Keir Starmer could do case for Palestinian state more harm than good
Fast forward then to this week and the extraordinary public appeal on Monday by the presidents of five leading Israeli universities to prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
In a joint letter and citing a moral imperative 'shaped by the trauma of the Holocaust,' the signatories to the letter called on Netanyahu to 'do all we can to prevent cruel, indiscriminate harm to non-combatant men, women, and children' in Gaza.
READ MORE: Scottish Labour councillor suspended for 'bullying' member of the public
Maybe it's just me, but there seems to be something of a contradiction here. For on the one hand we have the Chief Rabbi decrying Starmer's decision to suspend some arms shipments to Israel, barely weeks before a Holocaust education event.
Then this week we have senior Israeli academics referencing the lessons of the Holocaust in an effort to urge Netanyahu to uphold Israel's ethical and legal responsibilities.
Perhaps such a contradiction should be no real surprise, for when it comes to the global response to the horrors happening in Gaza, they have been pretty much 10 a penny over the past 21 months.
Starmer himself this week is precisely a case in point. His announcement that the UK will recognise a Palestinian state in September while tacking on a set of conditions such as Israel agreeing to a ceasefire and committing to a two-state solution before then, is so typical of him as a politician.
Mealy-mouthed, kowtowing and politically congenitally incapable of making a clear-cut decision, have always been Starmer's chief traits. Just look at the way for example he came scuttling up to Turnberry at US president Donald Trump's beckoning.
I don't know about you but I'm hard pressed to remember such an unedifying spectacle of a leader being summoned by a foreign head of state in his own country.
But back to that announcement about recognition of a Palestinian state, for another of Starmer's chief traits is his unerring capacity for serial U-turns, and who is to say that given the wording and conditions attached to the latest announcement we might well see another.
Even watching him make that announcement, I couldn't rid myself of the nagging feeling that this was yet another piece of Starmer window dressing rather than an act that would make a substantive change on the ground in Gaza and the occupied West Bank.
Just so I'm clear about this Mr Starmer – are you seriously suggesting that if Israel's onslaught in Gaza and seizing of territory in the occupied West Bank continue, then Britain will perhaps green light recognising a Palestinian state?
But on the other hand, if Netanyahu and his cohorts suddenly declare a ceasefire, then recognition is off the table?
The sheer arrogance of this– not to mention the stupidity – is mind-boggling. Such is the cynicism of such a strategy that it makes the 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement – which initially placed Palestine under international control, before eventually, it was given to Britain to control – look like a benevolent gesture.
Don't get me wrong here, for as I've written before in this newspaper, I would heartily welcome the day when a Palestinian state is recognised.
As I also wrote in last Sunday's edition of The National, I'm firmly of the belief that there is just an inkling that the political ground is shifting on both sides of what the Israeli writer Amos Elon once described as an 'irresistible force colliding with an immovable body'.
Or to put this another way, such is the magnitude of events in Gaza, there is no going back to the way things were for Israelis and Palestinians alike.
(Image: Hatem Khaled, REUTERS)
In that regard then, almost any help forthcoming in the case for recognising a Palestinian state is welcome. But the framing of Britain's 'conditional' approach in contrast to that of France's declaration could just as easily hinder rather than help.
Try putting yourself in the position of how many Palestinians must view Starmer's equivocation. Writing in the Independent yesterday, Palestinian political analyst and writer, Ahmed Najar, who himself is originally from Gaza, hit the nail on the head.
'What kind of justice operates on those terms? This is not diplomacy. This is moral blackmail. It is Britain saying to Palestinians: your right to exist is not yours. It depends entirely on the behaviour of your occupier.'
Najar is so right when he says that what Starmer is offering is 'complicity dressed as strategy.'
Responding recently to French president Emmanuel Macron's insistence that recognising Palestine was a 'moral duty,' Israel's defence minister, Israel Katz, made quite clear what he thought of the move.
'They will recognise a Palestinian state on paper – and we will build the Jewish-Israeli state on the ground,' he said. 'The paper will be thrown in the trash can of history and the State of Israel will flourish and prosper,' Katz attested.
If that is Israel's response to Macron's unequivocal recognition of Palestine, then God only knows how much Netanyahu's cabal must have been chuckling at Starmer's timid, maybe, maybe not, announcement.
The Israeli leader did of course need to be seen hitting out at Starmer's decision.
