The United Kingdom’s involvement in events in Israel is like trying to navigate a maze with a blindfold on.

It’s a real rollercoaster, given the historical, political, and social rollercoaster of the region. The Middle East has been a longstanding soap opera full of drama and tension, with plot lines that have been dragging on for decades.

Therefore, any interference or intervention by the UK should be approached with the delicacy of defusing a bomb made of glass.

Diplomacy is like the carefully choreographed dance moves at a crowded party—it’s crucial for not stepping on anyone’s toes in the intricate dynamics of the region.

Instead of crashing the party uninvited, prioritizing diplomatic channels helps us engage respectfully with all the guests, acknowledging their sovereignty and aspirations. We need to create an atmosphere that’s more chill than a spa day, encouraging peaceful dialogue and negotiation to find solutions that address everyone’s legit complaints.

This approach not only shows that we’re committed to keeping the peace, but also that we totally get how complex this whole party scene is and respect all the different folks trying to have a good time.

In a nutshell, manoeuvring through the intricate web of the Middle East requires the UK to dance with finesse, juggling diplomacy, a dash of sovereignty respect, and a generous helping of peaceful resolutions.

By mastering this act, the UK can sprinkle some magic dust to cultivate an atmosphere primed for long-lasting solutions and, voilà, a brighter, merrier future for the region awaits.

However, some may question the sense in charging in on autopilot suggesting a two-state solution is a silver bullet – when it clearly is not, given that one side has rejected such a solution every time:

• In 1937, the Peel Commission proposed the partition of Palestine and the creation of an Arab state.
• In 1939, the British White Paper proposed the creation of a unitary Arab state.
• In 1947, the UN would have created an even larger Arab state as part of its partition plan.
• The 1979 Egypt-Israel peace negotiations offered the Palestinians autonomy, which would almost certainly have led to full independence.
• The Oslo agreements of the 1990s laid out a path for Palestinian independence, but the process was derailed by terrorism.
• In 2000, Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered to create a Palestinian state in all of Gaza and 97 percent of the West Bank.
• In 2008, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert offered to withdraw from almost the entire West Bank and partition Jerusalem on a demographic basis.
• In addition 1948 to 1967, Israel did not control the West Bank. The Palestinians could have demanded an independent state from the Jordanians. On the contrary whilst Jordan was in control Arafat said there was no longer a claim as it was no longer part of Palestine. Once it was back in Israeli hands it miraculously became disputed land again! This is one of many reasons Jews and Israelis are cynical.

The Palestinians have a knack for turning down every chance that comes their way. It’s like they’ve made it a hobby to “never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity”, as Abba Eban once put it. They must have their reasons.

Unfortunately, we don’t have a clue what these are.

I guess we, and the Palestinians, like to keep life interesting!

Tours truly,

D. Cameron aka Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton