British Palestinians call UK plan to recognise Palestinian state 'ubsurd and performative'
After recalling his cabinet ministers from parliamentary recess on Tuesday, the prime minister said the UK will recognise a Palestinian state by September if Israel agrees to end the "appalling situation in Gaza".
The British Palestinian Committee (BPC), which represents the experiences of Palestinians in the UK, sent Sir Keir a letter ahead of the meeting urging him to take actions they said could make a real difference to people in Gaza.
They had urged him to not recognise Palestine as a state, calling it "symbolic" and said it "will not end the genocide and must not be used to deflect from accountability".
After Sir Keir announced his plan to recognise Palestine, Dr Sarah Husseini, BPC director, told Sky News the plan is "absurd while Israel continues to exterminate and starve women, men and children".
She added: "What is needed is urgent accountability for the genocide in Gaza and an end to UK military support to the state committing these crimes.
"This performative announcement does little to allay the concerns of Palestinians in this country. It will not relieve the government of its legal duties, and it will not silence the calls from the British public to end British complicity in the atrocities being livestreamed to their phones."
2:39
The war has now been going on for 21 months after it was sparked by Hamas militants killing 1,200 Israelis and taking 250 hostages on 7 October 2023. The militant group still holds 50 hostages, of whom only 20 are believed to be alive.
Sir Keir had been under pressure from his own MPs and other UK political parties, notably since France last week said it will recognise Palestine as a state, but had resisted - saying recognition needs to be part of a wider peace plan.
He has also refused to say whether "genocide" is taking place in Gaza - a claim Israel has vehemently denied.
Israel paused fighting in three areas for another 10 hours today to help aid distribution, the third day it has done so amid mounting international condemnation of the scenes of hunger unfolding in Gaza.
David Mencer, a spokesperson for the Israeli government, said: "There is no intent, (which is) key for the charge of genocide... it simply doesn't make sense for a country to send in 1.9 million tonnes of aid, most of that being food, if there is an intent of genocide."
Israel also rejected Sir Keir's plan and accused him of pandering to his MPs and the French.
The Israeli foreign ministry said: "The shift in the British government's position at this time, following the French move and internal political pressures, constitutes a reward for Hamas and harms efforts to achieve a ceasefire in Gaza and a framework for the release of hostages."
In the BPC's letter, it had said the government has "not only a political and moral obligation, but a legal obligation" to take three steps.
They are:
• Preventing and punishing Israel's "genocide" in Gaza and to end "all complicity in it"
• Apply "immediate and comprehensive sanctions on Israel"
• Safeguard the rights to freedom of expression and assembly in the UK
More specifically, the group called on Sir Keir to end "all forms of military collaboration, urgently review all public contracts to ensure they are not aiding unlawful occupation or genocidal acts, and support universal jurisdiction mandates".
22:05
The group said these steps would help towards ending the starvation crisis in Gaza, which it said had been made possible "due to the impunity granted to" Israel and "compounded by the active military, economic and diplomatic support from states such as the UK".
They also accused the UK government of introducing "draconian legislation to limit the rights" of British citizens campaigning to end the atrocities "and British complicity in those atrocities" - in reference to Palestine Action being designated as a terrorist organisation.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
28 minutes ago
- The Guardian
What conditions has Australia put on recognition of a Palestinian state – and what will happen if they are not met?
