UK recognition of Palestine 'highly likely' after Israel's furious reaction
It is less than likely that Israel will seek to fulfil the four conditions that Prime Minister Keir Starmer set out on Tuesday, in his major foreign policy reversal, as it has vehemently criticised the British move.
But academics have told The National that there is a chance that the major change in UK foreign policy could influence the Israeli government's decisions.
More importantly, with a number of countries moving towards recognition, including France, it could have an impact on Donald Trump's thinking.
The US President, it is argued, is the only leader who can sufficiently influence Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
UK recognition of Palestine as a state is now 'highly likely' to happen in September as Israel will not meet the conditions set out, Sir William Patey, co-chairman of the Labour Middle East Council, told The National.
While he believed that recognition should have been made without conditions, it would at least give the Palestinians 'some hope that the international community has not gone soft on a two-state solution, even if one is not immediately in prospect'.
Sir William, who is a former British ambassador to Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan, believes that Britain acting together with France and Saudi Arabia, could help 'end the carnage and to move things forward in a more positive light'.
'But they are up against the two most intransigent set of people that we've ever seen in the Middle East, Hamas and the most right-wing Israeli government that ever existed,' he added.
President Sheikh Mohamed on Wednesday received a phone call from UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer when he praised Mr Starmer's statements regarding Britain's intention to recognise the Palestinian state. He also stressed the priority of reaching an urgent ceasefire in Gaza and continuing the flow of humanitarian aid into the enclave.
Israel rejection
Mr Starmer's conditions demand that Israel ends the starvation in Gaza, achieves a ceasefire with Hamas, refrains from annexing the occupied West Bank and commits to the two-state solution, otherwise Britain will recognise a Palestinian state at the UN General Assembly in September.
Israel's immediate response was to utterly reject the proposal with Mr Netanyahu condemning Mr Starmer's position as one that 'rewards Hamas's monstrous terrorism' and could ultimately threaten Britain.
Co-operation on the conditions therefore seems unlikely, especially with a host of others pitching in, including former hostage and dual British-Israeli citizen Emily Damari, who said the UK's new policy would not 'advance peace – it risks rewarding terror' and sent a message 'that violence earns legitimacy'.
There is also little hope from the Israeli opposition, with Yair Lapid, leader of the centrist Yesh Atid party, stating that Britain's position 'does not advance the two-state solution – if anything, it distances it'.
Eyes on Trump
The words are strong but ultimately all eyes will be on Mr Trump's reaction. 'Many people, even in Israel, really hope that this time Trump will be the one who will say, 'game over, no more war', and that it will put an end to the fighting,' said Dr Michael Milshtein, head of Palestinian studies at Tel Aviv University.
The Israeli peace activist Gershon Baskin, who has close contacts with Hamas, agreed that 'everything is dependent – the war in Gaza, the hostages and agreements – on what Donald Trump does and nothing else'.
'If he tells Netanyahu to end the war, the war ends,' he added. 'If he tells Israel they can stay in Gaza, they'll stay in Gaza. If he says 'you got to get out of Gaza', they'll get out of Gaza.'
He cited the Israeli government's rapid U-turn on aid after Mr Trump expressed dissatisfaction over the images of starving Gazan children as the far reach of this influence.
So far, Mr Trump has been equivocal, stating he had 'no view' on the issue and did not vehemently object to it.
'I guess Starmer is doing the same thing as [French president] Macron, and that's OK. It doesn't mean I have to agree,' he said before departing Scotland on Tuesday.
Pressure building
But others see this as a longer-term shift that goes beyond Mr Netanyahu's time in office. Recognition is needed to 'kick-start a process' that would 'reach over the head of the Israeli government to the Israeli people' showing that 'this is the way forward', suggested MP Emily Thornberry, chairwoman of parliament's foreign affair committee.
She told the BBC that Britain would remain 'long-term allies' with Israel but would not do so 'with this far-right government' and it is now down to Mr Trump to 'lean on' Mr Netanyahu
Allied with France's decision last week to recognise Palestine, alongside the Netherland barring entry to Israel's far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, the UK's move could influence the US position.
