Recent polls have revealed that a majority of Palestinian respondents, both on the West Bank and in Gaza, believe that the October 7 atrocities were a good idea. There could be no clearer illustration that creating a Palestinian state would be Jewish suicide. This week, however, Labour is reportedly set to launch a manifesto committing to recognition of such a state over the heads of the Israelis.
To mainstream voters, it makes little sense. People understand instinctively that rewarding the worst pogroms since the Holocaust with a push for Palestinian self-determination is an example – to put it mildly – of rewarding bad behaviour. If this is the result of October 7, surely Hamas will feel even more encouraged to do it again? Not that the terror group wants a state alongside Israel. Its intentions are too genocidal for that. But it pursues its true goal by forcing capitulation by increments, and so do its Iranian backers.
The asymmetric strategy of terror that unfolded on October 7 had two stages. First came the unprovoked, depraved atrocities against Israelis; then came the human sacrifice of the Palestinians, an attempt to brainwash the world into believing that this was a case of Jewish genocide rather than self-defence. Hamas knew that once the initial shock had passed, it could rely upon the UN and NGOs, the keffiyeh-chic students on university campuses and the international Left to complete its propaganda goals, forcing Israel to lay down its arms before securing victory. Labour’s proposal confirms that the jihadis know us better than we know ourselves.
The last time such a unilateral move was attempted was by Israel itself, which withdrew from Gaza in 2005 and handed the keys to the Palestinians. We all know how that ended: the creation of an enclave in which every public service, every civilian building, every resource and aid donation, every aspect of infrastructure was bent towards the cult of death, with Tehran pulling many of the strings. Is there any reason to believe that replicating the experiment on a grander scale would produce anything but grander and bloodier results? If such horrors came to pass, would Labour support Israel’s self-defence? How quickly would it pivot to decrying the “genocide” and demanding a ceasefire?
Palestinian leaders have repeatedly shown no interest in a peaceful state of their own alongside Israel. Instead, the likes of Hamas wish for a country as a replacement for Israel.
In 1947, the Arab League rejected a UN proposal that would have created a Palestinian state alongside the nascent Israel. This rejectionism was repeated on many subsequent occasions, most vividly in 2008. On that occasion, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert offered them 94 per cent of the West Bank, with 6 per cent of Israeli land to make up the difference; East Jerusalem as their capital; the Old City of Jerusalem handed over to the international community; a tunnel connecting the West Bank and Gaza; and a thousand Palestinian refugees accepted into Israel annually for five years, with financial compensation for the rest. In turning this offer down, Mahmoud Abbas revealed a central truth. He did not want what the West so desperately wanted him to want.
Sir Keir has made a point in purging his party of its Corbynite rump. That has been very admirable. But voters will look at this manifesto pledge and worry that the tail still wags the dog. The sectarianism that has deformed British society, both in northern constituencies and on the streets of London on Saturdays, has its deepest hooks in Labour. Capitulation may buy a measure of party unity, but at what cost?
If this policy was implemented, Britain would sit at odds with the United States. But it would also sit at odds with reality. The tragedy of the region is such that before two states can be achieved, Palestinian society must be deradicalised. This is the work of generations and no manifesto commitment can change that.
Jake Wallis Simons is editor of the Jewish Chronicle and author of Israelophobia
Recent polls have revealed that a majority of Palestinian respondents, both on the West Bank and in Gaza, believe that the October 7 atrocities were a good idea. There could be no clearer illustration that creating a Palestinian state would be Jewish suicide. This week, however, Labour is reportedly set to launch a manifesto committing to recognition of such a state over the heads of the Israelis.
To mainstream voters, it makes little sense. People understand instinctively that rewarding the worst pogroms since the Holocaust with a push for Palestinian self-determination is an example – to put it mildly – of rewarding bad behaviour. If this is the result of October 7, surely Hamas will feel even more encouraged to do it again? Not that the terror group wants a state alongside Israel. Its intentions are too genocidal for that. But it pursues its true goal by forcing capitulation by increments, and so do its Iranian backers.
The asymmetric strategy of terror that unfolded on October 7 had two stages. First came the unprovoked, depraved atrocities against Israelis; then came the human sacrifice of the Palestinians, an attempt to brainwash the world into believing that this was a case of Jewish genocide rather than self-defence. Hamas knew that once the initial shock had passed, it could rely upon the UN and NGOs, the keffiyeh-chic students on university campuses and the international Left to complete its propaganda goals, forcing Israel to lay down its arms before securing victory. Labour’s proposal confirms that the jihadis know us better than we know ourselves.
The last time such a unilateral move was attempted was by Israel itself, which withdrew from Gaza in 2005 and handed the keys to the Palestinians. We all know how that ended: the creation of an enclave in which every public service, every civilian building, every resource and aid donation, every aspect of infrastructure was bent towards the cult of death, with Tehran pulling many of the strings. Is there any reason to believe that replicating the experiment on a grander scale would produce anything but grander and bloodier results? If such horrors came to pass, would Labour support Israel’s self-defence? How quickly would it pivot to decrying the “genocide” and demanding a ceasefire?
Palestinian leaders have repeatedly shown no interest in a peaceful state of their own alongside Israel. Instead, the likes of Hamas wish for a country as a replacement for Israel.
In 1947, the Arab League rejected a UN proposal that would have created a Palestinian state alongside the nascent Israel. This rejectionism was repeated on many subsequent occasions, most vividly in 2008. On that occasion, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert offered them 94 per cent of the West Bank, with 6 per cent of Israeli land to make up the difference; East Jerusalem as their capital; the Old City of Jerusalem handed over to the international community; a tunnel connecting the West Bank and Gaza; and a thousand Palestinian refugees accepted into Israel annually for five years, with financial compensation for the rest. In turning this offer down, Mahmoud Abbas revealed a central truth. He did not want what the West so desperately wanted him to want.
Sir Keir has made a point in purging his party of its Corbynite rump. That has been very admirable. But voters will look at this manifesto pledge and worry that the tail still wags the dog. The sectarianism that has deformed British society, both in northern constituencies and on the streets of London on Saturdays, has its deepest hooks in Labour. Capitulation may buy a measure of party unity, but at what cost?
If this policy was implemented, Britain would sit at odds with the United States. But it would also sit at odds with reality. The tragedy of the region is such that before two states can be achieved, Palestinian society must be deradicalised. This is the work of generations and no manifesto commitment can change that.
Jake Wallis Simons is editor of the Jewish Chronicle and author of Israelophobia