Under the guise of peace, Starmer’s two-state proposal offers Palestinians not liberation but surrender. The New York Conference demands disarmament, submission to the PA, and the erasure of resistance. This is not progress: it is the bloody mask of continued Zionist domination.
On 28 July, the UN held a conference in New York to discuss a so-called “Peaceful Settlement of the Question of Palestine and the Two-State Solution”. The meeting was convened by France and Saudi Arabia, and joined by seventeen countries, including the UK, the entire European Union, and the twenty-two member Arab League.
The conference poured their weight into a 7-page document detailing the, ostensibly, genocidal preconditions for the recognition of a Palestinian State. Alongside other prime ministers, Starmer raised the prospect of Britain endorsing a two-state solution, a proposal that wears the mask of progressiveness but in fact enshrines full acceptance of Zionist demands.
In his speech, Keir Starmer painted October 7 as ‘the worst massacre in Israel’s history’, citing the Palestinians’ suffering as a result of ‘a catastrophic failure of aid’, calling for the recognition of a Palestinian state as a ‘contribution to a peace process, at the moment of maximum impact, for the two-state solution’.
Starmer essentially threatened to ‘recognise the State of Palestine […] unless the Israeli government takes substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza, end the ceasefire, and commit to long-term sustainable peace, reviving the prospect of a two-state solution’.
His speech highlights the nature of the conference, in that it is fundamentally not about emboldening the right of Palestine to determine itself, that is, to be free of oppression, occupation and to acquire self-governence. In fact, Starmer is placing the burden of ending the genocide on the resistance, whilst giving the green light for Israel to continue its genocidal aims. The so-called two-state solution here does not represent a genuine path to liberation, but a trap designed to neutralise resistance and enshrine apartheid under the guise of compromise.
The seven-page document outlines that for the recognition of an ‘independent’ Palestinian state is predicated on the resistance demobilising, disarming, and handing over leadership to the collaborationist Palestinian Authority: “In the context of ending the war in Gaza, Hamas must end its rule in Gaza and hand over its weapons to the Palestinian Authority, with international engagement and support, in line with the objective of a sovereign and independent Palestinian State”.
Entirely at odds with the objective of an independent Palestinian state, the conditions here are fully in line with Israel’s war goals, stating the so-called “war” will continue until Hamas has handed its weapons over to the PA and demobilised. This is not a proposal for peace but a demand for surrender, forcing Palestinians to renounce the only means by which they have been able to resist Zionist apartheid and genocide.
Further, the document states that UNRWA (the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East) should withdraw from its role of providing education, healthcare and welfare to millions of Palestinian refugees, once a political solution is declared.
For the past two years, the UN has treated Israel’s goal of dismantling UNRWA as a red-line, insisting that states should continue to support it as essential to the survival of Palestinian refugees. Yet, the document proposed that UNRWA should ‘hand over’ its duties to, what is being euphemistically talked around, the collaborationist PA.
Despite mentioning Resolution 194 – the affirmation of the right of refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors to do so, and mandating compensation for those who choose not to return or for property loss – there is no mention of the right of return, only compensation.
Under the auspices of a ‘peace process’, we once again see the dirty, underhanded, and brutal nature of capitalist and Zionist ‘progress’. Using Palestinian statehood as a bargaining chip, the so-called ‘New York Conference’ has done nothing more than provide a carte blanche for Israel to achieve its military goals, painting the resistance as the aggressor, calling for its disarmament and deference of leadership, virtually, to the Israeli state or its PA lackeys.
The one-state solution, ie freeing Palestine from Zionist domination, is nowhere on the table. But neither a real two-state solution is. What is offered to Palestinians is to continue their life under Israeli apartheid. And it is this bloody and undignified existence that is given the name of independent statehood.
What the conference has most shown is that the so-called international community, no matter how destructive and bloody the Israeli state acts, will never hold Zionism accountable for this genocide. Even more, capitalist states will reward its genocide while blaming the Palestinians for their own plight.
This is what Starmer puts forward as a progressive position on Palestine. It is nothing short of enshrining and uplifting the official, racist ideology of Zionism, with some nebulous promise of a Palestinian bantustan in the future. The only way towards a truly independent Palestinian State must be through the defeat of the terror that is the Israeli state.