British MPs judged as representing world-wide shift in opinion


October 15, 2014
Sarah Benton

This posting has these items:
1) Times of Israel: UK MPs’ ‘Yes’ to Palestine – no earthquake, but certainly a tremor, those who dismiss the vote may be underestimating the consequences;
2) Finkelstein website: British MPs’ Palestine vote, Jamie Stern-Weiner emphasises the number of Tories who spoke for the motion;
3) JPost: PLO to UK: Follow your parliament’s lead and recognize Palestinian statehood, report of debate and Palestinian responses;
4) Economist: A state of things to come, why Bibi should be unsettled by vote;
5) The National: UK parliament votes to recognise Palestinian statehood, round-up of shifting sands for Israel;
6) Haaretz: British envoy to Israel: Palestine vote sign of ‘concerning’ shift in U.K. public opinion;
7) Ynet: UK envoy: British public opinion against Israel, UK and US ambassadors warn Israel to take note;
8 – Al Monitor: British vote brings Palestinians one step closer to statehood;
9) NY Times: A Symbolic Vote in Britain Recognizes a Palestinian State, potent indication of how public opinion has shifted since the breakdown of American-sponsored peace negotiations and the conflict in Gaza;


The speech of long-time Israel supporter Sir Richard Ottaway [above, speaking in a debate last January] in favour of recognizing Palestinian statehood created the biggest impact on some commentators. Sir Richard, Tory MP for Croydon South, has been Chairman of the House of Commons Select Committee on Foreign Affairs since 2010. In 2012 he announced he would stand down as MP at the next election. He has been condemned in right-wing blogs as a ‘fair-weather’ friend of Israel.


UK MPs’ ‘Yes’ to Palestine – no earthquake, but certainly a tremor

Now that the Parliament of the former mandatory power has endorsed Palestinian statehood, it may become harder for Israel to stave off similar moves elsewhere

By Raphael Ahren, Times of Israel
October 14, 2014

British MPs’ overwhelming 274-12 vote to urge their government to recognize a Palestinian state is no diplomatic earthquake. But it is certainly a tremor — and it could expand into a major fault that makes it increasingly difficult for Israel to argue against such unilateral moves.

The House of Common’s vote — urging David Cameron’s government to “recognise the state of Palestine alongside the state of Israel, as a contribution to securing a negotiated two state solution” — will not change official British policy vis-à-vis the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The issue will likely be discussed in the press for a few days, pro-Palestinian activists will celebrate their victory as an important affirmation of an idea whose time has come, and Israeli officials will condemn the move as premature and unhelpful. But there will be little if any immediate concrete diplomatic fall-out.

Prime Minister Cameron didn’t show up at the vote, and sought to shrug it off as pretty inconsequential. “I’ve been pretty clear about the government’s position [on Palestinian statehood] and it won’t be changing,” his spokesperson said before the discussion had started Monday.

And staunch friends of Israel in the Conservative Party are adamant that nothing has changed. “The [British] government supports a return to negotiations by Israel and the Palestinians and is not in favor of Palestinian unilateral moves at the UN or elsewhere,” said Stuart Polak, director of the Conservative Friends of Israel. “That a few, extremely partisan Labour MPs, with the help of [party chairman and opposition leader] Ed Miliband and the hapless Labour front bench, can engineer a win in a vote like this, does not change anything in British foreign policy. This is a backbench debate and vote and will not change government policy.”

Yet some Israeli officials privately acknowledge their unease about the Parliament of so important a country — the former mandatory power in Palestine — unilaterally endorsing Palestinian statehood, especially after the new government in Stockholm announced earlier this month that “Sweden will recognize the State of Palestine.”


Grahame Morris, Labour MP for Easington, put the motion. He chairs Labour Friends of Palestine & the Middle East.

The successful motion, proposed by MP Grahame Morris and discussed in the House of Commons’ Backbench Business Committee, is non-binding, yet it could set off a domino effect across Europe, according to officials in both Ramallah and Jerusalem.

“Regardless of the non-binding nature of the vote, it will have a significant impact on the British government’s policies and upcoming decisions on Palestine,” senior Palestine Liberation Organization official Hanan Ashrawi stated earlier this week, a sentiment she repeated after the motion had passed.

“There is indeed reason to worry,” a senior Israeli diplomatic official told The Times of Israel on Monday. “Not because it’s going to be translated into actual government policy, but because it’s a public opinion setter. It does create a trend, somehow.”

The decision does have the potential to eventually change UK policy, the senior official added, speaking on condition of anonymity. “Had it failed, it would have strengthened those who urge the government against supporting the Palestinians’ unilateral steps and to push them toward negotiations with Israel instead,” he said. “But it succeeded, and now it could have the opposite effect.”

In Britain’s pro-Israel camp, the vote is being insistently described as being of marginal importance — as merely a moral victory for the Palestinian cause that has little if any significance outside the confines of British party politics.

“This is more significant in terms of domestic policy than it is for British foreign policy,” said Toby Greene, director of research at the Britain Israel Communications and Research Center (BICOM), an independent pro-Israel think tank. “Its impact on British government policy is limited. It doesn’t reflect government policy, and it won’t form government policy.”