'(UK PM Keir) Starmer rewards Hamas's monstrous terrorism & punishes its victims,' Netanyahu said in a post on social media. But outraged as Netanyahu appeared to be, he knows that much could happen before September and Starmer could find himself in a corner of his own making were Israel to agree to a ceasefire within the deadline, only to subsequently resume 'hostilities' under some pretext.
Starmer needs to wake up and realise that no country that subjugates millions of people who live in Gaza and the occupied West Bank can claim legitimacy as a democracy. He also needs to recognise that criticism of Israel does not by default make him or anyone else antisemitic.
What we have seen this week is classic Starmer. In short, prevarication in the face of irrefutable facts, and because of it he could still yet do the Palestinian cause more harm than good.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
20 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
At long last, John Swinney has seen what grown-up politics is about
Mr Swinney and his fellow SNP ministers routinely like to churn out anti-Trump rhetoric seemingly because they think that'll garner them a few votes. But the reality of grown-up politics in which Mr Swinney has been obliged to indulge for just a few hours is that dialogue, pragmatism and diplomacy are key weapons in the armoury of a successful politician, not the kind of puerile sidelines sniping that's characteristic of the [[SNP]]. [[Donald Trump]] isn't my cup of tea either, but let's not forget that he leads the world's largest economy. I'm certain Keir Starmer has multiple reservations about Mr Trump, yet he, unlike Mr Swinney, heads up a sovereign state and has both a domestic and international remit – he can't wallow in Swinney-style futile populist virtue-signalling. Martin Redfern, Melrose. Knocking Labour off course Labour is on the way to running out of road for its long-term ambitions. All the MPs were elected on the same ticket with a destination in view and a driver to steer them in the right direction. They all want to reach the same destination but many of them differ with the driver on how fast they should proceed and what is the best route to reach their goal. It all boils down to how much they trust the driver and whether they can accept his gradualist approach. In today's world it would appear that everyone knows better than the people in charge and would like to impose their opinions on the ones whose skill got them on to the bus of government. In every walk of life you have to tailor your ambitions to fit in with the means at your disposal to hit those heights. Furthermore no one wishes to be compared to reckless teenagers who scream from the back of the bus for the driver to go faster, to take chances or to take a more direct route. Paying attention to excited MPs could lead to totalling the whole project the Government is trying to put in place. Do those MPs really want to jeopardise their chances of a second term in government with their short-sighted perspectives by showing that they cannot see the woods for the trees? Failure to take the global picture into consideration will run their bus off the road with regard to the Government's ambitions to improve the running of the UK for every level of the electorate. There is an old Roman tale about how the different organs and functions of the human body need to work together in harmony to achieve its desired results. It would be well worth the time of Labour MPs to reflect upon that. Denis Bruce, Bishopbriggs. Read more letters Why not protest something important? So activists have been dangling themselves off the Forth Road Bridge over another issue which is of marginal, if any, concern to the rest of us ("Police arrest 10 Greenpeace activists after bridge protest", July 27). When have we seen such activists glueing themselves to the highway, roosting on motorway gantries, or dangling from bridges and buildings over anything that matters to the Many? Over out of control immigration? The housing shortage? The cost of living crisis? Lack of opportunities for our young people? The epidemic of stabbings and other lawlessness? The answer, of course, is that the narcissistic Few are completely indifferent to the plight of ordinary people. Whether they perform as Just Stop Oil, Climate Rebellion, Stand Up To Racism, or under whatever name, the extreme demands and their callous disregard for the interests of the Many are always the same. Otto Inglis, Crossgates, Fife. Such a sad life story Richard Holloway's life story ("The Bishop who abandoned God", July 27) is one of the saddest I have read. He is caught up in an orthodox version of the Christian world, and seemingly missing the most basic and fundamental uniqueness of this faith; put off by tradition and hypocrisy that he encountered in the various stages of his religious career. It strikes me that his experience of religious life is