Latest news with #Fatah
New York Post
7 hours ago
- Politics
- New York Post
Europe's preening appeasers will recognize a fantasy — not ‘Palestine'
French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced this week that their countries would unilaterally recognize a Palestinian state. The first problem with that is 'Palestine' is a fictional place. There never was any such thing. And diplomatic recognition of it no more changes this reality than if Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu decided to recognize the archipelago of Islamic banlieues on the outskirts of Paris as an independent nation. But what exactly are Britain and France recognizing? Mahmoud Abbas, the dictator of the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, is now 89 years old. What do Macron and Starmer think will happen when he finally dies? The best-case scenario, I suppose, is for another corrupt strongman to take over an independent 'Palestine.' Will these Western European leaders back an autocracy? What happens when a civil war breaks out? Because the prospects are quite high. Since the Oslo Accords, the Palestinian Authority has relied heavily on Israel's security apparatus to stay in power. It would almost certainly implode without it. The French and Brits should recall that the first thing Gazans did when handed a protostate in 2005 was to destroy over 3,000 greenhouses and modern farming systems that American Jews had purchased for $14 million and handed them, gratis. The second thing they did, though, was put Hamas in charge. So, will France and Britain support open elections in this new nation? What if Hamas, or some other iteration of that organization, wins those elections? Will France and Britain recognize such a state? 'Hamas does not represent the Palestinian people,' Macron claimed during a visit to Ramallah with Abbas in 2023. This is Western elitist twaddle: The unpleasant truth is that Islamists far better represent the people than the 'moderate' Fatah party, which is propped up with billions of Western dollars and Israeli assistance. In 2006, Hamas not only won the Gaza elections, but also won a majority of the parliamentary seats in the PA, which it still holds. In 2024, Hamas and Fatah signed the Beijing Declaration, brokered by Communist China, agreeing to form an 'interim national reconciliation government.' Will the French and British 'recognize' a similar arrangement in the future? Is Macron going to send French troops into Jenin to root out Islamist militants firing Iranian- or Qatari-funded missiles into Jerusalem? Get opinions and commentary from our columnists Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter! Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters Whether the French could even win such a war, I suppose, is the better question. And what will 'Palestine' look like? Not once in the dozens of attempts to give Palestinians a state have they accepted any arrangement that didn't include 'a right to return' into Israel proper. 'Nakba' itself — Palestinians' bitter term for what they see as the 'catastrophe' of Israel's founding — was the result of a war that was launched by local Arabs and their allies who rejected a Jewish state. Even if a deal could be struck, what makes Macron and Starmer believe Palestinians can run their own nation, anyway? Palestinians in Gaza are unwilling to build the basic infrastructure necessary for themselves. despite receiving hundreds of millions in yearly aid. Every Israeli restriction on Palestinians in Gaza has been put in place to mitigate violence. When you send Gaza concrete, they build tunnels and military installations under hospitals, not schools or businesses. If you build them infrastructure, they dig up water pipes to make casements for rockets. When you allow shipments of necessities, they smuggle in explosives. When you send food, they give it to the terrorist army before the children. Unless, of course, those children have been recruited to the Islamist cause. Will France and Britain send in their citizens to administer this new state and its borders to ensure that the same doesn't happen again? Or will Israel just be forced to invade once more? Now, of course, Macron says Hamas must be 'disarmed' and that Gaza needs to be rebuilt. But the French and British recognition of 'Palestine' incentivizes the opposite. What do they think Israel has been trying to do? Is France or Britain going to disarm Hamas? Is France or Britain going to bring back the more than 50 hostages still being held and tortured in Gaza? Macron and Starmer, like so many apologists for Palestinian violence, lose nothing with this cynical moral preening meant to mollify their domestic Islamists. The real world is a lot more complicated. David Harsanyi is a senior writer at the Washington Examiner. Twitter @davidharsanyi