Just as Israel's population has been affected by images of starving Palestinians broadcast by its popular Channel 12 news, those same pictures are influencing Americans.
'People speak here about an international tsunami against Israel, that the gathering of American and European pressure on Israel can really have a massive impact,' said Dr Milshtein.
'Things can change'
But what makes Mr Netanyahu highly unlikely to accept the British conditions is that the moment he agrees a ceasefire it will entail an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and his coalition government will almost certainly collapse.
'But everything is very dynamic, so things can change,' said Dr Milshtein. 'Right now it is Trump's opinion and let's see what will happen with that. He has already surprised us when he spoke about starvation in Gaza so it can happen again.'
Bronwen Maddox, director of the Chatham House think tank, argued that Palestinian recognition would be an 'an unequivocal statement' that Britain views that as the only way to a secure future.
'The alternative to the creation of a Palestinian state is conflict without end, one that jeopardises Israel's security,' she added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
5 hours ago
- The National
Witkoff visits Gaza aid site as US draws up new plan
US envoy Steve Witkoff hinted at a new plan to feed Gaza on Friday, after visiting one of the food banks where starving Palestinians have allegedly been killed by Israel. Mr Witkoff said he and US ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee spent more than five hours inside Gaza "assessing conditions" and speaking to staff from the Israeli and US-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. The purpose of the visit was to give US President Donald Trump"a clear understanding of the humanitarian situation and help craft a plan to deliver food and medical aid to the people of Gaza", Mr Witkoff said. According to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, at least 1,373 Palestinians have been killed while seeking food. It said in a report that 859 were killed in the vicinity of GHF sites, and 514 along the routes of food convoys. "Most of these killings were committed by the Israeli military," it added. The US diplomats visited one of the GHF aid sites in the southern city of Rafah. "This morning I joined Steve Witkoff for a visit to Gaza to learn the truth about GHF aid sites," Mr Huckabee wrote on X. GHF wrote on the platform that it had delivered its 100 millionth meal on Friday. On Thursday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters the pair would 'secure a plan to deliver more food and meet local Gazans to hear first-hand about this dire situation '. Their visit came after Mr Trump lamented the aid situation in Gaza. He described it as 'terrible', despite Israeli claims that there is 'no starvation policy' in the enclave. 'It's terrible what's occurring there. It's a terrible thing. People are very hungry,' Mr Trump told reporters. 'You know, the United States gave $60 million for food, and it's a shame, because I don't see the results of it. And we gave it to people that, in theory, are watching over it fairly closely. We wanted Israel to watch over it.' Mr Witkoff would brief President Trump after the visit to 'approve a final plan for food and aid distribution into the region', said Ms Leavitt. Mr Trump himself echoed this in a phone call with US news site Axios on Friday touting a plan to "get people fed". "We want to help people. We want to help them live. We want to get people fed. It is something that should have happened long time ago," Mr Trump said, according to Axios. US-backed Israeli forces and private contractors have put in place a flawed, militarised aid distribution system that has turned aid distributions into regular bloodbaths, said Human Rights Watch on Friday. The UN report said that the Human Rights Office in the occupied Palestinian Territory has no information that the Palestinians killed while seeking aid were directly participating in hostilities or posed any threat to Israeli security forces or other individuals. "Each person killed or injured had been desperately struggling for survival, not only for themselves, but also for their families and dependents," it said. Meanwhile, increasing numbers of Palestinians are dying from malnutrition and starvation, including children, older people, people with disabilities and the sick or injured. "They often have little or no support and cannot access the locations where extremely limited aid may be available. This humanitarian catastrophe is human-made. It is a direct result of policies imposed by Israel that have severely reduced the amount of life-saving assistance in the Gaza Strip." Political theatre Many Palestinians described the US envoy's visit as little more than political theatre. 'Maybe he should come every day, at least then we'd be assured that people won't be killed or humiliated,' said Khaled Foad, 40, who was displaced to Mawasi in Khan Younis after his home in the Al Zahraa neighbourhood was destroyed. 