UK plans to recognise Palestinian state in September unless Israel takes action
Starmer spoke a day after talks in Scotland with US President Donald Trump, who said he did "not mind" if Britain recognised a Palestinian state, though Washington - Israel's closest ally - has long declined to do so.
Britain, if it acts, would become the second Western power on the UN Security Council to do so after France last week, reflecting Israel's deepening isolation over its conduct in its war against Hamas in Gaza, where a humanitarian disaster has set in and the Palestinian death toll has risen above 60,000.
Starmer said Britain would make the move unless Israel took substantive steps to allow more aid to enter Gaza, made clear there will be no annexation of the West Bank and committed to a long-term peace process that delivers a "two-state solution" - a Palestinian state co-existing in peace alongside Israel.
"The Palestinian people have endured terrible suffering," Starmer told reporters. "Now, in Gaza, because of a catastrophic failure of aid, we see starving babies, children too weak to stand, images that will stay with us for a lifetime. The suffering must end."
Starmer held a phone call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu before making his announcement, said a source, who asked not to be named.
In response, Israel's foreign ministry said in a post on X that Britain's move constitutes a "reward for Hamas" and would harm efforts to reach a ceasefire in Gaza.
The sight of emaciated Gaza children has shocked the world in recent days. Earlier on Tuesday, a hunger monitor warned that worst-case scenario of famine was unfolding in Gaza and immediate action was needed to avoid widespread death.
Israel has denied pursuing a policy of starvation. Foreign Minister Gideon Saar said on Tuesday the situation in Gaza was "tough" but there were lies circulating about starvation there.
With international criticism intensifying, Israel announced steps over the weekend to ease aid access. But the U.N. World Food Programme said it was not getting the permissions it needed to deliver enough aid.
PARTY PRESSURE
Starmer's decision marks a striking reversal in policy after he last week disappointed many in his party by rejecting calls to recognise a Palestinian state, saying the timing must be right as part of a wider peace process.
In recent days, Starmer has been increasingly vocal about the crisis in Gaza, saying this week that the people there faced an "absolute catastrophe" and the British public were "revolted" by the scenes of mass hunger and desperation.
Starmer said that before taking a final decision his government would make an assessment in September on "how far the parties have met these steps", but that no one would have a veto over the decision.
He spoke after recalling his cabinet during the summer holidays on Tuesday to discuss a new proposed peace plan being worked on with other European leaders and how to deliver more humanitarian aid for Gaza's 2.2 million people.
Successive British governments have said they will formally recognise a Palestinian state when the time is right, without ever setting a timetable or specifying the necessary conditions.
Some lawmakers in Britain's governing Labour Party said they thought Starmer had been reluctant to formally recognise a Palestinian state because it would mean distancing itself from the position of its closest ally, the United States.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio called France's announcement last week recognising a Palestinian state a "reckless decision".
China and Russia are the only other world powers that are permanent members of the UN Security Council to recognise a Palestinian state.
SHIFTING POSITIONS
The issue of recognition for a Palestinian state - seen as a powerful diplomatic lever to put pressure on Israel - came to the fore after President Emmanuel Macron said on Thursday France would recognise Palestine as a state in territories Israel captured in the 1967 Middle East war.
Israel and staunch supporter the United States blasted France's move, branding it a reward for Palestinian Hamas militants who ran Gaza and whose attack on Israel on October 7, 2023 triggered the current war.
At the start of the Gaza war in October 2023, when Starmer was the opposition leader, he fully backed Israel's right to defend itself. But his stance has shifted over the years to a tougher approach to Israel, especially since his election as prime minister just over a year ago.
His government dropped the previous government's challenge over arrest warrants issued by the International Criminal Court for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and has suspended some weapon sales to Israel.