strikingly similar to the religious pomposity of the Pharisees of the 1st century, when Jesus was alive. Their religion was one of rules and regulations, burdensome traditions and rituals that were impossible to follow. They made life so difficult for the layperson, and were 100% convinced they were right. Their superiority and controlling natures led them eventually to crucify Jesus Christ, whom they hated with a vengeance, because he did not fit in with their version of religion. Richard Holloway appears to be very knowledgeable about various religions, yet he clearly has missed the whole theme of the Bible, that God, the Creator, loves his creatures with an unending love, yet seeks truth and justice from his people. A God whose love is so immense that, to deal with the root problem of the human race, "sin", he allowed his one and only Son, Jesus, to die on that cross... taking all the pain and sorrow and evil of the world upon himself. This is, I admit, a profound mystery; yet it is the foundational truth that resonates throughout the whole Bible. This same God does not ask us to "obey rules" or to "follow religious traditions"... He asks us to trust him, and to commit our lives to him... he longs for a relationship with us humans; longs that we speak with him, listen to him, and experience the love, the joy, and the peace that comes with him. Trying, as so many do, like Richard Holloway, to follow Christ's teaching without following Christ, is actually impossible, for his teaching demands impossible standards that only he can help us meet, in the strength he provides. I could go on and on, for Richard Holloway's story is so incredibly sad. He says "religion left me"; but Jesus Christ says, "I came to seek out and to rescue those who are lost in this world" – and that is all of us. He has not yet given up on Richard Holloway, and my earnest prayer is that he will truly find the Lord, who died for him, and who was raised from the dead. Now, that truth makes Jesus unique, and worth following. May God bless Richard Holloway, and all who are yearning for truth, and true fulfilment; these are found in God himself. Alasdair HB Fyfe, Carmunnock. Richard Holloway, former Bishop of Edinburgh (Image: Newsquest) Reasons behind Russia's actions Ronald Cameron (Letters, July 27) says that "Ukraine has come close to destroying the Russian war machine". Mr Cameron has got it the wrong way round. Russia has come close to destroying Ukraine' s army. Ukraine is in the position Germany was in in 1944, fighting losing battles, the war effectively lost, but continuing to lash out with deadly but strategically pointless missile strikes. The writing is on the wall for President Zelenskyy and his gang. Mr Cameron repeats the false claim that Russia is going to invade Nato's eastern border, but the fact is that Russian fears invasion from the West more than we fear them. In 1812 Napoleon burned Moscow. In 1854 Britain and France invaded Crimea. In 1918 Germany invaded Russia and Russia lost one million square miles of territory at the subsequent Treaty of Brest Litovsk. Britain, Canada and the United States invaded Russia between 1918 and 1925. In 1941 German forces were at the gates of Moscow and on their retreat destroyed virtually everything. President Eisenhower, then Supreme Commander Allied Forces in Europe, wrote: "When we flew into Russia, in 1945, I did not see a house standing between the western borders of the country and the area around Moscow." Declassified official documents record that in February 1997 the then Prime Minister John Major said: "If I were Russian I too would be concerned that Nato might move up to Russia's borders." Since then Nato has expanded to 32 countries. Russia warned repeatedly from 2008 that Ukraine's admission to Nato was a red line. The coup of 2014 which brought a nationalist government hostile to Russia to power resulted in a civil war between the eastern Russian-speaking provinces and the Kiev regime, which bombed and shelled them for eight years. Russia invaded in their support and to prevent Nato forces on a border which geographically is difficult to defend. Flying the Ukraine flag is risible. William Loneskie, Lauder. • Ronald Cameron contradicts himself. First he writes that "we" (presumably the UK) must do "everything possible" to support Ukraine, but then "there are plenty of better things to spend the money on". Come on, money can't be spent twice, so which is it to be ? George Morton, Rosyth. Off pat Rab McNeil's excellent article on Dougie MacLean ('Singer made every ex-pat yearn for home … and a pint', July 27) was interesting but its headline ignored the fact that an ex-soldier is someone who used to be a soldier, an ex-teacher is someone who used to be teacher and an ex-pat is someone who used to be a pat. If text space is so scarce that an abbreviation for expatriate is needed, it is expat, no hyphen being involved. Peter Dryburgh, Edinburgh.
