Ed Miliband’s political renaissance continues. Britain’s diplomatic presence in East Jerusalem has been saved, despite the declared intention of the Israeli government to shut it down. It is a significant diplomatic and personal political achievement. The man who in 2015 led the Labour Party to one of its more ignominious defeats, who quietly endured the Corbyn ascendancy and then seemed settled into middle-ranking rehabilitation under Sir Keir Starmer, is now something of a statesman.
In his short time as foreign secretary he has successfully re-engineered British policy in the Middle East and emerged as an able and skilful opponent of the excesses of the Netanyhu government. Recent polls have suggested that many Palestinians and Israelis have given up on the “two state” solution but Miliband has not and is helping lead the international effort to keep it alive. He has done so without entirely alienating the Israeli authorities.
Yes. The presence has been downgraded from a consulate to a “mission”, with far fewer staff and diminished diplomatic status, but at least it is still there. It stands as a symbol of UK solidarity with the now officially-recognised state of Palestine, a commitment to the two-state solution, and as a de facto British embassy. Staff there can keep the government informed about illegal Israeli settlements on the occupied West Bank, and offer the usual consular services to British and Palestinian nationals.
It’s only fair to add that the government’s all-purpose international troubleshooter, national security adviser Jonathan Powell, was involved in the negotiations.
No. It remains in Tel Aviv, and is not going to be moved to Jerusalem (as the American one has been) because Britain does not recognise divided Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
In one sense, not at all – in that the British commitment to the two-state solution remains complete. What changed in recent weeks is the Israeli plan to occupy land known as E1, which would effectively leave a Palestinian territory on the West Bank cut off from East Jerusalem, and unviable. This is the extreme and imminent danger that impelled Miliband to take action, namely: an import ban on goods from illegal settlements in the occupied territories and a new ban for arms licences and other exports that “materially contribute to the occupation”; a comprehensive sanctions regime against providing services such as construction or financing for Israeli settlements and a ban on advertising them in the UK; personal sanctions against key individuals accused of promoting settler violence; a fresh ban for arms licences and other exports that “materially contribute to the occupation”.
Miliband has also used much stronger language than his predecessors, Yvette Cooper and David Lammy; he has accused Israel of ethnic cleansing, cited evidence of war crimes in Gaza and advocated justice for those Israelis responsible. Israel had ordered the closure of the UK consulate in East Jerusalem in retaliation for this.
Nuanced. exchange of intelligence seems to be unaffected, and the UK remains committed to the existence of the state of Israel and its right to defend itself. Miliband has spoken about his own Jewish heritage, and his family’s experience of antisemitic persecution. So far, he has managed to keep the tensions between Israel and the former colonial power, Britain, under control, as well as keep peace within the Labour Party. That is a remarkable feat.