The vote is ‘at best is expression of the views of backbenchers. It doesn’t necessarily means it has a majority in the parliament itself’

Greene was also not too worried about the British vote leading other European countries to follow suit. Generally, the EU likes to maintain some degree of unity on this kind of thing, he said. “Though Sweden has indicated that it wants to break ranks, there is no consensus among leading EU states in favor of recognizing Palestine outside of an agreement with Israel. I don’t expect that to change in the immediate future.”


James Clappison, Chairman, Conservative Friends of Israel failed to persuade many members of CfI – the largest group in the House of Commmons – to speak against the motion or attend, which failure may explain his ‘largely incoherent speech’. His judgment was also called into question by the Daily Telegraph when it revealed  in 2009 that he claimed £100,000 in expenses while owning two homes (no mortgage payments) plus another 22 which gives him a substantial rental income.

David Burrowes, a British MP who belongs to the Conservative Friends of Israel, decided to skip the vote and instead spend some time touring the Holy Land as a guest of the Israel Allies Foundation. Sure that the opposition would win the vote anyway, he felt that it was more important to show support for Israel on the ground than to cast a vain “no” vote in London.

“One shouldn’t underestimate that it’s got a strong campaigning edge to it,” Burrowes said about the success of the pro-recognition motion. But Prime Minister Cameron has been very clear about the government’s position, he added. The fact that a group of opposition MPs could push through a motion doesn’t alter the government’s course, he said.

Yet the current coalition of Conservatives and Liberal Democrats will not govern forever. Ahead of the May 2015 general elections, most polls see a slight lead for Labour, making Miliband a serious bet for prime minister.

Miliband, who voted in favor of Monday’s motion, could enshrine recognition of a Palestinian state as official government policy, the Conservatives’ Burrowes asserted. “He’s willing to sacrifice long-term issues [such as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict] at the altar of political expediency,” the rival MP said. “If he becomes the next prime minister, yes, there will be great pressure on him, and perhaps a mandate for him to move things like Palestinian recognition.”

The motion ‘does not commit Labour to immediate recognition of Palestine’

Perhaps so. Labour’s shadow foreign secretary, Douglas Alexander, last week in an article reiterated his party’s support for the “principle of recognising Palestinian statehood.” Yet Alexander also took pains to emphasize that Monday’s motion in parliament “does not commit Labour to immediate recognition of Palestine, or mandate the UK government to immediately bilaterally recognise the State of Palestine.”

Elaborating, he went on, “The timing and the mechanism by which Palestinian recognition takes place will continue to be matter decided by an incoming Labour Government.

“We have made clear previously that steps taken by individual governments outside of a wider international process won’t contribute to meaningful progress in negotiations towards a two state solution.”

Confused? We’re meant to be.

A historical rectification of the Balfour Declaration?
Since Britain is a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council and one of the three largest powers in the European Union, decisions by its Parliament, even if not binding, ostensibly carry more diplomatic weight than, say, declarations by the government of Sweden.

Could the House of Commons’ endorsement of Palestine inspire other major European countries to follow suit? France has long been toying with the idea of unilaterally recognizing a Palestinian state, but has so far refused to do so, despite the Palestinians’ best lobbying efforts. (Paris might “at some point” recognize Palestine, a government spokesperson said last week.)

Germany has made plain that it will not take such a step in the absence of a peace agreement. “There needs to be mutual recognition,” Chancellor Angela Merkel once said, in promising never to recognize a Palestinian statehood without Israel’s agreement.

In 2012, London abstained when the UN General Assembly voted on granting “Palestine” non-member state status. “The only way to give the Palestinian people the state that they need and deserve, and to give the Israeli people the security and peace they are entitled to, is through a negotiated two-state solution,” London’s Ambassador to the UN Sir Mark Lyall Grant said at the time. That has been UK government policy ever since. (Fourteen EU member states voted in favor of the Palestinians’ resolution, while only one — the Czech Republic — opposed).

The UK is historically much more connected to this region than most other European countries, a fact the Palestinians are seeking to capitalize upon. A yes vote, the PLO’s Hanan Ashrawi had said ahead of the debate, “would be the first clear step taken by the UK as part of the process of historical rectification of the disastrous consequences of the Balfour Declaration and the British Mandate over Palestine that ended in 1948 with the creation of the State of Israel.”

But most Israeli and British observers reject any connection with the 1917 Balfour Declaration – in which London said it viewed with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people” — or the British Mandate.

“Israel-UK ties are not based on or formed primarily by the history of Britain in the region,” said BICOM’s Greene. British policy in the Israeli-Palestinian arena, he added, is generally determined by what the UK government considers to best serve the interest of peace and stability: support for a negotiated peace process and getting behind the US as the leader in that process.

“The UK has tended to avoid symbolic and declarative posturing,” he said, “in favor of practicable help for Palestinian state building on the ground and support for an American-led top-down approach to peacemaking.”

Time will tell if that position holds after Monday’s night’s strong show of British legislators’ support for Palestine.



