Andy Burnham apologises for Labour’s initial Gaza response and pledges stronger pressure

Will Burnham liberate Labour's Palestine policy from Starmer's dead hand ?  Submitted by Avi Shlaim on Mon, 07/20/2026 - 11:37 A substantive change would involve calling Israel’s actions a genocide, implementing trade sanctions, banning all arms sales to Israel and, last but not least, the repeal of the ban on Palestine Action Andy Burnham speaks after being confirmed as the Labour Party's new leader and the country's next prime minister, during 'Labour’s Special Conference' in central London on 17 July, 2026 (AFP) On Former British Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s poor performance in the domestic political arena has undoubtedly played a part in his downfall only two years after his landslide victory in the 2024 general election. But even his severest critics seem to agree that his performance on the world stage was of a much higher order.  Strong support for Ukraine in its war with Russia, a commitment to Nato, a reset of Britain’s relationship with the European Union, and refusal to be drawn into the American-Israeli war of aggression on Iran - though in reality, Britain is being dragged deeper into the conflict - are often quoted as examples of his successful handling of foreign policy. Most fail, however, to mention one foreign policy area in which Starmer’s performance has been anything but praiseworthy: Israel-Palestine, specifically Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza. Starmer’s support for Zionism long preceded his rise to power.  In a February 2020 interview with the Jewish News during the race to replace then Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn, who was known for his principled advocacy of Palestinian rights, Starmer declared "I support Zionism without qualification".  Starmer was previously a successful human rights lawyer who championed the rights of Iraqi civilians under British custody and advocated for greater protection for asylum seekers.  Yet, his support for Zionism, the official ideology of the State of Israel, has never been dependent on Israeli adherence to international law or respect for Palestinian human rights.   A  hypocritical leader As leader of the Labour Party and later prime minister, Starmer’s unconditional support for Israel and indifference to Palestinian rights persisted. The Labour Party’s manifesto for the general election stated clearly that the party would "work alongside international partners to recognise the state of Palestine alongside the state of Israel".  Starmer was a fabricator and a fraud. Good riddance Read More » It also described Palestinian statehood as the "inalienable right of the Palestinian people". Following Labour’s electoral victory and his rise to the premiership, Starmer stalled on fulfilling this pledge for as long as he possibly could.  The Hamas-led attack, in which 1,200 Israelis were killed and 251 others taken hostage, occurred when Starmer was leader of the opposition. This was roundly, and rightly, condemned as a terrorist attack because it was directed, at least in part, against civilians.  Israel’s response, however, involved multiple violations of international humanitarian law: the indiscriminate killing of civilians; the forcible displacement of civilians; the destruction of homes and civilian infrastructure; deliberate damage to the educational and healthcare systems; cultural genocide; and the use of starvation as a weapon of war.   Against a backdrop of growing international condemnation of Israel for the horror it was inflicting on the people of Gaza, Starmer stood out in reasserting his stance. He kept repeating, almost parrot-like, that Israel has the "right to defend itself".  In an interview on LBC, he argued that this included the right to withhold water, food, and fuel from the people of Gaza.  As a former human rights lawyer, he would have known that this was illegal under international law. Yet he took ten days to qualify his remarks, during which the damage had already been done. This statement infuriated many of the Labour Party’s Muslim and progressive voters who were astonished at the hypocrisy of their leader. As prime minister, Starmer continued to demonstrate his staunch support for Israel in the face of discontent from the progressive wing of his party. This support took the form of supplying arms, intelligence cooperation, and diplomatic protection.  In September 2024, the government announced the suspension of around 30 export licences for items used by the Israeli army in its war on Gaza, but this amounted to less than a tenth of the total of approximately 350 licences.  The government also permitted the use of its bases, in the UK and in Cyprus, by Israeli and American aircraft carrying supplies for the war in Gaza. Between December 2023 and July 2025, the Royal Air Force conducted at least 606 reconnaissance flights over Gaza.  The Ministry of Defence (MoD) maintained that these flights were solely to help locate Israeli hostages held by Hamas, yet the scale of the sorties made it obvious that the real purpose was to aid Israel’s military operations. Britain’s complicity Under Starmer, the UK continued to use its position as a permanent member of the UN Security Council to defeat resolutions that were not to Israel’s liking.  Like his Tory predecessors, Starmer tried to remain as close as possible to America’s blatantly pro-Israel position, not realising that the real "special relationship" was not between the US and the UK but between the US and Israel.  By arguing that Israel was not committing genocide, Starmer tried to wriggle out of the obligation to put pressure on his ally to end it America used its veto four times to block resolutions for a ceasefire in Gaza. Having previously abstained, Britain did not back a ceasefire until 21 November 2024, a year after the Israeli genocidal military offensive began.  All 14 other members of the Security Council also backed the ceasefire resolution, but it was defeated for the fourth time by the American veto.  It took Starmer far too long to be persuaded to vote for a ceasefire, drawing widespread criticism from within his own party for dilly-dallying and for his apparent indifference to the humanitarian catastrophe inflicted by Israel on Gaza. The extent of Britain’s active support for Israel’s brutal war is exposed in full and incontrovertible detail in a book by Peter Oborne, Complicit: Britain’s Role in the Destruction of Gaza.  Oborne shows that almost everything the British public was told about the conflict in Gaza was untrue. He also shows how the mainstream media assisted the government in deceiving the public.  Peaceful demonstrations in solidarity with the embattled Palestinians were smeared as antisemitic "hate marches".  Evidence collected by the Ministry of Defence about Israeli war crimes was withheld. Statistics about British arms supplies to Israel were manipulated to conceal their full extent and the close cooperation between the military establishments of the two countries.  