Seventeen Words: Britain’s Recognition of Palestine and the Reckoning That Must Follow

Britain’s long-overdue recognition of the State of Palestine is a moment heavy with the ghosts of history (The Guardian, 2025). Announced by Prime Minister Keir Starmer on September 21, 2025, this decision has been presented as a step towards a two-state solution, a move to “keep alive the possibility of peace” (GOV.UK, 2025). But let us be clear: this is not a benevolent gesture. It is a minimal, shamefully late, and deeply compromised act of historical reckoning. For a nation that bears such a heavy responsibility for the dispossession and suffering of the Palestinian people, recognition cannot be a final act of redemption. It must be the beginning of a painful process of truth-telling, accountability, and, most urgently, action to confront the genocide happening in Gaza.

The timing of this recognition is telling. It comes not from a position of moral leadership, but from one of desperate damage control. As international pressure mounts and the horror in Gaza becomes impossible to ignore, Britain finds itself scrambling to maintain some semblance of credibility on the world stage. Yet even this belated gesture is undermined by the fundamental contradiction at its heart: how can you recognise a state while continuing to arm the power that is systematically destroying it? To celebrate this symbolic act while continuing to arm the perpetrators is a grotesque hypocrisy that exposes the rotten core of Britain’s foreign policy.

Britain’s Historic Debt

To understand the present, we must confront the past. Britain’s debt to the Palestinian people is a concrete historical reality that stretches back over a century. It begins with seventeen words. Seventeen words that would condemn the Middle East to over a century of violence and dispossession. Seventeen words that would set off the trail to the Nakba, generation after generation of dispossessed Palestinians, to refugees holding keys in camps far away, to this genocide.

On November 2, 1917, Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour penned a letter containing seventeen words that would reshape the Middle East: “His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.” The full declaration read:

Notice what is promised and what is not. A “national home” for Jewish people, but only “civil and religious rights” for the Palestinian Arab majority who comprised nine-tenths of the population. Palestinians were not even named as such: they were reduced to “existing non-Jewish communities,” their national identity erased with colonial precision (Al Jazeera, 2018).

But let us be clear about what the Balfour Declaration truly was: not an act of benevolence towards Jewish people, but a cynical wartime calculation. Britain was desperate to bring America into the Great War, and believed that promising Palestine to the Zionist movement would secure American Jewish support for US entry into the conflict. As British Colonial Secretary Lord Cavendish wrote in a 1923 memorandum, the Declaration’s object was “to enlist the sympathies on the Allied side of influential Jews and Jewish organizations all over the world” and “did in fact have considerable effect in advancing the date at which the United States government intervened in the war” (Palestine Chronicle, 2017). Seventeen words, written not for the Jews but to hopefully drag America into the trenches of Europe. Palestinian land was traded away as a bargaining chip in Britain’s imperial chess game, a people’s future sacrificed for military advantage.

The very phrasing betrays the imperial arrogance: Britain was promising away a land it did not own to serve interests that had nothing to do with the people who actually lived there.

The subsequent British Mandate for Palestine (1920–1948) was not a neutral administration, despite the fiction of international oversight through the League of Nations. It was a colonial project that actively facilitated the Zionist movement’s goal of establishing a Jewish state, while brutally suppressing Palestinian resistance. British policy during the Mandate period was characterised by systematic discrimination in favour of Jewish immigration and settlement, the creation of separate and unequal institutions, and the violent suppression of Palestinian political expression.

Under British rule, massive demographic changes were engineered through policy decisions that favoured Jewish immigration while restricting Palestinian political development (Al Jazeera, 2018). The British facilitated massive land transfers, often through dubious legal mechanisms that dispossessed Palestinian farmers. They armed and trained Jewish militias while criminalising Palestinian political organisation. When Palestinians rose up in the Great Revolt of 1936-1939, the British response was savage: collective punishment, house demolitions, mass detention, and the execution of Palestinian leaders.

The parallels with contemporary Israeli tactics are not coincidental. The methods of control, surveillance, and punishment that Israel employs today were pioneered by the British during the Mandate period. The architecture of oppression was built by British hands, and it has been refined and expanded ever since.

When Britain abandoned its mandate in 1948, it left behind a legacy of violence, displacement, and statelessness that continues to shape the Palestinian experience. The 1948 Nakba, in which over 750,000 Palestinians were expelled from their homes and hundreds of villages were destroyed, was not an unfortunate byproduct of war; it was the logical conclusion of three decades of British policy designed to make Palestine safe for Zionist colonisation (UN, 2021).

Recognition of Palestine now, over a century after those seventeen words condemned a people to dispossession and 77 years after the Nakba, is not a gift. It is a partial, and pitifully small, repayment of a historical debt that can never be fully settled. It is an admission, however tacit, of Britain’s role in creating the very problem it now claims to be solving.

