Keir Starmer must use goodwill with Trump to expedite Palestinian statehood
As long ago as 2014, a majority of MPs – including me – voted to recognise Palestinian statehood. Recognition has been Labour Party policy for at least the last three general elections. The Foreign Secretary, David Lammy, has repeatedly said that he is working closely with the French, who announced their intention last week.
It is no secret that pressure has ramped up in recent weeks, as the spectre of famine in Gaza has once again led the international community to look for new ways to demonstrate its commitment to a lasting peace.
I have been saying to anyone who will listen for the better part of a year that it is time for the UK to fulfil its long-term commitment to recognition. Last week, I was one of 200 MPs of all parties to sign a letter calling on the government to do just that.
On the same day, the Foreign Affairs Committee, which I chair, published a report into the Israeli-Palestinian conflict – the product of nine months' intensive work. In that report, by majority vote, we called for the UK government to 'recognise the state of Palestine while there is still a state to recognise'. We all called on the government to kick-start the political process for a two-state solution, and to demand a ceasefire and for aid to flood in.
Much of the coverage of the decision has seemed to reflect the Westminster bubble's Vicky Pollard-like attitude to any major policy change: 'Yeah-but, no-but.' When was the last time good news was simply welcomed?
A lot has been made of the so-called conditional nature of the announcement. But let's face it: such speculation had already been killed off within 24 hours, when Benjamin Netanyahu by return of post said 'no' to our demands. And so it's likely that the UK will recognise Palestine in the autumn.
Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe
What, then, does recognition mean – both for the suffering populations of Gaza and the West Bank, and for the UK's international standing?
The move to recognise a Palestinian state shows Netanyahu's far-right government that the international community will not tolerate the continued bombardment of Gaza. It will not tolerate the cutting off of aid. It will not allow Gaza and the West Bank to be annexed. As well as insisting that aid is allowed in, it will take concrete steps to support the self-determination of the Palestinian people.
In my view, it is also an attempt to reach over the heads of the far-right Israeli government and speak directly to the Israeli public, a majority of which polls consistently show want peace. It tells them there are nations out there that are willing to do the hard work to secure peace.
But above all, it shows that the UK is serious about getting back into the room and building the two-state solution that both Palestinians and Israelis desperately need.
That is especially powerful coming as it does alongside our allies. Both France, with whom Britain carved up the Middle East under the Sykes-Picot treaty more than a century ago. And our allies in the Arab world, including Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, who for their part issued a statement on Tuesday night calling for Hamas to disarm and end its rule of Gaza.
No, recognition is not a stand-alone solution. But nor is it merely symbolic. It is a gigantic first step.
Next, the UK must get together with those same allies and build a peace plan. I've seen indications that the government is beginning to do this. It is true that Netanyahu only listens to Donald Trump. So we must leverage the strong relationship that Keir Starmer has built and present that plan to the president, who, let's be honest, is hardly going to do the detailed work himself.
We should say, 'President Trump, you have the strength of ten presidents. Show Netanyahu that peace and two states is the only solution, and there might even be a Nobel Peace Prize in it for you.'
I am not saying it will work – but it might. And, in the face of the very real threat that the Palestinian land will be annexed out of existence, surely we must try.
While we must prioritise alleviating immediate suffering, it is our duty to work to secure peace and a future for the Palestinian people. For that, there is no solution other than the two-state one.
For years, the government has held out for the point of maximum impact. That moment is now.
[See also: Emily Thornberry interview: 'I want to rebuild good vibes about the UK']
Related
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scottish Sun
12 minutes ago
- Scottish Sun
Loophole in PM's swap plan means the more bogus an asylum seeker is, the less chance we have of kicking them out
FRENCH FARCE Loophole in PM's swap plan means the more bogus an asylum seeker is, the less chance we have of kicking them out MIGRANTS could dodge deportation under Labour's 'one-in, one-out' swap deal with France by lodging lengthy human rights appeals. The trial, which started yesterday, includes a clause where anyone making a human rights claim cannot be sent back until their case is heard in the courts. Advertisement 3 Small boat migrants could dodge deportation by lodging lengthy human rights appeals Credit: Getty 3 Lawyers will seize on a loophole to get round Sir Keir Starmer's migrant swap plan Credit: Getty 3 France has agreed to take back a limited number of boat migrants, pictured French President Emmanuel Macron Credit: AFP Tories last night warned lawyers will seize on the loophole to delay or block deportations. Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said: 'This deal is likely to be completely unworkable and will be ruthlessly exploited by lawyers to prevent people being returned to France. 'This deal has no numbers in it — presumably because they are so small. 