XPost: sci.military.naval, soc.history.war.misc, seattle.politics
XPost: or.politics, ca.politics

from
https://www.aol.com/boris-johnson-blasts-starmer-backing-170849016.html

Boris Johnson blasts Starmer for backing Palestinian state: ‘Ridiculous’ The Hill
Ashleigh Fields
Sat, August 2, 2025 at 10:08 AM PDT

Former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Friday slammed the
current UK leader for threatening to recognize Palestinian statehood
amid the ongoing war in Gaza, calling the move “ridiculous.”

Johnson signaled Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s commitment — largely following France’s lead — was aimed toward capturing voters’ attention, not promoting a ceasefire.

“It’s nothing to do with promoting peace in the Middle East. Is nothing
to do with advancing a two-state solution,” the former leader of the
UK’s Conservative Party said in an appearance on NewsNation’s “On Balance.”

“It’s everything to do with the continual oscillation of the Labor prime minister between his own two states, a state of paralyzed inaction and a
state of panic about what’s going on in the Labor Party,” he told host Leland Vittert.

Johnson continued, “The problem in the Labor Party, the governing party
in our country, is that they’re terrified of losing the votes of the
Muslim community. It’s nothing to do with helping the Palestinians. It’s about managing his own party.”

The former leader, who resigned from his role in 2022 amid a scandal
during the COVID-19 pandemic and following the U.K.’s withdrawal from
the European Union in 2020, criticized broader efforts to recognize
Palestine as a sovereign state.

“You’re not supposed to recognize a state unless it has clearly defined boundaries, plainly the state of Palestine does not. And it [must] have
a government [that] is capable of controlling those borders and part of
the government of the putative state of Palestine is the psychotic
Islamic fascist terrorist group Hamas,” Johnson said.

He also described Palestinian statehood as a “big reward” for little accomplishment.

More calls for a two-state solution have cropped up in recent weeks, as humanitarian conditions in the Gaza Strip remain dire. The United
Nations and other groups have pointed to reports of mass starvation and
the blocking of aid into the region as cause for concern.

The Israeli government has denied such claims and said Hamas is
promoting a deadly rhetoric to shame leaders. But Starmer and other
nations have flocked to the frontlines, promising aid through air drops
and medical treatments for the vulnerable as violence in the region
continues nearly two years after Hamas’s initial Oct. 7, 2023, attack.

Democratic lawmakers, including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries
(N.Y.) and Rep. Ro Khanna (Calif.), have pressed the Trump
administration to follow in the footsteps of the UK and France — as
peace talks have stalled. The U.S. has not agreed to recognize Palestine
as a state and Secretary of State Marco Rubio has pushed back on such calls.

The administration has also significantly reduced assistance efforts in
the Middle East, including the closure of the U.S. Agency for
International Development (USAID) and withdrawal from the United Nations
Food Program.

Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material
may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Also

‘A Palestinian state promises to be oppressive, corrupt and radicalised’ The Telegraph
Jacob Williams
Thu, July 31, 2025 at 11:00 PM PDT
Poll of the week
Poll of the week
Sir Keir Starmer has announced his plan for the UK to officially
recognise a Palestinian state in September unless Israel meets a number
of conditions.

The Prime Minister laid out these terms in a speech at Downing Street.
They include Israel agreeing to a ceasefire in Gaza and committing to a two-state solution.

In a Telegraph poll, readers were overwhelmingly opposed to the
decision, with 86 per cent of more than 50,000 voters saying Palestine
should not be recognised.

Toby Roberts, a Telegraph reader, is stringently opposed to the idea of
a Palestinian state, saying: “There is no evidence the Palestinians are capable of establishing and running a viable state, and a great deal of evidence to suggest that they are not.

“A Palestinian state promises to be oppressive, corrupt, impoverished, aid-dependent, resentful, radicalised, and riven by vicious internal factionalism.”

He concludes that it is “a mystery to me how anyone can think that such
an outcome would be in the interests of the neighbouring Arab states or
the West”.

Margaret Northey, another reader, says Hamas does not want a two-state
solution and, as a result of Sir Keir’s announcement, “Hamas will now
have even more reason not to agree to a ceasefire”.

John Culley echoes this sentiment, expressing dismay that conditions
have been imposed on Israel but not on Hamas: “If we are going to
recognise Palestine, surely the conditionality should be aimed at the Palestinians, what about releasing the hostages and Hamas surrendering
and/or dissolving itself.

“The current conditional approach still gives the Israeli’s a partial
veto over the process and incentivises Hamas to try and provoke Israel.
It is absolutely bonkers diplomacy.”

Nancy Brooks remarks that she thought the report of Sir Keir’s
announcement must be “incomplete” as no demand was made that the
remaining hostages be released, adding: “Clearly, a ‘solution’ is not what this is about, entirely a vote-gathering exercise. Shame on him.”

Another reader agrees that the announcement was intended for a domestic
as well as international audience: “Starmer’s focus on Gaza is an indication of where power and influence now lies in the Labour Party and
the organs of government.


“His pronouncement had nothing to do with peace, justice, morality, or
ending the war. It was a piece of theatre pandering to Labour’s
shrinking voter base; gesture politics of the most shameless kind.”

‘Only solution is a two-state one’
A minority of Telegraph readers sought to make the case in support of
the Prime Minister’s announcement, with one saluting Sir Keir for having “the leadership to stand up to bullying and intimidation from Trump and Netanyahu”.

Hedley Smith argues that the announcement did not reward Hamas and “you either recognise a state out of principle or you don’t”, adding: “The conditions of statehood are either met or they are not: it shouldn’t be conditional and used like a bargaining chip. I think they should have
been a state a long time ago and I don’t believe that right can be
bargained away.”

Nik Hill and Jennifer Morris both take a historical view when it came to arguing in favour of recognising Palestinian statehood.

Nik said: “The UN called for an independent Palestine and Israel to be recognised back in 1947. It’s about time it actually happened.

“That’s not rewarding Hamas (no Hamas in the West Bank for example).
It’s simply accepting that the only solution is a two-state one.”

Jennifer concurred and cited the Balfour Declaration of 1917 that
expressed British support for a Jewish homeland in Palestine but also
that the rights of the existing inhabitants would be protected.

She says that no government “stepped in as Israel took more land for
their settlements” and that “it is time to do the right thing” for the Palestinians.

‘The Arab world gets it. Starmer doesn’t’
Many readers also compared and contrasted the reaction of the British
state with that of the Arab world. Soon after Sir Keir’s announcement,
Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Egypt called for Hamas to surrender control of
Gaza and disarm.

Natalie Brooks writes that the Prime Minister’s ultimatum to Israel “has proven to be as ineffectual and meaningless as he is… even Arab nations
are suggesting Hamas needs to come to the table”.

Other readers weigh in: “You couldn’t make it up! Arab nations insist
that Hamas surrenders, while the British Prime Minister
(unintentionally, no doubt) offers it encouragement to continue! The
Arab world gets it. Starmer doesn’t.”

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)