Starmer to push digital ID rollout as Blair plans Gaza interim leadership with Trump allies

Britain’s prime minister is preparing to unveil a plan for compulsory digital ID cards for all adults, a policy that would tie immigration status to a nationwide verification system and spark questions about privacy and civil liberties. The initiative, described in multiple papers as a bold if controversial move, would place a smartphone-driven proof of who someone is at the center of daily life—from employment to housing and access to services. Coverage across the UK press ranged from dystopian warnings to calls for action on immigration, highlighting the energy and divisions the proposal has already provoked.

The plan would include a smartphone app designed to make it easier for employers and landlords to verify a person’s immigration status. Several papers noted that the digital-ID idea is framed by supporters as a practical tool to tackle small-boat arrivals and broader migration challenges, while critics warned it could curb civil liberties and create a new form of state surveillance. The Daily Mail described the plan on its front page with terms such as dystopian and authoritarian; the Telegraph printed the PM’s migration stance with the headline “I got it wrong on migration”; the i Paper framed the move as a new form of “Britcard” being made law for all adults; and the Guardian warned it could spark a clash with civil liberties campaigners. The Times said the scheme would “confirm right to work,” while other outlets tied the story to broader governance and technology trends impacting everyday life.

In a separate but closely watched development, Sir Tony Blair is reportedly seeking to run an interim Gaza government when the current war between Israel and Hamas ends. The plan, advanced by Blair’s think tank, the Tony Blair Institute (TBI), is said to have the backing of Donald Trump’s close aides, including Jared Kushner, the former president’s son-in-law and longtime Middle East adviser, and Steve Witkoff, the U.S. special envoy to the Middle East. According to the reporting, Blair would head a body called the Gaza International Transitional Authority (GITA), envisioned as Gaza’s supreme political and legal authority for an initial five-year period. The authority would be based in el-Arish, Egypt’s North Sinai capital near Gaza, and would enter the strip with a multinational force, with funding coming from Gulf states.

The arrangement would place Blair at the helm of a secretariat of up to 25 people and a seven-person board. After a transitional period, control would be handed to the Palestinian Authority, which would need to implement major reforms before taking full responsibility. The plan reportedly envisions reuniting Gaza and the West Bank under a single framework, though Hamas would be excluded from governance. Blair’s allies argue the former prime minister’s time commitment could help end the war and stabilize the region, while critics worry it could amount to an occupation in all but name. The plan’s backers cite Blair’s diplomatic experience and experience with international administrations in Kosovo and East Timor as a template for transition.

The initiative has drawn mixed reactions on the Palestinian side. Mahmoud Abbas’s administration has publicly said it would be ready to assume governance and security responsibilities, but would resist any arrangement that permanently excludes Hamas from meaningful roles in education and healthcare. Israel has rejected the idea of PA-led governance within Gaza but has reportedly engaged constructively with Blair’s plan, while the broader regional dynamic remains unsettled. In a related note, surveys conducted by Blair Institute researchers show that more than a quarter of Gazans would prefer international involvement in their governance after the conflict ends, a finding cited to bolster arguments for international oversight rather than unilateral control. Critics in Israel and allied governments warn that any post-war administration would face significant governance challenges and could risk entrenching a prolonged international mission in a way that resembles occupation rather than state-building.

The potential alliance between Blair’s post-war governance concept and Trump-era foreign-policy circles has generated both attention and anxiety. Reports describe meetings in which Kushner and others advocated Blair’s plan to U.S. president leaders, and in which proposals were circulated to Turkey, Pakistan, Indonesia and five Arab states at the United Nations General Assembly in New York this week. Saudi Arabia’s crown prince Mohammed bin Salman has signaled a desire for a post-war settlement that could lead toward a Palestinian state, while Israeli leaders have reiterated concerns about the proposal’s implications for governance in Gaza. The Tony Blair Institute has declined to comment on the specifics of the proposal.

As the two stories unfold, they illuminate different fault lines in 2025 geopolitics: the balance between security and privacy at home, and the complex politics of post-conflict governance abroad. In the United Kingdom, the digital-ID debate puts a sharp edge on how societies manage immigration, labor markets and civil liberties in an era of rapid digital change. In the Middle East, Blair’s envisioned interim administration tests the boundaries of international involvement in conflict resolution and state-building, raising questions about sovereignty, legitimacy, and the risks of external governance in a people’s homeland. The coming weeks are likely to see intensified scrutiny of both initiatives as lawmakers, civil-liberties groups, international partners and regional actors weigh potential outcomes.

The debate over digital IDs continues to unfold alongside the Gaza governance discussions, with both stories highlighting how policy ideas can rapidly move from proposal to contested front-page news in an interconnected world. The Tony Blair Institute has been contacted for comment on the Gaza plan, while spokespeople for the prime minister’s office have reiterated that discussions of digital-ID policy are ongoing and subject to formal policy development and parliamentary process. As the world watches, the interaction between domestic security measures and international post-conflict governance will be a defining dynamic of the month ahead.