Collaborator: How Starmer, in your name, made you an accomplice to terror

23 SEPTEMBER 2025 | OPINION

I. The Betrayal

I was on GB News the morning Britain recognised Palestine, and by accident I went viral. That in itself was grimly amusing, because Israel was always the one subject I had said I would never touch. Too heated. Too poisoned. Too endless. But October 7th changed that. The massacre changed that. The fallout changed that. The demonisation of the nation attacked, the whataboutery from the establishment, the hatred excused, the lies paraded as fact — all of it made silence impossible.

And then Sir Keir Starmer, a man without the moral character to occupy the office once held by Winston Churchill, handed a modern evil a victory that most in Britain do not even understand. This was not leadership. This was not diplomacy. This was collaboration.

Six British citizens were murdered by Hamas on October 7th: Emily Hand, Ada Sagi, Ofer Calderon, Emily Lewis, Hayim Katsman, and Jake Marlowe. Their names must be spoken. They were among the 378 people massacred at the Nova music festival — a gathering for peace, joy, and life — where women and children were gunned down, raped, mutilated, or dragged into Gaza. It was not politics. It was not territory. It was hate. Hate because they were Jews. And as the anniversary of that atrocity approaches, Hamas has been clear: Britain’s recognition is “one of the fruits of October 7”.

That is what Starmer’s Labour has delivered — not peace, not leverage, but a propaganda victory for a genocidal death cult. The British government has legitimised the killers of its own citizens. We talk about a two-tier society here at home. Now Labour has shown us something worse: two-tier humanity. Recognition was in the manifesto, yes. It was trailed during the election, yes. But delivering it now, in this way, with hostages still in Gaza, and with the memory of slaughter still raw — that is not principle. That is appeasement.

On GB News, I told Stephen Dixon and Anne Diamond the truth: a proscribed terrorist organisation had just been gifted legitimacy. When they pressed me on Starmer’s caveat — that Hamas must “play no role” — I said what it really was: a strongly-worded letter. If we’re being honest, Hamas should be wiped from the earth. Instead, Britain rewards them. Starmer did not lead – followed orders. In this act, Britain has made itself a collaborator in terror.

II. The Rot Inside Labour

And let’s be clear — this was never really Starmer’s decision. He is not leading this party; he is being led. The backbenches demanded recognition. Corbyn’s new party amplified it from the outside. The activists dictated it from the streets. And Starmer, paralysed by fear, yielded.

Corbyn’s movement will dine out on this. They will say Labour finally bent to them, finally caved in to pressure, finally gave them the symbolic victory they had campaigned for – and they will be right. Recognition is not seen as a British policy; it is seen as Corbynism by stealth.

Jonathan Powell’s fingerprints are all over it too. Blair’s old fixer, forever trying to polish a legacy, whispering from the shadows. Powell was there for the betrayal of the Chagos Islanders. Powell thinks in grand gestures, not consequences. And Powell is once again shaping policy without ever facing a voter. Starmer lets him. That alone tells you everything about who is really in control.

Meanwhile Labour’s fault lines widen. Neil Kinnock resurfaces to demand Britain rejoin the EU or the Single Market, reopening the wound that cost Labour whole swathes of the country. Andy Burnham, the Mayor of Greater Manchester, is openly manoeuvring for a leadership challenge. He does not even bother to hide it — and that tells you how weak Starmer is. His rivals no longer need to play palace games in secret. They can do it in the open, because he is that fragile.

And then there is Starmer’s own performance. His infamous “sausages” slip at his first Conference speech as Prime Minister was not just embarrassing – it was revealing. A man with no gravitas, no weight, no authority. A barrister on a battlefield. Britain has a Prime Minister who looks the part only until he opens his mouth.

Nor does this moral bankruptcy begin with him. David Lammy, as Foreign Secretary, restarted UK funding to UNRWA — an agency accused again and again of collaborating with Hamas. Appeasement dressed as aid; the same cowardice repackaged.

After my GB News interview, Claire Muldoon and Cristo Foufas took up the point I raised. Of course, you can criticise Israel without being anti-Semitic. That isn’t the issue. The issue is how many hide behind that line to excuse their hatred, to excuse their antisemitism, to cloak their lack of moral fibre. Israel is not perfect – no country is. But when the BBC refuses to call Hamas what it is — a terrorist organisation — while gleefully branding people “far-right” without evidence, the mask slips. And once it slips, it never comes back.

This is why Hamas targeted a music festival for peace. This is why they tortured hostages, defiled bodies, and paraded them like trophies. It was hate – that is the point. And Britain has just given them recognition as reward.

Diplomatically, the fallout is catastrophic. Israel sees betrayal. The United States sees weakness. Donald Trump, whatever else you think of him, said it straight: recognition rewards terror. He had seen the videos of October 7th. He told us so at Chequers. He knows what Hamas is. Gulf states, who prize sequencing and stability, will see Britain’s move as reckless indulgence; they are right. And what have we gained? Nothing. No trade. No capital. No leverage. Only applause from protestors and disdain from allies.

Labour promised scrutiny. It delivered a stitch-up. Labour promised principle. It delivered appeasement. And at the centre of it all sits a man who does not lead, but follows orders.

III. The Consequence

And so what now? The answer is simple: nothing. No peace. No leverage. No money. No credibility. Only shame.

This is not diplomacy. It is appeasement. And worse: it is appeasement carried out in full knowledge of the consequences. Starmer and his circle know Hamas has called this “a fruit of October 7th”. They know Israel views it as betrayal. They know Trump and Washington and the Gulf capitals see it as weakness. They know Jewish communities in Britain feel abandoned. They know all of this — and they still do it. Why? Because Labour convinces itself that it is right and ignores the consequences.

It is a pattern. They were warned family farm tax would devastate. They ignored it. They were warned winter fuel allowance cuts would be cruel. They ignored it. They were warned national insurance hikes would strangle growth. They ignored it. And now they are warned recognition rewards terror — and they ignore it.

We have seen this play before, with Ukraine. We abandoned the victims, appeased the tyrant, pretended to act, and dressed cowardice up as statesmanship. Putin was indulged until his tanks rolled across borders – and now the same trick is being repeated with Hamas. Hamas and Putin: two tyrants, different theatres, same mistake. Britain abandons the victim, appeases the aggressor, and convinces itself it is noble.

We pledged “never again” after the Holocaust. Never again to stand by while Jews were targeted for extermination. Never again to let anti-Semitism metastasise into genocide – and yet here we are. Britain may not be running Auschwitz, but Britain is driving the trains that carry the Jews to their death.

We know what “from the river to the sea” means: it means extermination. There is no caveat; no nuance. When the Metropolitan Police flinch at confronting Islamist mobs chanting it, that is complicity. When the BBC ducks the word “terrorist”, that is collaboration. And when the Prime Minister of Britain recognises Palestine in the wake of October 7th, that is surrender.

This is not about Palestine. It is about Labour’s internal convulsions. About Starmer’s lack of leadership. About Powell’s whispers, Corbyn’s shadow, Burnham’s open manoeuvres, Lammy’s appeasement, the BBC’s cowardice, and the establishment’s moral collapse. It is about a governing class that prefers gestures to principles, weakness to strength, cowardice to leadership.

And for that, Starmer, Labour, the BBC, and the elites who applauded this must never be forgiven.

Britain has not stumbled. It has not erred; it has chosen. It has chosen appeasement. It has chosen collaboration. And in that choice, Britain has fallen further, faster, and with more disgrace than in living memory.

We are not neutral. We are not weak. We are worse.

We are collaborators in terror.