'Let the people benefit from this 'show'. Even women haven't been safe from the violence, and now they're pretending to treat people with kindness,' he added, referring to deaths near GHF aid sites. Awoni Salah, a 50-year-old Gazan, echoed Mr Foad's sentiments. 'The visit of Trump's envoy, Steve Witkoff, to the American aid distribution centres is a show,' he said. 'Today, there is no repression, no pepper spray, no gunfire, no casualties. 'If you want to know the truth, just let international journalists into Gaza. It's as simple as that. Let him visit one of Gaza's hospitals, then he'll see the reality for himself.' Mr Witkoff arrived in Israel on Thursday, before he and Mr Huckabee had a 'very productive meeting' with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other officials about delivering food and aid to Gaza, Ms Leavitt said. The death toll from Israel's military campaign in Gaza has passed 60,100, and images of starving children have fuelled anger and concern in many western countries, including the US. This week, for the first time, President Trump admitted that 'real starvation' was taking place across Gaza. Germany's Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul also arrived in Israel on Thursday on a trip to try to convince Israeli counterparts to allow in more aid. On Friday, Mr Wadephul met the families of seven German-Israeli hostages being held by Hamas in Gaza, according to the German Embassy in Tel Aviv. Mr Wadephul signalled on Thursday that Germany may be reconsidering its position on Israel and Gaza, amid UN reports of famine spreading in the strip. Israel is increasingly finding itself in a 'minority position', Mr Wadephul warned in a statement issued before his visit. French President Emmanuel Macron announced last week that his country, a heavyweight in the EU, plans to recognise a Palestinian state, becoming the first major western nation to do so. Britain and Canada have since said they could also do so. Israel's refusal to end the war in Gaza and its aid policy in the Palestinian territory have made it more isolated than ever. Mr Witkoff's visit follows the imposition of US sanctions on members of the Palestinian Authority and the Palestine Liberation Organisation. Washington accused the PA and PLO of 'continuing to support terrorism', supporting international legal cases against Israel and 'undermining prospects for peace', the US State Department said on Thursday. Palestinian officials told The National the sanctions were punishment for seeking an end to Israel's occupation and the establishment of a Palestinian state.
The National
8 hours ago
- The National
Lebanese cabinet expected to pass executive order asserting sole state control over weapons
Lebanon's Cabinet is expected to pass an executive order next week that enshrines the state's commitment to maintaining exclusive control of weapons nationwide, political sources told The National on Friday. An executive order would formalise into policy what Lebanese leaders have been trying to achieve since a November ceasefire officially put an end to fighting between Israel and Lebanon's Hezbollah party and paramilitary organisation. The expected move follows reports that the US has ramped up pressure on Lebanon's leaders to issue a formal cabinet decision committing to disarm Hezbollah – a position also taken by the US-backed Lebanese Forces party, a rival of Hezbollah. The LF has accused the state's top leadership – the President, Prime Minister and Parliament Speaker – of negotiating on behalf of Lebanon without the collective input of the government. 'Our position has been very clear since the beginning,' said Ghassan Hasbani, an LF member of parliament. 'We're demanding from the government, which we're part of, to take a collective decision to put a timeline for the implementation of removal of arms, and the dismantling of militant armed groups by the end of this year.' But a Lebanese political source, speaking on condition of anonymity, expressed scepticism that the executive order would amount to a major political decision. 'The order will probably condition disarmament on Israel's withdrawal,' said the source. Another political source close to the LF told The National that they were lobbying for a majority vote at the cabinet meeting. 'We're not observers or spectators. We are part of this government and we're going to push for a decision.' The November ceasefire, which ended 14 months of war, required Israel's withdrawal from south Lebanon, Hezbollah's disarmament starting with the area south of Lebanon's Litani river, and the eventual deployment of the Lebanese army throughout the entirety of the state. But Israel has refused to withdraw from five Lebanese points of territory it occupied during the war and continues to attack Lebanon almost daily, while Hezbollah has conditioned its disarmament on Israel's withdrawal – putting Lebanon's leaders in a difficult position. Next week's cabinet meeting to enshrine the state's monopoly on arms follows a forceful speech from President Joseph Aoun, the former army chief, in which he made explicit mention of Hezbollah's arsenal for the first time. Mr Aoun reiterated Lebanon's commitment to reclaiming weapons from all paramilitary groups, 'including those of Hezbollah'. The President's speech was also an indirect response to Hezbollah chief Naim Qassem, who earlier this week accused the US and Israel of employing 'intimidation and threats', and said the November ceasefire was meant 'exclusively for the south Litani area' and not the whole of Lebanon. 