Oborne’s data fully substantiates his charge of British complicity in the destruction of Gaza. Based on deep research and inside sources, this is a remarkable book about a remarkably sordid aspect of British foreign policy in the short-lived Starmer era. Israel’s initial war aim was the ethnic cleansing of the Gaza Strip, but when this encountered Egyptian resistance, Israel began to perpetrate a genocide. The charge of genocide is hotly denied by Israel and its friends.  How western media helped turn Israel's genocide into 'fake news' Read More » But the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague found on 26 January 2024 that there was a plausible risk of genocide in Gaza and ordered Israel to take a series of measures to stop it.  Israel, as is its wont, ignored the ruling. On 16 September 2025, a UN commission concluded that Israel was, in fact, guilty of genocide.  A resolution passed by the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) states that Israel's conduct meets the legal definition as laid out in the UN convention on genocide.  Under this convention, the UK has a legal duty to do all it can to prevent and to punish genocide, including a comprehensive ban on the sale of arms to the offending party.  By arguing that Israel was not committing genocide, Starmer tried to wriggle out of the obligation to put pressure on his ally to end it. He also equivocated about executing the arrest warrant that the International Criminal Court (ICC) had issued against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former defence minister for war crimes and crimes against humanity.  Pressure from below One of the consequences of the growing public revulsion at Israel’s war crimes, was pressure from below on Western governments to recognise Palestine’s right to statehood. A number of European governments did so, including Ireland, Spain, Norway, and Slovenia.  On 21 September 2025, after months of pressure, including from his own cabinet ministers, Starmer eventually agreed to recognise Palestine.  The British recognition of the Palestinian right to statehood in 2025 was thus too little, and 108 years too late In a letter to Mahmoud Abbas, the president of the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah, he announced the formal decision to recognise "the State of Palestine as a sovereign and independent state".  The terms in which this recognition was granted reeked of colonial double-standards and arrogance. "I am conscious of the historical role that the United Kingdom has played in the Middle East," wrote Starmer. "In 1917, Britain supported the principle of a national home for the Jewish people…. In making this decision today, I reaffirm the United Kingdom’s commitment to a Palestinian state for the Palestinian people, and our enduring support for a two-state solution in which Palestinians and Israelis live side by side in peace and security.”  The reference is, of course, to the notorious Balfour Declaration, often described as Britain’s "original sin" in the Middle East. This was a classic colonial document which completely ignored the rights and aspirations of the native population. In 1917, the Jews comprised 10 percent of the population of Palestine while the Arabs comprised 90 percent. Yet Britain chose to recognise the right of the minority to national self-determination and to deny it to the majority. To add insult to injury, the declaration referred to 90 percent of the population as "the non-Jewish communities in Palestine", as if only Jews counted.  The British recognition of the Palestinian right to statehood in 2025 was thus too little, and 108 years too late.  Britain should have recognised the Palestinian right to statehood in their patrimony back in 1917 when they constituted an absolute majority. Yet, the cornerstone of the British Mandate for Palestine was to deny democracy until the Jews became the majority.  This was only achieved during the 1948 war as a result of the ethnic cleansing of Palestine. 750,000 Arabs were made refugees, and the name Palestine was wiped off the map. This is what in Arabic is called the Nakba, meaning catastrophe. The Nakba is not a one-off event; it is an ongoing process that reached its most cruel climax in Gaza. Like his five Tory predecessors, Starmer stubbornly refused to admit any British responsibility for the Palestinian tragedy. He presents himself as a champion of international law and the rule-based international order, yet his claims to moral authority ring utterly hollow given his record on the Palestinian issue. One of his government’s most outrageous measures to suppress pro-Palestinian protest in this country was to redesignate "Palestine Action", a direct-action group, as a terrorist organisation.  The penalty for supporting a terrorist organisation is up to 14 years in prison.  The absurdity of this piece of legislation was made plain when 2,700 demonstrators, mostly old-age-pensioners, were arrested and charged for carrying placards that said:"I oppose genocide; I support Palestine Action".  Burnham shift: More tactical than moral Britain’s history in Palestine sits at the heart of a 400-page legal petition submitted by a group of elderly Palestinians, led by Munib al-Masri, a 92-year-old philanthropist from Nablus, under the banner "Britain Owes Palestine". Drafted by leading human rights lawyers and three academics (of whom I am one), it documents in minute detail Britain's unlawful conduct during the Mandate period.  True, a great deal has happened since then.  Here's what Burnham must do if he really wants to reset Labour's Palestine policy Read More » Yet, the petition argues that today’s devastation in Gaza and the Occupied West Bank is rooted in Britain’s multiple violations of international law in the period between 1917 and 1948. It demands an apology from the UK for its historical wrongs in Palestine.    Munib al-Masri, his grandson Munib who was shot and paralysed by an Israeli soldier, the lawyer Victor Kattan, and I submitted the hefty petition to 10 Downing Street on 10 September 2025.  A cross-party coalition of 45 MPs and peers urged Starmer to respond to the petition. Nine months on, the Government has said nothing. The response from Starmer’s 10 Downing Street was a stony silence. That silence is itself a form of complicity in British crimes against the Palestinian people from 1917 to the present.     On Monday, Andy Burnham has replaced Starmer as leader of the Labour Party and prime minister. He has apologised for the Labour government’s initial response to Israel’s military offensive in Gaza, arguing that it should have called for a ceasefire earlier and put more pressure on Israel.  The Labour Party "didn’t get it right" and needs to do better under his leadership, he said. This admission signalled a potentially significant shift in the UK’s approach to the Middle East. Burnham was in effect saying that he would listen more closely to the grassroots than Starmer did and that his support for Israel would not be unconditional.  