Palestine Recognition: Too Little, Too Late

An Alibi in Advance: Western Leaders’ Belated Recognition of Palestine

The UK has formally recognised Palestine as an independent state, Keir Starmer announced on Sunday, in a move the government hopes will demonstrate commitment to peace while easing domestic political tensions. Canada and Australia made similar declarations ahead of a UN General Assembly conference in New York.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu immediately condemned the announcement as “absurd” and “a reward for terrorism.” Starmer insisted otherwise, promising further sanctions against Hamas leadership and declaring the terrorist group would play no role in a future Palestinian government.

“Let’s be frank, Hamas is a brutal terror organisation,” Starmer said. “Our call for a genuine two-state solution is the exact opposite of their hateful vision. This solution is not a reward for Hamas, because it means Hamas can have no future, no role in government, no role in security.”

Yet his conclusion revealed the reality that forced this belated action: “The man-made humanitarian crisis in Gaza reaches new depths. The Israeli government’s relentless and increasing bombardment of Gaza, the offensive of recent weeks, the starvation and devastation are utterly intolerable. Tens of thousands have been killed, including thousands as they tried to collect food and water. This death and destruction horrifies all of us. It must end.”

On two things we agree: this war is horrifying and bring the hostages home… on both sides!

However, throughout this announcement, the biggest concern appears to be self-preservation, not self-determination. Of course, we welcome recognition of Palestinian statehood, but it comes dripping with the blood of nearly two years of slaughter.

A Bid for Absolution: The Cynical Timing of the Palestine Recognition

The UN pleads for humanitarian access to relieve #Gaza's agony. But Labour's leader ignores this cry, fixating on Hamas rockets as the source of conflict. His rhetoric perpetuates a medieval siege mentality that prolongs suffering, rather than uniting moderates for peace. pic.twitter.com/uMBQyDlGTr

— Labour Heartlands (@Labourheartland) October 11, 2023

It comes after a conservative estimate of 67,000 deaths, the majority women and children. It comes after Gaza has been reduced to rubble. It comes after the UN proclaimed Israel is committing genocide. It comes far too late to matter to those buried beneath the ruins.

More than 150 countries, including France, are expected to recognise Palestine by week’s end, though some will attach conditions. The United States, now effectively opposed to a two-state solution, has rejected the UK move entirely.

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese hedged his recognition with conditions: “Further steps, including the establishment of diplomatic relations and the opening of embassies will be considered as the Palestinian Authority makes further progress on commitments to reform.”

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney echoed Starmer’s defensive posture: “Recognising the state of Palestine, led by the Palestinian Authority, empowers those who seek peaceful coexistence and the end of Hamas. This in no way legitimises terrorism, nor is it any reward for it.”

The timing is telling. This announcement comes seven decades after the end of the British mandate in Palestine and the formation of Israel, and only after Netanyahu’s military campaign became so ferocious, so contemptuous of international law, that even complicit Western governments could no longer maintain their pretence of neutrality.

While Downing Street doesn’t portray this as punishment of Israel, the step would never have been taken if the Gaza offensive had been conducted with any regard for Palestinian life or international humanitarian standards.

Israel’s foreign ministry rejected what it called the “one-sided” recognition, warning it could destabilise the region, as if the systematic destruction of Gaza represented stability.

The sceptic in me recognises this for what it is: a desperate attempt by Western leaders who armed, funded, and diplomatically shielded Israel’s campaign to create a reference point for future absolution. They hope that decades from now, historians will point to this moment and overlook how these same leaders stood silent, bomb after bomb, death after death, declaring Israel’s right to self-defence while Palestinians were denied the right to exist.

Recognition without consequence means nothing. Where are the sanctions against Israel for violations of international law? Where is the arms embargo? Where is the accountability for those who enabled this catastrophe? Empty gestures cannot rebuild Gaza’s hospitals or resurrect its children.

This announcement represents not moral clarity but political calculation, a government more concerned with managing its conference season than addressing the genocide it helped facilitate.

Recognition, then, is welcome. But it is also hollow. For those leaders who armed Israel, shielded it at the UN, and cheered it on as the bombs fell, this sudden conversion carries the stench of political expediency. They will point to this day and say, “See? We stood for Palestine.” But history will remember that they stood for Israel first, and only moved once the genocide was undeniable.

The sceptic in me cannot help but ask: is this recognition a step toward justice, or simply an alibi?