UPI
17 hours ago
- Politics
- UPI
Lawyers warn British govenment over Palestnian state recognition plan
More than 40 members of the House of Lords wrote the attorney-general, urging him to advise the British government to ditch a plan to recognize a Palestinian state in September because it would break international law. File Photo by Peter Foley/UPI. | License Photo July 31 (UPI) -- British lawmakers warned Thursday that proposed recognition of a Palestinian state by the government of Prime Minister Keir Starmer would breach international law because Palestine does not meet the legal threshold for statehood. The 43 members of the House of Lords, Parliament's upper chamber, said in a letter that the plan to recognize Palestine unless Israel agreed to a cease-fire and resumed efforts toward a two-state solution violated the legal requirements of an Americas treaty from the 1930s. The 1933 Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States, signed by the United States, Brazil, Peru and 17 other Americas nations, stipulates that to be recognized as a defined territory in international law, a state must have a permanent population, an effective government and the capacity to enter into relations with other states. The bipartisan group of peers, among them some of Britain's top legal experts, wrote the attorney-general, Lord Hermer, urging him to advise Starmer against the move on the grounds that Palestine met only one of the criteria. They said the lack of certainty over borders was obvious as was the absence of a "functioning single government," given the bitter power struggle between the two Palestinian factions -- Fatah in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza. "The former has failed to hold elections for decades, and the latter is a terrorist organization, neither of which could enter into relations with other states," the group said. The lords called Hermer on a previous claim that government foreign policy was guided entirely by its commitment to international law, saying that if that were true, Hermer should "explain to the public and to the government that recognition of Palestine would be contrary to the principles governing recognition of states in international law." The government responded by pointing out that Britain was not a signatory to the Montevideo Convention and that the move was in line with the bulk of United Nations member-countries that had already taken the step to formally recognize a Palestinian state. "We haven't signed up to the Montevideo Convention, but is there a clear population in Palestine? Yes, there is in Gaza and the West Bank," business minister Gareth Thomas told a radio station. "We have made clear that we think you would recognize the state of Palestine, and that state of Palestine would be based on the 1967 borders. Of course, there would have to be land swaps and there would be a shared capital of Jerusalem. They are well-regarded international views. "As I say, 140 other countries have already recognised the state of Palestine. The prime minister was in talks this week with a series of countries, including Canada, and Canada have overnight, as you will have seen, taken the decision to recognise Palestine in September." However, Lady Deech, an academic lawyer and chair of the House of Lords Appointments Commission, said the Montevideo Convention was based on a pre-existing law and, since it had gone unchallenged for so long, was now considered customary law. "This country is definitely bound by it, as the prime minister must know," she said. Lady Deech also pointed out that Palestinians had rejected the offer of a Palestinian state no fewer than four times in the seven decades prior to 2008. In his first comments since doubts over the legality of his policy emerged, Starmer avoided the issue, instead addressing widely reported criticism from British-Israeli hostage Emily Damari, held by Hamas for more than a year, who accused Starmer of "moral failure" and standing on the wrong side of history. Starmer insisted he listened to the hostages and their families and continued as he had always done to push for the release of those still held. But he said Britain also needed to do everything it could to "alleviate the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza, where we are seeing the children and babies starving for want of aid which could be delivered."
