Displaced Palestinians lineup to receive donated food at a community kitchen in Khan Younis, southern Gaza Strip, July 23, 2026
…
EIGHTY MPs and peers have written to new Prime Minister Andy Burnham urging decisive action to uphold Palestinian rights and impose comprehensive sanctions on Israel.
The cross-party group of politicians demanded in an open letter today that Britain recognise the UN’s findings on genocide and implement the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling in full.
They also called for the imposition of sanctions, including a full arms embargo and a ban on trade that supports Israel’s illegal settlements.
PSC deputy director Peter Leary said: “This timely letter from MPs and peers echoes the views of millions of people across Britain.
“For far too long the British government has wilfully ignored its responsibilities under the Genocide Convention and the findings of the International Court of Justice while actively supporting Israel’s atrocities against the Palestinian people.
“If Andy Burnham really intends to break from the toxic legacy of his predecessor, he must start by imposing wide-ranging sanctions against Israel, including a full arms embargo and a total ban on all trade that aids or assists Israel’s violations of international law.”
Keir Starmer objects to criticism of the IDF. He asks how could anyone object to them starving people to death, forced marches like the Nazis did, bombing Gaza’s hospitals and universities, mass-murdering journalists, healthworkers and starving people queuing for food, killing and raping prisoners and murdering children. He calls for people to stop obstructing his genocide for Israel.
A woman uses an umbrella to try to cope with the scorching heat in London on 8 July. Rasid Necati Aslim/Anadolu via Getty Images
For months, ministers have refused to publish a report on how climate crisis will affect the UK. Burnham must release it
The past two months have seen exceptionally hot weather across much of Western Europe, with even the UK witnessing record temperatures. Even now, England and Wales are well into their third heatwave this year, with some areas on their 13th consecutive day of temperatures above 30°C.
More than 2,700 people are thought to have died as a result of the extreme heat in England and Wales, with scientists estimating that 440 people died during each of the three peak days of June’s record-breaking heatwave, when temperatures reached 37.7°C.
The situation was perhaps best summarised by the Met Office’s State of the UK Climate report for 2025, published last week: “What we used to think of as extreme, we increasingly see as normal.”
Introducing the report, its lead author, climate information scientist Mike Kendon, notes that “2025 was the UK’s warmest year on record, the sixth time this record has been broken in the 21st century so far”. He adds: “The latest 10-year period (2016-2025) is 1.33°C warmer than the period from 1961-1990”.
In these elevated temperatures, wildfires are a particular concern. This week, local authorities across France cancelled many Bastille Day events to minimise fire risks, not least from firework displays, and in the UK there were fears about what are becoming known as “firewaves”. Less cold winters mean more vegetation earlier in the spring, which, when dried out by heatwaves like those seen this year, increases the risk of wildfires. Last Tuesday, emergency services dealt with 19 such fires, including two major incidents, according to the National Fire Chiefs Council.
Speaking to the Guardian, Maria Barbosa of the UK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology said: “What we are witnessing is climate change actively rewriting the vulnerability of the British landscape.” Perhaps the key element to draw out here is that this is not a change likely to affect us in the future; it is happening now.
Moreover, it relates to one of the surprising elements of the June heat: a public disconnect in the UK between acceptance of climate breakdown and relating this to carbon dioxide emissions from burning coal, oil or gas. People seemed unwilling or unable to make this link, even with the widespread personal experience of heat, the risk of wildfires and those reports of thousands of deaths.
One explanation is that many of our biggest media outlets often fail to point to the connection.
Researchers at the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit reviewed 2,500 news reports on the heatwaves from the nine main national daily newspapers, finding that nearly three-quarters made no mention of climate breakdown. The Financial Times was most likely to mention the climate crisis, doing so in 50 of its 78 articles on the heatwaves, while The Sun was least likely to do so – making the link in only four of its 69 articles.
All too often, the reports gave the impression that the main challenge regarding the heatwaves will be adapting to the “new normal” of a hotter world, with plenty of coverage on changing our behaviour, converting buildings and being prepared for new health concerns.