'Returning just six per cent of illegal immigrants, as reported, will have no deterrent effect whatsoever — because 94 per cent get to stay.' Advertisement READ MORE ON MIGRANTS HERE WE GROW UK's immigration hotspots revealed... how does YOUR hometown fare? France has agreed to take back a limited number of boat migrants — one for each the UK accepts legally from French soil. But conditions must be met before someone is removed. Britain picking up tab And Tories say that even those with human rights claims which have been certified as 'clearly unfounded' by officials cannot be sent back until their case is dealt with in the courts, which could take years. The Home Office denies this is the case. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said the Government won't set targets for how many will be deported. Advertisement She added: 'We will provide regular updates. People will be able to see how many are being detained, how many are returned. It is right we should be transparent. 'But we're not setting the numbers in advance, firstly because there is no fixed number in terms of the overall number of people to come through this system, and secondly because we're not going to provide (gangs) with that operational information.' Watch moment migrant boat arrives on Spain hols beach before they are chased & tackled by angry locals Ministers hope the new route — where migrants in France apply online — will offer a 'safe and legal' alternative to the boats. But those who have already crossed are not eligible, meaning thousands already here won't be affected. Advertisement Only around 50 people a week are expected to be returned, equivalent to only one in every 17 boat arrivals. The new legal route to Britain only applies to people already in France who have not tried to cross illegally. To qualify, they must prove they have close family in the UK, are at risk of being trafficked or exploited, or come from a country with a high level of successful asylum claims, such as Afghanistan. This Starmer/Macron wheeze has zero chance of working. Alp Mehmet, of Migration Watch UK Unaccompanied children, people with criminal records, and anyone who has previously been deported from the UK cannot apply. Advertisement The deal also reveals that Britain is picking up the tab for both directions of travel — paying for the transport of migrants we send back to France and those we bring in legally. Alp Mehmet, of Migration Watch UK, said: 'This Starmer/Macron wheeze has zero chance of working. "It won't discourage migrants, while smugglers will be tempted to pile more people into flimsy vessels.' The deal will remain in force until June 2026. But the legal route can be paused automatically if France slows down on taking people back. Advertisement More than 25,000 migrants have crossed in small boats in 2025, up 49 per cent on the same point last year.
The Sun
13 minutes ago
- The Sun
Keir Starmer faces new sleaze row over Labour caught offering access to influential figures for cash
SIR Keir Starmer faces a new sleaze row over Labour offering access to 'influential' figures for cash. Since last summer a group linked to the party has been flogging sponsorship packages costing £9,500 to private firms. In exchange business leaders are invited to private meetings with 'key policymakers' where they can 'shape the conversation'. Sponsorship packs offered to companies include a £7,850 deal, where buyers can enjoy a 'private breakfast/dinner roundtable with an influential Labour figure'. There's also an £11,750 option to sponsor a 'parliamentary panel event with key policymakers' or £30,000 choice to pay for a 'Westminster drinks reception'. The cash for access, revealed by The Times, is organised by a group called the Labour Infrastructure Forum (LIF). Because it's run by lobbyists and a council of Labour bigwigs, but isn't itself a lobbying company, it is exempt from usual anti-sleaze rules. The organisation so far refuses to reveal which firms have signed up to its lucrative deals and who the influential Labour figures are that have taken part in back-room meet ups. A spokesperson for LIF said the group uses sponsorship cash to cover costs and 'any LIF activity that is supported by sponsors will be made publicly available at the time and in our annual report, as is common across the industry'. A Labour Party spokesman said: 'Commercial partnerships at events are a longstanding practice and have no bearing on party or government policy. The party fully complies with all rules relating to the reporting of donations.' Sir Keir Starmer red-faced AGAIN after Commons opens sleaze probe into his earnings 1
The Sun
13 minutes ago
- The Sun
There's a really simple way to sort out our dysfunctional civil service, Keir – your latest gimmick is a waste of time
LABOUR is to make the civil service more 'working class' by offering internships only to those from 'lower socio-economic backgrounds'. Their eligibility will be judged on what job their parents did when they were 14. 4 4 Meaning that Sir Keir 'my father was a toolmaker' Starmer would make the cut. But his Chancellor Rachel Reeves, whose parents were teachers and therefore classed as 'professionals', would not. Talk about fiddling while Rome burns. Look, I'm not against limiting the number of Tristams and Jemimas who find themselves interning at the Houses of Parliament because 'Daddy' knows some politician 'from his club'. And the thought of some hand-picked, 'working class' realists rolling their eyes in despair behind the lectern every time the Government announces its latest, daft initiative is admittedly an appealing one. But what does 'class' actually mean these days, and how is it judged? Take me, for example. Born in 1962, my mum brought me up alone, I went to state school, and for several years we lived extremely happily with my godparents in their council house. Mum worked as a stable girl, then became a secretary, and eventually trained as a teacher — a job she was doing when I was 14. Which, according to the Social Mobility Commission that advises the Government on such matters, is a 'professional and managerial' occupation along with chief executive, doctor, journalist, engineer and nurse. So, along with Ms Reeves, that rules me out too. PM vows to drastically increase the numbers of channel migrants sent back to France 'Intermediate' occupations include driving instructor, IT