Thirty years after the ceremony of signing Oslo Accords, that saw Yitzhak Rabin, Yasser Arafat, and Bill Clinton shake hands in the Rose Garden, we are no closer to a renewed peace process that puts negotiation first and recognition second. Oslo established a process for peace that would prioritise negotiation first before the recognition of a Palestinian state, alongside a recognised Israeli state, according to the borders of 1967. The assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, at a time of outpost construction, and the ascension onto Haram al-Sharif/The Temple Mountby Ariel Sharon led to the unravelling of Oslo. Since then, domestic politics on either side of the Green Line have been defined by polarisation, co-option, and fragmentation. This new norm has demanded a new approach to find a ‘middle-ground’ amidst the squeezing out of moderate Israeli and Palestinian opinion. Recognition of two-states may have to come first before any official peace process coming ‘the day after.’ 

What will be the Labour Party’s approach to Israel/Palestine?

The upcoming British elections scheduled for the 4th of July, do matter of course, because of Britain’s role in shaping European security, together with Washington, on NATO: and more closely, Ukraine. Polls indicate that Sir Keir Starmer’s Labour Party are expected to win a ‘supermajority,’ which begs the question: will Labour choose to re-calibrate its approach to ‘the recognition of a Palestinian state’ in line with its European partners namely Norway, Spain, Ireland, and Slovenia? Will Labour deal with the war in Gaza, the International Court of Justice case by South Africa, and the charges of ‘war crimes’ by the International Criminal Court differently? How does Labour Party policy differ from the policy of the Conservative government?

Before these questions can be answered, why now? The horrendous massacre committed by Hamas on the 7th of October and the massacres committed by the Israeli government have piled pressure on the international community to re-launch a peace process. Since Oslo, de facto annexation in the West Bank, has brought about a ‘one state reality.’ Recognition does not amount to a legal solution to the ‘Bantustanisation’ in the West Bank, but a policy to secure the fundamental right for statehood of a ‘nation’ historicised by the ‘Philistines’ from the Late Bronze Age. Other than historical necessity, this policy serves to reaffirm Europe’s ‘credibility’ to the maintenance of international ‘law and order’ that has had eyes rolling across the Global South. 

Norway, Spain, and Ireland show the way towards recognition first

Norway, Spain, and Ireland are no strangers to post-colonial violence at times of rupture. Norway, of course, facilitatedthe Oslo peace process in the early 1990s whilst Irish nationalism was on full display against the British during the ‘Troubles.’ Spain, on the other hand, maintains extensive ties with former colonies south of the Gibraltar Strait in Morocco, whilst maintaining strong socio-linguistic ties with states in Latin America. 

Slovenia acted after the trilateral move of Oslo, Madrid, and Dublin; however, it is not alone in what is building momentum towards unilateral recognition. Malta, Belgium, and Portugal have indicated their willingness to recognise Palestinian statehood before any formal peace process. Former colonial experiences, in countries formerly colonised, has taught ex-colonial states the lessons of supporting ‘occupation.’ ‘European values’ of ‘upholding international law’ have been called into question since South Africa’s case at the International Court of Justice followed by Prosecutor Karim Khan’s case of ‘war crimes’ against Hamas officials, Prime Minister Netanyahu, and Defence Minister Yoav Gallant at the International Criminal Court.

However, all roads to peace lead to the White House. Momentum on recognition is building, although any meaningful solution will need Washington’s backing as Israel’s main patron and protector including at the UN Security Council. The United Kingdom’s commitment to recognition will certainly be in lockstep with Washington which will be closely followed by those European states – the Netherlands, Finland, Germany, France whose industrial-defence complex rely on Anglo-American leadership in intelligence sharing and defence via NATO. 

The Labour Party’s respect for upholding international law

British foreign policy on recognition is unlikely to change at Downing Street in the event of Labour’s win. Starmer’s front bench are from the ‘Right’ of the Labour Party, in a bid to tie Labour to the centrist politics of ‘that win’s British political parties’ power in a two-party system. The only dividing line on ‘Gaza,’ will boil down to the extent a Labour Government will commit itself to the agenda of ‘upholding international law.’ The jurisdiction of the ICC’s actions will likely divide Labour policy from the current government’s rhetoric on the ICC case as “unhelpful.” 

Respect for international law has been heavily damaged since the UK decided to leave the European Union. However, Shadow Foreign Secretary David Lammy has committed the Labour Party to full compliance with the jurisdiction of the ICC. Unlike his American counterpart, Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, the legal ramifications of Israel’s operations in Gaza may be a clear dividing line between Washington and London should the Republicans win in November. The damage to Israel’s ‘PR’ has been enormous, even if Washington protects Tel-Aviv at the UNSC from any meaningful end to the war or occupation.  However, any future peace process will be grounded in the atrocities committed on both sides once the war in Gaza ends.

British foreign policy is unlikely to shift come July. Respect for international law is likely to return, however, and the ramifications of Israel’s operations in Gaza will mount pressure on any future Israeli government involved in any meaningful peace process. Pressure on Israel, from the international community will be heightened. However, the ‘destruction of Hamas’ infrastructure, to prevent it from any post-war effort, may be possible but not its ideology. Initial reports suggest that Qatar has come under increased pressure to expel Hamas, whilst Netanyahu has pinned his political survival on ‘winning the war in Gaza.’ 

The U.S. will remain a key to progress

Any peace process will depend upon the endorsement of the U.S. despite the decision(s) of a growing number of European states to recognise Palestine first and shape a peace process second. Ultimately the future of the American presidency, come November, will shape the path to peace and its implication for further recognition of Palestinian statehood within the Labour Party front bench.