Empty recognition
It has now been almost 22 months since Israel launched its full-scale assault on Gaza, a military operation that the International Court of Justice has found plausibly amounts to genocide under Article II of the Genocide Convention.¹ Keir Starmer, now Prime Minister, has responded by offering to recognise the State of Palestine: in September.
He frames this as a bold contribution to peace. In fact, it is the opposite. Recognition of a people’s right to self-determination is not a political bauble to be dispensed when convenient. It is a legal obligation. By deferring it, Starmer is not contributing to peace. He is participating in a system of calculated delay, a system that is enabling the ongoing destruction of Gaza.
Starvation as a weapon
Earlier this month, the UN-backed Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) confirmed what many already knew: the worst-case scenario of famine is now underway in Gaza.² The body reported ‘mounting evidence’ of widespread starvation and death due to deliberate obstruction of aid. UNICEF described infants as ‘skin and bones’ with entire communities surviving on grass and animal feed.³
In response, Israel has claimed there is ‘no starvation in Gaza’ and insists it does not restrict aid.⁴ These statements are demonstrably false. On multiple occasions, Israeli forces have opened fire on civilians queuing for flour.⁵ A study by World Central Kitchen estimated that 67% of aid convoys are turned away, delayed, or attacked.⁶
This is not an accidental outcome. I t is the calculated use of starvation as a method of war. Article 8(2)(b)(xxv) of the Rome Statute defines the deliberate starvation of civilians as a war crime.⁷ Yet the UK continues to supply Israel with components used in weapons systems deployed in Gaza, including those made by BAE Systems and Elbit UK.⁸
What recognition means: and what it doesn’t
Recognition of a Palestinian state, in this context, is not radical. The UK supported the creation of Israel in 1948, even though they were at war with the Irgun for three years. It has had full diplomatic relations ever since. More than 140 countries recognise Palestine already.⁹ The UK does not because, for decades, it has deferred that decision to the outcome of a ‘peace process’ that has long since become a smokescreen for annexation and apartheid.
By delaying recognition until ‘the moment of maximum impact’ as Starmer put it, he is in effect issuing Israel a deadline: You have four more weeks to complete your operation. If by then you have not taken ‘substantive steps’ toward peace: a phrase so nebulous it could mean anything, then the UK will, finally, take a position it should have adopted 30 years ago.
But Gaza cannot wait 30 more days. Nor should it have to. The enclave has been rendered ‘uninhabitable’ according to the UN as far back as 2012.¹⁰ That was before three major bombing campaigns, a full blockade, and now near-total devastation. The number of Palestinians killed now exceeds 60,000,¹¹ the majority of them women and children.
Why now? Why wait?
Why the delay? The likely answer lies not in Gaza, but in Westminster, and Washington. The Starmer government, like its predecessors, calculates foreign policy primarily through the lens of transatlantic alliance. Successive British governments have found themselves unable, or unwilling, to diverge significantly from US foreign policy, particularly regarding Israel.¹²
When Joe Biden was facing an election and significant internal pressure, he repeatedly called for a ‘temporary ceasefire’” while continuing to arm the Israeli military.¹³ His administration has vetoed multiple UN resolutions calling for a halt to hostilities.¹⁴. Trump is worse. And of course Starmer isn’t going to stand up to Trump because has a backbone of blancmange. Any significant UK deviation from that line would incur political costs, and Starmer, ever cautious, seems unwilling to pay them.
There is also a domestic factor. Since becoming Labour leader, Starmer has waged a concerted campaign against the party’s left, suspending hundreds of members for supporting Palestinian rights.¹⁵ Many Jewish socialists and anti-Zionist activists have been purged, while Labour Friends of Israel remain unchallenged.¹⁶
To now take a stand for Palestinian recognition without antagonising those same groups requires a balancing act. Hence the delay. Hence the conditions. Hence the appearance of moral clarity, without the substance.
Recognition without consequences
Even if Starmer does recognise Palestine in September, it will change nothing unless it is paired with concrete action. Recognition must not be symbolic. It must trigger:
- An immediate suspension of arms sales to Israel under the UK’s own export licensing rules, which prohibit arms transfers where there is a clear risk of misuse.¹⁷
- Sanctions on Israeli officials involved in war crimes, including asset freezes and travel bans.
- Support for international legal accountability, including at the International Criminal Court and ICJ
None of these measures have been proposed. On the contrary, Foreign Secretary David Lammy has stated that the UK will continue its military cooperation with Israel.¹⁸ If recognition is not tied to consequences, it is not recognition. It is just PR and it is cynical.
The path of least resistance
There is a deeper pathology at work here: the British state’s instinctive avoidance of moral clarity when it involves its allies. We have seen this before, in Iraq, in Yemen, in Rwanda. The same pattern: delay, equivocate, obfuscate. Wait until the killing stops, and then mourn the dead.
This form of moral cowardice is always dressed up as diplomacy. We are told that to take a side would be irresponsible. That nuance is required. That both sides must be heard. But some conflicts do not allow for such luxuries. When one side is dropping 2,000-pound bombs on refugee camps, and the other is starving, diseased and dying, the time for nuance is over.
As the South African government stated in its genocide case against Israel: “The scale of destruction is such that Gaza may soon be a place where no Palestinian can survive.”¹⁹
By waiting until September, Keir Starmer is not standing up for Palestinian statehood. He is gambling that the last remnants of Gaza will be gone by then, so that recognition can be extended to a corpse, without offending the powers that be.
And that is cowardice of the highest order from a Prime Minister who has been openly complicit in the war crimes of Israel.
References:
1. ICJ Order in South Africa v. Israel (Jan 2024) – https://www.icj-cij.org
2. IPC Famine Review Committee Report on Gaza, July 2025 – https://www.ipcinfo.org
3. UNICEF Gaza Emergency Updates – https://www.unicef.org/press-releases
4. Israeli Government Press Statement, July 2025 – https://www.gov.il
5. Amnesty International, March 2024 – “They Fired on Us as We Starved” – https://www.amnesty.org
6. World Central Kitchen Report on Aid Convoys – https://wck.org
7. Rome Statute of the ICC, Article 8(2)(b)(xxv) – https://www.icc-cpi.int
8. CAAT UK Arms Exports Database – https://caat.org.uk
9. UN General Assembly Resolution 67/19 (2012) – https://www.un.org
10. UN Report: Gaza 2020 – https://www.unrwa.org
11. Gaza Health Ministry (via Al Jazeera, BBC, July 2025) – https://www.aljazeera.com
12. Chatham House: UK–US Foreign Policy Alignment – https://www.chathamhouse.org
13. Reuters, July 2025 – “Biden Calls for Ceasefire But Maintains Arms Flow” – https://www.reuters.com
14. UN Security Council Voting Records – https://digitallibrary.un.org
15. Labour Files, Al Jazeera Investigations – https://www.aljazeera.com
16. Jewish Voice for Labour, Expulsions Dossier – https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org.uk
17. UK Strategic Export Control Criteria – https://www.gov.uk
18. Hansard Parliamentary Record, July 2025 – https://hansard.parliament.uk
19. South Africa ICJ Case Filing – https://www.icj-cij.org
A bit of shameless self-plugging here. This is www.TetleysTLDR.com blog. It's not monetised. Please feel feel to go and look at the previous ones on the website and if you like them, please feel free to share them.