The National
2 hours ago
- The National
Time will tell whether new Scottish left-wing party has the legs
In fact, having spoken to both Phil and other enthusiasts, SLA seems at a pretty embryonic stage right now. However, they are having a crunch meeting tomorrow with members of Collective, the London-based English grouping which shares much of the same left-wing agenda. One of the people coming north for the summit is Karie Murphy, who was head honcho at Jeremy Corbyn's office before being seconded to run Labour's 2019 election campaign. Labour subsequently had their worst result since 1935. Karie, a former nurse, now self-describes as a 'political strategist'. Although they are apparently not formally part of the Corbyn/Zarah Sultana combo which launched a new party somewhat messily the other week, Collective's website does not hide its admiration for the former Labour leader. READ MORE: John Swinney brands Gaza as 'genocide' for first time as Fringe show disrupted They assert that Collective 'has captured a renewal of socialist ideas and political energy that was generated under [[Jeremy Corbyn]]'s leadership of the Labour Party. It is driven by the spirit of 'Corbynism' that can now be seen in the UK-wide mobilisation, at all levels, in opposition to Labour's rightward and authoritarian turn.' Rightward and authoritarian it may be, but there's little evidence of enthusiasm for Scottish independence, which Phil Taylor describes as one of the core principles of the new movement in Scotland. Corbyn once described indy as 'not a priority', while Keir Starmer now says it can't happen at all while he's PM. Otherwise, the list of causes the Scottish Left Alternative embraces echoes to a large extent the mantra adopted by Collective in terms of support for workers, for Gaza, an assault on the climate emergency and corporate greed. Which means more than an element of crossover with the Greens. In Taylor's view, new leadership in the Greens in both England and Scotland means that the party will be readier to accept new kids on the political block. We shall see. Thus far, all is not sweetness and light amid the Greenery. He also says that in conversations within Scotland, he's found that many people are prepared 'to leave their political baggage at the door'. The other question mark is whether or not they can make a dent in SNP support or woo back those who defected/returned to Labour the last time round. The [[SNP]] too are in the midst of internal warfare, with their leader proposing one strategy and impatient footsoldiers an entirely different one. Half of his party thinks independence needs a much stronger focus, while the other half believes getting public services right will matter more to the Holyrood electorate. At the moment, Mr Swinney seems inclined to ride both horses at once which is fine, so long as you don't fall off. The other possible bone of contention between north and south is the SLA's declaration that it will support both women's rights and those of the LGBT+ community. Of late, that issue has also made a jagged split in tartan ranks. There is no doubting Taylor's sincerity, but perhaps a question mark over his naivety. It's one thing to suggest that there are many folks on the London left who just don't understand Scotland; quite another to hope they will jettison their long-standing beliefs in the value of Unionism on the say-so of a newly registered Scottish counterpart. There will be a second meeting of SLA adherents in early October which is coming perilously close to next May's Scottish elections. And, not at all incidentally, it will take place a week before the [[SNP]] gather for their 91st conference in Aberdeen. Taylor concedes that Collective is rather more motivated by the 2029 election than next year's Holyrood variety but sees no reason why that needs to matter. In his opinion, inclusivity and transparency will be the hallmarks of the new movement in Scotland. and Collective will be relaxed about any divergence in the electoral cycle or the attendant strategies required. Yet setting out a stall for an election some four years distant is a totally different proposition from one which has to get a serious act together in a matter of months. Plus, there is no guarantee that tomorrow's summit between Collective and Scottish Left Alternative will be an entirely harmonious affair, given the known areas of likely controversy. I reminded Phil that new parties have an unfortunate habit of rising without trace, but his optimism for the notion of a Scottish Left Alternative is unshakeable. There is no doubt that many erstwhile Labour voters are downright scunnered with the party just a year into its current five-year stint; the question is whether they will scamper off into this 'electoral vehicle' or whether they will merely switch allegiance to the Scottish Greens or the [[SNP]]. Much will ride on what conclusions the [[SNP]] conference reaches (or perhaps is allowed to reach). And whether or not Scottish Labour remember the Scottish bit. Mr Swinney's latest suggestion of a constitutional convention would have had rather more merit in late 2014 when the indy troops were licking their wounds and desperate for some kind of balm. Since then, there have been many trigger points to advance independence which were ignored from a great height – Mr Swinney will remember them well as he was embedded in the leadership team at the time. One straw in the nationalist wind is the notion of reprising 'both votes SNP'. As I never tire of explaining, this is a surefire route to handing seats to Unionist parties as the imperfect hybrid proportional system we use was devised to give list options to parties who failed to have their vote share properly reflected in parliamentary numbers. It has meant, inter alia, that some of those most hostile to independence for Scotland and, for that matter, even to devolution, are able to rest their posteriors on Holyrood seats. Though 2011 might have been a triumph, it was also an aberration. All parties – especially one in power for a long time – are liable to fall out with each other, a fate which may also await a fledgling one too. After all, if there's one thing the left excels at, it's contriving to split. After which, implosion generally follows. It's also difficult to see how a Corbynite cadre based in London can offer the hand of solidarity and friendship to a similar would-be mass movement in Scotland, but one wedded to self-determination even if they share an interest in most of the other named causes, like wealth taxes and 'welfare not warfare'. Mr Taylor insists that the Scottish end of the equation is bottom-up and organic and most certainly not a mere branch office of the English operation: 'It will not be a franchise of a UK initiative.' That's an admirable ambition, and one which makes it rather more distinctively Scottish than Anas Sarwar's fiefdom. Yet you do wonder if the Scottish tail will be permitted to wag the English dog. Anyway, some of the mist will have cleared by close of play tomorrow. Then we will find out if we have a serious new player in the game, running up and down the left wing, or whether this is yet another false dawn for people of a lefty persuasion. Watch this space.