British MPs’ Palestine vote

By Jamie Stern-Weiner, Norman Finkelstein website
October 14, 2014

Last night, British MPs voted 274 to 12 to recognise the State of Palestine. The abstention rate was high—just 286 of 650 MPs voted—in part because in accordance with convention government ministers abstained, and in part because the Labour leadership demanded that those of its MPs who showed up vote ‘yes’ (and thus, a substantial minority did not show up), and in part because most Tory MPs were absent.

By my count, the vote broke down as follows. Of 56 Liberal Democrat MPs, 29 voted, 28 in favour of recognition. Of 257 Labour MPs, 194 voted, unanimously in favour of recognition. Of 303 Conservative MPs, 45 voted, 39 in favour of recognition.

What are the implications?

First, the Labour leadership officially endorsed recognition, as did a large majority of Labour MPs. Second, while Liberal Democrat ministers abstained, the party supports recognising Palestinian statehood, as did nearly every Liberal Democrat MP who voted. Third, most Conservative MPs abstained, while those who voted overwhelmingly favoured recognition (by 39 to 6—or what Ha’aretz hack Anshel Pfeffer describes as a ‘split’). The high Tory abstention rate is difficult to interpret, although the editor of the leading Conservative Party website takes it as evidence that ‘support for Israel is slipping away’. Taken together, and despite the high rate of Tory abstention, the vote demonstrated strong support for recognition of Palestine that crossed party lines.

Throughout the debate, anger at Israel’s relentless settlement of the West Bank, cruelty in Gaza and rejection of the international consensus two-state solution was palpable. Before and during the discussion, MPs took turns to swat away the tired line, reiterated last week by the Obama administration, that international pressure on Israel harms the peace process. The notion that recognition of Palestinian statehood ‘would put an end to negotiations’, one former Tory minister declared, ‘is patently absurd’, while ’refusing Palestinian recognition is tantamount to giving Israel the right of veto’. Israel’s ‘illegal occupation’ and ‘illegal settlements’, a former Labour minister insisted, can be reversed ‘only by actions, not simply by words’:

The only thing that the Israeli government… under Bibi Netanyahu understands is pressure.

Particularly striking was the sight of MPs with strong pro-Israel voting records taking the stand to explain their support for recognition of a Palestinian state. ‘I was a friend of Israel long before I became a Tory’, Conservative MP and chairman of the influential foreign affairs select committee Sir Richard Ottaway began, and ‘I have stood by Israel through thick and thin’. But I realise now, in truth, looking back over the past 20 years, that Israel has been slowly drifting away from world public opinion. The annexation of the 950 acres of the West Bank just a few months ago has outraged me more than anything else in my political life.

‘I have to say to the Government of Israel’, he concluded, ‘that if they are losing people like me, they will be losing a lot of people’.

Indeed, the significance of last night’s vote is, as the Economist suggests, ‘as an indication of where British, and European, sympathies increasingly lie’. It came just a few days after Sweden’s prime minster announced that his country will recognise the state of Palestine, and in the context of increasing EU frustration and Latin American assertiveness with Israel.

Israel is well aware of its isolation, which explains its fanatical hostility to United Nations and international legal involvement in resolving the conflict. ‘On the matter of borders’, former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak lamented, ‘the entire world is with the Palestinians and not with us’.

For supporters of a just peace in the Middle East, this isolation is both cause for hope and a clear strategic cue. As it stands, last night’s vote was a powerful symbolic gesture; if Palestinians and their supporters act swiftly to capitalise on it, and build on growing international momentum for concrete measures to support the Palestinians and pressure Israel, it can become an important step towards victory.

Recognise Palestine, End the Illegal Siege, Dismantle the Illegal Wall, Enforce the Law.

A mass nonviolent movement of Palestinians mobilised behind these demands, and reinforced by the unparalleled energy, creativity and experience of the solidarity movement abroad, would win.

That is the message of last night’s vote.



PLO to UK: Follow your parliament’s lead and recognize Palestinian statehood

PLO Secretary-General Yasser Abed Rabbo calls on the British government to endorse the move by voting in favor of a Palestinian state at the Security Council.

By Jerry Lewis, Khaled Abu Toameh and Tovah Lazaroff, JPost
October 14, 2014

The Palestinian leadership on Tuesday lauded a symbolic 274-12 vote late Monday night in Britain’s House of Commons to recognize Palestine as a state, saying it was an important step toward acceptance among Western countries and as a member state in the United Nations. It called on the British government to follow Parliament’s lead.

British Prime Minister David Cameron abstained.

Only 286 of the 650 members of the House of Commons were present during the vote, which Labor MP Grahame Morris had called. Prior to the vote, Cameron’s spokesman said foreign policy would not be affected, whatever the outcome.

Nabil Abu Rudaineh, spokesman for Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, said the vote would “enhance the prospects of peace” in the Middle East.

PLO Secretary-General Yasser Abed Rabbo called on the British government to endorse the move by voting in favor of a Palestinian state in the UN Security Council.

The United Kingdom is one of the council’s 15 members, and as a permanent member, it has veto power.

Abed Rabbo said Britain was “obliged more than any other country to vote in favour of a Palestinian state because of its responsibility for the continued suffering of the Palestinian people since the notorious Balfour Declaration.”