The Hill
17 hours ago
- Politics
- The Hill
Recognizing Palestine now would only undermine peace
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emanuel Macron have announced that their nations are considering unilaterally recognizing Palestine. At first glance, this might seem a powerful symbolic move: a gesture to remind Israel's benighted government that the disenfranchisement of millions is morally indefensible and strategically unwise. But, at this time, the move would be disastrous. Israelis will not withdraw from any land until Hamas ceases to be a threat — and recognizing Palestine now will strengthen the group, just as most Arab states are finally calling on it to disarm. There can be no more self-defeating action than to perpetuate the presence of this jihadist mafia organization, which has brought disaster upon Palestinians and Israelis both, and which is currently much diminished by the war. With Gazans suffering immensely, might recognition not spur change? Well, consider the fact that almost 150 countries have recognized Palestine, but that has proven meaningless in the face of a reality in which there is no agreed territory, no settled borders and no unified Palestinian government capable of exercising authority. Hamas, one of the two relevant Palestinian factions, rejects peace outright and has consistently used terror against Israelis to derail diplomacy. The other, Fatah, which controls the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority, is corrupt and incompetent, but saintly by comparison. Yet Fatah too has failed to embrace peace offers that would have created a Palestinian state on about 98 percent of the territory they seek, the last one coming in 2008. Israel pulled out of Gaza completely in 2005, and Hamas forcefully expelled the Palestinian Authority from the territory two years later. Hamas has used Gaza ever since as a launching pad for attacks. The Oct. 7, 2023 invasion and massacre was just the most horrifying episode. Sadly, the attack succeeded in derailing what looked like an incipient Israeli-Saudi normalization deal — and has also convinced Israelis that they cannot afford to grant the Palestinians any more land. Major powers recognizing a Palestinian state now would signal to Palestinians that the most barbaric variant of terrorism pays the highest dividend and has indeed brought them over the line. Support for Hamas would soar, despite the group sparking a war that left much of Gaza flattened, hundreds of thousands displaced and tens of thousands killed. To imagine Israel then pulling out of the West Bank — with Hamas perhaps primed to take that area over too — is fantasy. This area, where the Palestinian Authority controls pockets of 'autonomy,' borders the very heart of Israel. Tel Aviv lies just 25 miles from Qalqilya, and Jerusalem is surrounded on three sides. An Oct. 7-style invasion from the West Bank would be exponentially more devastating. Israelis will not and cannot agree to a Palestinian state unless this existential fear is addressed and resolved. That means one thing above all: Hamas must be gone. Not weakened, not partially sidelined, but gone, at least as an armed outfit, and completely delegitimized. Until that happens, any serious negotiation involving the West Bank is politically impossible in Israel. Moreover, any future Palestinian state must be demilitarized. That means no armed militias, no rocket factories, no independent chains of command. A future government — presumably a reformed Palestinian Authority — must hold a monopoly on the use of force, just as any legitimate state must. Hamas would never agree to this. Sidelining Hamas would be also in the interests of Palestinians. Hamas is a theocratic militia that has turned Gaza into a miserable prison and turned Israelis against the two-state solution. The Arab world, if it seeks Palestinian independence, must cut off Hamas's funding, deny it refuge and arrest its leaders-in-exile — and then grant maximal assistance of every kind to Palestinian leaders willing to coexist with Israel. I say all this not as an opponent of Palestinian independence, but as someone who indeed believes partition is essential to Israel's survival as a Jewish and democratic state. About 15 million people live between the river and the sea, split roughly evenly between Jews and Arabs. Without partition, Israel will either cease to be Jewish or cease to be democratic. This would seem to be so obvious that Israelis who support the occupation are caricatured as religious zealots, racists or idiots. But many are none of those things — they're simply scared. They remember the 1990s bombings after the Oslo Accords, the bloodshed of the Second Intifada after the Camp David Summit in the early 2000s, and now the slaughter of Oct. 7. This fear cannot be ignored, even if the occupation is cruel and the Jewish settlements in the West Bank indefensible. Palestinians deserve dignity, rights and even statehood — if they can agree to demilitarization. But none of that will happen if Hamas remains in place. What is needed now is maximal pressure on Hamas to disarm. A corollary of all this is that Israel's government will in turn have to be pressured to reengage with the Palestinian Authority, which Netanyahu has foolishly demonized. But recognizing Palestine now would probably stiffen right-wing forces in Israel. Recognition should be used not as a reward for terrorism, but as an incentive to abandon it. The promise of statehood should be conditioned on Palestinian unity under moderate leadership, the dismantling of armed factions and credible steps toward peaceful coexistence. Only then can recognition serve its intended purpose: to support a lasting peace. France and the U.K. no doubt mean well. And outlining a roadmap would be helpful. But an unconditional recognition would embolden Palestinian extremists, alienate Israelis and make a two-state solution harder to achieve. Macron and Starmer need to think more carefully. Dan Perry is the former Cairo-based Middle East editor and London-based Europe-Africa editor of the Associated Press, the former chairman of the Foreign Press Association in Jerusalem and the author of two books.
