UK recognises State of Palestine as world reacts to Gaza crisis

The United Kingdom formally recognised the State of Palestine on Monday, a move announced by Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and expected to be ratified at the United Nations General Assembly next week. The decision places Britain among more than 150 governments that recognise a Palestinian state and underscores a renewed emphasis on a two-state framework as Gaza remains under blockade and civilians face humanitarian hardship. It drew swift condemnation from Israel and the United States, which warned the move could complicate hostage negotiations and security cooperation with key allies.

Hamas officials quickly celebrated. Mahmoud Mardaw, a senior Hamas official, told AFP that the announcements by the UK, Canada and Australia recognise Palestine and represent a victory for Palestinian rights and the justice of our cause, sending a message that no matter how far the occupation goes, it will not erase our national rights. In response, Starmer said Hamas is a brutal terror organisation and signaled plans to intensify sanctions on the group, arguing the move is intended to revive hope for a two-state solution. In a video posted on social media, the prime minister said the step would help revive the hope of peace for the Palestinians and Israelis within a two-state framework. He stressed that the UK would proceed despite objections from the Netanyahu government and broader concerns about the timing and impact on Gaza humanitarian relief.

Canada and Australia followed with recognitions, with Prime Ministers Mark Carney and Anthony Albanese announcing their governments would officially recognise Palestine. Observers expect France and Portugal to follow suit. Israeli officials described the UK move as absurd and a reward for terrorism, while US officials warned of consequences for regional stability and intelligence-sharing with allies. The Israeli government signaled that it would continue pursuing its war aims, saying the decision was a misstep in a conflict that it argues requires a robust security approach rather than diplomatic gestures.

Within Britain, the move drew mixed reactions among lawmakers and advocacy groups. Deputy Prime Minister said the decision was about giving the Palestinian people hope, though he acknowledged it would not by itself end the fighting or alleviate humanitarian suffering. Labour voices were divided; some argued recognition could not wait for perfect conditions, while others warned it could complicate security and intelligence ties with Israel. Labour Friends of Israel said the move would change nothing on the ground and could undermine leverage needed to secure the release of hostages and to ensure Hamas cannot play a role in any future Palestinian state. The group also stressed concerns about Iranian influence and Palestinian Authority reform. Critics on the back benches and among Conservative supporters argued the move risked Britain’s international standing and damaged relations with its closest ally.

Legal and financial implications quickly entered the debate. Some legal scholars have warned that recognizing a Palestinian state could open the door to damages claims against Britain for historic governance of the territory, with estimates that have ranged up to £2 trillion. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has pressed for reparations under international law, arguing for compensation based on the value of land under British rule between 1917 and 1948. While some experts say such sums are theoretically possible in lawsuits or arbitration, others caution that the legal pathway to such damages is uncertain and would hinge on complex international-law arguments and historical judgments.

Families of hostages condemned the decision. Ilay David, whose brother Evyatar David was among those abducted, said recognition would send Hamas a message that it can continue to hold hostages and stall negotiations for their return. Other relatives argued that recognition could embolden Hamas and complicate efforts to secure the hostages’ release. A group of families wrote an open letter to Starmer urging that recognition be deferred until their loved ones were home.

Reaction from observers and political opponents included Nigel Farage’s Reform UK, which claimed that Hamas and a Palestinian state are inseparable for now and described the move as surrender to terrorism. Within Labour, some lawmakers warned the decision could undermine security cooperation with Israel, while others argued it was a necessary step toward a genuine two-state process. Labour’s stance has been the subject of debate among alliance partners and foreign-policy groups in Britain.

In Washington, former President Donald Trump said he disagreed with Starmer about recognition during his state visit to the United Kingdom. Palestinian officials and diplomats continued to frame recognition as a foundational step toward statehood, noting that it aligns with the long-stated positions of many governments that see a two-state solution as the path to peace. Husam Zomlot, head of the Palestinian mission in the United Kingdom, told the BBC that the UK’s action reflects a historical moment and that the world should celebrate a correction of a colonial-era wrong as part of advancing a Palestinian state. Zomlot said that recognition is not an endpoint but a beginning toward greater political and legal recognition on an international stage.

As the UNGA gathering looms, advocates say recognition could provide a diplomatic lever to press for a ceasefire and concrete steps toward Palestinian reform, while critics warn that without tangible actions on the ground—such as a ceasefire, the disarmament of militants, and commitments to humanitarian relief—the move risks being viewed as symbolic rather than transformative. The unfolding debate underscores a broader global dilemma: how to balance the rights of a Palestinian state with the immediate security concerns of Israel and its allies, and how to reconcile decades of conflict with renewed international appetite for negotiated peace.