Layla Moran, the UK’s first and only MP of Palestinian heritage, discusses her party’s stance on the ongoing conflict in Gaza in an interview with the Editor of The Muslim News, Ahmed J Versi. Moran, whose Christian Palestinian relatives are currently stranded in a besieged Catholic church in Gaza City, also talks about the vilification of pro-peace activists, the UK’s performance in securing peace, and the long-term solution to the decades-long conflict.
The Government and Labour have both refused to call for a ceasefire in Gaza, stating that a halt would allow Hamas to reorganise militarily. What is the Lib-Dem position on a ceasefire?
The Liberal Democrat position is to have a complete bilateral ceasefire that applies to Hamas as much as it does to the IDF. We need it because of the scale of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. At the beginning, we said to ourselves, ‘If this happened to the UK, what would our government do?’ We would go after the terrorists. We agree that Hamas needs to be removed from Gaza. But we must accept that their political leadership is not in Gaza; it’s in Qatar. Second, how do you avoid children, particularly boys who are now orphans, becoming radicalised, not just in Gaza but across the world, because of the bombardment in the name of going after Hamas like this? The conclusion is that there is no military solution to this goal. If we want to get rid of Hamas, we must understand that Hamas is not just an organisation. Hamas is an idea. How do you replace an idea? You replace it with a better idea, which is hope. This is why we talk about two states with every breath, because security for the Israelis comes from security for the Palestinians. I was pleased that Lord Cameron, when he visited Palestine, said exactly that. But if you agree that security can only be achieved for Israel by having a secure and dignified Palestinian state, what are you going to do about it? This action that we are seeing now in Gaza, in my view and the view of the Liberal Democrats, including my party leader, Ed Davey, is not going to achieve that end. It is going to make it worse.
What do you think of the PM’s refusal to denounce Israel’s collective punishment of Palestinians in Gaza, whether by indiscriminate bombing or blockade of the enclave, and his insistence that Hamas alone is responsible for Palestinian suffering?
The government has made a big mistake. The British government, especially given the history of the region, the British Mandate, and the Balfour Declaration, should be completely even-handed in this debate.
Let’s be honest: Britain is partly responsible for why we are where we are. If it believes in international law without fear or favour, it should apply to both Hamas and the Israeli Defence Forces. For this reason, the Liberal Democrats have called for two things.
First, the government wholeheartedly backs the ICC investigation into war crimes, which looks at both Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories from 2014 onwards, including illegal settlements, for example, and the disparity of rights for Palestinians in all parts of the territory.
I am pleased that it looks like the government has changed a little bit. Second, the government needs to release its legal advice on international humanitarian law and the rules of war. What has the Foreign Office been told by its lawyers? Because a lot of people are talking about “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing”, these are big words with legal definitions.
What the Liberal Democrats say is that we need lawyers to tell us what is [legally] right or wrong. What do the government lawyers say? Until we see that, this government needs to treat both sides equally, because, let us face it, that’s what caused the problems in the first place.
Do you agree with Business and Trade Secretary Kemi Badenoch that Israel should be applauded for going to “great pains” to adhere to international law when bombing Gaza?
Her words are symptomatic of taking sides that this government has become a part of. They pay just lip service to international law.
There are two things here: First, the question is whether the Israelis are adhering to international law, and if they are, the Liberal Democrats have called on the government to release the legal advice that they have had to confirm this. Because if they think it is not true, it has big implications for Britain when it talks about international law and human rights with other countries.
Given the scale of the civilian casualties, the concern is that this is going to lead to even more violence and insurgency. We have seen support for Hamas increase, not decrease, as a result of what they’re doing. Either those international laws are not fit-for-purpose, or they are breaking them, at which point the question becomes: what is this government doing to hold them accountable through mechanisms such as the International Criminal Court?
But where we are now is a suggestion that the government is not at all critical of the Israeli government and its response. They call for restraint, but they will not be specific about what they should be restraining against, and they can’t give us assurances about that.
What of the government’s claims that they are speaking privately to the Israelis to restrain their bombing?
