Close Menu
    Starmer rejects call to immediately recognise Palestinian state
    United Kingdom

    Starmer rejects call to immediately recognise Palestinian state

    Share.
    View 11 Comments

    11 Comments

    1. denyer-no1-fan on

      >While Mr Starmer said he was “unequivocal” about wanting to see a Palestinian state, he insisted this needed to be part of a “wider plan which ultimately results in a two-state solution and lasting security for Palestinians and Israelis”.

      Isn’t it strange that we can recognise the State of Israel but not the State of Palestine despite supporting a two-state solution? We even call the West Bank and Gaza “Occupied Palestinian Territory”, which state is being occupied?

    2. EdmundTheInsulter on

      If he recognises Palestine is he going to be ok with large areas settled by Israel? What did he say about that?

    3. potpan0 on

      You see, the issue was that MPs petitioned *Keir Starmer* about recognising Palestine. They should have realised they’d have been better off petitioning Morgan McSweeney and Peter Mandelson instead. They’re the ones who call the shots, not Keir.

      Mark Ames made a good point the other day that ‘[all the worst people rushing at once to create an alibi, really bad sign of what’s around the corner](https://x.com/MarkAmesExiled/status/1948563043446657275)’. A lot of right-wing politicians and commentators, who have previously been happy to engage in apologetics for Israel, have very rapidly changed their stance and become a lot more critical. With mass starvation setting in they can see what is around the corner and want to get their defences ready for when they inevitably get brought before the courts for enabling genocide. That Streeting, Cooper and Lammy have pivoted to calling for a recognition of Palestine shows they know what’s going to happen. So Starmer *continuing* to reject this shows that he really is dogmatically committed to defending and apologising for the Israeli government, no matter what the cost.

    4. rtrs_bastiat on

      Were the state of Palestine recognised now, would that calcify the borders as they stand?

    5. richmeister6666 on

      Good. You can’t reward Hamas’ massacre. Otherwise what’s to stop the likes of the Kurds etc doing something similar? Sets a dangerous precedent. Recognition should come, but when hamas are removed

    6. 811545b2-4ff7-4041 on

      1. It doesn’t change anything on the ground, it’s not exactly distribution of aid or elimination of Hamas
      2. It’s just a platitude
      3. It pisses off our international partners
      4. It doesn’t define ‘what Palestine is’ or it’s boundaries

    8. atticdoor on

      If he did, the only thing that would change is that British people would be in danger too. National leaders need to be able to make these decisions of their own accord, with the full set of facts that backbenchers may not be privy to. These are things which can be part of the negotiations, to move people to peace, rather than given away for nothing just to look good to one of the sides.

    11. Jammoth1993 on

      It’s weird because Palestine existed before Israel and the people are indigenous to the land, yet they’re the ones who are treated like pests.