The Australian government has pledged to recognise a Palestinian state. The prime minister, Anthony Albanese, says the decision is 'predicated' on commitments from the Palestinian Authority's (PA) Mahmoud Abbas, who has said his group will undergo critical governance reforms, and that a future state will have no room for members of the terrorist group Hamas. But Albanese's government won't say what would happen if those commitments are missed. Here are the key questions about the recognition discussion. Albanese says Abbas has made pledges including: A demilitarised Palestine. Recognising Israel's right to exist in peace and security. The Palestinian Authority holding elections and undertaking governance reforms, including education system reforms to not promote further violence. No role for Hamas. Shahram Akbarzadeh, a professor of Middle East politics at Deakin University, says the PA commitments raise 'lots of challenges'. He describes the PA as 'rife with corruption and nepotism' but says there is no other body which could begin processes towards Palestinian statehood. It is vital then, Akbarzadeh says, that western nations – likely led by the EU, UN and ideally the US – help lead democratic and governance reforms in the PA. 'All of this requires and calls for sustained international engagement and investment – funds and expertise,' he says. 'If the international community wants to see a viable new state emerge, there needs to be support for it. You can't just issue a declaration and walk out the door.' Sussan Ley, the opposition leader, claims Albanese is skating over the issue. 'He actually refuses to say what will happen if the conditions that he sets out for recognition are not met,' she told the Sydney radio station 2GB. Akbarzadeh says barring Hamas from a future governing role is 'widely accepted' by Arab leaders, but the 'practicalities' are difficult. 'That's going to be a much harder proposition than disarming Hamas … it will involve a lengthy process of checks and balances,' Akbarzadeh says. He questions whether the ban would extend to people in Gaza who were forced to affiliate with members of Hamas, as the ruling party in the territory. 'Affiliation with Hamas during that time doesn't mean necessarily they're all terrorists. Everyone in Gaza had some sort of affiliation with Hamas, as a necessity of life. It adds another layer of complication,' he says. Amal Naser, of the Palestine Action Group, told Channel Nine: 'I don't think it's very plausible' Hamas could be blocked from a future Palestinian state. 'But the key issue here is that western states can't be determining who is in governance in Palestine, but they do have an obligation to prevent and punish this genocide,' she said. Albanese told Channel Nine the international community could stop Hamas members from running for elections – but did not say exactly how. 'You can [stop Hamas] if you have the Arab states in the Middle East all speaking as one as well as the Palestinian Authority as well as the international community.' Albanese has repeatedly said recognition is a chance to 'isolate Hamas' and promote more moderate voices. Albanese and the foreign affairs minister, Penny Wong, shrugged off repeated questions on Monday and Tuesday about commitments not being met. Albanese has refused multiple times to say whether Australia could revoke Palestinian recognition. Government sources indicate Labor is focused on making the reforms work, rather than considering alternatives. Wong told the ABC on Monday that Australia and the international community would 'hold the Palestinian Authority to its commitments'. Ley says a future Coalition government would revoke Palestinian recognition, raising questions about how such a diplomatic backflip could be executed three or six years into the future of a newly established Palestine. The Coalition has claimed Palestinian recognition is a reward for Hamas. Wong says there is 'much more work to do in building a Palestinian state'. Australia will contribute to building the capacity of the PA and providing humanitarian aid to civilians in Gaza. Asked on the ABC whether Australia would help in rebuilding Gaza after Israel's military bombardment, Albanese said Australia would 'play our part' – but noted Australia was 'not big players in the Middle East'. More than 146 countries have already recognised Palestine. In recent weeks, France, Canada and the UK have pledged to recognise. The Canadian leader Mark Carney's pledge was also predicated on the PA's commitment to reforms and elections, including no role for Hamas and a demilitarised Palestine. The French president, Emmanuel Macron, in pledging recognition, noted Abbas's condemnation of Hamas, and the PA's calls for Hamas to be disarmed and excluded from future governance of Palestine. Macron also spoke of the PA's commitment to reforms and elections. The British prime minister, Keir Starmer, pledged to recognise Palestine unless Israel's government took 'substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza', including a ceasefire and peace plan. Wong says practical steps, such as an Australian embassy presence or conferring full embassy status to the Palestinian delegation to Australia, would be tied to the PA's commitments. But no firm timeline or details have been confirmed. The government is facing pressure from inside and outside its ranks to go further in responding to Israel's military campaign. Labor Friends of Palestine, an internal pressure group, has urged the government to impose sanctions on more members of Netanyahu's government, put more aid and mobile hospitals into Gaza, and set up a humanitarian visa pathway for Palestinians. Other Palestinian Australian groups have urged the cutting of diplomatic ties with Israel – a step Albanese rejected as 'completely counterproductive'.
