Starmer rifiuta la chiamata per riconoscere immediatamente lo stato palestinese

>While Mr Starmer said he was “unequivocal” about wanting to see a Palestinian state, he insisted this needed to be part of a “wider plan which ultimately results in a two-state solution and lasting security for Palestinians and Israelis”.

Isn’t it strange that we can recognise the State of Israel but not the State of Palestine despite supporting a two-state solution? We even call the West Bank and Gaza “Occupied Palestinian Territory”, which state is being occupied?

You see, the issue was that MPs petitioned *Keir Starmer* about recognising Palestine. They should have realised they’d have been better off petitioning Morgan McSweeney and Peter Mandelson instead. They’re the ones who call the shots, not Keir.

Mark Ames made a good point the other day that ‘[all the worst people rushing at once to create an alibi, really bad sign of what’s around the corner](https://x.com/MarkAmesExiled/status/1948563043446657275)’. A lot of right-wing politicians and commentators, who have previously been happy to engage in apologetics for Israel, have very rapidly changed their stance and become a lot more critical. With mass starvation setting in they can see what is around the corner and want to get their defences ready for when they inevitably get brought before the courts for enabling genocide. That Streeting, Cooper and Lammy have pivoted to calling for a recognition of Palestine shows they know what’s going to happen. So Starmer *continuing* to reject this shows that he really is dogmatically committed to defending and apologising for the Israeli government, no matter what the cost.

Good. You can’t reward Hamas’ massacre. Otherwise what’s to stop the likes of the Kurds etc doing something similar? Sets a dangerous precedent. Recognition should come, but when hamas are removed