If talking in private is not achieving anything, then the next obvious step is to say something publicly, and that applies extra pressure. Two million people are displaced, nearly 20,000 are now killed, and the numbers are getting even higher. How bad does this need to get before they break cover and talk publicly?
We are talking about governments that I do not trust anymore. I have never trusted this British government. That is why I am a member of the opposition. They were breaking international law over Brexit, Northern Ireland, and our courts. That is why we want an election.
I am terribly upset with America and the way that they have taken one side over the other. The only thing that binds us together post-World War II is the international rules-based order, which is the UN. It is incredibly flawed, but it’s what we’ve got. They undermine that system. That is a real casualty because it does not just affect what is happening in Israel/Palestine, it affects every human on the planet.
Despite a few arrests and most of the protestors displaying no signs of antisemitism or pro-Hamas support, former Home Secretary Suella Braverman dubbed the Gaza ceasefire demonstrations “hate marches.” What do you think of the unprecedented vilification of pro-ceasefire protests?
These are not “hate marches.” We have an inalienable right to protest. We should hold that dear. Even if they disagree with what the people on the march are saying, we should all be defending the right, because that is a key part of our democracy. Second, we have seen on other marches that some people cause trouble. But the vast majority, more than 99%, given how huge these marches are, are people who are looking at what is happening in Gaza and the West Bank and are crying because they don’t know what else to do.
REIn our democracy, as a citizen, there are many things you could do, You could write to your MP, vote in an election, and in the interim, make your views known by protesting.
That is what those people are doing. To tar everyone with the same brush and suggest that they are hateful when what they are calling for is an ending of violence and asking for peace is a wilful misunderstanding of everyone on those marches. Now, what is the overlap with the people on those marches and voting Conservative? I would imagine it is quite low. Let us call what the Conservatives are doing what it is. Their electoral strategy is about creating division in the country, and it suits them to do so.
But there is something I will touch on, several people in the Jewish community have pointed out that there are things said on these marches that they find hurtful. For example, ‘from the river to the sea,’ chant.
The word “intifada” is very hurtful to them. While many of the people, I am sure, who are saying these things don’t mean it to be hurtful, “intifada” means uprising. “From the river to the sea” is just a geographical area. All I would say to those people is to be wary and know it’s hurtful.
Could you say the same sentiment with different words that don’t get lost in the hurt on the other side? And so I’ve been trying to create these vigils where we bring people together—Christians, Muslims, Jews—all together, where we’re being very respectful of each other because we don’t want to find ourselves in a situation where, through a little bit of ignorance or misunderstanding, you create more division, especially when we’ve got governments like these. My plea to people on the marches is just, is there another form of word?
This is not giving in. It is being respectful and sensitive to other people, many of whom are also calling for peace, but they’re too scared to do that in whatever situation they’re in.
There is a consensus for a two-state solution to resolve this conflict, but how can we to persuade Israel to accept that solution, given its long-standing opposition to it?
There are several different steps. Recognition of Palestine. I laid my Palestine recognition bill just yesterday. Again, every year since I’ve been elected, I wear my keffiyeh while I do it, and I’m proud to do it every year.
That needs to happen first, not last in the process. We also need elections in Palestine—free and fair elections—where political prisoners who might have otherwise stood can stand. We need a change of leadership in Israel, which does not include Ben-Gvir and Smotrich and the people who are supporting the settlers
We need a proper plan for the settlements because people point to the settlements and rightly look at the proliferation of the settlements. They are still illegal under international law, and it is Israel’s problem.
So, if Israel is committed to a two-state solution, it should. You need political will. You need the leaders not just in Israel and Palestine but in the whole of the Arab world, the whole of the West, to see that this is a problem that is long past due solving. It has been 75 years, and this needs to be the last time.
And yes, it has not happened before, but that doesn’t mean it can’t happen. Just look at Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland was a 1,000-year-old conflict, and right until the very end, no one thought you could solve it until they did.
