Palestinian statehood debated in the House of Lords

“But none of this justifies the reaction of the government of Israel in two invasions of the Gaza Strip, in 2009 and 2014.”

Lord Steel, a former president of Medical Aid for Palestinians, and a member of a friends of Israel group, said that he knew the Israeli government did not like the term “apartheid”, but added: “The fact there are separate roads in the West Bank is strongly reminiscent of what I used to find in South Africa.”

Lord Cope said Israel had stolen Palestinian land by force.

“I believe it is time that the UK recognises Palestine as a country. The extremists on both sides squeeze out the moderates in the middle. Recognition would give the Palestinian moderates a real boost,” he said.

It was wrong, Baroness Blackstone said, to believe that it was too soon for an independent Palestinian state. Israel’s lack of government, warring factions, unclear borders and lack of a capital city in 1948 had not stopped the founding of the state, she added.

But Lord Pannick said there was “good reason” for Britain not to recognise an independent country at this time.

“Recognising a state of Palestine at this time would hinder a peace settlement because what’s needed on both sides is the compromises that have to be made in bilateral negotiations,” he said.

Baroness Warsi, who resigned from the government over its stance towards the Gaza conflict last summer, said: “Desperate times make people take desperate measures. In the past these were violent. When Palestinians see the reality of a two-state solution diminishing then they start to fight for the Palestine that they want to exist.

“That’s the desperation that we see from the Palestinians. It’s not hard to understand the feeling of hopelessness.”

Lord Mendelsohn suggested the debating of the motion in the Lords was “unhelpful” and failed to provide a “useful framework” that would help Israelis and Palestinians.

“We do need to re-energise the peace process, but this Palestinian unilateralism will not do it,” he said. “It is not the last throw of the dice. It is not the last minute.”

Lord Palmer said: “As a friend of the Israelis and Palestinians I do not believe there is any alternative to those countries sitting down and settling their differences with painful compromises on both sides.”

Suggesting that politicians were using the topic as a “political football”, Lord Leigh said the government should be commended on its position.

He highlighted Hamas’s desire to destroy the Jewish people and said the terror group would not be dissuaded from using violence if a Palestinian state was recognised now.

“Unilateral steps would undermine peace negotiations and reward the Palestinian Authority at a time of terrorism,” he added.

Lord Winston told the House he was a Zionist and a descendant of Rabbi Joseph Caro who settled in Israel in the 15th century.

He said that recognising a Palestinian state would make the situation worse and lead to more violence.

He also noted that antisemitism among Palestinians was a serious problem.

Baroness Tonge claimed that the "continuing injustice and the hypocrisy of the West" in supporting Israel was fanning the flames of Islamic extremism.

"Continuing failure to create a Palestinian state is causing trouble for us all," she said.

She also suggested that Israel's position was contributing to the rise of antisemitism in Europe, with people conflating its actions with the diaspora communities. She asked why Jewish leaders did not speak out against "injustice against Palestinians".

No vote was due to take place at the end of the debate.

MPs voted in October to recognise the state of Palestine following a symbolic and unprecedented debate in the House of Commons. A motion calling for the recognition of a Palestinian state was passed by 274 votes to 12 after they spent five hours debating the issue.