The Symbolism of Recognition

Symbolism matters in international relations, but it can also be weaponised to obscure reality. The recognition of Palestine by the United Kingdom carries undeniable weight; a permanent member of the UN Security Council finally acknowledging what 140 other nations have long accepted. For the country that authored those seventeen words in 1917, this represents a moment of profound historical irony. The nation that promised away Palestinian land is now, over a century later, grudgingly admitting that Palestinians might actually deserve a state.

But let us examine what Britain is actually recognising. It is not the Palestine that existed before 1917. It is not the Palestine that could have existed without the Balfour Declaration’s colonial intervention. It is the truncated, besieged, and systematically diminished Palestine that remains after more than a century of dispossession, a Palestine that exists more in aspiration than in reality.

The recognition comes wrapped in the familiar language of Western paternalism. Starmer’s statement emphasises “reform of the Palestinian Authority” and a path “from a ceasefire in Gaza to negotiations on a Two State Solution” (GOV.UK, 2025). Notice the implicit hierarchy: Palestinian statehood remains conditional on Palestinian behaviour, as if the occupied must prove their worthiness to the occupier. The colonised must demonstrate their readiness for freedom to the coloniser. It is the same logic that has justified decades of delay and prevarication.

Most tellingly, the recognition is explicitly tied to the two-state solution, a framework that has become the graveyard of Palestinian aspirations. After decades of Israeli settlement expansion, the West Bank resembles nothing so much as the bantustans of apartheid South Africa. The two-state solution has been systematically murdered by Israeli policy, yet Britain clings to its corpse as if it might somehow be resurrected through diplomatic incantation.

This is recognition as alibi. It allows Britain to claim moral progress while changing nothing fundamental about its relationship with either Palestine or Israel. It provides the appearance of justice while preserving the structures of injustice. It is, in short, a masterpiece of imperial sleight of hand, the same kind of cynical calculation that produced those seventeen words in 1917.

Recognition Is Not an End Point

While Britain congratulates itself on this symbolic gesture, Palestinian children are being murdered with British-made weapons. While Starmer speaks of “keeping alive the possibility of peace,” British components are being used to destroy hospitals, schools, and entire neighbourhoods in Gaza. This is the obscene reality that renders Britain’s recognition not just hollow but actively insulting; a diplomatic pat on the head delivered while the knife twists deeper.

The recognition of Palestine cannot be an end in itself. It cannot be a final chapter that allows Britain to wash its hands of its historical and ongoing responsibilities. To treat it as such would be a profound betrayal of the Palestinian people and a cynical manipulation of international law. Recognition must be the beginning of a new, active, and coherent policy that confronts the reality of the present moment.

And what is that reality? It is genocide. For almost two years, since the horrific attacks of October 7, 2023, the world has watched as Israel has systematically dismantled Gaza, killing tens of thousands of people, displacing millions, and creating a man-made famine. This is not a war; it is a campaign of extermination. And the British government, while mouthing platitudes about a two-state solution, has been actively complicit.

The scale of destruction in Gaza is unprecedented. According to the latest figures, over 65,000 Palestinians have been killed, with thousands more buried under rubble (Anadolu Agency, 2025). The healthcare system has been destroyed, schools and universities reduced to rubble, and the entire population displaced multiple times in what can only be described as ethnic cleansing.

But the horror goes beyond the immediate violence. Israel has imposed a total siege on Gaza, cutting off food, water, fuel, and medical supplies. This is a deliberate strategy of starvation designed to make life impossible for the Palestinian population. As Israeli officials have made clear in their public statements, the goal is not military victory but the complete destruction of Palestinian society in Gaza.

In this context, Britain’s recognition of Palestine rings hollow. How can you recognise a state while arming the power that is actively committing genocide against its people? How can you speak of a two-state solution while providing the weapons that are being used to make that solution impossible?

The Present Reality: Genocide Cannot Be Ignored

On September 16, 2025, the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory delivered its devastating verdict: Israel has committed genocide in the Gaza Strip (OHCHR, 2025). The Commission found that four of the five genocidal acts defined by the 1948 Genocide Convention have been carried out against Palestinians in Gaza: killing, causing serious bodily or mental harm, deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about destruction, and imposing measures intended to prevent births.

Crucially, the Commission also found that these acts were committed with the specific intent to destroy Palestinians in Gaza as a group. This intent was evidenced not only by the pattern of Israeli actions but also by explicit statements from Israeli political and military leaders. The Commission applied the “only reasonable inference” standard established by the International Court of Justice, concluding that genocidal intent was the only plausible explanation for Israel’s conduct.

This is not a controversial opinion or a partisan interpretation; it is the finding of a UN-mandated body, based on overwhelming evidence and rigorous legal analysis. The Commission specifically found that Israeli President Isaac Herzog, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant have incited the commission of genocide, and that Israeli authorities have failed to take action to punish this incitement (OHCHR, 2025).