Sky News
an hour ago
- Sky News
US accuses UK of 'significant human rights issues' and restricting free speech
The US State Department has accused the UK of having "significant human rights issues", including restrictions on free speech. The unflattering assessment comes via a new version of an annual Human Rights Practices report, with its publication coinciding with Vice President JD Vance's holiday in the Cotswolds. It says human rights in the UK "worsened" in 2024, with "credible reports of serious restrictions on freedom of expression", as well as "crimes, violence, or threats of violence motivated by antisemitism" since the 7 October Hamas attack against Israel. On free speech, while "generally provided" for, the report cites "specific areas of concern" around limits on "political speech deemed 'hateful' or 'offensive'". Sir Keir Starmer has previously defended the UK's record on free speech after concerns were raised by Mr Vance. In response to the report, a UK government spokesperson said: "Free speech is vital for democracy around the world including here in the UK, and we are proud to uphold freedoms whilst keeping our citizens safe." The US report highlights Britain's public space protection orders, which allow councils to restrict certain activities in some public places to prevent antisocial behaviour. It also references "safe access zones" around abortion clinics, which the Home Office says are designed to protect women from harassment or distress. They have been criticised by Mr Vance before, notably back in February during a headline-grabbing speech at the Munich Security Conference. The report also criticises the Online Safety Act and accuses ministers of intervening to "chill speech" about last summer's murders in Southport, highlighting arrests made in the wake of the subsequent riots. Ministers have said the Online Safety Act is about protecting children, and repeatedly gone so far as to suggest people who are opposed to it are on the side of predators. 5:23 The report comes months after Sir Keir bit back at Mr Vance during a summit at the White House, cutting in when Donald Trump's VP claimed there are "infringements on free speech" in the UK. "We've had free speech for a very long time, it will last a long time, and we are very proud of that," the PM said. But Mr Vance again raised concerns during a meeting with Foreign Secretary David Lammy at his country estate in Kent last week, saying he didn't want the UK to go down a "very dark path" of losing free speech. 1:22 made by the likes of Nigel Farage and Elon Musk. Harvard chief among them.
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
Starmer to co-chair Ukraine meeting after call with Trump and European leaders
Sir Keir Starmer will co-chair a meeting with pro- Ukraine allies on Wednesday after a call with US President Donald Trump and European leaders about ending the war. Sir Keir will join a virtual call at midday with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. They will then be joined by Mr Trump and US vice president JD Vance. Later, the Prime Minister will co-chair a Coalition of the Willing meeting to update wider partners on the day's discussions. The Coalition of the Willing is an international effort to support Ukraine towards a lasting peace, led by the UK, France and Ukraine. It is made up of 31 countries that have pledged strengthened support for Kyiv, including 27 European countries, as well as Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Japan. Ahead of Wednesday's call, a Downing Street spokesperson said: 'The Prime Minister remains absolutely focused on a solution to this conflict grounded in Ukraine's national interests. 'He is determined to achieve a just and lasting peace in Ukraine, backed by robust and credible security guarantees that will deter Russia from threatening Ukraine in future.' Meanwhile, Mr Vance is set to meet US troops stationed at RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire on Wednesday. The US Vice President will receive a briefing on the base's capabilities and deliver remarks. According to The Times, he will also meet Reform UK leader Nigel Farage for breakfast in the Cotswolds. This comes after meeting with shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick and shadow home secretary Chris Philip on Tuesday. The call between European and US leaders comes ahead of the expected meeting between Mr Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday. The two leaders are set to meet to discuss the future of the Kremlin's invasion, without the presence of Mr Zelensky. The Ukrainian President said at a news briefing on Tuesday that Mr Putin wants Ukraine to withdraw from the remaining 30% of the Donetsk region that Kyiv controls as part of a ceasefire deal. This was conveyed to him by US officials, Mr Zelensky explained. However, he reiterated that Ukraine would not withdraw from territories it controls because it is unconstitutional and would only serve as a springboard for a future Russian invasion. Mr Trump has also signalled he thinks Ukraine might need to cede territory in order to end the conflict, stating there is likely to be 'some land-swapping going on'. Speaking during a lengthy press conference on Monday, Mr Trump pledged to 'try to get back' some of Ukraine's 'oceanfront property' from Russia. He said: 'We're going to change the lines, the battle lines. Russia has occupied a big portion of Ukraine. They've occupied some very prime territory. We're going to try and get some of that territory back for Ukraine. 'They have taken largely – in real estate we call it oceanfront property. That's always the most valuable property.' A statement released by the European Union on Tuesday read: 'A just and lasting peace that brings stability and security must respect international law, including the principles of independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity and that international borders must not be changed by force. 'The people of Ukraine must have the freedom to decide their future. 'The path to peace in Ukraine cannot be decided without Ukraine. 'Meaningful negotiations can only take place in the context of a ceasefire or reduction of hostilities.' In response, Mr Zelensky said on X (formerly Twitter): 'I am grateful to the leaders of Europe for their clear support for our independence, territorial integrity, and precisely such an active approach to diplomacy that can help end this war with a dignified peace. 'Indeed, We all support President Trump's determination, and together we must shape positions that will not allow Russia to deceive the world once again. 'We see that the Russian army is not preparing to end the war. On the contrary, they are making movements that indicate preparations for new offensive operations. 'In such circumstances, it is important that the unity of the world is not threatened. 'As long as they continue the war and the occupation, all of us together must maintain our pressure – the pressure of strength, the pressure of sanctions, the pressure of diplomacy.'
