What's stopping Keir Starmer from recognising Palestine as a state?
He's under pressure from 221 MPs – more than a third of all the people who sit in the House of Commons – who collectively signed a letter urging recognition.
He's under pressure from Jeremy Corbyn's newly announced left-wing party, which placed alleged UK complicity in the Gaza horror at the centre of its launch, and the significant number of supporters it has attracted.
And he's under pressure from top Labour figures, ranging from London Mayor Sadiq Khan to members of his own cabinet, who are pushing him on the matter both publicly and privately.
Those calls have grown in the past few days, as images of starving children have been beamed around the world and French President Emmanuel Macron has announced France will formally recognise Palestine as a state.
But the Prime Minister has remained firm, insisting he will only press forward at the moment when the move would have the maximum impact.
Craig Munro breaks down Westminster chaos into easy to follow insight, walking you through what the latest policies mean to you. Sent every Wednesday. Sign up here.
In a statement released on Thursday night, Starmer said: 'We are clear that statehood is the inalienable right of the Palestinian people.
'A ceasefire will put us on a path to the recognition of a Palestinian state and a two-state solution which guarantees peace and security for Palestinians and Israelis.'
The UK is deeply entwined in the history of the region currently occupied by Israel and Palestine.
In 1916, the British claimed control of the region called Palestine amid the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, and the following year, Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour said the UK would back a 'national home' for the Jewish people in the area.
A little over three decades later, in 1948, David Ben-Gurion declared the independence of Israel. The UN admitted Israel as a member in 1949, but not Palestine.
It was not until 1988 that Palestinian statehood was recognised by any UN member states, after the Palestinian National Council formally declared independence.
Today, 147 of the UN's 193 member states recognise Palestine, including the vast majority of the countries in Asia, Africa and South America.
The UK, US, Canada, Germany, Japan, Australia and New Zealand are among the nations that do not.
In 2014, MPs in the House of Commons voted to 274 to 12 in favour of recognising Palestine as a state.
But David Cameron's government responded with a line that remains familiar today – that recognition would wait until it was deemed most appropriate for the peace process.
On the face of it, the British government appears to be closer than ever to announcing formal recognition of a Palestinian state.
Among the high-profile cabinet members reportedly arguing in favour are Deputy PM Angela Rayner, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, Health Secretary Wes Streeting and Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood.
The UK has also been closely aligning with France on the issue, as part of the E3 group of nations alongside Germany.
However, both Starmer and Foreign Secretary David Lammy have insisted publicly that the move is only worth making when it would be most effective in the pursuit of peace.
On Tuesday, Lammy told the BBC: 'We don't just want to recognise symbolically, we want to recognise as a way of getting to the two states that sadly many are trying to thwart at this point in time.'
Labour's election manifesto last year said the party is 'committed to recognising a Palestinian state as a contribution to a renewed peace process which results in a two-state solution with a safe and secure Israel alongside a viable and sovereign Palestinian state.' More Trending
The letter signed by 221 MPs, organised by Labour's Sarah Champion, said the announcement of recognition should come at a UN conference co-chaired by France and Saudi Arabia on Monday and Tuesday.
It said: 'British recognition of Palestine would be particularly powerful given its role as the author of the Balfour Declaration and the former Mandatory Power in Palestine. Since 1980 we have backed a two-state solution.
'Such a recognition would give that position substance as well as living up to a historic responsibility we have to the people under that Mandate.'
Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@metro.co.uk.
For more stories like this, check our news page.
MORE: Will there be a bank holiday and trophy parade if England win Women's Euro 2025?