The Commission’s findings are consistent with those of other authoritative bodies. Amnesty International has concluded that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza (Amnesty International, 2024). The International Court of Justice has issued provisional measures ordering Israel to prevent genocidal acts, measures that Israel has flagrantly ignored (ICJ, 2024). The International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for Israeli leaders Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity (ICC, 2024).

In the face of this overwhelming evidence, the international community’s response has been shamefully inadequate. While some countries have imposed limited sanctions or suspended arms sales, the flow of weapons to Israel continues largely unabated. The United States, Israel’s primary patron, has actually increased military aid during the genocide, providing the bombs and bullets that are being used to kill Palestinian children.

Britain’s role in this genocide is particularly shameful given its historical responsibility for the Palestinian predicament. Since 2015, the UK has approved over £500 million in military exports to Israel (Oxfam, 2025). Even after a partial suspension of arms export licenses in September 2024, the flow of weapons has continued through loopholes and exemptions, most notably components for the F-35 fighter jets that are being used to bomb Gaza (Campaign Against Arms Trade, 2025).

This is both a moral and legal failure. Under the Genocide Convention, all states have an obligation to prevent and punish genocide. By continuing to arm Israel, the UK is not only failing to meet this obligation; it is actively complicit in the crime of crimes. Under international law, states that aid and abet genocide can be held responsible for the crime itself.

Britain’s Arms Trade: The Machinery of Genocide

The scale and nature of Britain’s military relationship with Israel reveals the depth of British complicity in Palestinian suffering. This relationship likely understates its true scale, as many transactions are conducted through third parties or under general licenses not subject to reporting requirements.

The most significant element of this trade is the F-35 Lightning II fighter jet programme. Britain is a key partner in the development and production of the F-35, contributing critical components including electronic warfare systems, fuel systems, and life support equipment (Campaign Against Arms Trade, 2025). Without British components, the F-35 cannot function effectively.

Israel operates a fleet of F-35I “Adir” aircraft, which have been extensively used in the bombardment of Gaza. These aircraft are capable of carrying a wide range of munitions, from precision-guided bombs to bunker-busting weapons designed to destroy underground targets. The systematic use of these aircraft in Gaza has made them a central tool in what the UN Commission has determined to be genocide.

The British government’s defence of continued F-35 exports reveals the cynical nature of its arms control policy. When challenged in Parliament about these exports, ministers have argued that the components are not sold directly to Israel but through a “global spares pool” managed by the United States (House of Commons Library, 2025). This is a distinction without a difference; British components are still ending up in Israeli aircraft that are being used to commit genocide.

The government has also argued that the F-35 programme is exempt from arms export controls because it predates the current conflict. This argument is legally and morally bankrupt. The Genocide Convention does not contain a grandfather clause that exempts pre-existing arms deals from the obligation to prevent genocide. If anything, the long-standing nature of the F-35 programme makes British complicity more, not less, culpable.

Beyond the F-35, Britain has continued to export a wide range of military equipment to Israel even after the partial suspension of licenses in September 2024. According to data released by the government, multiple shipments of military items were sent from the UK to Israel between October 2023 and May 2025, including components for military vehicles, surveillance equipment, and small arms (The Guardian, 2025). This continued trade makes a mockery of the government’s claims to be taking a principled stance on arms exports.

Conclusion

Britain’s recognition of Palestine is a beginning, not an end. It is a single step on a long and arduous journey towards justice. But that journey cannot even begin until Britain confronts the hypocrisy at the heart of its policy. To recognise a state while arming its destroyer is a moral and political absurdity that undermines the very concept of international law.

Let us be honest: Britain has never behaved well towards Palestine or Palestinians. From those seventeen words in 1917 to the arms shipments of 2025, the record is one of consistent betrayal and complicity. But that does not mean it cannot change course. History is not destiny, and nations, like individuals, retain the capacity for moral transformation even after decades of wrongdoing.

The best time for Britain to choose the right side of history was yesterday. The second-best time is right now. This moment of recognition, however flawed and belated, represents a fork in the road. Britain can continue down the familiar path of complicity and hypocrisy, providing symbolic gestures while enabling genocide. Or it can choose the harder but ultimately more honourable path of genuine accountability, confronting its historical responsibilities and working to build a just and lasting peace.

The time for symbolic gestures is over. The time for action is now. The ghosts of history are watching, and they demand more than empty words. They demand justice, accountability, and an end to the cycle of violence and dispossession that began with seventeen words written in 1917 and has shaped the Palestinian experience for over a century.

This is Britain’s moment of choice. It can remain trapped by the logic of empire, forever defending the indefensible. Or it can break free from its colonial past and become, for the first time in its relationship with Palestine, a force for justice rather than oppression.