Last month, Britain sanctioned two far-right Israeli cabinet ministers, Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, accusing them of repeatedly inciting violence against Palestinians.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
9 hours ago
- Scoop
Diplomatic Merchandise: Exploiting The Issue Of Palestinian Recognition
They have been the playthings of powers for decades, and there is no promise that this will end soon. Empires and powers seem to come and go, yet the plight of the Palestinians remains more horrific than ever. Now, in the next instalment of the grand morality game, France, the United Kingdom and Canada promise to recognise Palestinian statehood at the September meeting of the 80th session of the United Nations General Assembly. From the perspective of soothing the conscience, this is a mighty thing – for those in Paris, London and Ottawa. It does not save a single life on the ground in Gaza or the West Bank, provide a single meal for a starving family, or rebuild a single destroyed school. But President Emmanuel Macron, and Prime Ministers Sir Keir Starmer and Mark Carney can all commune as a triumvirate of principled statesmen. Macron, the first of the three, had been making signals on the issue earlier in the year. The French leader had hoped that a UN conference sponsored by France and Saudi Arabia would be the venue for joint recognition, but it came to naught with the resumption of hostilities in Gaza and Israel's attacks on Iran's nuclear facilities. In turning to the G7 nations, he hoped to amplify the urgency of recognition. In doing so, the onus was also on the Palestinian Authority to make certain concessions to add momentum. A letter from PA President Mahmoud Abbas sent to Macron duly came, condemning the attacks of October 7, 2023 by Hamas, demanding the immediate release of all hostages and pledged the holding of elections and reforms to governance. Hamas – not that Abbas had any claims on this point – would also 'no longer rule Gaza' and would have to surrender 'weapons and military capabilities to the Palestinian Security Forces, which will oversee their removal outside the occupied Palestinian territory, with Arab and international support'. On July 24, Macron confirmed in a letter to Abbas conveyed via France's Consul General in Jerusalem that recognition of a Palestinian state would follow in September 'in light of the historic commitments that were made' and the threatened two-state solution. On July 28, in his opening speech to a plenary session of the High-Level International Conference on the Peaceful Settlement on the Question of Palestine and the Implementation of the Two-State Solution, France's Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs, Jean-Nöel Barrot stated the 'prospect of two States, whose rights are recognised and respected, is in mortal danger.' But assurances and momentum had been achieved, with Barrot acknowledging the condemnation by the Arab League of the Hamas attack and the insistence by its members on the release of the remaining hostages, the disarming of the group and conclusion of its rule in the Strip. Of the G7, Starmer was the next to be swayed, but with a notable proviso: 'the UK will recognise the state of Palestine by the United Nations General Assembly in September unless the Israeli government takes substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza, agree to a ceasefire and commit to a long-term sustainable peace, reviving the prospect of a Two-State Solution.' To this could be added the need for Hamas to release the hostages, accept a ceasefire, disarm and 'play no part in the government of Gaza.' In shabby fashion, room is left to withdraw the offer for recognising Palestinian statehood. 'We will make an assessment in September on how far the parties have met these steps.' Carney, the latest addition, claimed on July 30 that the two-state solution growing from a negotiated settlement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority had been eroded as a prospect by four factors: the threat of Hamas to Israel; accelerated building across the West Bank and East Jerusalem, including numerous instances of Israeli settler violence; the E1 Settlement Plan and the July vote by the Knesset calling for the annexation of the West Bank; and the ongoing failure by the Israeli government to arrest 'the rapidly deteriorating humanitarian disaster in Gaza, with impeded access to food and other essential humanitarian supplies.' The Canadian PM, in reasons almost identical to Macron, had also been swayed by 'the Palestinian Authority's commitment to much-needed reforms' in governance, including the promise to hold elections in 2026 that will exclude Hamas, undertaking anti-corruption measures and the creation of a demilitarised Palestinian state. A resounding theme comes through in the latest flurry of statements: Palestinians continue to be lectured and harangued under the guise of humanitarian understanding, told who can represent them or not (a reformed Palestinian Authority promisingly good, Hamas decidedly bad), and whether they can have any semblance of a military force. 