MORE: Empty shops to be turned into clubs and bars under new government plans
MORE: Trump warns 'there'll be no Europe left' before immediately hitting golf course
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
25 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
STEPHEN DAISLEY: The out-of-touch political dreamers who've now been handed a rude awakening by reality
Ten years and a few months ago, I was dispatched to Paisley to try to interview Mhairi Black. I say 'try to' because everywhere we went someone would interrupt to tell the 20 year-old they were voting for her. It's not easy grilling a candidate on currency options for an independent Scotland when every few minutes a passing stranger suddenly downs their Tesco bags and asks for a selfie. This was the eve of the 2015 general election and the SNP was poised to sweep Labour from its west-central heartlands. Nicola Sturgeon was selling out the Hydro. Black was about to become the youngest MP since the Great Reform Act. I still had hair. It was another Scotland. A decade on, Black says she's done with the SNP and is no longer a member. She pinpoints 'capitulation on LGBT rights, trans rights in particular' as her reason for leaving, though adds: 'I thought the party could be doing better about Palestine as well'. Much as I don't share Black's views on gender or Gaza – or a great deal else, for that matter – I respect them. They're sincerely held. If you're going to hate anyone in politics, don't hate the ones who disagree with you on principle, hate the ones prepared to agree with you on any principle just to get ahead. Unfortunately her principles are far removed from those of the median voter, who remains baffled by the notion that someone can 'identify' into a different sex and even more baffled as to how this became a priority for politicians across the land. Many feel strongly about the deaths in Gaza but for most voters it is nowhere near the top of their concerns, which are dominated by their family, then their social circles, then their neighbourhood, then their country. Idealists who make a virtue of empathising more with those on the other side of the world get very angry about this. They even invented a term for it, 'hierarchy of death', which seems superfluous when we already had a term for it: human nature. For the SNP to have clung onto Black's membership subs, it would have had to return to a subject (trans rights) which has caused it no end of internal division and political misery, and adopt an even more strident stance on Israel's military response to the Palestinians' October 7 invasion and murder, rape and abduction of its citizens. The SNP is a political party, not a moral philosophy seminar. It exists to win elections and, in theory, achieve Scottish independence. What votes would it win by taking Black's advice? What votes is it at risk of losing by not? The former Paisley and Renfrewshire South MP comes close to identifying the problem herself, when she says: 'If anything, I'm probably a bit more Left-wing than I have been. I don't think I have changed all that much. I feel like the party needs to change a lot more.' The SNP does have to change, but not in the direction Black wants. The Nationalists and most other parties have spent the past decade or so breenging off on a tangent about trans rights, systemic racism, Donald Trump and the rest. A correction was long overdue. This agenda lacked popular consent and stoked resentment among both those who opposed it fiercely and those who protested over so much time and effort being frittered away. The Supreme Court judgment in For Women Scotland has helped immeasurably. Party leaders and policy-makers were able to point to the ruling and pass responsibility onto the justices. They weren't backsliding, the court was clarifying the law. For John Swinney, this has been a blessed opportunity to ditch positions he went along with at the time, I've no doubt against his better judgment, but which he knows have gravely damaged his party's standing with the public. A man with more gumption would have stood up and said something when it mattered, but if Swinney isn't much of a leader – and he certainly isn't – nor is he alone in that category. During the initial consultation stage for reforming the Gender Recognition Act, a senior politician in one party admitted to me that they didn't understand the issue, or why it was a priority, but they'd be voting for it because they had been told to. Politics is the trade of dreamers and cynics and while Mhairi Black might be wrong about everything at least she's sincere about it. She isn't the only dreamer to be rudely awakened lately by political reality. Maggie Chapman has found herself dumped as the Greens' lead candidate in North East Scotland, replaced by Guy Ingerson, ex oil-and-gas worker turned Net Zero enthusiast. According to a pet theory of mine, that makes it unlikely that Chapman will be re-elected next May. The theory: a person's likelihood to vote for the Scottish Greens correlates with their proximity to a Pret A Manger. Edinburgh and Glasgow, home to 11 and six branches of the posh sandwich chain respectively, just so happen to be the Greens' best and second-best performing areas on the regional lists. Aberdeen, with just two, lags far behind in Green support. Whether or not my theory holds water (or overpriced coffee), Chapman's Holyrood career appears to be over after years of headline-grabbing pronouncements. Her principles also deserve respect. Not because they're sincerely held but because we should remain open to ideas from other planets. When the landmark ruling was handed down in For Women Scotland, Chapman attended a rally to denounce the 'bigotry, prejudice and hatred coming from the Supreme Court'. She once told an interviewer that allowing eight year olds to change their legal sex was something that 'in principle we should be exploring'. Following the October 7 attack on Israel, she shared a tweet saying the murderous rampage was not terrorism but 'decolonisation'. Yes, her views are deranged, but the more pertinent question is how these came to be the views of someone elected to make sure Scots can see a doctor, find a good school for their children, and not get mugged at knifepoint. The answer is that ideologues like Chapman are not interested in all that boring, quotidian stuff that fixates middle-class taxpayers. Simply ghastly people, those bourgeois types, with their petrol-guzzling cars, their authoritarian demands for more police on the streets, and their grasping fixation with ambition and acquisition. Don't they know there are more important issues in the world? There are far too many in Holyrood or keen to get there who think like this. For them, life is just one long university debating society match, in which enlightened elites like them exchange barbs and bon mots over affairs of state. The little people might fret about bills and savings and leaving an inheritance for their children, but they are above such vulgar materialism. They are here to change the world, you know. In my observation, those most keen to change the world tend to have the least experience of it. They make terrible politicians because they quickly find out the world doesn't work the way they want and they resent the voters for that. If the voters set the agenda in politics, Mhairi Black and Maggie Chapman wouldn't be the only ones in our insular, self-righteous governing class that would be stampeding for the exit. Democracy is still the most radical idea of all. Maybe one day we'll give it a try.
