Baroness Chapman (Minister of State for International Development) has been telling Parliament: “We all wish this peace process well and will do everything we possibly can to see it sustained.”
At the same time John Healey (Secretary of State for Defence), answering a question, said it was not the case that British troops were in Gaza to monitor the ceasefire. “A small handful of British forces personnel have been deployed to the Civil-Military Co-ordination Centre at the request of the US, and it is the US that is leading that work.”
Neither of them is questioning the legitimacy of what’s going on. Hadn’t they noticed that there is no proper peace process, no legal framework? And under what authority is the US “leading that work”?
A team of 28 independent human rights experts, appointed by the United Nations Human Rights Council, have said that a permanent ceasefire, a rapid release of unlawfully detained persons, an influx of humanitarian aid under United Nations supervision, no forced displacement, the withdrawal of Israeli forces, and non-annexation of territory are all normal requirements of international law and shouldn’t depend on a formal peace plan.
But they argue that other elements of Trump’s plan are inconsistent with fundamental rules of international law and the 2024 Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) which demands that Israel ends its unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
They list no fewer than 15 serious objections including these:
Any peace plan must respect the ground rules of international law. The future of Palestine must be in the hands of the Palestinian people, not imposed on them under duress by outsiders.
The United Nations – not Israel or its closest ally – has been identified by the ICJ as the legitimate authority to oversee the end of the occupation and transition towards a political solution in which the Palestinians’ right of self-determination is fully realised.
The plan does not guarantee the Palestinian right of self-determination as international law requires, and is subject to vague pre-conditions concerning Gaza’s redevelopment, Palestinian Authority reform, and a “dialogue” between Israel and Palestine. Palestine’s future would thus be at the mercy of decisions by outsiders, not in the hands of Palestinians as international law commands.
The plan also requires more negotiations with Israel, when the Israeli Prime Minister has already declared that Israel would “forcibly resist” statehood. Fulfilling the right of self-determination cannot be conditional on negotiations.
The “temporary transitional government” is not representative of Palestinians and even excludes the Palestinian Authority, which further violates self-determination and lacks legitimacy.
Oversight by a “Board of Peace” chaired by the US President is not under United Nations authority or transparent multilateral control, while the US is a deeply partisan supporter of Israel and not an “honest broker”.
An “International Stabilisation Force”, outside the control of the Palestinian people and the United Nations as a guarantor, would simply replace the Israeli occupation with a US-led occupation.
Partial Israeli occupation continues indefinitely through a “security perimeter” inside Gaza’s borders, which is absolutely unacceptable.
Nothing is said about de-militarisation of Israel, which has committed the worst imaginable international crimes against the Palestinians and threatened peace and security in the region through aggression against other countries. Likewise, de-radicalisation is imposed on Gaza only, while public incitement to genocide has been dominant rhetoric in Israel.
The plan largely treats Gaza in isolation from the West Bank including East Jerusalem, when these areas must be regarded as a unified Palestinian territory and State. The plan does not address other fundamental issues such as ending illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank (including East Jerusalem), borders, compensation, and refugees.
The proposed “economic development plan” and “special economic zone” could result in illegal foreign exploitation of resources without Palestinian consent.
The International Court of Justice has been crystal clear: conditions cannot be placed on the Palestinian right of self-determination. The Israeli occupation must end immediately, totally and unconditionally, with due reparation made to the Palestinians. But there is no duty on Israel and those who have sustained its illegal attacks in Gaza to compensate Palestinians for illegal war damage.
So what exactly did Trump and his special guests sign at the peace summit at Sharm el-Sheikh on 13 October? It was called The Trump Declaration for Enduring Peace and Prosperity – Presidential Memoranda. Only around 30 of the 193 members states of the United Nations attended. Hamas and Israel were both absent. The document was sheer woffle and signed only by Trump, El-Sisi, Al-Thani and Erdogan. How representative was this charade? How legally valid?
Trump and some of his allies seem totally ignorant of their solemn duty to recognise Palestinian statehood. So, where does all this leave the near-universal pledge to recognise Palestinian as a state (and make it happen)?
Fortunately, UN Resolution 37/43 of December 1982 is there to help. It comprehensively re-affirms previous resolutions and treaties on the universal right to self-determination and the speedy granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples in order to provide an effective guarantee that human rights may be observed. Note the words “speedy granting”. Palestinians have been kept waiting for over 100 years for a guarantee of their rights.
And 37/43 considers that denying the Palestinian people their inalienable rights to self-determination, sovereignty, independence and return to Palestine, and the repeated acts of aggression by Israel against the peoples of the region, constitute a serious threat to international peace and security. It strongly condemns those Governments that do not recognise the right to self-determination and independence of all peoples still under colonial and foreign domination and alien subjugation, notably the Palestinian people.
So nations participating in Trump’s plan, including Britain, ought to have known better. It delivers a short break in the carnage and an exchange of (some) prisoners but was otherwise formulated with ulterior motives. Genuine peace and respect for Palestinian rights are simply not on Trump’s agenda.
Why is the Palestinian Authority so ill-prepared?
The International Development Committee in its Third Special Report of Session 2024–25 published in April 2025 announced it had begun planning for the ‘next phase’ in Gaza, with the Government preparing to take a leading role in the process. “The Government must detail how it intends to take immediate action to halt the attacks on Palestinian civilians and lands, notwithstanding its respect for judicial rulings on the matter. The Government “partially agreed”, but we’re given no details on progress.
The Committee also reported: “On 15 October 2024, the Foreign Secretary announced new sanctions targeting three illegal settler outposts and four organisations that have supported and sponsored violence against communities in the West Bank.” This was a pathetic response considering armed Israeli squatters, under the Allon Plan, have been terrorising Palestinians since 1967. The squatters and those who transfer them into the Palestinian homeland and fund and supply them (i.e. the Israeli government) are all classed as war criminals. They all need slapping with sanctions. Today there are well over 700,000 of them making Palestinians’ lives a misery.
The Committee went further, maintaining:
Israel continues to decry in public any potential investigation or ruling by international courts, giving the impression that it does not pay due regard to international law.
The Government must set out immediately the steps it will take, in line with global allies, to ensure that Israel is held accountable for any ongoing breaches of international humanitarian law.
The Government must set out how it intends to work with the international community to bring an end to Israel’s illegal occupation of the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
The Government, in partnership with its allies, must demand that Israel abides by its obligations under the Geneva Conventions and customary international law and facilitates access to detainees for officials of the International Committee of the Red Cross.
Again, the Government “partially agreed” but we’ve heard nothing more.
The Committee said it was working to support and strengthen the Palestinian Authority as it delivers its reform agenda in preparation for recognition. That was many months ago and the PA seems hopelessly unprepared. What exactly has the British Government been doing all this time?
A UN Security Council draft resolution mandating an international stabilisation force is being circulated. Have you had sight of this, and if so, what is the UK Government’s stance please? And what is the Opposition’s view? Will there be a debate? Can we expect transparency?