Nabil Sha’ath, a senior Fatah official and former PA foreign minister, said the vote would have a positive impact on the positions of Europe and the efforts to persuade Security Council members to support the Palestinian stance.

Sha’ath also predicted that the vote would have “legal and political repercussions” with regard to the boycott of Israel, as well as settlements and Israeli “assaults” on Jerusalem.

He expressed hope that other EU countries would follow suit.

Fatah’s top representative in the West Bank, Azzam al-Ahmed, said the vote marked the “beginning of the awakening of the British and international conscience.” He said it was high time that the world endorsed a “moral stance toward the Palestinian people in order to end the historic injustice done to them.”

Israel, meanwhile, dismissed the diplomatic significance of the symbolic vote by refusing to dignify it with a formal response from Jerusalem.

Instead, its embassy in London issued a statement.

“There should be no illusion that a unilateral call for premature recognition of Palestine advances peace in any way whatsoever. It fails to address the real obstacles to peace, including the Palestinian insistence on a ‘right of return,’ which undermines the very concept of two states for two peoples, as well as the need for genuine security arrangements to prevent further mass attacks on Israeli civilians,” the statement read.

“Sending a message to Palestinians that they do not need to make hard choices for peace, and to Israelis that their concerns are of no import, only undermines the efforts of those working to bring about a real and lasting change,” it added.

The United Kingdom does not recognize Palestine as a state, preferring to see it born out of a negotiated two-state solution that ends all claims and ensures an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

France holds a similar position.

But French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said on Tuesday that if there were no possibility of renewed negotiations, Paris “would not shirk its responsibilities” and would recognize the Palestinian state.

“From the moment when we say that there are two states, there will be recognition of a Palestinian state. That goes without saying; it’s logical,” Fabius said. “The only question [is] the modalities and how to do it in the most efficient way. What we want is not something symbolic, but something that is useful for peace.”

Over the past few days, top officials around the world, including US Secretary of State John Kerry and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, have called for renewed talks, but at present there is no plan to jumpstart the frozen peace process.

Most of the speakers in the four hour House of Commons debate expressed support for the Palestinian cause, starting by saying, “I am a supporter of Israel but…,” before launching into a catalogue of complaints about Israel’s policies.

Former Labour foreign secretary Jack Straw, along with former Liberal Democrat party leader Menzies Campbell, amended the resolution to make it acceptable to more MPs by suggesting that any recognition be “a contribution” to the peace process.

During his own speech, Straw pointedly reminded lawmakers that while the Israel camp wanted to stave off recognition until negotiations with the Palestinians had been completed, his amendment aimed to secure such recognition beforehand for the simple reason that he felt it wrong that Israel could have a veto over Palestinian statehood by refusing to end the negotiations.

Countering Straw was another former foreign secretary, Conservative MP Malcolm Rifkind, who argued that recognition could not be granted to an entity that had no borders, no army and no government. And until the Palestinians sorted themselves out, he said, he didn’t think it made much sense to grant them the recognition they were seeking.

He wryly remarked that Britain had not recognized Israel until 1950, two years after it declared statehood.

Sir Gerald Kaufman, a Jewish but strongly pro-Palestinian Labor MP, accused Israel of not acting in “a Jewish way,” adding that its actions actually encouraged anti-Semitism.

Two senior backbenchers also made their mark on the debate.

Sir Richard Ottaway, who chairs the foreign affairs select committee, spoke movingly of how he was a lifelong supporter of Israel but would support the recognition motion because of his dismay at events during the Gaza conflict. His Labour predecessor, Mike Gapes, also declared himself a friend of Israel but said he would vote for the resolution because moves toward recognition would help stop fundamentalists from taking over the region.

While there were some pro-Israel speeches from the Conservative benches, Tory MPs, with a couple of exceptions, decided not to follow up by voting against the motion.

Instead they joined the vast majority of their party colleagues in abstaining, in an attempt to render the vote valueless.

One Conservative lawmaker, Mike Freer, resigned on Tuesday over the vote. Freer, the sole parliamentarian representing the heavily Jewish constituency of Finchley and Golders Green, labeled the motion “backbench business.”

“Govt policy on two state solution remains best hope for lasting peace,” Freer tweeted after the resolution was passed.

The outcome of the vote surprised few seasoned observers of the Westminster political scene. It showed there had been a considerable shift toward the Palestinian camp within the House of Commons, a shift that was somewhat accelerated by the recent Gaza fighting. Still, it was not a true reflection of the entire house, as only those Conservatives who support Palestinian statehood actually voted.

For political reasons, the Labour opposition, led by Ed Miliband and shadow Foreign Secretary Douglas Alexander, have chosen to support the idea of Palestinian statehood.

Cynics believe there is a simple explanation: With a closely fought general election less than seven months away, trying to secure some of the country’s estimated three million Muslim voters – many in key marginal constituencies – makes political sense.

Nonetheless, several Labour MPs disagreed with their colleagues, and in a major public display of revolt, a quarter of the shadow cabinet decided to abstain.

Reuters contributed to this report.