Burnham’s motive for the slight policy shift is probably more tactical and electoral than moral. He recognises the deep anguish on the left of the Labour Party over the destruction of the Gaza Strip. He knows, from opinion polls, that two-thirds of Labour voters who switched to the Green Party in the 2024 election said that the party’s position on the destruction of Gaza was a factor.  Burnham hopes to win back Labour voters with an apology for the party’s initial response to the crisis in Gaza and a promise to put more pressure on the Israeli government.  One can only hope that, under the new management, the change in Labour’s policy on Israel-Palestine will not be merely tonal but substantive. A substantive change would involve calling Israel’s actions a genocide, implementing trade sanctions, banning all arms sales to Israel and, last but not least, the repeal of the ban on Palestine Action.  The real question remains: will Andy Burnham have the courage to liberate the Labour Party’s policy on Palestine from the dead hand of Sir Keir Starmer?  The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye. Israel's genocide in Gaza Opinion Post Date Override 0 Update Date Mon, 05/04/2020 - 21:29 Update Date Override 0

The truth is Burnham’s mea culpa on Gaza was nothing but a change in tone Submitted by Barry Malone on Thu, 07/16/2026 - 15:09 Britain’s anointed prime minister's Gaza apology contained nothing of substance for the victims of genocide – or anyone else Children react as Palestinians inspect the site of an Israeli strike on a tent at a camp sheltering displaced people, in Gaza City on 7 July, 2026 (Ebrahim Hajjaj/Reuters) On On the surface, it certainly seemed a very big deal. Andy Burnham, Britain’s prime minister-in-waiting, had apologised for Gaza. "Labour’s initial response to the treatment of Gaza caused huge hurt. We got it wrong and I am sorry for that," he posted on social media along with a three-minute video. The key word there, absent from some headlines, was "initial". And that word is important because we need to understand exactly what Burnham was saying sorry for if we are to have a sense of how his moral compass could intersect with a record of political expediency when it comes to diplomacy. On 11 October 2023, Kier Starmer, now prime minister and then leader of the Labour Party opposition, sat down for what should have been a routine interview with LBC’s Nick Ferrari. What he said, though, was to become his defining moment for many on the left. Initially, Starmer dutifully trotted out the lines that all mainstream British politicians were repeating – lines taken from the mantras that Israel has pushed for years. Firstly, Israel had the right to defend itself. Secondly, everything Israel was doing in Gaza was the fault of Hamas for carrying out the 7 October attack. But when asked by Ferrari if it was an appropriate response for Israel to lay siege to the Palestinian enclave and cut off its power and water supplies, Starmer replied: "I think Israel does have the right". Extraordinarily, he had, in effect, endorsed war crimes. 'Real hurt' As fury grew, it took nine days for some mealy-mouthed context to be added, when a spokesperson said he had meant that Israel had a general right to defend itself. That appears to be what Burnham is primarily distancing himself from. Andy Burnham has rightly spoken out on Labour's Gaza shame. Now comes the hard part David Hearst Read More » Though it wasn’t directly called out in his video statement, the implication was there, and a few days later Burnham expanded on the point in an interview with Gary Lineker - a British footballing icon forced out of the BBC for his anti-genocide position. "In my view, it was wrong for the suggestion to be made that essential supplies could be closed off," he said. "It was an impression given but sometimes in politics when those impressions land with people, they can cause real hurt." The only other substantive criticism of his predecessor was that Starmer had called for a ceasefire too late. Burnham himself, as mayor of Manchester, had called for one alongside local council leaders on 27 October 2023. It’s worth noting that, by then, more than 7,000 Palestinians had been killed, including more than 3,000 children. Some 1.7 million people had been made homeless, and healthcare facilities and schools were being attacked daily. Also, what material difference would it have made? When has Israel ever genuinely responded to "calls" to do anything, even from its closest supporters? Expecting a Labour careerist like Burnham to call the genocide a genocide was always fanciful. But where was the apology for slavishly backing the Israeli government diplomatically and militarily as it slaughtered more than 73,000 people, including 21,000 children? Where was the apology for the silence as medics and journalists were murdered on an industrial scale? And where was the apology for supplying the Israeli army with components for the F-35 jets it uses to kill Palestinian civilians? Bleeding support Even Burnham’s ideas on how "to do better" were relatively empty and toothless. There was nothing measurably new, nothing creative, nothing that suggested any real acceptance of the fact that the existing world order has been blown to pieces. Expecting a Labour careerist like Burnham to call the genocide a genocide was always fanciful And yet, Britain’s centrist commentariat treated his statement as a real break with what had come before. Breathless big-name journalists rushed to characterise his stance as "a significant shift" or "a significant intervention". That it was considered so consequential neatly demonstrates the limited wiggle room western politicians have on Palestine, and the grip the pro-Israel lobby has on them. We were also treated to the galling and shameless spectacle of Starmer government ministers welcoming Burnham’s apology as if they hadn’t been in lockstep with the prime minister in running cover for the genocide for almost three years. They embraced it loudly because they, like Burnham, know that Labour is bleeding more supporters to the leftist Greens than to the far-right Reform UK.  They know, too, that many of those people have turned their backs on the party because of Gaza, including swathes of middle-class liberals and huge numbers of Muslims. That, at heart, is what the apology was about. Fresh thinking Burnham’s statement may also have revealed a leader with no strong ideas about Britain’s place in the world or how it should evolve - as briefings to political correspondents in the UK from people who know him have suggested. Because here’s the thing: Andy Burnham, for all his down-home northern-boy-done-good posturing, was raised in the Labour Party, holding only one job outside of politics in his adult life: a brief three years at a trade magazine from the age of 21.   