BBC News
a day ago
- Politics
- BBC News
Lawyers warn Starmer recognising Palestinian state could break international law
Some of Britain's most distinguished lawyers have warned the government that recognising a Palestinian state would breach international Minister Sir Keir Starmer announced the UK would move towards recognition unless Israel met certain conditions, including agreeing a ceasefire and reviving the prospect of a two-state solution, on Tuesday.A day later, Canada announced it would also move towards recognition at a UN summit in September, where 147 of the UN's 193 member states already formally recognise a Palestinian opponents argue Palestine does not meet the legal requirements for statehood under international law because important criteria have not been met. The Montevideo Convention sets out the criteria for the recognition of a state under international law as a defined territory, a permanent population, an effective government and the capacity to enter into relations with other states.A group of 43 peers, including some of the UK's most eminent lawyers, has set out their belief that Sir Keir's pledge could be in breach of international law as the territory may not meet these criteria for a letter to the government's attorney general, Lord Hermer, first reported by the Times, they call for him to advise the prime minister against recognition."It is clear that there is no certainty over the borders of Palestine," they argue, and also that "there is no functioning single government, Fatah and Hamas being enemies". "The former has failed to hold elections for decades, and the latter is a terrorist organisation, neither of which could enter into relations with other states," the letter adds. The peers warn that it "would be unwise to depart from" the Convention, signed in 1933, "at a time when international law is seen as fragile".They add: "You have said that a selective, 'pick and mix' approach to international law will lead to its disintegration, and that the criteria set out in international law should not be manipulated for reasons of political expedience."Accordingly, we expect you to demonstrate this commitment by explaining to the public and to the government that recognition of Palestine would be contrary to the principles governing recognition of states in international law."Lord Hermer has previously insisted that a commitment to international law "goes absolutely to the heart" of the government's approach to foreign BBC has obtained a full list of signatories, which includes the prominent barrister Lord Pannick - who represented the previous government at the Supreme Court over its Rwanda well as lawyers, some of Parliament's most prominent Jewish voices, including crossbench peer Baroness Deech, Labour's Lord Winston and the Conservatives' Baroness Altmann, have also put their name to the letter. The peers' intervention follows condemnation of Sir Keir's announcement by Emily Damari, a British-Israeli women who was held captive by Hamas for more than a year, who said Sir Keir is "not standing on the right side of history". Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also claimed it "rewards Hamas's monstrous terrorism".Responding to fears the decision to recognise a Palestinian state does not align with the 1933 Montevideo Convention, business minister Gareth Thomas told Times Radio: "We haven't signed up to the Montevideo Convention, but is there a clear population in in Palestine? Yes, there is in Gaza and the West Bank."We have made clear that we think you would recognise the state of Palestine, and that state of Palestine would be based on the 1967 borders."Of course, there would have to be land swaps and there would be a shared capital of Jerusalem. They are well-regarded international views."Thomas stressed the UK Government had "made clear that there needs to be reform to the Palestinian Authority, that Hamas can have no role in the future government of Gaza and Palestine more generally". Pointing to the 147 other countries that have already recognised a Palestinian state, he added that the prime minister "was in talks this week with a series of countries, including Canada, and Canada have overnight, as you will have seen, taken the decision to recognise Palestine in September".Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said his country plans to recognise a Palestinian state as part of the two-state solution - that is Israel and Palestine living said his decision was prompted by the "catastrophe" in Gaza, and because he feared the prospect of a Palestinian state was "receding before our eyes".The Palestinian Authority - which runs parts of the occupied West Bank - must commit to "much-needed reform" he said, and Hamas, which controlled Gaza, "can play no part".The UK has said it too would recognise a Palestinian state in September unless Israel committed to a Keir has said the UK will only refrain from recognition if Israel allows more aid into Gaza, stops annexing land in the West Bank, agrees to a ceasefire, and signs up to a long-term peace process over the next two also said Hamas must immediately release all remaining Israeli hostages, sign up to a ceasefire, disarm and "accept that they will play no part in the government of Gaza". Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to keep up with the inner workings of Westminster and beyond.