A state of things to come

By Bagehot, Economist
October 13, 2014

THE Israeli government might try to take solace in the low turnout—only half of British MPs showed up to debate a motion proposing to recognise Palestine as a state on October 13th. Yet their verdict was overwhelming: the motion was carried by 274 to 12.

As a backbench motion, the coalition government, which asked its ministers to abstain during the vote, can choose to ignore it. But as an indication of where British, and European, sympathies increasingly lie on this issue, it will be profoundly unsettling for Benjamin Natanyahu, Israel’s prime minister.

The main opposition Labour Party—including its leader, Ed Miliband, who has Israeli relatives and has visited Israel as Labour’s leader—supported the motion. So did the Liberal Democrats, the government’s junior partner, which has long advocated recognising Palestine. And on the Conservative side, which has traditionally been more sympathetic to the Jewish state, the motion also received some striking backing.

Richard Ottaway, the veteran Tory chair of Parliament’s influential foreign affairs select committee, said Israel’s recent decision to expand its settlements in the West Bank had persuaded him to break a lifelong habit of staunch pro-Israeli support. “Looking back over the past 20 years, I realise now Israel has slowly been drifting away from world public opinion. The annexation of the 950 acres of the West Bank just a few months ago has outraged me more than anything else in my political life. It has made me look a fool and that is something I deeply resent.”

“In normal circumstances” Mr Ottaway said he would have opposed the motion, because the Palestinian refusal to recognise Israel was fit to disqualify it from statehood. But, he said, “such is my anger with the behaviour of Israel in recent months that I will not be opposing this motion. I have to say to the government of Israel: if it is losing people like me, it is going to be losing a lot of people.”

The vote in the House of Commons follows an announcement from Sweden’s new centre-left government on October 3rd that it intends to recognise Palestine. Around 130 countries have already done so; Sweden would be the first longstanding EU member to follow suit on Palestine’s behalf.

Recognition from Britain, given its historical role in Israel’s birth and closeness to America, would be a much bigger fillip for the Palestinian cause. Given that Mr Miliband is currently the bookies’ favourite to win next year’s general election, and probably then rule in tandem with the Lib Dems, that has never looked so likely.



UK parliament votes to recognise Palestinian statehood

The National
October 14, 2014

JERUSALEM // The British parliament’s vote to recognise a Palestinian state reflects shifting public sentiment against Israel in the UK and around the world, Britain’s ambassador to Israel said on Tuesday.

British legislators on Monday voted 274-12 in support of a motion calling on the government to “recognise the state of Palestine alongside the state of Israel”.

Nabil Abu Rudineh, spokesman for Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas, said the British vote was “a step in the right direction” and that “the two-state solution is the solution of the international community”.

While the parliament’s vote will not change British government policy, it is “significant” because it reveals attitudes toward Israel after the latest war in Gaza, said Ambassador Matthew Gould.

Mr Gould told Israel Radio that although it was only symbolic, Israel should take note of the vote.

“I think it is right to be concerned about what it signifies in terms of the direction of public opinion,” Mr Gould said.

The 50-day violence ended with a truce but killed more than 2,100 Palestinians, most of them civilians, according to the United Nations. On the Israeli side, 72 people died, most of them soldiers.

The British House of Commons’ vote Monday came nearly 100 years after Britain issued its famous Balfour Declaration in 1917, which affirmed its support for establishing a home for the Jewish people in Palestine. Israel was founded in 1948.

Israel’s recent settlement activity such as the move to approve more Jewish housing in east Jerusalem has “a very corrosive effect on international opinion”, the British envoy said.

Israel’s foreign ministry said the vote in Britain undermines chances for peace because Palestinian statehood should come about only as a result of negotiations with Israel.

“Premature international recognition sends a troubling message to the Palestinian leadership that they can evade the tough choices that both sides have to make,” the ministry said.

Prime minister David Cameron and other government leaders abstained, and more than half of the 650 House of Commons members did not participate in the vote. But the motion had support from both government and opposition MPs, who said it could help revive the stalled peace process.

In 2012, the UN General Assembly voted to recognise a state of Palestine on territories captured by Israel in 1967. The United States and many European countries have not followed suit.

But earlier this month, Sweden’s new prime minister Stefan Lofven said his government would recognise the state of Palestine, an announcement that drew praise from Palestinian officials and criticism from Israel.

In a further symbol of international support for the Palestinians, UN chief Ban Ki-moon arrived in the Gaza Strip on Tuesday and was scheduled to participate in a meeting of the new Palestinian government.

Mr Ban was driven through the ruins of Gaza City’s Shujaieh neighbourhood and the Jabaliya refugee camp – the scenes of some of the heaviest Israeli shelling in this summer’s conflict.

He said the devastation he saw was far worse than that caused in the previous Israel-Gaza conflict of winter 2008-2009.

“The destruction which I have seen while coming to here is beyond description. This is a much more serious destruction than what I saw in 2009,” Mr Ban said.

“I’d like to take this opportunity to express my deepest condolences to people who lost their lives and also to families who lost their loved ones.”

Israel has denounced the Palestinian government because it is backed by the militant group Hamas, but Western governments have signalled a willingness to work with it.