But the challenge we face goes way beyond that. Adapting to a world where average temperatures are 2.5°C above current levels might be possible at considerable cost and human suffering, but unless we also cut carbon dioxide emissions, then we will have to keep on adapting to ever-higher temperatures. Concentrating on current adaptation alone is barely half the answer.
This is a known issue within government and is causing such concern that publicity is unwelcome, as shown by events relating to a study prepared by the Joint Intelligence Committee, which was officially described as a “national security assessment” and titled somewhat ominously: Global biodiversity loss, ecosystem collapse and national security.
The study was supposed to be launched at a landmark event on 9 October last year, but was held back, with one source telling The Guardian that insiders “feared it was being suppressed because the government was unwilling to face the issues raised.”
After pressure from MPs, including the official environmental audit committee, and Freedom of Information requests to publish the report, the government eventually released a redacted 14-page version in January this year. It warns of a high probability that the UK’s national security, financial prosperity and food security will come under threat from the climate crisis and the subsequent collapse of vital ecosystems that support food production.
Even that makes for very sober reading. The report identifies nine “planetary boundaries” as the safe limits identified for human pressure on nine Earth system processes crucial to maintaining a stable planet, such as climate change, biosphere integrity and oceanic acidification. Six have already been crossed.
The report concludes that ecosystem degradation is occurring across all global regions and every critical ecosystem is on a “pathway to collapse”, which it helpfully defines as “irreversible loss of function beyond repair”.
The implications are huge. This is an official government study by the combined intelligence agencies, and even if redacted, it is unable to hide the crisis ahead. One conclusion is obvious: if this is the greatest threat to our security and the integrity of the global ecosystem, we should be redirecting money away from conventional military spending and towards human and environmental security.
A key requirement of Andy Burnham as incoming prime minister should be the immediate release of the full report, followed by a vigorous public debate on where we go from here.
Donald Trump urges you to be a Climate Science denier like him. He says that he makes millions and millions for destroying the planet, Burn, Baby, Burn and Flood, Baby, Flood.Nigel Farage urges you to ignore facts and reality and be a climate science denier like him and his Deputy Richard Tice. He says that Reform UK has received £Millions and £Millions from the fossil fuel industry to promote climate denial and destroy the planet.Orcas comment on killer apes destroying the planet by continuing to burn fossil fuels.
New PM slashes fuel bills and culls Starmer deadwood, but peace activists warn that placing John Healey as new Chancellor shows ‘beyond doubt that the military industrial complex is in charge of Burnham’s economic policy’
Prime Minister Andy Burnham hosts his first Cabinet meeting at 10 Downing Street, London, July 21, 2026
WE ARE a cost-of-living government, Prime Minister Andy Burnham told his new Cabinet today after slashing energy bills for millions.
Mr Burnham acted to cut VAT on energy bills at a cost of £850 million as his first major move in Downing Street after naming a new team purged of deadwood from Sir Keir Starmer’s government.
However, anti-war campaigners warned that his choice of inveterate warmonger John Healey as new Chancellor presaged a further attack on welfare, health and education.
In a joint statement, Stop the War Coalition and the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament said: “To hand the Treasury purse strings to a man who demanded a £197 billion increase in arms and nuclear weapons spending demonstrates beyond doubt that the military industrial complex is in charge of Burnham’s economic policy.
“The arms dealers and generals are undoubtedly now in the cabinet. John Healey’s appointment as chancellor will inevitably mean huge fights over welfare, health and housing to come.
“None of the social and economic ambitions — tackling the cost-of-living crisis in particular — that Burnham claims to aspire to will be possible if an ever-growing portion of the economy is devoted to war and destruction,” the two campaigns stated.
This work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
People stage a pro-Palestinian demonstration and call on Labour Party leader Andy Burnham, who is preparing to take office as prime minister, to impose comprehensive sanctions on Israel, in London, United Kingdom on July 18, 2026. [Raşid Necati Aslım – Anadolu Agency]
Britain has a new Prime Minister at a moment when history is demanding more than carefully worded statements.
As Andy Burnham enters Downing Street, he inherits a foreign policy crisis that has exposed deep divisions over Britain’s commitment to human rights, international law and the protection of civilian life: Israel’s devastating assault on Gaza.
