Tomorrow, Great Britain will hold its national elections. The Labor party, led by Keir Starmer, is expected by virtually everyone to win. While Starmer has done much to rid the party of the anti-Semites and Israel-hating fanatics who came to dominate it under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn, Labor has failed to regain the trust of many British Jews. Among them is Melanie Phillips:

Starmer boasts of his ruthlessness in getting rid of Labor’s hard left. Yet Corbyn’s former deputy, John McDonnell, who has accused Israel of apartheid and genocide, remains a party figure. And Starmer’s deputy, Angela Rayner, who was happy to serve Corbyn’s agenda in his shadow cabinet, was also protected from the purge.

Starmer may have rid the Labor party of its most egregious anti-Semites. But as in the progressive world in general, he has drawn a wholly artificial line between Jew-hatred and the demonization of Israel that is now de rigueur on the left.

In an apparent effort to reassure Jewish voters, Starmer, whose wife is Jewish, recently spoke about his family’s routine Shabbat dinners, and his efforts “to carve out really protected time for the kids” on Friday nights, when, he explained, “I will not do a work-related thing after six o’clock, pretty well come what may.” As if to compete with Labor in the anti-Semitism sweepstakes, the Conservatives rushed to attack this anodyne statement as a sign of laziness. Stephen Pollard writes:

Even by the desperate standards of a desperate party, desperate to find any way of attacking Keir Starmer, this is desperate stuff. But the desperation turns into the disgusting when it comes to [Defense Secretary] Grant Shapps’s intervention. The defense secretary is a proud Jew. He knows full well what trying to keep Friday night free for Shabbat with the family actually means.

Unless you’re fully observant (and unless I am missing something, even the Tories in their desperation haven’t gone so far as to suggest Sir Keir is an Orthodox Jew), it doesn’t mean switching off all electronics and refusing to answer the phone. It just means having dinner with your family. But . . . Shapps went for the jugular: “Virtually every military intervention we’ve carried out has happened at night, partly to keep our servicemen and women safe.”

It is even worse that the message underlying this smear is that any Jew who has Friday night dinner with his family—let alone anyone who actually keeps Shabbat—is a wastrel deserving of opprobrium from the government. But what is truly foul is when that attack comes from a Jew.

If there’s one lesson to be learned from the history of the Israel-Arab conflict, it’s never to be confident that an end is in sight. Ehud Yaari nevertheless—and with all due caution—points to some noteworthy developments:

The absolute primacy of “armed struggle” in Palestinian discourse has discouraged any serious attempt to discuss or plan for a future Palestinian state. Palestinian political literature is devoid of any substantial debate over what kind of a state they aspire to create. What would be its economic, foreign, and social policies?

One significant exception was a seminar held by Hamas in Gaza—under the auspices of the late Yahya Sinwar—prior to October 7, 2023. The main focus of what was described as a brainstorming session was the question of how to deal with the Jews in the land to be liberated. A broad consensus between the participants was reached that most Israeli Jews should be eradicated or expelled while those contributing to Israel’s success in high tech and other critical domains would be forced to serve the new Palestinian authorities.

Yet, the ongoing aftershocks from the ongoing war in Gaza are posing questions among Palestinians concerning the viability of armed struggle. So far this trend is reflected mainly in stormy exchanges on social-media platforms and internal controversies within Hamas. There is mounting criticism leveled at the late Mohammad Deif and Yahya Sinwar for embarking upon an uncoordinated offensive that is resulting in a “Second Nakba”—a repeat of the defeat and mass displacement caused by launching the war in 1948.

To be sure, “armed struggle” is still being preached daily to the Palestinian communities by Iran and Iranian proxies, and at least half the Palestinian public—according to various polls—believe it remains indispensable. But doubts are being heard. We may be reaching a point where the Palestinians will feel compelled to make a choice between the road which led to past failures and an attempt to chart a new route. It will certainly require time and is bound to cause fractures and divisions, perhaps even a violent split, among the Palestinians.