Daily Mail
a day ago
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Top lawyers warn Keir Starmer his pledge to recognise a Palestinian state risks breaking international law as PM continues to face furious backlash
Sir Keir Starmer 's pledge to recognise a Palestinian state risks breaking international law, some of Britain's top lawyers have warned. A group of 38 members of the House of Lords, including some of the UK's most eminent lawyers, issued the alert in a letter to Attorney General Lord Hermer. They said the Prime Minister's pledge to recognise Palestine within weeks, which he announced on Tuesday, may breach international law. This is because the territory may not meet the criteria for statehood under the Montevideo Convention, a treaty signed in 1933. The peers said Palestine 'does not meet the international law criteria for recognition of a state, namely, defined territory, a permanent population, an effective government and the capacity to enter into relations with other states'. There is no certainty over the borders of Palestine they said, and no single government, as Hamas and Fatah are enemies. Lord Hermer has previously insisted that a commitment to international law 'goes absolutely to the heart' of the Government's approach to foreign policy. Sir Keir has sparked a furious backlash by saying Britain could recognise Palestinian statehood in September, ahead of the UN General Assembly. The UK will only refrain from doing so if Israel allows more aid into Gaza, stops annexing land in the West Bank, agrees to a ceasefire, and signs up to a long-term peace process over the next two months. Hamas must immediately release all remaining Israeli hostages, sign up to a ceasefire, disarm and 'accept that they will play no part in the government of Gaza', Sir Keir also said. A British-Israeli woman, who was held hostage by Hamas for a year, yesterday blasted the PM for 'emboldening' the terror group by moving to recognise Palestine. Emily Damari, who spent 471 days in Hamas captivity, accused Sir Keir of 'moral failure' and claimed he is 'not standing on the right side of history'. Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu has claimed the UK's action 'rewards Hamas's monstrous terrorism'. In their letter to Lord Hermer, first reported by The Times, the peers added: 'You have said that a selective, 'pick and mix' approach to international law will lead to its disintegration, and that the criteria set out in international law should not be manipulated for reasons of political expedience. 'Accordingly, we expect you to demonstrate this commitment by explaining to the public and to the Government that recognition of Palestine would be contrary to the principles governing recognition of states in international law.' Among the respected lawyers to have signed the letter are Lord Pannick - who represented the previous government at the Supreme Court over its Rwanda scheme - as well as KCs Lord Verdirame and Lord Faulks. Some of Parliament's most prominent Jewish voices, including crossbench peer Baroness Deech, Labour's Lord Winston and the Conservatives' Baroness Altmann, have also put their name to the letter. Former Conservative cabinet ministers Lord Pickles and Lord Lansley have also supported it, as has Sir Michael Ellis KC, a former Conservative attorney general and the only non-peer whose name appears on the letter. Government minister Gareth Thomas this morning insisted UK recognition of Palestine would be compliant with international law. He told Times Radio: 'We haven't signed up to the Montevideo Convention, but is there a clear population in in Palestine? Yes, there is in Gaza and the West Bank. 'We have made clear that we think you would recognise the state of Palestine, and that state of Palestine would be based on the 1967 borders. 'Of course, there would have to be land swaps and there would be a shared capital of Jerusalem. They are well-regarded international views. 'As I say, 140 other countries have already recognised the state of Palestine. 'The PM was in talks this week with a series of countries, including Canada, and Canada have overnight, as you will have seen, taken the decision to recognise Palestine in September.' Mr Thomas, a business minister, added the Government had 'made clear that there needs to be reform to the Palestinian Authority, that Hamas can have no role in the future government of Gaza and Palestine more generally'.
