayed not only himself but the Republic. This is the rot at the heart of American militarism.

As historian Andrew Bacevich has long warned, the professional military has become more of an instrument of imperial ambition than a defender of democratic values, with senior officers more concerned with their next post than with the Constitution they swore to uphold. Kaine’s silence was not a mere slip of the tongue; it was a symptom of a deeper malaise.

The logistical picture Kaine described in private was not theoretical; the calculations were unforgiving.

Current stockpiles of interceptor missiles and precision munitions could not sustain a prolonged air campaign against a country three times the size of Iraq. The Wall Street Journal documented a “worrying gap” in U.S. missile stockpiles, noting that reserves were “far below” the requirements of intensive and sustained operations. Pentagon contractors were instructed to “double or even quadruple” production of Patriot, SM-6, and precision-strike missiles—a tacit admission that the arsenal built for Cold War scenarios is inadequate for the war being fought today.

Consider Gaza: Israel, the most heavily armed military power in the Middle East, with complete air and naval dominance, has turned a tiny coastal strip into a moon-like landscape of devastation over two and a half years, yet it has not broken Hamas. Gaza is only 37 kilometers long. Iran, on the other hand, is a nation of 90 million people, with mountainous terrain, strategic depth, fortified infrastructure, and a combat-hardened Revolutionary Guard. The idea that it will collapse under a few weeks of American airstrikes is not strategy; it is wishful thinking. “God help us if this continues, if it gets to four weeks,” Colonel Daniel Davis warned on the Deep Dive podcast. He was speaking in military terms, and the same prayer applies. Politically.

When Trump now raises the prospect of sending ground troops, he is not escalating from a position of strength, but rather improvising from a position of denial. Admitting that air power and missiles alone cannot achieve the political objective is an admission that the original objective was never honestly assessed. This is the pattern of American wars at the end of an empire: Glittering promises, disastrous calculations, and then a grim and horrific reckoning paid in blood by those who had no seat at the table where the lies were told.


The costs are already piling up—not just in the currency of munitions and riches, but in the currency that empires always ultimately spend and regret most: credibility. America’s word, already devalued by two decades of contrived justifications for war, is getting cheaper by the day.

Democracies can tolerate miscalculations, and they can tolerate bad presidents, but what they cannot long tolerate is the institutionalization of a culture where the truth is whispered behind closed doors and swallowed whole in front of cameras. When the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff allows his words to be weaponized for propaganda — when the man in charge of counting missiles refuses to correct a president who pretends they are plentiful — something far greater than military credibility collapses.

What is crumbling is the social contract between the governed and those who send them to their deaths.

Caine’s silence was not cautious; it was complicity. And in an imperial machine suffering from a shortage of ammunition and a shortage of truth, complicity is the only resource that seems inexhaustible, because when the missiles finally run out, slogans won’t replace them.

Reality will.

Al-Azzawi is an Iraqi writer who contributed this piece to Al Rai Al Youm which was translated and appeared in crossfire.com

Continue reading
‘They Don’t Know Iran’s Military Lexicon’: First Six Days of The Aggression

By Abdul Bari Atwan


They truly don’t know Iran. By this, I mean the Israelis and the US, and even some Arab leaders, none of whom dared to condemn the aggression. But the aggression entered its sixth day without the regime falling, and/or the new interim leadership rushing to the nearest negotiating table to surrender. The following factors need to be considered.

The battlefields:

First: The downing of an advanced American fighter jet, the F-15, by Iranian missiles in the west of Iran, a firstever development. This suggests the Iranian military leadership may have developed new missiles capable of achieving this feat, or they acquired them from their Chinese and Russian allies, or both, particularly the Russian S-400 and S-500 missile systems.

Second: The entry of Hezbollah’s ballistic missiles into the arena, striking deep inside Israel, specifically Tel Aviv and Haifa, for the first time after 15 months of restraint and the rebuilding of its military arsenal, and/or what was destroyed during the Israeli aggression. This means that no area in the Zionist entity will be safe.

Third: The fiery speech delivered by Sheikh Naim Qassem, Secretary-General of Hezbollah, containing strong unprecedented tone statements most notably: “We will not surrender and we will defend our land, no matter the sacrifices and despite the disparity in capabilities. We will not surrender.”