* Associated Press, with additional reporting from Agence France-Presse



British envoy to Israel: Palestine vote sign of ‘concerning’ shift in U.K. public opinion

‘Parliamentary vote is a sign of the way the wind is blowing, and will continue to blow without any progress towards peace,’ says Matthew Gould.

By Haaretz
October 14, 2014


Matthew Gould. Photo by Tal Cohen

Britain’s ambassador to Israel said Tuesday that the U.K. parliament’s vote to recognize a Palestinian state shows the shifting public sentiment in Britain against Israel.

In an interview with Israel Radio, Matthew Gould told Israel Radio that the symbolic vote in the House of Commons reflects the view of Israel following the war in Gaza, which killed more than 2,100 Palestinians, the majority civilians, and more than 70 Israelis, the majority soldiers.

“I think it is right to be concerned about what it signifies in terms of the direction of public opinion,” said Gould.

Gould confirmed Monday after the result that British policy on recognition remains unchanged, but warns that the issues raised by the Commons motion should not be dismissed out of hand.

“Separate from the narrow question of recognition, I am concerned in the long run about the shift in public opinion in the U.K. and beyond towards Israel,” says Gould. “Israel lost support after this summer’s conflict, and after the series of announcements on settlements. This Parliamentary vote is a sign of the way the wind is blowing, and will continue to blow without any progress towards peace.”

British Prime Minister David Cameron and other government leaders abstained from the vote Monday, which passed by a majority 274-12.

The vote, which followed a debate that lasted nearly five hours, has no practical significance since it does not oblige the British government to change its current policy of recognizing Palestine only after a peace deal is reached between Israel and the Palestinians. The vote passed thanks to the Labour Party’s mobilization, as well as the Conservative Party’s virtual absence from the vote.

Opposition leader and Labor Party Chairman Isaac Herzog on Tuesday called the U.K. parliament’s decision to recognize the Palestinian state a “resounding failure” in the path set by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman.

“This is another resounding failure for the school of Netanyahu and Lieberman. A cold wind is blowing toward Israel from every corner of the world, yet the prime minister and foreign minister refuse to face the facts, and are bringing a harsh diplomatic storm upon us.”



UK envoy: British public opinion against Israel

Diplomats respond to British parliament’s vote to recognize a Palestinian state, with former Israeli ambassador to US saying Israel sticking head in sand instead of leading its own diplomatic front: We prefer fighting rockets than boycotts.

By Attila Somfalvi, Ynet news
October 14, 2014

Britain’s ambassador to Israel says the British parliament’s vote to recognize a Palestinian state shows the shifting public sentiment in Britain against Israel, while Israel’s former ambassador to the US said Israel failed to respond to the move which could have negative implications for Israel.

Matthew Gould, Britain’s ambassador to Israel, told Israel Radio on Tuesday that the symbolic vote in the House of Commons reflects the view of Israel following the war in Gaza.

Gould said: “I think it is right to be concerned about what it signifies in terms of the direction of public opinion.”

Meanwhile, former Israeli ambassador to the US, Michael Oren, told Ynet that the “support expressed by Britain for the establishment of the Palestinian state is much more important than the Swedish one, and is being underestimated.”

The British vote followed an announcement by the new Swedish government that it would recognize Palestine is a state. Following outcry in Israel, the Swedish government toned down its position and said the recognition would take place only after peace talks.

According to Oren, “Britain is a member of the UN Security Council. The Palestinians are going to the UN in November and they want at least nine votes in the Security Council (to force Israel to commit to a timeline for withdrawing from the West Bank.) There is a chance America will abstain, but a lot of it is up to us.”

Oren echoed Gould’s claim, saying “Britain is one of our closest friends and allies, and still 274 parliament members supported the (non-binding) movement, with only 12 objecting.”

Regarding the Palestinians UN Security Council bid, Oren shed light on additional implications the vote could have: “America currently does not accept the (resolution’s) draft. But even if the Americans veto the resolution, with nine or ten votes that Palestinian will still be able to petition (The International Criminal Court in) The Hague.

“I am slightly shocked by the fact that we are not responding. The Palestinians are playing smart and we aren’t responding,” he said.

“Israeli society does not want to real with the implications. It is easy to deal with rockets, it is concrete and understandable. But we don’t want to deal with a boycott,” he lamented

Oren stressed that the vote did not signal a shift in British policy, but only reaffirmed Britain’s position that it retains the right to recognize a Palestinians state when the time is right.

“We knew in advance that was the British position and is not changing.”

Oren suggested Israel lead a counter-measure in response to the Palestinians diplomatic offensive: “Israel needs to lead a unilateral initiative, but that inspires discomfort here in Israel. Israel has never clearly said what its interests are in this regard. We need leadership and a little courage so as not to stay inactive in the face of recent developments.”

Israel’s Foreign Ministry said the vote undermines chances for peace because Palestinian statehood should result only from talks with Israel.

British Prime Minister David Cameron and other government leaders abstained from the vote Monday.



British vote brings Palestinians one step closer to statehood

Although the vote by the British Parliament to recognize the state of Palestine is nonbinding, it adds momentum to the Palestinian push for statehood.