For Palestinians, this is not an abstract diplomatic dispute. It is a humanitarian catastrophe that has claimed tens of thousands of lives, displaced entire communities and reduced much of Gaza’s civilian infrastructure to ruins.
Many human rights experts, legal scholars and international organisations have warned that Israel’s actions may amount to genocide, with the International Court of Justice currently examining allegations brought by South Africa under the Genocide Convention. The debate over the legal determination continues, but the scale of suffering is undeniable.
The question now facing Britain’s new Prime Minister is whether the UK will continue responding with statements of concern or whether it will finally use its influence to demand meaningful action.
Thousands of people recently marched through London calling on Britain’s new leadership to take stronger action for Gaza, demanding an end to civilian suffering and greater accountability for those responsible. Their message was clear: Palestinians cannot survive on expressions of sympathy alone.
For decades, Britain has presented itself as a defender of international law and human rights.
British governments have condemned abuses committed by states around the world and called for accountability when civilian populations are harmed.
But principles lose their meaning when they are applied selectively.
The suffering of Palestinian civilians should not be treated as a diplomatic inconvenience or reduced to carefully balanced language. International law exists precisely to protect vulnerable populations, especially during moments of war and political pressure.
If Britain genuinely believes in a rules-based international order, then Gaza is a defining test.
The UK cannot demand accountability from some governments while shielding allies from meaningful scrutiny. Human rights cannot depend on political relationships.
Palestinians Need More Than Words
Humanitarian organisations have repeatedly warned of the devastating conditions facing civilians in Gaza.
Aid agencies have highlighted widespread hunger, displacement, the destruction of medical facilities and the collapse of essential services. ActionAid has called on Britain’s new Prime Minister to take urgent action to protect Palestinians, ensure humanitarian access and uphold international humanitarian law.
Medical Aid for Palestinians (MAP), which provides healthcare support to Palestinians living under occupation and conflict, has called on Britain’s new government to move beyond rhetoric and take concrete steps to protect Palestinian lives.
But humanitarian aid alone cannot address the root causes of this crisis.
The UK must use its diplomatic influence to demand an immediate end to actions that continue to devastate Palestinian civilian life.
This means supporting accountability mechanisms, ensuring British foreign policy does not contribute to violations of international law, and recognising that Palestinians have the same fundamental rights to freedom, safety and dignity as any other people.
Britain’s historical role in the Middle East gives it a particular responsibility.
The consequences of Britain’s decisions in the region continue to shape realities today, including the legacy of the British Mandate for Palestine and the events surrounding the creation of Israel in 1948.
That history does not mean Britain alone can solve the conflict. But it does mean Britain cannot claim neutrality while Palestinians continue to endure immense suffering.
A meaningful foreign policy requires more than managing diplomatic relationships. It requires moral courage.
The UK has significant influence through its diplomatic relationships, its position at the United Nations and its international standing.
That influence should be used to protect civilian lives—not simply preserve political alliances.
For many Palestinians, Muslims and human rights advocates in Britain, trust in Westminster has been severely damaged.
Many feel that Palestinian lives have been treated as less valuable and that the language of human rights has been applied inconsistently.
This is the challenge facing Andy Burnham’s government.
The new Prime Minister has an opportunity to demonstrate that Britain’s commitment to human rights is not selective, and that Palestinian suffering will not be ignored because confronting it is politically difficult.
History often judges governments not only by the crises they inherit, but by how they respond when confronted with injustice.
Gaza represents such a moment.
The question is whether Britain’s new leadership will look away, offer cautious statements, or take the steps necessary to protect Palestinian lives and uphold international law.
Palestinians do not need another government expressing concern while the destruction continues.
They need action.
Britain has a new Prime Minister. Now it must act on Palestine.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.
Donald Trump calls for help from NATO allies in securing the Strait of Hormuz despite saying on 7 March 2026 that they don’t need people to join wars after they’ve already won. He’s challenged with the claim that he lies as much as the IDF.Orcas discuss rotting brain, front Orca says Sundown Syndrome is a dead givaway and he wishes someone would Lock Him Up
Displaced Palestinians lineup to receive donated food at a community kitchen in Khan Younis, southern Gaza Strip, July 23, 2026