The people of Palestine have waited long enough. They have endured dispossession, occupation, and now genocide with a patience that shames their oppressors. They deserve more than recognition; they deserve justice. And justice demands not just words but action, not just symbols but substance, not just recognition but reparation. The question is not whether Britain is capable of providing it - the capacity for moral courage exists in every nation. The question is whether Britain has the will to finally, after more than a century of failure, choose to do what is right.

If you value this kind of writing, please consider subscribing to Plague Island.

We don’t hide our work behind a paywall, because we want it to be read. But if you can support it, we’ll use that support to keep writing more, and writing better.

Paid subscribers receive early access, behind-the-scenes newsletters, and the chance to shape future essays.

We write with rigour, we cite everything, and we answer only to our readers.

Or support us with a one-off tip → Buy Me a Coffee

References

Al Jazeera (2018) ‘More than a century on: The Balfour Declaration explained’, Al Jazeera, 2 November. Available at: https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2018/11/2/more-than-a-century-on-the-balfour-declaration-explained [Accessed: 23 September 2025].

Al Jazeera (2025) ‘Which are the 150+ countries that have recognised Palestine as of 2025’, Al Jazeera, 23 September. Available at: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/9/23/which-are-the-150-countries-that-have-recognised-palestine-as-of-2025 [Accessed: 23 September 2025].

Amnesty International (2024) ‘Amnesty concludes Israel is committing genocide in Gaza’, Amnesty International, December. Available at: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/12/amnesty-international-concludes-israel-is-committing-genocide-against-palestinians-in-gaza/ [Accessed: 23 September 2025].

Anadolu Agency (2025) ‘Gaza death toll climbs to over 65,300 Palestinians amid Israel’s genocidal war’, Anadolu Agency, 22 September. Available at: https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/gaza-death-toll-climbs-to-over-65-300-palestinians-amid-israel-s-genocidal-war/3694730 [Accessed: 23 September 2025].

Campaign Against Arms Trade (2025) ‘How the UK arms and supports Israel’s genocide in Gaza’, Campaign Against Arms Trade. Available at: https://caat.org.uk/publications/how-the-uk-arms-and-supports-israels-genocide-in-gaza/[Accessed: 23 September 2025].

GOV.UK (2025) ‘PM statement on the recognition of Palestine: 21 September 2025’, GOV.UK, 21 September. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-statement-on-the-recognition-of-palestine-21-september-2025[Accessed: 23 September 2025].

House of Commons Library (2025) ‘UK arms exports to Israel’, House of Commons Library. Available at: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9964/ [Accessed: 23 September 2025].

ICC (2024) ‘Situation in the State of Palestine: ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I rejects the State of Israel’s challenges’, International Criminal Court, 21 November. Available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/situation-state-palestine-icc-pre-trial-chamber-i-rejects-state-israels-challenges [Accessed: 23 September 2025].

ICJ (2024) ‘Order of 26 January 2024’, International Court of Justice, 26 January. Available at: https://www.icj-cij.org/node/203447 [Accessed: 23 September 2025].

OHCHR (2025) ‘Israel has committed genocide in the Gaza Strip, UN Commission finds’, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, 16 September. Available at: https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/09/israel-has-committed-genocide-gaza-strip-un-commission-finds [Accessed: 23 September 2025].

Oxfam (2025) ‘Does the UK sell arms to Israel?’, Oxfam. Available at: https://www.oxfam.org.uk/get-involved/campaign-with-oxfam/gaza-israel-crisis-sign-petition-call-for-ceasefire-now/does-the-uk-sell-arms-to-israel/ [Accessed: 23 September 2025].

The Guardian (2025) ‘UK recognises state of Palestine to ‘keep alive’ two-state solution’, The Guardian, 21 September. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/sep/21/uk-recognises-palestine-as-an-independent-state[Accessed: 23 September 2025].

The Guardian (2025) ‘UK sent Israel thousands of military items despite export ban, study finds’, The Guardian, 7 May. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/may/07/uk-sent-israel-thousands-of-military-items-despite-export-ban-study-finds [Accessed: 23 September 2025].

UN (2021) ‘Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem: Part I (1917-1947)’, United Nations. Available at: https://www.un.org/unispal/history2/origins-and-evolution-of-the-palestine-problem/part-i-1917-1947/ [Accessed: 23 September 2025].

UN (2024) ‘The Palestine Question: A Brief History’, United Nations. Available at: https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-206581/ [Accessed: 23 September 2025].

Palestine Chronicle (2017) ‘Who Wrote the Balfour Declaration and Why: The World War I Connection’, Palestine Chronicle, 26 October. Available at: https://www.palestinechronicle.com/who-wrote-the-balfour-declaration-and-why-the-world-war-i-connection/ [Accessed: 25 September 2025].