'Recognising a State of Palestine today,' states Barrot, 'means standing with the Palestinians who have chosen non-violence, who have renounced terrorism, and are prepared to recognise Israel.' Standing, it would seem, with a certain type of idealised Palestinian. The Palestinians have become diplomatic merchandise or bits of currency, to be gambled with in the casino of power politics. Starmer is the worst exponent of this, hoping for such returns as Israel's halt to the slaughter and famine in Gaza and the release of the hostages by Hamas and its disarmament. But the idea of Palestinian recognition remains, at this stage, a moot point. At the end of any diplomatic tunnel on this lies certain requirements that would have to be met, not least the criteria of the Montevideo Convention from 1933. Despite gathering some dust over time, it outlines the relevant requirements for statehood: any recognised state in international law must have a permanent population, a defined territory, a discernible government and the capacity to enter into relations with other states. In the UK, some 43 cross-party peers have sent a letter of warning to Starmer arguing against recognising a Palestinian state, citing such familiar, legal grumbles. There was, for instance, 'no certainty over the borders of Palestine' nor 'a functioning single government, Fatah and Hamas being enemies'. Neither could enter into relations with foreign states, with one entity having not held elections for decades, and the other being a 'terrorist organisation'. Despite the UK not signing the Montevideo Convention, recognising Palestine 'would be contrary to the principles of governing recognition of states in international law,' the convention having become part of international customary law. On the bloodied ground, where legal abstractions dissolve into fleshy realities, Israel is doing its level best to make sure that there will be nothing left of a Palestinian state to recognise. For Israel, the case is not one of if or when, but never. The machinery of slaughter, deprivation and dislocation is now so advanced it risks smothering the very idea of a viable Palestinian entity. Israeli policy till October 2023 was engineered to stifle and restrain any credible progress towards a Palestinian state, crowned by feeding the acrimonious divisions between Hamas and Fatah. After October 7 that year, the sharpened focus became one of expulsion, subjugation, or plain elimination of the general populace. Palestinian sovereignty remains, to date, incipient, a bare semblance of a political self. This egregious state of affairs continues to be supported, even by those wishing to recognise Palestine. In some ways, those sorts are arguably the worst.
1News
14 hours ago
- 1News
Why not enough food is reaching Gaza even after blockade lifted
International outcry over images of emaciated children and increasing reports of hunger-related deaths have pressured Israel to let more aid into the Gaza Strip. This week, Israel paused fighting in parts of Gaza and airdropped food. But aid groups and Palestinians say the changes have only been incremental and are not enough to reverse what food experts say is a "worst-case scenario of famine" unfolding in the war-ravaged territory. The new measures have brought an uptick in the number of aid trucks entering Gaza. But almost none of it reaches UN warehouses for distribution. Instead, nearly all the trucks are stripped of their cargo by crowds that overwhelm them on the roads as they drive from the borders. The crowds are a mix of Palestinians desperate for food and gangs armed with knives, axes or pistols who loot the goods to then hoard or sell. Many have also been killed trying to grab the aid. Witnesses say Israeli troops often open fire on crowds around the aid trucks, and hospitals have reported hundreds killed or wounded. The Israeli military says it has only fired warning shots to control crowds or at people who approach its forces. The alternative food distribution system run by the Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation has also been marred by violence. ADVERTISEMENT International airdrops of aid have resumed. But aid groups say airdrops deliver only a fraction of what trucks can supply. Also, many parcels have landed in now-inaccessible areas that Palestinians have been told to evacuate, while others have plunged into the Mediterranean Sea, forcing people to swim out to retrieve drenched bags of flour. Here's a look at why the aid isn't being distributed: The morning's headlines in 90 seconds, including toddler found in suitcase on bus, Russian volcano erupts, and Liam Lawson pips former world champion. (Source: 1News) A lack of trust The UN says that longstanding restrictions on the entry of aid have created an unpredictable environment, and that while a pause in fighting might allow more aid in, Palestinians are not confident aid will reach them. "This has resulted in many of our convoys offloaded directly by starving, desperate people as they continue to face deep levels of hunger and are struggling to feed their