Here's what Burnham must do if he really wants to reset Labour's Palestine policy Read More » And even a cursory glance at the record of the former Tony Blair lieutenant shows a man who has always flowed with the tide on the big foreign policy questions. He voted in favour of the war on Iraq in 2003. Then in 2010, during a failed bid for the Labour leadership, he defended that decision despite it being clear by then that the invasion was a disaster that needlessly killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis.  He also consistently voted against calls for investigations into Britain’s role in the invasion, and in 2011 loyally supported the UK’s disastrous intervention in Libya. But – and here is where the cynical Burnham comes into view – in 2024, when it had become politically smart to do so, he said that he did in fact regret his Iraq war vote. While some have suggested that Burnham’s “Manchesterism” philosophy could be adapted into a foreign policy framework, the former mayor himself doesn’t appear to be someone who will develop anything approaching a diplomatic doctrine. But fresh thinking has never been more urgent. International law, for all that it ever existed, is in tatters; US President Donald Trump is an erratic player with a demonstrated ability to upend longstanding realities with lightning speed; China and Russia are growing in strength; and middle powers are clubbing together for protection. Instead of rising to that moment, though, expect the new prime minister to maintain the status quo on Ukraine, slightly soften relations with the European Union and, despite previously strong criticism, take a pragmatic approach to Trump. On Israel-Palestine: incremental steps if any. Writing in The Times newspaper, Burnham was also careful to reassure the security establishment and arms industry that he would, as all prime ministers are expected to do, continue to increase defence spending. But he needs to accept that an anarchic world is not predictable, and if as some have suggested, he thinks he can focus on domestic issues while spending less time on the international stage, he will have a rude awakening, fast. For a British public as engaged as ever in foreign policy after almost three years of Israeli genocide in Gaza, the same old Labour will not be enough. The truth is that Burnham’s mea culpa on Gaza was nothing but a change in tone. It was not the politics of substance. It was the politics of what young people call “vibes”. And vibes will not be enough to bring people back to Labour. The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye. UK Politics Opinion Post Date Override 0 Update Date Mon, 05/04/2020 - 21:29 Update Date Override 0

UK politicians call for sanctions on Israel as Starmer's Gaza legacy slammed Submitted by Oscar Rickett on Wed, 07/15/2026 - 14:03 Over 80 MPs and lords write to Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, as incoming prime minister Andy Burnham urged to take tougher stance on Israel Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer attends the Nato summit in Ankara, Turkey, Wednesday, 8 July 2026 (Alastair Grant/Pool via Reuters) Off Over 80 British MPs and lords have called on their government to impose comprehensive sanctions on Israel, as a collection of charities slammed outgoing prime minister Keir Starmer's legacy on Palestine. In a letter to the UK’s foreign secretary, Yvette Cooper, the politicians urge the government to act “in line with the International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion on Israel”.  This Sunday, 19 July, will mark two years since the ICJ found that Israel’s decades-long occupation of the Palestinian territories was “unlawful”, and that its “near-complete separation” of people in the occupied West Bank breached international laws concerning “racial segregation” and “apartheid”.  “We urge the government to impose sanctions and other concrete measures to uphold its legal obligations under this ruling and wider international law,” the letter’s signatories, led by Labour MPs Imran Hussain and Richard Burgon, write. On Wednesday, 17 British charities urged Andy Burnham, who is set to take over as prime minister from Starmer, “to take action to end Israel’s atrocities against Palestinians”. The charities, including Save the Children UK, Medical Aid for Palestinians, Islamic Relief and Amnesty International UK, said in a statement that Burnham must “take decisive action on Gaza and the occupied West Bank, warning that Palestinians cannot afford further political inaction”.  Assessing Starmer's legacy on Palestine, Save the Children UK said: "History will remember your complicity." The charity added: “Despite a partial arms suspension in 2024, Keir Starmer’s government has continued to enable Israel’s atrocities against Palestinians, their families and children through the supply of F-35 fighter jet parts.”  Israel deepens its occupation Since the ICJ’s advisory opinion in July 2024, the politicians who signed the letter to Cooper - including former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, Green Party MPs Sian Berry and Hannah Spencer, New Labour minister Lord Peter Hain and Jewish Kindertransport refugee Lord Alf Dubs - say that Israel has “deepened its illegal occupation”. 'The hope is that the incoming prime minister recognises that the UK government has a duty to act' - John McDonnell, Labour MP Another signatory to the letter, former Labour shadow chancellor John McDonnell, told MEE: “The Netanyahu government clearly believes it can act with impunity as it destroys any hope of a two-state solution with its total annexation of the West Bank. "The hope is that the incoming prime minister recognises that the UK government has a duty to act.” Israel now controls over 60 percent of Gaza, which it has largely destroyed during its genocide. It has pushed further into Syria and into southern Lebanon under the pretext of fighting Hezbollah.  Israel has also intensified its annexationist measures in the West Bank, including by approving plans to register land there as Israeli state property. In September last year, Israel’s finance minister and de facto “governor” of the West Bank, Bezalel Smotrich, unveiled a controversial plan to annex the vast majority of the occupied Palestinian territory. Smotrich, a far-right settler himself, proposed absorbing 82 percent of the West Bank into Israel, a move that would effectively eliminate the prospect of a future Palestinian state. He described the principle behind the plan as taking control of “maximum land with minimum [Palestinian] population”. Israel approves over $400m to fund 34 settlements in occupied West Bank Read More » In the letter to Yvette Cooper, the MPs and peers write that Israel’s actions over the past two years “underline how, without much bolder action, the Israeli government will continue to simply ignore the words of condemnation from political leaders and governments and deepen its illegal occupation”. The ICJ is clear that all states have an obligation to recognise the illegality of the occupation and to not enter into "economic or trade dealings with Israel". The letter states that, “despite acknowledging the Court’s findings”, the British government has “not formally responded or taken the steps required to meet its legal and moral obligations”. “The government knows what needs to be done,” the letter continues. “It has rightly imposed widespread sanctions on Russia for its illegal war on Ukraine. Yet there has been no such comprehensive response to Israel’s unlawful occupation as it does elsewhere.” The British politicians urge their government to ban all trade with illegal Israeli settlements, act against companies profiting from occupation, impose targeted sanctions, suspend the UK-Israel trade agreement, and end all arms transfers to Israel, including components for F-35 jets. Andy Burnham, Israel and Gaza The letter comes at a time when Burnham, who is set to take over as prime minster next week, is under scrutiny over his position on Israel and Palestine. The former New Labour minister has apologised for Labour’s response to Israel’s genocide in Gaza, saying his party “didn’t get it right” and that it must now do more. 