By Daoud Kuttab, Al Monitor / Palestine Pulse
October 14, 2014

After debate ended Oct. 13 in Westminster and the votes were cast, 274 British members of Parliament (MPs), representing major parties as well as diverse communities, passed a motion calling on their government to recognize the state of Palestine.

“The vote is symbolic, but the discussion is essential,” Manuel Hassassian, the Palestinian ambassador to the United Kingdom [above], had told Al-Monitor on Oct. 12, the day before the motion by the Labor Party backbencher Grahame Morris was slated for a debate and vote. “It is not a binding vote, but it will send a strong message to the British government and to the world.”

Hassassian, speaking by phone from his London home, had said he was sure that most members of the Labor Party would vote for the motion, because their leader, Ed Miliband, “had on three recent occasions spoken in favor of recognizing Palestine.” Labor’s official position was posted by shadow Foreign Secretary Alexander Douglas on the party’s website.

Palestinians were also encouraged by a column in the British press by Vincent Fean, a former UK consul general who served in Jerusalem between 2010 and 2014, and by a statement issued by Catholic and Anglican churches in support of a vote for Palestine. As many as 350 Israelis, including former ministers, generals and members of the Knesset, publicly called for UK recognition of Palestine. Scottish External Affairs Minister Humza Yousaf also announced support for the vote.

Nontheless, Hassassian had said he would be happy if only 200 MPs showed up and was excited simply to have the issue publicly debated. In the end, support for Israel crumbled, with many MPs speaking passionately for Palestine.

The debate itself covered a number of issues. Several MPs referred to the Balfour Declaration, asserting that it was time to implement the second half of it. The 1917 letter sent by British Foreign Minister Alfred Balfour to Lord Rothschild supporting “a homeland for Jews in Palestine” had also stated that “nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.”

The Israeli war on Gaza and Israeli settlement policies were referenced more than any other subjects. Speakers read letters from their constituents, some of whom had been to the West Bank and recalled their encounters at Israeli checkpoints and the various manifestations of the occupation. MPs also mentioned the need to support the moderate Palestinian leadership of President Mahmoud Abbas versus Hamas.

In the interview with Al-Monitor, Hassassian referred to repeated speeches he had made in which he described the birth of radical Islam as the result of the failure to resolve the Palestinian conflict, which he called the “crux of the conflict in the Middle East.” He also said that a favorable vote would send a message to France and Germany and have a “domino effect” on countries reluctant to recognize Palestine.

Following on the decision by Sweden to recognize the state of Palestine, the vote in Parliament, even if only symbolic, clearly reflects the will of the British people, regardless of the position of Prime Minister David Cameron’s government. The argument has been effectively demolished that the world must wait until Israelis and Palestinians reach a mutually agreed solution as a prerequisite for countries to recognize Palestine.

The message from Westminster to Brussels, Washington and Israel is that the issue is no longer if, but when, a Palestinian state will be realized. Summing up the current situation, Hassassian compared the failure to resolve the conflict to a large tanker constantly ramming an iceberg: “Eventually the iceberg will give.”

The vote in the British Parliament has given Palestinian statehood a strong push. The iceberg that is Israel and its US and assorted European allies will continue to resist the Palestinians’ desire for self-determination and the will of the international community to support them, but such resistance cannot hold out forever. For better or for worse, the British vote has placed the Palestinians one step closer to statehood.



A Symbolic Vote in Britain Recognizes a Palestinian State

By Stephen Castle and Jodi Rudoren, NY Times
October 13, 2014

LONDON — Against a backdrop of growing impatience across Europe with Israeli policy, Britain’s Parliament overwhelmingly passed a nonbinding resolution Monday night to give diplomatic recognition to a Palestinian state. The vote was a symbolic but potent indication of how public opinion has shifted since the breakdown of American-sponsored peace negotiations and the conflict in Gaza this summer.

Though the outcome of the 274-to-12 parliamentary vote was not binding on the British government, the debate was the latest evidence of how support for Israeli policies, even among staunch allies of Israel, is giving way to more calibrated positions and in some cases frustrated expressions of opposition to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s stance toward the Palestinians.

Opening the debate, Grahame Morris, the Labour Party lawmaker who promoted it, said Britain had a “historic opportunity” to take “this small but symbolically important step” of recognition.

“To make our recognition of Palestine dependent on Israel’s agreement would be to grant Israel a veto over Palestinian self-determination,” said Mr. Morris, who leads a group called Labour Friends of Palestine.

Richard Ottaway, a Conservative lawmaker and chairman of the House of Commons foreign affairs committee, said that he had “stood by Israel through thick and thin, through the good years and the bad,” but now realized “in truth, looking back over the past 20 years, that Israel has been slowly drifting away from world public opinion.”

“Under normal circumstances,” he said, “I would oppose the motion tonight; but such is my anger over Israel’s behavior in recent months that I will not oppose the motion. I have to say to the government of Israel that if they are losing people like me, they will be losing a lot of people.”

The breakdown of negotiations over a two-state solution, continued Israeli settlement building and the bloody conflict in Gaza all appear to have jolted Europe’s politicians, including Sweden’s new prime minister, Stefan Lofven, who this month pledged to recognize Palestine, the first time a major Western European nation had done so.