engineer, shopkeeper and hotel manager, while 'working class' jobs are those such as cleaner, waiter and bricklayer. It's all very prescriptive and, let's face it, old-fashioned. Aside from a few Hyacinth 'Bouquets' in the suburbs, does anyone really care about class any more? And isn't this seeming Labour obsession with it just inverted snobbery? Back in the day when I was in charge of a busy newspaper department, I always recruited the best person for the job, regardless of their background. Pipe dream I met some immensely stupid people who'd been to private school, and some immensely smart ones who hadn't. And vice versa. Their education, class, religious beliefs, ethnicity, sexual preferences, eating habits, whatever, were irrelevant, and so too was whatever Mummy or Daddy did for a living. I looked for punctuality, enthusiasm, honesty, quick-thinking and a willingness to work hard. And that's what the civil service should be looking for too. Meanwhile, it's curious to learn that, despite its keenness to attract kids from lower socio-economic backgrounds, Labour's internships are still only being offered to undergraduates studying for a degree. Which rules out those bright 'working-class' kids for whom university is but a pipe dream for fear of racking up huge student debt. Such hard work A FRIEND of mine who runs a small business frequently regales me with amusing stories about the entitled attitude of some of those applying for junior positions. 'I don't work on Fridays,' said one applying for a 'full-time' role, while another stressed she would need at least a two-hour lunch break every day to return home and check on her new puppy. 'Some of them act like they'd be doing me a favour by turning up at all for the job I'd be paying them to do,' she laughs. I thought of this when I read this week that a 45-year-old asset manager on £330k a year took his employers to a tribunal after feeling 'shocked' and 'angry' at how small his £10k annual bonus was despite being 'almost entirely absent from work' while suffering from long Covid. Apparently, he thought his bonus (on top of his salary) should have been around £100k. For. Doing. Virtually. Nothing. Thankfully, common sense prevailed and the judge ruled in his employer's favour. But honestly, some people. Kinnock tax on health a big turn-off LABOUR'S former leader Lord Kinnock has called for the Government to slap VAT on private healthcare to help fund the NHS. Hmmm. Except it probably wouldn't because, chances are, it would simply result in a significant number of people giving up private healthcare to rely on the already overstretched NHS instead. Much like Labour's VAT raid on private schools which has forced many families to pull their children out and, instead, send them to the nearest good – and therefore oversubscribed – state school. Following the closure of the private Bishop Challoner School in Bromley, South East London, last month, state alternatives in the county received around 100 enquiries in just 48 hours. So it remains to be seen whether Chancellor Rachel Reeves – pictured this week at a holiday camp in Kent – takes the advice of Lord Kinnock, who has also suggested the introduction of a 'wealth tax' that, without doubt, would result in even more high-net-worth individuals departing these shores. Little wonder that, when polls suggested (wrongly) back in 1992 that he might win the general election, The Sun ran the front page headline: 'If Kinnock wins today will the last person to leave Britain please turn out the lights.' The public aren't stupid and Ms Reeves et al would be wise to remember that. JOB TO TACKLE CRIME 'IF I left my job, these would be the number one reason,' says a police officer. Is it lawless street thugs? The poor prosecution rates in courts? Or a lack of support from their superiors? Nope. It's too much support in the groin area. Namely the standard- issue cargo trousers that have been described by 69 per cent of officers as 'problematic'. 'They teach us all these good restraints and moves in public-safety training but I can't do half of them in these trousers,' says one officer. The study, by Lancaster University Law School, says officers have complained of crushed testicles, cuts, blisters and swelling from the tight, chafing fabric. Ouch. The Police Federation agrees, saying the restrictive uniforms are stopping officers from keeping their communities safe. In other words, it's tough to tackle crooks when your tackle's crooked. CHEERS TO OLD TIMERS AFTER emerging damp and starving from the I'm A Celebrity jungle last year, I was keen to indulge in a late night out. But post-8pm, the restaurants of Brisbane's Surfers Paradise were virtually deserted. Like Americans, they eat early. 'You Brits are party animals,' one muscle-bound waiter told me disapprovingly when I ordered an Aperol Spritz at, er, 8.30pm. Now it seems that restaurants in the UK are adapting to accommodate a growing trend for 6pm dining here too. Richard Piper, of Alcohol Change UK, says: 'Younger diners especially are making choices that reflect physical and mental well-being but also financial health. 'Earlier dining helps avoid expensive late-night drinking. People want to socialise without the hangover.' Great idea. So last week, a friend and I arranged to meet for dinner at 6pm. Trouble is, we were still there at 9.30pm, having scoffed and quaffed far more than if we'd stuck to our usual 8pm meeting time. Clearly, we're not cut out for this modern world. LIFE IN CHECK THE new grandmaster (shouldn't that be grandmistress?) of the Women's Chess World Cup is 19-year-old Divya Deshmukh from India. Former chess coach RB Ramesh says: 'She was a confident girl from a very young age. 'She didn't have that negative side to her, the one that tends to create self-doubt. That inner chatter that wrecks things, fortunately, was missing in her.' Maybe. Or perhaps, given that much of her spare time is spent practising chess moves, she isn't constantly on social media being fed impossible depictions of 'perfection' or hate-filled judgments from people who don't even know her.