'Almost three years into Israel's genocide in Gaza, the need for action could not be clearer. The UK's obligations under international law are clear' - Halla Keir, Medical Aid for Palestinians “I know many people feel that at the start of Israel’s military action in Gaza, my party didn’t get it right, and I am sorry about that. The response has too often not been good enough. We need to do better,” he said. Burnham referred to the “unbearable suffering” in Gaza, calling it a “scar on our collective conscience”. He also criticised Israel's ever-expanding occupation of territory in Gaza, adding: “We’ve got to do more to put pressure on the Israeli government.” The prime-minister-in-waiting applauded Starmer’s government for recognising Palestine, imposing sanctions on far-right Israeli ministers, and imposing a ban on “British bombs and or bullets” going to Israel. “We have taken some important steps,” Burnham said. “But let’s be honest, the UK was too slow to call for a ceasefire. And we must now do more to strengthen our approach.” Cooper, too, has shifted her rhetoric recently, admitting that Labour’s early response to Gaza was wrong. But a shift in tone may not herald a meaningful shift in policy.  “Every new prime minister inherits difficult decisions. But this should not be one of them,” Halla Keir, advocacy and research manager at Medical Aid for Palestinians, said in reference to Britain taking action to curb Israel. “Almost three years into Israel's genocide in Gaza, the need for action could not be clearer. The UK's obligations under international law are clear. What is needed now is the political courage to act.” “Nothing can change the horrors Palestinians have faced,” Save the Children UK said. “But the next prime minister has an opportunity to put an end to the UK government’s role as an ally to atrocities.”  UK Politics News Post Date Override 0 Update Date Mon, 05/04/2020 - 21:19 Update Date Override 0

Here's what Burnham must do if he really wants to reset Labour's Palestine policy Submitted by Ben Jamal on Mon, 07/13/2026 - 16:09 Vague statements are not enough. To win back lost voters, the incoming leader must halt arms sales to Israel and end the crackdown on anti-genocide protesters Labour MP Andy Burnham, presumed to become the party's next leader, delivers a speech in Manchester, northern England, on 29 June 2026 (Toby Shepheard/AFP) On Having maintained a near-total silence on Labour’s policy in relation to Palestine since he began his open campaign for the leadership, Andy Burnham has now broken his omerta with an “apology” for the party’s past failures. One must presume his advisers made clear that a shift on Palestine was crucial to win back the voters whose desertion was key to precipitating British Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s ignoble removal from office.  If they are earning their salaries, they should have pointed to recent opinion polling, which revealed that Labour is losing more voters to parties of the left than the right. More than half of voters who switched to other leftist or centrist parties said that Labour’s policy on Palestine was a factor.  Among those who are still members of the Labour Party, a poll released in June by Save the Children UK and other groups showed overwhelming support for a ban on trade with illegal Israeli settlements (87 percent) and a suspension of all arms sales to Israel (78 percent).  In addition, 58 percent said policy on Palestine was a crucial factor in their view on who should lead the party. There is thus a clear demand for a fundamental shift - and this is not new.   At the Labour conference last September, delegates passed a motion - with overwhelming support from trade unions and constituency parties - accepting the conclusions of a UN report that found Israel is committing a genocide in Gaza, and calling for a full arms embargo.  The problem for those demanding fundamental change, both inside and outside of the party, is that this is not what Burnham is offering - at least not in his initial statement on the matter. Appalling failure Even Burnham’s apology for Labour’s past failures was limited to an admission that at the start of Israel’s assault on Gaza, the party’s response was inadequate.  He makes a direct reference to the UK’s slowness in calling for a ceasefire. He is right about that appalling failure, most notoriously in Starmer ordering MPs not to support a ceasefire motion tabled by the Scottish National Party in November 2023, at a time when Israel was destroying Gaza’s infrastructure and killing a Palestinian child every 10 minutes.  It is also a reminder that Burnham, by that point, had already become one of the few prominent Labour politicians to depart from the party’s official policy, coming out in support of a ceasefire by late October 2023.  Will he adopt the policy passed at the Labour conference last year, by accepting the UN finding that Israel is guilty of the crime of genocide?  But the public anger towards Labour is not rooted in the failures back then. It is driven by the party’s continuing failure to hold Israel to account - and further, by its ongoing military, economic and political support for Tel Aviv.  A clear manifestation of this failure is the response to the  advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in July 2024 which affirmed the illegality of Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territories. The ICJ called for the occupation to end and for third-party states, including the UK, not to provide any aid or assistance that enables it to continue.  For two years, the UK has failed to offer a response to this opinion. Pressed on the issue in a committee meeting earlier this month, Foreign Office minister Hamish Falconer was still unable to say when one would be forthcoming.    Demands for more robust action on Israel’s crimes do not suggest that the country should be treated differently from others violating international law, but rather that it must be held to the same standard.  