The conflict in Gaza also gave new impetus to efforts to pressure Israel through a campaign to boycott some goods made in West Bank settlements. And it helped fuel a surge in anti-Semitic episodes across Europe this year amid concerns that opposition to Israeli policies was allowing anti-Jewish bias to take root in the European mainstream.

Paul Hirschson, a spokesman for Israel’s Foreign Ministry, said that moves like the British resolution and Sweden’s recent statement “make conflict resolution much more difficult” by sending Palestinians the message that “they can achieve things” outside negotiations. Israel, the United States and most of Europe have long insisted that the only path to Palestinian statehood is through bilateral negotiations.

Mr. Hirschson said “there’s no legal weight behind” the British resolution and that it “contravenes the policy of all three” British political parties, including Labour, but acknowledged that it “sours” relations with a longtime and staunch ally.

“I don’t know how much of it is about Britain-Israel relations, or various different Israel-Europe relations, and how much of it is about Britain-Arab relations,” Mr. Hirschson said in a telephone interview. “Europe is in a way playing to the Arab world. Europe is in terrible economic condition, and they have to trade with the Arab world.”

Prime Minister David Cameron’s government opposes recognizing a Palestinian state at this point, and the parliamentary debate and vote are not likely to change British policy. But the issue is being debated in a growing number of capitals.

Romain Nadal, the French Foreign Ministry spokesman, said Monday that France “will have to recognize Palestine,” but he did not specify when the official recognition would take place.

The last conflict in Gaza “has been a triggering factor,” Mr. Nadal said. “It made us realize that we had to change methods.”

The European Union recently condemned Israel’s decision to expand settlements and on Sunday the bloc’s foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton, pledged 450 million euros, or about $568 million, for the reconstruction of Gaza. The European Union has spent more than €1.3 billion in the Gaza Strip in the last decade.

Britain’s parliamentary debate comes amid pressure for a boycott of goods from Israeli companies operating in the occupied West Bank. One Labour Party lawmaker, Shabana Mahmood, recently joined protesters in lying down outside a supermarket in Birmingham selling such goods, forcing it to close temporarily.

“The problem is that we are drastically losing public opinion,” Avi Primor, the director of European studies at Tel Aviv University and a former Israeli ambassador to the European Union, told Israel Radio on Monday. “This has been going on for many years, and became particularly serious after the talks failed between us and the Palestinians after nine months of negotiations under Kerry, and even more so after Operation Protective Edge.”

That referred to failed efforts by Secretary of State John Kerry to revive the peace process and Israel’s military operations in Gaza in the summer.

If Sweden does recognize Palestine — and there is no timetable as yet — it will become the first big nation in the European Union to do so, although some East European countries did so during the Cold War, before they joined the union.

In 2011 a motion calling for recognition of Palestine won the support of Spanish lawmakers, though the government has not followed through on that vote.

In that same year the “State of Palestine” applied to become a member of the United Nations and, although that effort failed, in 2012 it successfully obtained the lesser status of nonmember observer state. The Palestinians leveraged their new status in April to join 15 international treaties and conventions, which helped bring about the breakdown of the latest round of peace talks.

Separately, 134 of 193 United Nations member states have extended diplomatic recognition to the State of Palestine.

Since the Aug. 26 cease-fire that halted the summer’s hostilities, the Palestinians have stepped up these diplomatic efforts, pursuing a United Nations Security Council resolution demanding a deadline for Israel’s occupation; threatening with renewed intensity to prosecute Israel in the International Criminal Court; and lobbying for recognition in European capitals.

In Britain, where elections loom next year, Israel’s policies have become politically sensitive. In 2011, Britain’s foreign secretary, William Hague, laid down official policy saying that Britain reserved the right “to recognize a Palestinian state at a moment of our choosing and when it can best help bring about peace.”

But over the summer, the leader of Britain’s opposition Labour Party, Ed Miliband, said that Mr. Cameron was “wrong not to have opposed Israel’s incursion into Gaza” and rebuked him for his “silence on the killing of innocent Palestinian civilians caused by Israel’s military action.”

And while pro-Palestinian sentiment is clearest within the Labour Party, frustration with Israeli policy has surfaced in all three main political parties.

In August, Sayeeda Warsi, a Conservative Party politician, quit her post as a Foreign Office minister over the issue, describing government policy on Gaza as “morally indefensible.”

Martin Linton, a former Labour Party lawmaker who is editor of Palestinian Briefing, an online publication, said that the view in Parliament had shifted significantly in favor of recognition in recent years and was catching up with public opinion.

Stephen Castle reported from London, and Jodi Rudoren from Jerusalem. Maïa de la Baume contributed reporting from Paris.

Links

Amongst the other reports/comments:
Guardian: Israel condemns British MPs’ vote to recognise Palestinian state
Israel HaYom: Israel fears European trend after British recognition of ‘Palestine’
Arutz Sheva: British Parliament Votes to Recognize ‘Palestine’
Le Monde: Royaume-Uni : vote symbolique pour la reconnaissance de la Palestine
Palestine recognition: How Conservative MPs voted, Conservative Home

© Copyright JFJFP 2024