In a stunning display of moral cowardice and historical amnesia, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced that the United Kingdom would formally recognize a so-called “Palestinian state.” This decision, coming alongside similar moves by Canada and Australia, is a reward for decades of terrorism against Jews in Israel and around the world and a permission structure for more violence. This is not just a diplomatic blunder or an antisemitic proclamation; it is a deliberate willingness to ignore the reality of the world to placate the more radical and insane members of British society.
The roots of this misguided policy trace back to 1947, when Britain, overwhelmed by its colonial failures and the prospect of a massive wave of Holocaust-surviving migrants from a war-torn Europe, simply washed its hands of the Palestine question. Facing mounting violence from both Jewish and Arab forces during the Mandate period, the British government referred the issue to the United Nations, effectively abdicating all responsibility for the territory it had administered since the end of World War I. The UN’s Partition Plan (Resolution 181) proposed dividing the land into Jewish and Arab states, but Britain refused to enforce it, withdrawing in May 1948 and leaving a vacuum that led to Israel’s War of Independence. This was the first act of British irresponsibility—and now, nearly 80 years later, Starmer’s recognition is an attempt to retroactively atone for sins that were never truly Britain’s to bear alone. Instead of supporting the Jewish state’s right to exist and defend itself, Britain is now legitimizing the very forces that rejected partition and sought to destroy Israel.
Let’s be clear: Britain never created a Palestinian state, nor did it ever intend to. Under the 1917 Balfour Declaration, Britain pledged support for a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine, a commitment rooted in Zionist aspirations and the League of Nations Mandate. When the dust settled after 1948, the “Palestinian” Arabs—who, in truth, were part of a broader Arab world—ended up under Jordanian control in the West Bank and Egyptian administration in Gaza. There was no sovereign Palestinian entity; the term “Palestine” was a British administrative convenience, not a promise of Arab statehood. Jordan annexed the West Bank in 1950, and Egypt held Gaza until 1967. Israel’s victory in the Six-Day War liberated these territories from hostile occupation, yet Britain now pretends that recognizing a vague “Palestine” rectifies some historical wrong. This is revisionist history at its worst, ignoring that the Arabs repeatedly rejected opportunities for statehood in favor of war against the Jews.
This recognition comes less than two years after the barbaric Hamas-led attacks on October 7, which killed over 1,200 Israelis and took more than 250 hostages in the deadliest assault on Jews since the Holocaust. By granting statehood to the Palestinians now, the U.K. is effectively rewarding the very terrorism that fuels the conflict. Hamas, a terrorist organization designated as such by Britain itself, governs Gaza and maintains strongholds in the West Bank. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah faction glorifies “martyrs” and pays stipends to terrorists’ families. Starmer’s move signals to jihadists worldwide that acts of savagery can coerce Western democracies into concessions. It’s a slap in the face to Israeli victims and a green light for future atrocities.
Any so-called Palestinian state would inevitably become a terrorist state, controlled by extremists bent on Israel’s destruction. Look at the Palestinian leadership: Abbas, now in the 20th year of his four-year term, oversees a corrupt regime that incites hatred through school curricula and media. Hamas’s charter calls for Israel’s annihilation, and even “moderate” factions like Palestinian Islamic Jihad operate freely. A sovereign Palestine, without Israeli security oversight, would be an Iranian proxy on Israel’s doorstep—a launchpad for rockets, tunnels, and suicide bombings. History proves it: the PLO under Arafat turned Jordan into a terror base in the 1970s, leading to Black September. Zionists have always known that peace requires a partner for peace, not a state for jihad. Britain’s recognition ignores this, dooming the region to endless violence.
Israel learned this lesson the hard way in 2005, when it unilaterally disengaged from Gaza, removing all settlements and military presence to create a de facto Palestinian state. What did the world get in return? Hamas seized control in 2007, turning Gaza into a fortress of terror. For nearly 20 years, rockets have been fired at Israeli civilians, culminating in the October 7 massacre. International aid, meant for development, funded terror tunnels and weapons. If Gaza—with its borders, governance, and billions in funding—became a hellscape of extremism, imagine a full Palestinian state encompassing the West Bank. Israel’s withdrawal was a gesture of goodwill, and the result was horrifying.
This “recognition” is a joke and not worth the paper it’s printed on. What borders define this state? Is Britain willing to claim that nearly 600,000 Jews in Judea and Samaria need to leave? As we all know, a true Palestinian state would be “Judenrein,” as opposed to Israel, where the Arab and Muslim population exists with full rights. Or something else? There’s no agreed-upon government—the Palestinian Authority doesn’t control Gaza, and Hamas rejects Abbas’s authority. Over 140 countries already recognize Palestine symbolically, yet it changes nothing on the ground. Starmer claims it’s to “keep alive” the two-state solution, but without negotiations, security guarantees, or demilitarization, it’s empty posturing.
Compounding the absurdity, this recognition opens the floodgates to financial ruin for Britain. Mahmoud Abbas has long threatened to sue the U.K. for reparations over the Balfour Declaration, now demanding a staggering £2 trillion in compensation for “historical injustices.” Legal experts warn that formal recognition could trigger international claims, forcing Britain to pay for a “state” it helped conceptualize but never realized. Abbas’s audacity knows no bounds—he blames Britain for the Nakba while ignoring Arab leaders’ rejection of partition.
At the helm of this disaster is Keir Starmer, a weak and feckless leader whose priorities are dangerously misplaced. Instead of fretting over distant conflicts, Starmer should focus on the radical Islam encroaching on British streets—from pro-Hamas protests in London to Islamist infiltration of institutions. His Labour government, with its history of antisemitism scandals, now sides against Israel while ignoring the rise of extremism within the U.K. Starmer’s “ultimatum” to Israel was ignored, leading to this petulant recognition. A true statesman would bolster alliances with democratic Israel, not appease terrorists. Starmer’s idiocy endangers not just the Middle East, but Britain’s own security.
Of course, the U.K. is not alone in this. Both Canada and Australia, both part of the Commonwealth, declared that they recognize a fictional Palestinian state as well. Giorgia Meloni in Italy refused to do so, and riots have taken place in the streets. The U.K., Canada, and Australia may think capitulating to their radicals may save them in the long run, but in reality, it’s going to destroy the fabric of their own sovereign nations.
Moshe Hill is a political analyst and columnist. His work can be found at www.aHillwithaView.com and on X at @HillWithView.
