Why Starmer should say no to Trump's 'board of peace' offer
As 2026 kicks off, the Israeli genocide in Palestine continues.
Every day in Gaza, Israeli forces violate the October ceasefire with bombings, shootings and denial of aid. The ceasefire deal merely decelerated this process to a pace that international leaders appear comfortable living with.
In the three months since then, Israel has killed more than 442 Palestinians. While it is a lower rate of killing than before the ceasefire, the atrocities continue.
The grinding suffering and humanitarian catastrophe is exacerbated daily, rather than being addressed. At the same time, Israel’s division of Gaza is being further entrenched, as the “yellow line” shifts ever westwards.
This will pose major challenges to donor states, including Britain - not least as it still purports to back international law and the rules-based order, at a time when US President Donald Trump has shredded any last remnants of this system by abducting Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro on 3 January.
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
No wonder Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been sporting a huge grin ever since.
So how can the likes of the British government step up to meet this challenge? Downing Street is in constant panic mode, weighing every decision against the potential wrath of the unpredictable and dangerous US president, with all the spine of an overcooked piece of spaghetti.
Britain must show more willingness to challenge Trump’s actions on all fronts. Precedent does not evoke optimism, as highlighted by Britain’s recent refusal to call out the US operation in Venezuela as a violation of international law.
The bare minimum
In the context of Gaza, for how much longer can Britain stomach the Trump plan - which is neither ending the Israeli genocide, nor enabling any movement towards a long-term viable solution, let alone a Palestinian state?
The British government should have been more active in objecting to its codification at the UN Security Council, and even more so as the Trump plan is violated daily.
Britain is now offered the UK a seat in Trump’s proposed “board of peace”. Prime Minister Keir Starmer should say no, absent a comprehensive redrafting of its mandate to one that is advisory rather than supervisory.
Those on this neocolonial structure will be nothing less than window dressing for an American-Israeli strategy to crush Gaza, making whoever is inside this tent complicit. There is also the real risk that this board could be adopted as a model for other conflicts, bypassing the legitimate existing structures of the UN.
Above all, the Starmer government must shift from expressing 'concern' to implementing coercive measures to change Israel's behaviour
At the same time, arguments over the Gaza stabilisation force will continue, given that potential troop-providing states are not willing to be peace enforcers - that is, the ones who have to disarm Hamas by force.
Britain must encourage a drastic revision of the terms of reference to make this feasible. It can work with allies, including in the region, to present a united front on this issue.
The bare minimum would be for Britain to take action to stop Israel from impeding the flow of aid into Gaza, and to permit all UN and humanitarian agencies to operate freely across Palestine. Israel should be pressured to cancel its draconian restrictions on these agencies. Sanctions will almost certainly be required to bring this about.
Moving to the occupied West Bank, Britain should expect and prepare for this to become the epicentre of Israel’s onslaught in 2026.
Netanyahu will do this to keep his coalition together, with elections on the horizon that must take place by October. He wants to hoover up as much of the Israeli right-wing vote as possible, while his rivals for this demographic aim to show that they are even more hawkish than the Likud leader.
Building on recognition
In terms of the occupied West Bank, Britain has adopted stronger public legal positions, not least in respect of Israeli settlements. It should reinforce this with further sanctions.
If Britain is serious about a two-state solution and ending the occupation of Palestine, it must impose a full ban on all dealings not just with settlements, but with the Israeli occupation more broadly. The recent announcement of a tender for the construction of 3,400 housing units at the doomsday E1 settlement offers the latest of many pegs to impose such a ban, alongside likeminded European states.
Starmer should build the UK’s strategy around last September’s recognition of the state of Palestine. Britain and France should work in tandem to push policies to bring this about.
Ministers should consistently reference that Gaza is part of the state of Palestine - but more importantly, that the unlawful Israeli occupation must be brought to an end. UK-Palestine deals should be negotiated, including a free trade agreement.
The UK can also assist in promoting enhanced governance, as major questions loom over the fate of the Palestinian Authority (PA). President Mahmoud Abbas is in his 90s, and the PA lacks credibility and legitimacy, while Israeli measures cripple it financially. Far-right ministers openly want to dismantle it.
Britain should oppose this, while working towards a genuinely credible body whose priority is not the maintenance of the occupation and status quo, but representation and governance for all Palestinians.
A more credible Palestinian government must be allowed to take over Gaza. Palestinian agency cannot be sidelined any further, nor thwarted by Israeli demands for reform, designed to keep the PA impotent and eternally subservient to the occupation. Britain should lead on this approach.
Above all, the Starmer government must shift from expressing “concern” to implementing coercive measures to change Israel’s behaviour. Israel cannot be treated as a democratic state that respects the rule of law, but as a rogue actor that prevents any chance of peace - not just in Palestine, but across the region.
This would bring the Starmer government into line not just with international law, but also with British public sentiment - a solid foundation for any forward-looking strategy.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
Middle East Eye delivers independent and unrivalled coverage and analysis of the Middle East, North Africa and beyond. To learn more about republishing this content and the associated fees, please fill out this form. More about MEE can be found here.