'Anyone calling today for the surrender of weapons, whether internally or externally, on the Arab or the international stage, is serving the Israeli project,' Mr Qassem said on Wednesday. Hezbollah is believed to still have a superior military capability to the Lebanese army, despite suffering major losses in its leadership and arsenal during its war with Israel, which began on October 8, 2023, in support of its ally Hamas in the Gaza strip. The group – along with its allies – also form a political bloc that wields the power to paralyse parliamentary endeavours. 'We're hoping that after what we heard from the President, this can be translated into a government decision to give clear orders to the Lebanese Armed Forces to put out a plan with a timeline to start its execution,' Mr Hasbani told The National. 'There will be some kind of executive order coming out on Tuesday, but it's one thing to say we want it to happen as a prerequisite, and another for it to actually be implemented. 'This way it becomes an official government position rather than the political views of the political leaders.' Hezbollah has publicly remained staunch in its demand that Israel withdraw from Lebanese territory and cease its attacks before it will disarm, but it has thus far refrained from responding to Israeli attacks. Another political source close to the Lebanese Forces said that passing executive order would be 'just another attempt to move forward on paper'. 'Israel's presence in Lebanon suits both Hezbollah and Israel. Israel won't leave unless Hezbollah disarms and Hezbollah won't disarm unless Israel withdraws. They're both buying and selling time.'
The National
8 hours ago
- The National
Does the downfall of the 'Shah of Shahs' hold lessons for the regime that deposed him?
Earlier this week Iranian exiles, including some not long released from Tehran's Evin prison, made their way to Cairo's Al Rifa'i Mosque to pay respects at the tomb of the last Shah. It is an event on July 27 that commemorates the loss of the imperial order and this year represented the 45th anniversary of the death of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. It came just weeks after the Shah's former patron, the US, bombed the regime that ousted the monarchy in what US President Donald Trump has called the 12-day war. Author Scott Anderson has written a definitive account of the last days of the monarchy in King of Kings (Shahanshah) with the subtitle Unmaking of the Modern Middle East. The current predicament of the religious leaders who preside over the new Iranian system could hardly be more present. His continuing conversations with Iranian contacts both within the country and in the diaspora mean that Anderson sees sentiment as having shifted to a more nationalistic plane, something that bolsters the Islamic Republic regime. 'I feel that the events of the last month have just set any [opposition] movement way back by years,' he tells The National from his west coast of the US home. 'Now the regime can paint anybody who is in opposition as 'lackeys of the Americans who just bombed our country and killed several hundred of our innocent civilians'.' There is a contrast with the beleaguered Shah in 1979 who saw the US as his last resort when one of the periodic outbursts of unrest turned into people power-style demonstrations that eventually overwhelmed his security forces. When it came to it, the book painfully illustrates how no help was there. Look west The Shah had gone to great lengths to woo America, something the book demonstrates very well. But in the 1970s America was distracted by its economic problems, not least the inflation caused by the oil price shock. Jimmy Carter, US president at the time, unlike Donald Trump, was not willing to intervene in the affairs of his ally. Worse, Washington's Cold War considerations allowed a dithering president to place his faith in a misguided calculation on how Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini would rule. 