But what was the thing that they had in common? First, vast amounts of money went into helping peace-building initiatives, helping with the resourcing of various governments toward that aim. Almost nothing has been going in that direction in the last few years. You had political will for all parties involved, including the international community, who held their hand every step of the way. It took patience, diligence, and time.
All these things have been missing in the Israel-Palestine conflict. It’s no wonder we’ve ended up in the situation we are in now. Everyone thought that we could put this conflict in the ‘too-difficult-to-solve’ pile and that it was just going to go away. It was never going to go away.
Those of us who have been raising the alarm have been raising it for years. This is the moment we seize the day, seize all these incredible millions of people around the world who are suddenly saying this is enough, and then it’s going to happen again in a different form and name. It may be not Hamas, something else. Unfortunately, it’s going to come back.
The reason it hasn’t happened in all these years is that Israel has been creating illegal settlements and defying international law with impunity, knowing that the US and the UK would not take any action to make it comply. So, as you stated, there is no will. What is the Lib Dem position on placing sanctions on Israel?
It is Liberal Democrats’ policy that we would ban all goods made in illegal settlements. This was passed into our policy in 2021, with Liberal Democrats Friends of Israel agreeing alongside Liberal Democrats Friends of Palestine. Because as liberals, we believe in the international rule of law. This isn’t the same as boycotting all goods from Israel or whatever.
This is different because these are illegal settlements. Therefore, any economic activity with those people and those economies only helps to fund something illegal. And that is obvious. So that is something we are now pushing.
The other thing we’re pushing for is a presumption of denial for the arms trade with any of the countries that are on the FCDO priority list, of which Palestine and Israel are two among. The third thing that is incredibly important is that there is a new trade deal between Israel and the UK.
That trade deal needs to be clear—not just exemptions, not just preferential trade, which is the current plan, but punitive trade with those settlements, and they should be banned completely. So, we have an opportunity in the trade deal to implement this policy. We do not just need to convince the Tories, though. We also need to convince the Labour Party, because that is not their policy either.
I agree with you that, yes, Israel needs to be held to account. But you can look across every single issue in this. It could be international law, corruption, political prisoners, the economy, sanctions, or the occupation itself. There are so many ways that Israel is not upholding its end of the bargain. Palestinians are also underserved by their politicians. This is why the international community needs to now turn its attention to all aspects of society in Israel Palestine, and beyond.
This is the case I’m making to David Cameron and whoever else I might be able to speak to. I’ve secured a meeting with Andrew Mitchell to speak about this issue. What I’m going to say to him is that we need to see this, Israel Palestine. Peace in Israel and Palestine is a security issue, not just for Israelis and Palestinians but for the whole of the region and arguably across the world. Because if we do not solve this, Iran is going to continue to use Palestine for its own ends.
The person who is going to be most upset by peace in Palestine and Israel is the leader in Iran. It is Putin. It is anyone who wants chaos. If you don’t want chaos there, or in Indonesia and everywhere else, where you might also have insurgency happening as a result of the third-holiest site in Islam, and one of the most holy sites, certainly in Judaism and Christianity, then you need to solve this problem.
Do you support taking Israel and Palestine to the ICC for breaches of international law?
Absolutely! We 100% support it. I questioned Lord Ahmed on this recently. He shook his head and said, yes, we support. Andrew Mitchell also said he supports it. He supports the ICC. I know they have changed their minds. Andrew Mitchell, in recent questions, has changed his tone. And what he said, know, we support the ICC, he said, and the determination of its jurisdiction is up to the ICC.
I have welcomed the change of tone from the UK government. I welcome that. Let us give them a little bit of credit where credit is due because at least they’ve realised that that is the right mechanism.
(Photo credit: David Woolfall/UK Parliament)
READ MORE
Editorial: Western leadership values at odds with their people and the world
King’s College union officers suspended for ceasefire calls
St Andrews University rector racially abused over Israel ‘genocide’ claim
Biden support nosedives among Arab Americans
Protesters shut down four UK arms factories producing Israeli fighter-jets
Palestinian student shot in Vermont is paralysed from chest down
M&S pulls Christmas advert post after Palestinian flag criticism
