UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer has stated that the United Kingdom will recognize a Palestinian state by September unless Israel fulfills specific preconditions, including agreeing to a ceasefire in Gaza and reinvigorating the prospect of a two-state solution.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded sharply to the announcement, asserting that the decision rewards “Hamas’s monstrous terrorism.”
What would be the implications of such recognition, and what impact would it have?
Palestine exists in a state of both being and not being a state.
It enjoys a considerable degree of international recognition, maintains diplomatic missions abroad, and fields teams in international sporting events, including the Olympics.
However, due to the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it lacks internationally recognized borders, a designated capital, and a standing army. The Palestinian Authority, established following the peace accords of the 1990s, does not exercise full control over its territory or population in the West Bank due to Israeli military occupation. Gaza is currently experiencing a devastating conflict, with Israel as the occupying power.
Given its status as a quasi-state, recognition is inevitably symbolic to a degree. While it would represent a significant moral and political statement, it would likely result in minimal change on the ground.
Nevertheless, the symbolism carries weight. As Shadow Foreign Secretary David Lammy noted in his address to the UN on Tuesday, “Britain bears a special burden of responsibility to support the two-state solution.”
He referenced the 1917 Balfour Declaration, signed by his predecessor, Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour, which initially expressed Britain’s support for “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.”
Lammy emphasized that the declaration also included a solemn promise “that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.”
Supporters of Israel have often pointed out that Lord Balfour did not explicitly refer to the Palestinians or mention their national rights.
However, the territory formerly known as Palestine, governed by Britain under a League of Nations mandate from 1922 to 1948, has long been considered unfinished international business.
Israel was established in 1948, but efforts to create a parallel Palestinian state have been unsuccessful for a multitude of reasons.
As Lammy stated, politicians “have become accustomed to uttering the words ‘a two-state solution.'”
This phrase refers to the establishment of a Palestinian state alongside Israel in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, generally along the borders that existed prior to the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.
However, international efforts to achieve a two-state solution have failed, and Israel’s settlement construction in large parts of the West Bank, deemed illegal under international law, has rendered the concept largely symbolic.
The State of Palestine is currently recognized by 147 of the UN’s 193 member states.
At the UN, it holds the status of a “permanent observer state,” granting participation rights but not the right to vote.
With France also promising recognition in the coming weeks, and assuming the UK follows suit, Palestine will soon have the support of four of the UN Security Council’s five permanent members (China and Russia being the others).
This would leave the United States, Israel’s closest ally by far, isolated in its position.
Washington has recognized the Palestinian Authority, currently led by Mahmoud Abbas, since the mid-1990s but has refrained from recognizing an actual state.
Several US presidents have voiced support for the eventual creation of a Palestinian state, though Donald Trump is not among them. Under his two administrations, US policy has strongly favored Israel.
Without the support of Israel’s closest and most powerful ally, it is difficult to envision a peace process leading to a viable two-state solution.
Successive British governments have discussed recognizing a Palestinian state, but only as part of a peace process, ideally in coordination with other Western allies and “at the moment of maximum impact.”
These governments believed that doing so simply as a gesture would be a mistake, potentially creating a sense of moral satisfaction without producing tangible change on the ground.
However, current events have evidently influenced the present government’s decision.
The scenes of escalating starvation in Gaza, growing outrage over Israel’s military campaign, and a significant shift in British public opinion have all shaped government thinking.
The demands from MPs, including those on the cabinet front bench, have become increasingly vocal.
During a recent debate in the House of Commons, Lammy faced numerous questions from across the political spectrum regarding the UK’s continued lack of recognition of a Palestinian state.
Health Secretary Wes Streeting articulated the sentiments of many MPs when he urged the government to recognize Palestine “while there is still a state of Palestine left to recognize.”
However, the UK has not simply mirrored the actions of France’s Emmanuel Macron last week or the governments of Ireland, Spain, and Norway last year.
Sir Keir has made his pledge conditional: Britain will act unless the government of Israel takes decisive steps to end the suffering in Gaza, reach a ceasefire, refrain from annexing territory in the West Bank—a move symbolically threatened by Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, last week—and commit to a peace process that results in a two-state solution.
Downing Street is aware that there is virtually no possibility of Netanyahu committing to such a peace process within the next six weeks, as he has repeatedly rejected the creation of a Palestinian state.
Therefore, British recognition of Palestine appears imminent.
Despite Netanyahu’s staunch opposition, Sir Keir hopes that this will indeed be a “moment of maximum impact.”
However, the Britain of 2025 is not the Britain of 1917 when the Balfour Declaration was signed. Its ability to exert influence is limited, and the actual impact remains uncertain at this time.
The visit with the IDF follows near daily reports of deadly shootings in the vicinity of the sites.
The Palestinian student, who arrived in France in July, has had her university accreditation withdrawn.
A worker has died after being attacked during a “behind-the-scenes tour” for visitors.
Since a war with Israel in June, Iran has stepped up forcible returns. Some Afghans say they were beaten.
The US says both the PLO and the Palestinian Administration continue to support “terrorism”.