Fourth: The introduction of the fastest “infiltrating” drone into the Iranian Air Force for the first time. Named “Hadid 110,” it has a speed of 517 km/h and, according to Western military experts, is considered more efficient than its sister drone, “Shahed,” which performed well deep inside Israel. Its production costs only $35,000, while shooting it down costs $4 million.

Fifth: Every day of resistance by the Iranian army and people costs the occupying state approximately $1 billion. As for America, the costs of the war has already nearly spiralled to $160 billion in the first six days. These preliminary estimates are likely to rise, especially after the bombing of aircraft carriers and the destruction of warships, the increasing number of dead and wounded, the largest military buildup since the Iraq War, and the rise in energy prices.

Sixth: The fulfillment of the promise to close the Strait of Hormuz, which means delivering two fatal blows. The first is to the Western economy because oil and gas prices would likely reach record-breaking figures, and the second, for the Arab states who host the US military bases. Closing the Strait means preventing their oil and gas exports from reaching global markets, and the losses will increase while oil and gas revenues decrease depending on the war’s duration and developments.

The Iranians wanted from the outset a regional war of attrition with no end in sight in direct opposite to the new American warefare military doctrine, which aims for short, swift, and clean wars (without American casualties). The Iranians resolved to bomb all those cooperating with the aggression in the region. This new Iranian theory was best and most clearly expressed by Sheikh Naim Qassem when he called on the Israeli army to prepare for many days of fighting with all available means.

Defeat, surrender, and raising the white flag, individually or collectively, have no place in the Iranian military and political lexicon. In the first six days, the Iranian army launched 500 hypersonic missiles with multiple cluster warheads and more than 2,000 drones, resulting in the displacement of more than 7 million settlers to shelters and tunnels, and the destruction of large parts of Tel Aviv and Haifa.

Neither the 47-year-long starvation siege, nor three Israeli-American aggressions within a few years, nor the incitement of popular protests and the planting of spies among the protesters, nor the deployment of aircraft carriers and warships, nor inflation and the collapse of the national currency, succeeded in defeating the mighty and unwavering Iranian will, and consequently, in toppling or changing the regime.

Our proof is they baffled the Americans in negotiations that lasted more than two years in Vienna and in several other Arab and European capitals, and they never conceded. They rejected all American conditions, starting with halting enrichment and handing over 460 kilograms of highly enriched uranium, and even refusing to allow the inclusion of the Iranian missile industry or severing ties with resistance factions on the negotiating table.

Yes, arrogance, conceit, and the unfortunate complicity of some Arabs blinded them to the true nature of Iran, and they will pay a very heavy price, the most prominent feature of which will be the destruction of all Israeli gas infrastructure. In the Mediterranean, water and electricity stations, and the lack of distinction between settler and soldier, many assumptions have changed after the massacre of the children’s school in southern Iran… and time will tell.

This opinion was written in Arabic by the chief editor of Alrai Al Youm Abdul Bari Atwan and translated for crossfirearabia.com

Continue reading

You Missed

IRGC says Iran started its Operation True Promise 26 by launching missiles and drones against Israel

IRGC says Iran started its Operation True Promise  26 by launching missiles and drones against Israel

Iran Halts Attacks on Neighboring States Unless…

Iran Halts Attacks on Neighboring States Unless…

Iranian govt spokesman: 30% of victims are children; 165 of them killed among 1300 civilians who died by US/Israeli bombing

Iranian govt spokesman: 30% of victims are children; 165 of them killed among 1300 civilians who died by US/Israeli bombing

White House: ‘We destroyed more than 30 Iranian ships and are moving to destroying the navy completely’

White House: ‘We destroyed more than 30 Iranian ships and are moving to destroying the navy completely’

White House: ‘We Have 4 to 6 Weeks to End The Military Operations in Iran’

White House: ‘We Have 4 to 6 Weeks to End The Military Operations in Iran’

IRGC: Iran Has Not Closed The Hormuz Strait Except to Ships Linked to Israel/USA

IRGC: Iran Has Not Closed The Hormuz Strait Except to Ships Linked to Israel/USA