families," said Olga Cherevko, a spokesperson for the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, or OCHA. "The only way to reach a level of confidence is by having a sustained flow of aid over a period of time," she said. ADVERTISEMENT Israel blocked food entirely from entering Gaza for two and a half months starting in March. Since it eased the blockade in late May, it allowed in a trickle of aid trucks for the UN, about 70 a day on average, according to official Israeli figures. That is far below the 500-600 trucks a day that UN agencies say are needed — the amount that entered during a six-week ceasefire earlier this year. Palestinians rush to collect humanitarian aid airdropped in central Gaza Strip. (Source: Associated Press) Much of the aid is stacked up just inside the border in Gaza because UN trucks could not pick it up. The UN says that was because of Israeli military restrictions on its movements and because of the lawlessness in Gaza. Israel has argued that it is allowing sufficient quantities of goods into Gaza and tried to shift the blame to the UN "More consistent collection and distribution by UN agencies and international organisations = more aid reaching those who need it most in Gaza," the Israeli military agency in charge of aid coordination, COGAT, said in a statement this week. With the new measures this week, COGAT, says 220-270 truckloads a day were allowed into Gaza on Tuesday and Wednesday, and that the UN was able to pick up more trucks, reducing some of the backlog at the border. Aid mission still face 'constraints' Cherevko said there have been "minor improvements" in approvals by the Israeli military for its movements and some "reduced waiting times" for trucks along the road. ADVERTISEMENT But she said the aid missions are "still facing constraints." Delays of military approval still mean trucks remain idle for long periods, and the military still restricts the routes that the trucks can take onto a single road, which makes it easy for people to know where the trucks are going, UN officials say. Antoine Renard, who directs the World Food Program's operations in Gaza and the occupied West Bank, said Wednesday that it took nearly 12 hours to bring in 52 trucks on a 10km route. "While we're doing everything that we can to actually respond to the current wave of starvation in Gaza, the conditions that we have are not sufficient to actually make sure that we can break that wave," he said. Aid workers say the changes Israel has made in recent days are largely cosmetic. "These are theatrics, token gestures dressed up as progress," said Bushra Khalidi, Oxfam's policy lead for Israel and the Palestinian territories. "Of course, a handful of trucks, a few hours of tactical pauses and raining energy bars from the sky is not going to fix irreversible harm done to an entire generation of children that have been starved and malnourished for months now," she said. A Palestinian youth carries a sack of aid that landed in the Mediterranean Sea after being airdropped over central Gaza. (Source: Associated Press) Breakdown of law and order ADVERTISEMENT As desperation mounts, Palestinians are risking their lives to get food, and violence is increasing, say aid workers. Muhammad Shehada, a political analyst from Gaza who is a visiting fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, said aid retrieval has turned into the survival of the fittest. "It's a Darwin dystopia, the strongest survive," he said. A truck driver said Wednesday that he has driven food supplies four times from the Zikim crossing on Gaza's northern border. Every time, he said, crowds a kilometre long surrounded his truck and took everything on it after he passed the checkpoint at the edge of the Israeli military-controlled border zones. He said some were desperate people, while others were armed. He said that on Tuesday, for the first time, some in the crowd threatened him with knives or small arms. He spoke on condition of anonymity, fearing for his safety. Ali al-Derbashi, another truck driver, said that during one trip in July armed men shot the tires, stole everything, including the diesel and batteries and beat him. "If people weren't starving, they wouldn't resort to this," he said. Israel has said it has offered the UN armed escorts. The UN has refused, saying it can't be seen to be working with a party to the conflict – and pointing to the reported shootings when Israeli troops are present. Uncertainty and humiliation ADVERTISEMENT Israel hasn't given a timeline for how long the measures it implemented this week will continue, heightening uncertainty and urgency among Palestinians to seize the aid before it ends. Palestinians say the way it's being distributed, including being dropped from the sky, is inhumane. "This approach is inappropriate for Palestinians, we are humiliated," said Rida, a displaced woman. Momen Abu Etayya said he almost drowned because his son begged him to get aid that fell into the sea during an aid drop. "I threw myself in the ocean to death just to bring him something," he said. "I was only able to bring him three biscuit packets".