The Sun
25 minutes ago
- The Sun
Fury as bankrupt Birmingham council offering asylum seekers huge discounts on swimming, golf, trampolining & Villa games
BANKRUPT Birmingham Council is offering small boat asylum seekers hefty discounts on leisure activities — including swimming, golf and trampolining. The Labour -run authority, which is locked in a bin strike now in its seventh month, is giving migrants up to 25 per cent off through its Passport To Leisure scheme. 2 2 Migrants, many of whom have crossed the Channel by boat before claiming asylum on reaching the UK, can also get a fifth off on the use of council swimming pools. Martial arts classes are subsidised for migrants under the initiative, as are courses on trampolining, golf, gymnastics and football. The price of a trip to a council wellbeing centre for fitness, yoga, squash and badminton sessions is also cheaper. The council even offers £1 tickets to Aston Villa matches for migrant children, as long as they are accompanied by a full paying adult. In a further slap in the face for taxpayers, asylum seekers get ten per cent off at most council leisure sites, meaning cheaper trips to the theatre, museum and city's botanical gardens. Under the scheme, £3 is lopped off tickets to watch shows, such as Disney musical Mary Poppins at the Birmingham Hippodrome. The Passport To Leisure card is available to over-60s, full-time students, carers, disabled people and recipients of certain benefits. Birmingham — England's largest local authority district by population — already has a 'Be Active' scheme for asylum seekers which offers free swimming and gym sessions. The council is £3.9billion in debt and declared itself effectively bankrupt in September 2023 with the issue of a Section 114 notice, limiting it to essential spending only. It is also under fire over its handling of a bin strike which has seen mountains of rubbish pile up on the city's streets. Migrant hotel protesters take to the streets again as demonstrations spread across the country in weekend stand-off Unite union members are in a dispute over pay and proposed changes to some roles. Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said: 'This is a bankrupt Labour council, in the middle of a bin strike, racking up billions in debt, hiking council tax by 21 per cent, and their priority is trampolining perks for illegal immigrants. 'It is a slap in the face for hard-pressed taxpayers who are being forced to subsidise freebies for illegal immigrants who claim asylum having crossed the channel.'
Telegraph
25 minutes ago
- Telegraph
The safe passage of aid must be allowed in Gaza
The dramatic shift in Israel's policy towards Gaza follows weeks of mounting international pressure for more to be done to help the Palestinian people caught in the middle of this catastrophe. The arguments over who was responsible are largely pointless now. The casus belli was the October 7, 2023 invasion by Hamas and the murder of more than 1,000 Israelis, and the kidnapping of scores more. Without that atrocity what we are now seeing would not have happened. Those who march through European capitals every week, blaming Israel for wanting peace and security free from neighbours seeking their destruction, do not have to live in the region. Nor do they consider what any country would do if its citizens were taken hostage and kept as bargaining counters by terrorists. Had they been released and Hamas accepted Israel's right to exist this could have ended months ago. But with a humanitarian crisis unfolding in Gaza we are past the blame game, as the Israeli government is tacitly conceding by offering 10-hour daily pauses and opening aid corridors in densely populated parts of the Strip. This is 'to enable the safe passage of UN and humanitarian aid organisation convoys delivering and distributing food and medicine to the population'. There have also been air drops of aid in recent days. Critics will say this has come a bit late in the day, although the Israelis have challenged Hamas's accounts of what has happened to past aid convoys, many of which they say have been hijacked. Nonetheless, the new, open-ended, policy is indicative of the massive pressure now being applied to Jerusalem, with countries like France proposing to recognise a Palestinian state. As more pictures emerge from inside Gaza it has become impossible for the Israelis to maintain a narrative that the privation of the people is being exaggerated. Now they have opened up the aid corridors it is imperative that the world sees it is being delivered to women and children and not being intercepted by Hamas. To that end, opening the country to the free and safe movement of foreign media representatives can only be to Israel's advantage. The fact remains, however, that Hamas is still holding at least 50 hostages, of whom 20 are thought still to be alive. Their release is essential to any chance of an agreement to end the conflict. Furthermore, apart from Jordan and the UAE, what are other Arab countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia doing to help the Palestinians?
