British Member of Parliament and former diplomat, Hamish Falconer, has rejected calls by other MPs for the UK to recognise a Palestinian state. Falconer said “We do wish to recognise a Palestinian state, we wish to do so as a contribution to a two state solution and we will make a judgment about when the best moment is to try and make the fullest possible contribution.” Similarly, the UK Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, David Lammy, says that the UK will recognise a Palestinian state “at a time that is most conducive to the peace process.” The implication is that recognition must follow progress. But there is no peace process, and postponing recognition only helps ensure there never will be one. Pickthall House argues that recognition must come before negotiation. Treating Palestinian statehood as a reward rather than a prerequisite allows the continued entrenchment of a status quo defined by land dispossession, population transfers, and permanent displacement.
Our recent white paper on Israel’s military priorities shows that the current campaign in Gaza is not simply a war but part of a broader strategy of land consolidation. Over 1.9 million Gazans have been displaced, and civilian infrastructure systematically destroyed. In the West Bank, illegal settlements expand weekly, while Israeli leaders speak openly of annexation and “voluntary transfer,” with no credible political pathway for return. In this context, delaying recognition until a Palestinian state exists is circular logic: Palestinians are told to prove the viability of statehood while being denied the conditions necessary to achieve it.
Recognition does not mean endorsing a particular faction. It affirms the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination, a right grounded in international law and one the UK claims to uphold. Over 140 UN member states have already recognised Palestine. The UK’s refusal, despite its historic role and stated commitment to a two-state solution, weakens both its moral standing and diplomatic influence not just in the region, but more broadly with other participants in the global rules-based order, not to mention stirring turmoil at home in the UK. As recent UK-France talks show, European governments are increasingly willing to move towards coordinated recognition of Palestine, making British hesitation not only morally untenable but diplomatically isolating.
Delaying recognition until Israel agrees effectively grants it a veto. If the UK supports peace, it must help create the symmetry needed for meaningful negotiations. Recognition is not radical but necessary. Anything less is complicity in injustice. Britain cannot claim to support two states while denying one the legitimacy of the other; this only rewards obstruction and undermines basic rights.
Pickthall House urges the government to recognise Palestine now, not when it is convenient, but when it is most needed. Recognition is not the end of the peace process; it is how one begins.