This should begin by accurately naming these violations. Under Starmer, Labour dealt with the question of whether Israel is committing a genocide by hiding behind the line that this was for the courts, not politicians, to determine.  In his statement, Burnham actually retreats further by not even being prepared to state that war crimes are being committed, but merely that “they appear to have been”.  Ramping up pressure Contrast this with Burnham’s statement as mayor of Manchester in November 2024, that the conflict in Ukraine “has seen the Russian government committing war crimes and human rights abuses”. No court has made a definitive ruling on this. Instead, Burnham’s statement correctly relied on the copious reports from UN bodies and human rights agencies. And even when the world’s top court weighed in with a clear opinion, as in the aforementioned ICJ ruling of July 2024, it was not sufficient to drive the Labour Party to act.   If Burnham is serious about the need for a change of policy, then here is the test. Will he ensure the government finally responds to the ICJ opinion and implements its recommendations in full? Will he adopt the policy passed at the Labour conference last year, by accepting the UN finding that Israel is guilty of the crime of genocide?  How Andy Burnham could set Britain on a new course on Israel and Palestine Read More » Will he also accept the findings of a further UN commission report issued last month, which documents in forensic detail Israel’s targeting of Palestinian children, and implement its recommendations in full?  Taking these steps would commit the government to a full arms embargo, comprehensive sanctions, and an end to all trade that supports Israel in its ongoing violations of international law and Palestinian rights.  Burnham’s apology and admittance that Labour got things wrong must be accompanied by an admission that those who have been protesting Israel’s actions, and calling on the government for a change in policy, got it right. That would mean ending the repression of protests and the proscription of Palestine Action.  Britons involved in the Palestine solidarity movement will not accept Burnham’s recent statement as sufficient, but they can take heart from the fact that his issuing of it is a clear admission of concern that Labour’s policy is costing the party votes that need to be won back.  This should be interpreted as a signal to ramp up the pressure, beginning with ensuring that the next national march on 18 July, likely just hours before Burnham moves into No 10, is huge in numbers - and clear in its articulation of what is required to meet the test of real change.  The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye. UK Politics Opinion Post Date Override 0 Update Date Mon, 05/04/2020 - 21:29 Update Date Override 0

Andy Burnham has rightly spoken out on Labour's Gaza shame. Now comes the hard part Submitted by David Hearst on Mon, 07/13/2026 - 13:20 The future prime minister should reconstruct a Labour Party with a strong moral core. This begins with Palestine and not repeating Starmer's fatal mistakes Andy Burnham, British prime minister in waiting, delivers a speech at the People's History Museum in Manchester, Britain, on 29 June, 2026 (Reuters) On It is easy, if not to say tempting, to be cynical about Andy Burnham. To describe him as a machine politician with a missing moral core, the perfect fodder for lobbies; the politician whose inner thoughts no-one really knows: the man who has been whisked from Makerfield to Downing Street with a minimum of scrutiny, due process, or debate. A man on a magic carpet. Every instinct tells me not to take Burnham at face value. But that is not what I propose to do. I am going to take Burnham at his word when he apologised for the Labour Party’s policy on Gaza. There is a lengthy list of consequences entailed in this apology, which I spend the rest of this column writing about.  But for now, I am going to assume Burnham was speaking genuinely, out of conscience, and that this was the best possible start to his premiership. First of all, he did not have to raise the issue of Gaza. There was no pressure on him to do so from a mostly pro-Israel Parliamentary Labour Party. The immediate issues he will have to face as prime minister are domestic ones: the cost of living crisis, his choice of chancellor, a flat-lining economy and the size of the domestic debt. And, secondly, there was even less incentive to raise Gaza at the very time he was being crowned the next leader of the Labour Party by 322 Labour MPs, almost 80 percent of the party. Why Gaza On entering Downing Street, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s first act was to shut the door on Palestine.  As leader of the opposition, he told LBC that Israel "had the right" to withhold power and electricity to the besieged enclave, a remark he tried to explain away under pressure but which only made it worse. The UK public is not shy to call out genocide. Will the new prime minister join them? Read More » Burnham’s first words on the threshold of power were to apologise for most of what Starmer did not do on Gaza, although he praised his predecessor for pushing the recognition of the Palestinian state.  The prime minister in waiting said the UK was too slow to call for a ceasefire, that Israel continues to violate it, that there is a surge of settler violence in the Occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem, and that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was "clearly attempting to make a two-state solution impossible". He vowed to look at further sanctions on Israeli settlers and banning trade with the settlements. If Burnham has assets he is bringing to the job, assets that Starmer lacked, this was the incoming man putting them front and centre on show.  The people who know Burnham in Manchester describe him as having a gift for listening to people and seizing the public mood. He showed both traits during the bombing of the Manchester Arena, which was the nightmare start to his time as mayor, and the moment he was told that Manchester would get just £22m (approx $30m) for testing and tracing Covid. His feisty reaction earned him the title of "king of the north".  In describing Gaza as a "scar on our collective conscience", Burnham was seizing the public mood. For Gaza is no longer a niche issue of the left. It has become a mainstream bipartisan issue. At last we have a prime minister in waiting who acknowledges that. This is in itself no mean achievement. However, saying Gaza is a scar on our collective conscience is easier than starting to heal the wound. Actions not words Burnham has twice now refused to call what is happening in Gaza a genocide. Once with the excuse that he could not "judge things of that enormity from where I am as mayor of Greater Manchester". Gaza has sparked the biggest protest movement in living memory, far outstripping the student protests in 2010 or the Iraq War in 2003. People living the length and breadth of the land from Truro to Scotland have been judging Gaza for what it is. Refusing to acknowledge the genocide in Gaza is as bad, if not worse, than Starmer’s refusal to call for a ceasefire at the start of this campaign Apparently if you live in Manchester, you can not do that. The second time was when he made his apology last week. Burnham said such issues were for the international courts to decide, not politicians.  