Scoop
14 hours ago
- Scoop
On The Perils Of Trading With Trump
Luxon did protest too much on the weekend. Sure, the credulous party faithful were willing to believe him as he continued to lay the blame for the state of the economy on what Labour did, or didn't do three, four or six years ago – but at some point, the man has to look in the mirror. Last year, things were going to be better in 2025. Now, good times are allegedly waiting just around the corner. Maybe next year? Maybe 2027, if you re-elect him? Luxon's core claim that Labour left the economy in a terrible, awful no good mess somehow evaded the notice of all of the international credit rating agencies, who were still giving Labour top marks for managing the economy here and also here and here as well on the eve of the 2023 election. Moreover, the subsequent inflationary bubble/cost of living crisis was the direct result of the subsidies and industry supports that got us through the pandemic, and that corporate NZ was demanding at the time should be bigger, and should be kept in place for longer. Luxon is very keen for all of that to go down the memory hole. But in passing...I wonder which Covid wage subsidies and which sectoral suppport schemes for business does Luxon think were mistakes that he would not have made? On balance, the surge of inflation seems to have been a relatively small price to pay for keeping so many firms afloat, and for saving so many jobs and household incomes. One shudders to think what would have happened if a National government had been in power during Covid. But more to the current point, the coalition government has since done a worse job than any other Western democracy of enabling the economy to recover from its post-Covid inflationary bubble. By dint of its cutbacks to government-led activity, National has prolonged and deepened the recession. Thanks to the random job losses that National has imposed, retailers are suffering and households – made fearful of losing their incomes - continue to be gunshy about spending. There is no end in sight. Where's the beef? Reportedly, us having 15% tariffs slapped on our exports to the US came as a total shock. If so, Finance Minister Nicola Willis and Trade Minister Todd McClay must have been asleep at the wheel. The simple truth is that we run a trade surplus with the US. Meaning: we sell them more than they buy from us. The Aussies by contrast, are running a trade deficit with the US, and have been duly rewarded by Trump for doing so. Looking at those two sets of contrasting figures should have warned our government to expect to be treated differently. In Trumpland, any country that runs a trade surplus with the US is a Bad Country that is ripping the US off. How 'bad' have we been? Pretty bad, in Trumpian terms : In May 2025, United States exported $319M and imported $528M from New Zealand, resulting in a negative trade balance of $209M. Between May 2024 and May 2025 the exports of United States to New Zealand decreased by $85.6M (21.1%) from $405M to $319M, while imports increased by $30M (6.03%) from $498M to $528M. In a sense then, New Zealand is a victim of its own success. Yes, we are now operating in the US market at a 5% competitive disadvantage to Australia. But the new tariff situation isn't entirely bad news for our beef exporters. Brazil has long been a major supplier to US fast food restaurant chains of ground beef – the US is Brazil's second biggest market for beef - but it has just been hit with 50% tariffs, mainly because Trump disapproves of how the Brazilian courts are prosecuting his old pal, Jail Bolsonaro. Australia will have a 5% head start, but there may also be some potential for New Zealand beef exporters to capitalise on Brazil's misfortune. The risk is that Brazilian beef will be sold at a bargain price to other countries, depressing global prices. In the meantime, our emissaries are now heading to Washington to plead our case, but with very few negotiating cards to play. The fatuous free market zeal we displayed in the 1980s and 1990s is once more coming back to bite us. Because New Zealand unilaterally removed its own tariff barriers back then, we have little left to bargain with in our trade talks with other countries. Why should they offer us anything, when we've already given them everything they might want for free? Out of Balance New Zealand makes much of its diplomatic balancing act between China on trade, and the US on defence and security. Yet as the current Trump tariff episode shows, our dependency on the US for trade (and for foreign investment funds) is highly significant. The NZ/US Council executive director Fiona Cooper pointed this out in a speech she gave in March.. 