'There started to be this idea within the Carter administration: 'Well, you know, if the ayatollahs take over, that's not the worst thing for us, because at least they'll be anti-communist'. And really, in the last few months of the revolution, you saw this growing acquiescence of the Carter administration,' said Anderson. It was an ill-fated visit to the White House in 1977, where the welcome ceremony was disrupted by tear gas and police clashing with anti-Shah protesters, that set off the fateful demonstrations in Iran. The incident on the Ellipse was broadcast on Iranian TV. As Gary Sick, a White House adviser at the time, observed, if Iranians saw a sparrow fall from the tree, it was the CIA that killed it. So too the live images of the Washington clashes sparked revolt in Iran. Self-regard What ultimately paved Khomeini's way to power lay in the Shah himself. Anderson says Reza Shah believed his own Shahanshah propaganda on the country's modernisation but failed to see how that created dangers. 'Obviously the Shah was extending prosperity,' he said. 'There was a huge number of scholarships. There was a certain lifestyle available in Tehran. The economic factor however isn't strong enough to save him. You had the streets flooded with young men, overwhelming men, coming from the countryside and from villages that really hadn't changed much of 300 years. Suddenly they are being exposed to this very westernised culture in the major Iranian cities. It would just cause a massive disjunction.' It was no coincidence that the Shah lost his vizier Asadollah Alam, who died in April 1978. During one of Alam's stints as prime minister, the state mobilised to crush massive demonstrations in 1963. It was also under Alam's firm hand that the Shah staged his grandiose and grating Persepolis celebrations of 2,500 years of the Persian empire, described as the most expensive party ever staged. 'Alam was his alter-ego for 20-odd years, and actually he was the one who crushed things in 1963 as the prime minister at the time,' said Anderson. 'He crushed the clerical revolts and oversaw Khomeini getting sent into exile. Ironically, the Americans saw that as the Shah's response. It wasn't the Shah's response, but the Shah took credit for it. The Americans finally saw the Shah as a strongman, and so that was kind of a secret that he always had with us.' Ailing monarch The Shah himself was ill with the cancer that killed Alam, during the 1978 events. Subordinates feuded and the military high command was left no clear orders. 'One cliche I heard over and over about the Shah is he would oscillate between being tough when the revolution was happening and then being an appeaser,' said Anderson. 'In fact he did both simultaneously. He declares martial law but then orders the troops not to fire on demonstrators or only as the very last resort,' Anderson said. Anderson reviews the myth of the feared Savak secret police and says that, compared to the record of today's IRGC or Basji militia, it was a something of a paper tiger. 'I think they've acted much more brutally,' he said. 'I mean the prisons in Islamic Iran are far greater than they ever were under the Shah as far as political prisoners are concerned. You have this very pervasive security system now that's loyal to the regime." Modern technology assists the system of control in a way unimaginable in the Shah's day. 'Iranians are very sophisticated when it comes to technology and things like that, so I think that they have a much broader surveillance system that is far advanced in technological terms than anything the shah's ever could have dreamt of creating.' Breaking point King of Kings recounts a scene at Tabriz airbase in October 1978 as pilots handed in their resignations. The commanding general phoned his counterpart in Shiraz where resignations were also piling up on the commander's desk. His response was to tell the men that he too supported Khomeini and told his men to return to barracks. Four months later he led his pilots in a switch to the revolution and ended up as the interim defence minister. No such fog of confusion has yet set in for the present day regime, despite assassinations by Israel at the highest level. There is also a clear-cut focus on who is the real enemy under the current supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. 'Certainly very late into the game the Shah always perceived his danger coming to the left,' says Anderson. 'He saw the [Khomeinists] as a bunch of medievalists and had nothing but disdain for the ayatollahs. So Savak was always geared to looking at the danger of the left and they're on the Shah's payroll so they gave it to him. 'I think he thought it was much more rooted in tribalism.' Turn back the clock Generations of monarchists have rallied around the US-based exiled son of the late Shah of Iran. Reza Pahlavi, who was then the 17-year old Crown Prince, is now a globe-trotting advocate for a reborn monarchy. He called on Iranians to rise against the regime during the US and Israeli attacks and has since met foreign dignitaries including former UK prime minister Boris Johnson to further his cause. Despite the loyal pilgrimages made to the Cairo mausoleum annually, Anderson does not see a new imperial order in Iran. "I think it is utter fantasy," he says. "You have got to remember 80 per cent of Iran's population has been born since the revolution. Iran is a very young country."