This is almost as absurd. No British court or judge has ruled about the new and highly problematic definition of antisemitism by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, but that did not stop the Labour Party adopting it. Burnham pretends the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the world’s court, is still scratching its head about genocide in Gaza. But that - again - is not the whole truth. These judges issued a stern warning to Israel to immediately stop the war or risk being judged genocidal.  That was over two years ago when Israeli troops entered Rafah.  Many tens of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza have since been killed. Children have been deliberately targeted by snipers. Incubators with newborns inside have been switched off. Palestinians in Gaza are dying from diseases like renal failure and cancer because of Israel’s refusal to let them leave the besieged strip and reach hospital.  The whole of Gaza is in a continuous state of genocide. Refusing to acknowledge this is as bad, if not worse, than Starmer’s refusal to call for a ceasefire at the start of this campaign, which Burnham specifically criticised. UK’s legal duty This is not a matter of opinion. The UK has a legal duty to uphold the ICJ's findings.  Israel has defied the ICJ repeatedly and made it absolutely clear that, whatever the outcome of the ceasefire with Hamas, it intends to engineer large-scale ethnic cleansing, or as its Defence Minister Israel Katz puts it "voluntary migration". Read it yourself: The UN report on Israel targeting Palestinian children stands up to scrutiny Read More » The UK’s response under Starmer was not just to look the other way. It was to arm Israel to continue its bombing campaign.  Under Starmer, the UK sent over 500 surveillance flights over Gaza whose intelligence it shared with Israel.  Each and every action the UK took was in breach of its obligations under international humanitarian law, international human rights law, the Genocide Convention, and customary international law by maintaining policies and relationships that contribute to, facilitate, or fail to prevent Israel’s unlawful conduct in the occupied Palestinian territory.  The UK’s obligations under international law are not a la carte dishes, from which a prime minister can pick and choose. Continuing settlement expansion, annexation, apartheid, persecution and mass displacement all expose the UK to allegations of complicity in internationally wrongful acts, for which it too could be prosecuted. Remedying this would require a swathe of actions for which neither Burnham, nor industry, nor its workforce are remotely prepared. At a minimum it would mean suspending the UK’s existing trade agreement with Israel; prohibiting British companies from directly or indirectly supporting illegal settlements; taking enforcement action against those who do; ensuring that UK-registered charities are not raising funds for organisations or projects that entrench the occupation. It would mean UK banning selling goods produced at settlements in the West Bank, banning British citizens from serving in the occupying Israeli army that has - and still is - committing genocide in Gaza and war crimes in West Bank and Lebanon. It would mean cancelling all export licences for military hardware to Israel, first and foremost parts of the F-35 fighter programme. Suspending all military-to-military links and all intelligence co-operation.  This list has only just started. The moment Burnham embarks on this path, he would walk into a blizzard of opposition from the unions - although Unite, one of the UK’s largest unions, backs a boycott - the workforce of BAE Systems, industry chiefs, the military industrial complex, the security establishment - and not least the US itself.  Just consider what happened to Robin Cook, Tony Blair’s foreign secretary who resigned over the decision to invade Iraq in 2003. The UK’s obligations under international law are not à la carte dishes, from which a prime minister can pick and choose Cook had set out to build an ethical foreign policy. Cook championed the Chagossians' right of return to the islands that had become a US military base on Diego Garcia. Cook provoked Washington’s ire, and subsequent foreign secretaries reversed course. Defence contracts do more than just provide cutting-edge manufacturing, design and engineering work to the UK workforce. They lock Britain into a predetermined portfolio of policies that no government can extricate itself from easily and without substantial cost. That’s the whole purpose of them. Extricating the UK from supplying parts to Israel’s F-35 fighter programme would mean jeopardising a business worth $6.7bn. The Campaign Against Arms Trade lists as many as 79 companies in Britain whose exports are covered by an Open General Export Licence (OGEL) which allows companies registered for the licence to export unlimited quantities of equipment to the relevant countries, so long as it is for the F-35, without need for individual licences. The former foreign secretary David Lammy’s suspension of a small number of export licences was smoke and mirrors. It evaded the core of the arms trade which was hidden by OGEL. A national disgrace Is Burnham going to end this deceit by suspending all export arms licences to a country which is openly practicing ethnic cleansing? Once you embark on this journey, it is difficult to know where to stop. Palestine Action case reveals the limits of terrorism discourse Read More » As if making a dent on all of the above was not bad enough, there is another more immediate issue, closer to home than far away Palestine.  The drama will be taking place in a court room near you almost every month from now until the next general election. More people have been charged with terrorism offences in the weeks since Palestine Action was banned at the beginning of July last year than during the entire “war on terror”, dating back to September 2001, the Middle East Eye revealed.  Thousands of people have been arrested under the Terrorism Act since its prescription and more than 700 of them charged.  One of them is a retired magistrate from Truro, Cornwall.  Deborah Hinton, 82, a former magistrate, said of a prison sentence "Obviously I’m very upset, I’m very nervous, but I couldn’t do anything else but do what I did. I didn’t have a choice. We are heading towards an authoritarian state, and as I saw it, it was my duty to take a stand." Hinton is not alone.  The average profile of a British "terrorist" is a woman with an average age of 57. Government statistics say that where sex is known, arrests linked to Palestine Action were 4.4 times more likely to be female, with an average age of 57 compared to 30 for non-Palestine Action-linked arrests. The Palestine Action scandal was a Labour Party creation and Labour now has to stop it As this courtroom drama has unfolded, the sentencing is getting stiffer.  