'Over the last 12 months, the US has overtaken Australia to become New Zealand's second largest export market after US is New Zealand's largest market for beef and wine, no doubt including a lot of fine Marlborough wine. It is an important market for many other products including other meat, dairy, honey, casein, fish, fruit and wood, as well as mechanical appliances, medical instruments, electrical machinery, pharmaceuticals and aluminium and steel products. In addition, she noted, ' The US is also a fast-growing market for New Zealand services exports, which were worth nearly $7 billion in the year to September 2024. The US is now our largest services market, taking nearly a quarter our total services exports.' (Those services dollars are being driven upwards by the numbers of US tourists coming to New Zealand. We're mounting ad campaigns to attract more of them.) All signs therefore, would suggest that our booming goods and services trade with the US is badly unbalanced, at least on the terms Donald Trump uses to view the world. Chances are, we will probably continue to run a trade surplus with the US – and will remain in Trump's bad books - until Air New Zealand buys a few more planes from Boeing and/or until via AUKUS, we start buying large amounts of expensive weaponry from the likes of Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and General Dynamics. That would be a bad idea for other reasons. Footnote One: Some of Trump's headline tariff rates are highly deceptive. The 35% headline tariff rate on Canada for instance not only exempts some of the stuff the US wants and needs (eg Canada's energy exports) but also much of the trade carried out under the CUSMA trade agreement (between Canada, the US and Mexico) that's due to be reviewed next year. In the meantime, Canada's real tariff barriers with the US are not 35%, but average out in single digits. In other words Canada too, has some real trade advantages over us in US markets. Footnote Two: Brazil has far more reason to feel aggrieved than we do. After all, it runs a trade deficit with the US - normally treated by Trump as a sign of virtue – but has been hit by a 50% tariff because of its 'persecution' of Bolsonaro. Yet as with Canada, Brazil's headline rate is rife with exemptions on stuff that the US wants and needs, including fresh orange juice. Overall 45% of Brazil's exports will be exempt, but the rate will still hit two of Brazil's main exports to the US very hard: beef and coffee. As mentioned above it is hard to predict what the impact will be on global prices for beef and coffee, as Brazil seeks to find other markets. Increasingly, Brazil's alternative market for its oil, soybean and beef exports is China. Already only 12% of Brazil's exports get shipped to the US, while 28% is being sold to China. Ironically, Trump's mood swings on tariffs are serving to make China look like the sensible adult in the room on global trade, and the preferred buyer of first and last resort. In itself that's an added reason for us not to join an AUKUS military pact targeted at China. Crafting our diplomatic efforts in order to earn imaginary brownie points in Washington looks like being an increasingly futile exercise. Footnote Three: All of the evidence on US trade exemptions suggests that New Zealand's best fallback negotiating strategy with the Trump administration – if we can get in the door at all – would be to argue for an exemption, probably for beef exports. We seem unlikely to get relief from the headline 15% rate, given that this seems to be the bottom line penalty for every country running a trade surplus with the US. Footnote Four One of the stranger items on the Trump tariff enemies list has been the harsh 20% rate levied on Taiwan. This comes amid signs that US support for Taiwan may be waning. It seems only yesterday that the US was giving every sign that any Chinese aggression against Taiwan would be met with the full force of US military now, maybe not so much. Taiwan is suddenly being pushed out at arms' length. For example: on top of those 20% tariffs, there has been this: Washington blocked Taiwan Premier Lai Ching Te's request to visit New York next week during a planned overseas trip to Taipei's Latin American allies. The Trump administration is also considering a downgrade to bilateral defence talks, which it postponed in June. The reason for the sudden cooling? Well, Premier Lai has been talking about leading his faction-ridden minority government into declaring independence from China, a gambit likely to trigger an even more furious response than usual from China. Parts of what China sees as its sovereign territory cannot be allowed to secede at will. That's the kindest interpretation of the US switcheroo, as an attempt to rein in Premier Lai. It is also a useful reminder that the US is an unreliable defence ally, and that its priorities and commitments in the Asia-Pacific region can change at a moment's notice according to its own domestic perceptions and priorities. In sum that's yet another good reason for New Zealand not to join AUKUS, a nuclear pact that would be under the effective operational command of the Americans.
