National security analyst Cliff May offered sharp criticism of recent moves by Western European leaders to threaten recognition of a Palestinian state at the United Nations, arguing the gesture is not only diplomatically hollow, but actively counterproductive to achieving peace in the region.
The conversation was sparked by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s announcement that the UK will recognize a Palestinian state during a September UN session unless Israel agrees to a ceasefire and resumes full aid delivery to Gaza. French President Emmanuel Macron has voiced similar positions in recent days, intensifying pressure on Israel while Hamas remains entrenched in the territory.
May dismissed the move as political theater driven by domestic pressures within European socialist parties, particularly their large Muslim constituencies. “This is about playing to voters, not solving anything,” he said, noting that these declarations lack detail on the governance, borders, or legitimacy of any such Palestinian state. Without a viable government or disavowal of terrorism from Hamas, May warned that unilateral recognition merely rewards violent extremism.
Dan Proft and May explored the role of international media and organizations in shaping the current narrative. Both pointed to instances of misleading or incomplete reporting from outlets like The New York Times, including a recent story involving a malnourished child in Gaza that failed to disclose a preexisting medical condition and cropped out a healthy sibling present in the same photo. May, a former Times reporter himself, criticized the paper for amplifying Hamas-supplied narratives while downplaying necessary context.
The interview also revisited the long-standing influence of the United Nations in Gaza. May described how various UN agencies, particularly UNRWA, have effectively acted as an extension of Hamas’s social infrastructure for years—delivering education, healthcare, and other services under Hamas’s control. He expressed outrage that some UN staff were found to have directly participated in the October 7th attacks against Israel.
On the topic of what a viable path forward might look like, May emphasized that any solution must begin with Hamas relinquishing its control and abandoning its goal of eliminating Israel. Yet, he noted, neither Starmer nor Macron has called for such actions from Hamas, undermining their credibility as peace brokers.
The discussion later turned to Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine. Proft noted President Trump has set a new deadline for Vladimir Putin to accept a ceasefire, warning that failure to comply would result in severe economic penalties, particularly on oil exports. May viewed the move as significant, indicating the administration has grown weary of waiting for a diplomatic off-ramp.
Putin, he argued, continues to pursue territorial conquest and envisions restoring a Russian empire, with Ukraine as the crown jewel. However, with increasing Western military support—including U.S.-supplied Patriot and long-range missiles—May said there’s a growing chance that mounting pressure could force Putin to accept a ceasefire and retreat.
May concluded by warning of the broader strategic threats posed by what he called the “axis of anti-Americans,” referencing the growing alignment of Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran. He urged the U.S. and its allies to scale up their defense production capabilities to counter the rising threat of authoritarian powers working in coordination against the West.
Cliff May’s assessment painted a stark picture: peace in Gaza is being undermined by appeasement politics in Europe, while the broader international order faces increasing instability driven by aggressive regimes. Recognizing a Palestinian state in the current climate, he argued, only strengthens Hamas and reduces the chances of a sustainable peace.