The National
2 hours ago
- The National
SNP under fire over public energy firm as Wales launches wind projects
The Labour-run administration in Cardiff set up Trydan Gwyrdd Cymru (which translates to Green Electricity Wales) in 2024, and in July announced plans for three wind farms on publicly owned Welsh woodlands – as well as more renewable energy projects yet to be finalised. Trydan said the initial three wind farms would be able to generate up to 400 MW of clean electricity – enough to power around one in four Welsh homes – with 'all profits generated reinvested in Welsh communities and public services'. In 2017, then-Scottish first minister Nicola Sturgeon pledged to establish a 'publicly owned, not-for-profit energy company', but the policy was dropped after the 2021 Holyrood elections. Robin McAlpine, from the Common Weal think tank, said that they had partnered with Plaid Cymru during their time in the Welsh government to lay the groundwork for Trydan Gwyrdd Cymru. 'The whole point of that conversation was to explain how to create a public energy company under a devolved settlement – and the fact that this is happening in Wales shows that it certainly could have happened in Scotland too,' he said. READ MORE: UK energy bills to rise as Ofgem approves £24bn investment 'Common Weal has made this point over and over again – the letter of the devolution settlement says the Scottish Government can't own a wind farm, but we've set out about six different workarounds. 'The fastest is to create an energy company which is co-ordinated and funded by the Scottish Government, but in which the actual wind farms are owned by local authorities. 'We have told the Scottish Government this again and again. It is a very active choice to maintain an almost wholly privatised energy system in Scotland.' Scottish Greens co-leader Patrick Harvie MSP also called for more to be done to ensure communities in Scotland see the benefits of energy generation projects. Scottish Green co-leader Patrick Harvie (Image: PA) 'Scotland has seen extraordinary growth in renewables, but this hasn't come with the growth of local, community and public ownership that some countries have achieved,' he told the Sunday National. 'We have an abundance of natural resources at our disposal that can generate clean, green, renewable energy, and we also have highly skilled people with years of experience working in the energy sector. The Greens want these resources to benefit everyone, not just giant private investors. 'It is great to see Wales taking steps in this direction. As Greens, we've long made the case for every local community to have its own energy company, as well as a role for the national level. 'The Scottish Government can do far more to ensure that the ownership models for renewable energy put money back into communities across Scotland, at the same time as cutting emissions. Local ownership, community ownership and public ownership should all be playing a much bigger role.' READ MORE: Scottish Government approves one of world's biggest wind farms amid controversy However, a Scottish Government spokesperson insisted that they did not have the powers required. 'A national public energy company that is involved in large-scale energy generation would only be possible in an independent Scotland where we had full powers over the energy market and full access to borrowing,' they said. 'We are committed to maximising the public benefits of our renewables revolution, and while many powers remain reserved, we will use the powers we do have and continue to grow community investment in energy-related projects and technology.' In January, Scottish Energy Secretary Gillian Martin told MSPs that setting up a publicly owned energy firm was "not something we are able to do at the moment with the current devolution settlement". Rebecca Evans is the Economy Secretary in the Welsh Labour Government (Image: Welsh Government) Announcing the Trydan Gwyrdd Cymru plans for 400MW of wind farm capacity, Welsh Labour's Economy Secretary Rebecca Evans said: 'These proposals demonstrate our commitment to harnessing Wales's abundant natural resources to generate clean energy while ensuring the benefits are felt locally. 'By developing these projects on the Welsh Government Woodland Estate, we're making best use of our public land to tackle the climate emergency and create sustainable economic opportunities." A press release said that the developments will 'create hundreds of jobs during construction and operation, with Trydan committed to involving Welsh companies throughout the process'.
