Together with France we announced our intention to recognise a Palestinian state. In this column on 26th July I remarked that, although this was ‘gesture politics’ nevertheless, I acknowledged that sometimes in politics a gesture is called for. Recognising Palestine – gesture politics?
Our gesture was to give vent to our growing despair at the consequence for civilians of the ferocity of Israel’s assault on Gaza. Equally, the accumulation of years of frustration at a growing policy of ‘apartheid’ in Israel’s stewardship of the occupied West Bank (this will be received as a controversial statement but, having once been the minister responsible for our assistance to Palestinians, I believe it to be justified: It is time to call a spade a bloody shovel).
For years the objective of our policy has been the implementation of a Palestinian state based on the occupied West Bank. Throughout this time however, Israel’s actions have been designed to thwart any such prospect.
Now that we have announced our determination to recognise Palestine, Israel has brought forward its most controversial development: building some 3,500 dwellings in the East 1 corridor, linking East Jerusalem with existing illegal settlements, and cutting the West Bank in half. The intention is clear, and has been made explicit by Israel’s Finance Minister, Bezalel Smotrich:
“they’ll keep talking about a Palestinian dream, and we’ll keep on building a Jewish reality…a reality that buries the idea of a Palestinian state, because there’s nothing to recognise’.
How are we to respond?
Equally, how are we to respond to man-made famine in Gaza, as well as the continuing devastation of civilian life?
Every time ministers come to the Commons to face the anger at what is being done in Palestine, they reiterate that they are very cross about it; They refer to the actions that they have taken – some modest reductions in arms sales and the sanctioning of a handful of individuals. When MPs point out that these measures have had no impact, the Secretary of State, David Lammy refers to ‘further action’ that we will consider.
What action?
Well, I did ask:
Hansard 20 May Column 934
Sir Desmond Swayne
The House wants to know, and Israel needs to know, exactly what the Foreign Secretary means by “further action”.
Mr Lammy
I would ask the right hon. Gentleman to consult the Oxford English Dictionary and look at the two words.
I think Mr Lammy demeaned himself with that answer, but I understand his difficulty. He is appalled and angry about what is happening in Palestine but he is at a complete loss. We are in thrall to the Trump administration and know that it will not tolerate any effective sanctions on Israel. We have other fish to fry. So, we stand and watch as Gaza burns and the West Bank is swallowed. We will be judged accordingly.