Sunday, September 21, 2025

Answering Adrian's innocent questions about recognition of the State of Palestine

A chap called Adrian Hilton, who appears to write for the Spectator and is also "Chairman of the Academic Council of the Margaret Thatcher Centre", has asked a series of eight questions about the UK's impending recognition of the State of Palestine (which will apparently take effect after a speech later today).  The questions are clearly supposed to be impossible to answer and yet most of them are actually extremely easy to answer.  I was going to reply to the questions directly on Twitter, but it would have taken quite a long thread, so I'll do it here instead.

"1. What are the borders of this Palestinian state?"

The pre-1967 borders of the Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem and the West Bank.

"2. What is the capital city?"

East Jerusalem, de jure.  Ramallah, de facto, due to the ongoing illegal occupation of Palestine by a neighbouring state.

"3. What is its constitution or polity?"

A quick Google search suggests the Amended Basic Law of 2003 is the interim constitution of the State of Palestine.

"4. Who forms the government?"

Fatah.

"5. Who is its leader?"

Mahmoud Abbas is the President of the State of Palestine.

"6. How ‘sovereign’ will it be?"

In terms of constitutional theory, as sovereign as the UK or Germany or any other state with widespread international recognition.  But if you mean in terms of actual control on the ground, that obviously depends on whether or not Israel ends the illegal occupation of the State of Palestine's sovereign territory.

"7. How will this help ordinary Palestinians?"

Without a state, there will scarcely even be a Palestinian people left to help.  The Israeli government has made abundantly clear that any remaining Gazan Palestinians who have not yet been exterminated will be removed under duress from the territory of Palestine.  Refusing to recognise the State of Palestine would implicitly legitimise this act of ethnic cleansing and genocide.

"8. What about Israel's hostages?"

That is a completely unrelated issue, given that the hostages are held by Hamas, and not by the State of Palestine or by anyone in control of the State of Palestine.

Hope this helps, Adrian.

*.  *.  *

The Scot Goes Pop fundraiser for 2025, launched eight long months ago in January, has been inching closer to its target figure...but can it get there?  Many thanks to everyone who has donated so far.  If you'd like to help Scot Goes Pop stay afloat during this prolonged transitional period while I seek to find out whether video blogging is viable as an alternative funding model, card donations are welcome HERE.    Or, if you prefer, direct donations can be made via PayPal.  My PayPal email address is:  jkellysta@yahoo.co.uk

Another way of helping is by subscribing to my YouTube channel (which I must stress is completely free!).  I need to reach at least 1000 subscribers and I'm currently on 562.

3 comments:

  1. Saw him being platformed on BBC 'news'. Sounds and looks like a twatty Tory Cedric. And if that's reducing the argument to ad hominid, so be it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bloody auto correct! 'Ad hominid' is probably complimentary in this joker's case!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree with the interpretation. The Oslo Accords accepted the existing settler landgrabs of the time, and therefore Bantustanisation. The Oslo Accords were never implemented, and the Zionists have since rendered them obsolete by a never ending series of colonial expansions by small increments, and relative stealth (enough stealth for the American paymasters to claim ignorance). In the absence of the Oslo Accords, the UK is by inference signing up to the 1967 borders. Whether Starmer knows this or agrees with that interpretation is another matter. If this upsets Tel Aviv, hell mend them! By always taking an extreme, absolutist stance, they have worked themselves into a logical cul de sac where they are for once the losers.

    ReplyDelete