At the last protest outside New Scotland Yard, 14 activists were arrested under Section 12 of the Terrorism Act, which criminalises inviting support for a proscribed organisation and carries a maximum sentence of 14 years in prison. This has become a national disgrace.  The Palestine Action scandal was a Labour Party creation and Labour now has to stop it. It should be de-proscribed and all sentences associated with it quashed. Otherwise Burnham will have people in court every day from now until the next election - doctors, teachers, retired magistrates - being sent down as terrorists for having done nothing more than acting on their conscience. A decision is needed on this. And soon.  As far as we know, Burnham plans to keep Shabana Mahmoud, who has made the proscription of Palestine Action the centrepiece of her time in office as home secretary. Opposition to Burnham’s remarks about Gaza has spent little time gathering pace. The Board of Deputies of British Jews (BoD) and Jewish Leadership Council (JLC) have conveyed "significant concerns" to Burnham’s team over his remarks. They criticise him for not mentioning the "continuing operation of Hamas" in Gaza - when it has maintained the ceasefire - or operations in the West Bank. French commentator Bernard-Henri Levy said: "Not a single word about Hamas’s responsibility for holding its own people hostage and turning them into human shields. That is called blindness - or worse, cowardice. Shame on you, Prime Minister." Human Rights Watch and Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor have both said that they have found no evidence that Hamas has used Palestinian civilians as human shields in Gaza during the post-7 October hostilities.  By contrast, Israeli soldiers themselves have testified to Haaretz and ITV News that the Israeli army has systematically used Palestinian civilians as human shields in Gaza during the post-October 7 hostilities. Jack Rankin, Conservative MP for Windsor, reposted the JLC/BoD statement on X, saying: "This is spot on. The pernicious obsession with Israel has fuelled antisemitism in our country. All sensible minded Brits should stand with our beleaguered Jewish neighbours. Rather than prioritising cynical political attempts to appease sectarian, Islamist and far-left voters, Andy Burnham should focus on delivering for the whole country." Andrew Fox, Henry Jackson Society researcher, posted:“So, with Yvette Cooper, Hamish Falconer and Andy Burnham yesterday all repeating straight-up lies about Israel, including about amount of aid entering Gaza and the Hamas colonel-doctor, we can safely draw one conclusion: The Corbyn era of old, antisemitic Labour is back.” Another Jeremy Corbyn? One can see where all this is heading: Burnham is Jeremy Corbyn revisited and deserves the same treatment. I am not sure a repeat of the campaign against Corbyn is going to work a second time round. Burnham developed a good relationship with the Manchester Jewish community as mayor. How Britain's contempt for the UN enables Gaza genocide Read More » Public opinion in Britain has hardened. Anyone on a mobile phone can see for themselves what is happening in Gaza and the occupied territories. The civilian suffering is so overwhelming and so continuous in Gaza it defies even Israel’s ability to cover it up, still less to brand coverage of it as a "blood libel" against Jews.  But cast all notions of right and wrong aside. Consider this issue purely from pragmatic electoral politics.  We now have had two by-elections in Greater Manchester. The first was one in which Labour should have won easily but did not because Burnham was barred from standing by a Starmer-controlled National Executive Committee. Unlike Makerfield, the Reform candidate in the Gorton and Denton by-election was strong, and the Labour vote collapsed to Hannah Spencer in the Greens' first-ever Westminster by-election victory.  Burnham is not making the same mistake that doomed Joe Biden’s presidency, Kamala Harris’ election campaign and Starmer’s two-year tenure in office.  Starmer lasted longer than a head of lettuce. It was longer than Liz Truss’ 45 day office, but his downfall was just as sudden - both he and Truss left office bewildered, stunned by the reaction of a party each leader felt was behind them. Starmer thought he could dictate terms to a British electorate that was not having it. Every Labour MP knew that the vote in the recent local councils elections was a vote against Starmer personally. Even when local councillors were good, they were voted against because of Starmer. He had become a massive vote loser. Burnham is not going to repeat these mistakes.  The message to a future Labour leader is clear. Don’t take voters for granted, be they Muslim, progressive, be they from right or left.  Otherwise they will walk away from Labour forever and usher in a new era of British politics dominated by the far right. The only way to stop this happening is to reconstruct a Labour Party with a strong moral core. This begins with Palestine and when that happens the dam of unconditional support for Israel will collapse. The magic carpet has had many honourable appearances in literature. But it ended up as a ride in a Disney theme park. Burnham would not want the same thing to happen to his term of office.  He is a better politician than that.  The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye. UK Politics Opinion Post Date Override 0 Update Date Mon, 05/04/2020 - 21:29 Update Date Override 0

Pro-Palestinian groups urge 'decisive action' after Burnham's Gaza apology Pro-Palestine groups, Labour MPs and party activists have welcomed Andy Burnham's apology over Labour's response to Israel’s genocide in Gaza, while calling on the party leadership contender to back his words with "decisive action".  Burnham, who is expected to become Labour leader and Britain's next prime minister in the coming days, said earlier this week that Labour "didn't get it right" and that it must now do more. “I know many people feel that at the start of Israel’s military action in Gaza, my party didn’t get it right, and I am sorry about that. The response has too often not been good enough. We need to do better,” Burnham said. Burnham said the “unbearable suffering” in Gaza was a “scar on our collective conscience”. He also criticised Israel's ever-expanding occupation of territory in Gaza, adding: “We’ve got to do more to put pressure on the Israeli government.” Wes Streeting, the former health secretary, said Burnham’s remarks were “extremely welcome”.  Meanwhile, Clive Lewis, the Labour MP for Norwich South, said it was “an important and much-needed first step”. Read more: Pro-Palestinian groups urge 'decisive action' after Burnham's Gaza apology Labour MP Andy Burnham waves after delivering a speech in Manchester, England, on 29 June 2026 (AFP/Toby Shepheard)