Live updates: Follow the latest news on Israel-Gaza
A humanitarian truce in Gaza may give momentum to debates about Israel and Palestine’s shared future among British-Jewish organisations advocating a two-state solution.
Hannah Weisfeld, director of Yachad, feared that talking about peace sounded “naive” in the aftermath of the October 7 attack, but in the past month her organisation has kick-started efforts to empower moderate Israeli voices and have them heard in British-Jewish circles.
“A lot of extremism is being heard, we think people need to hear voices that are moderate but also talking about the future, and looking at the day after the war, and voices for change,” said Danielle Bett, Yachad’s communications director.
Marginalised by war, these voices may begin to gain more traction as hostages begin to be released. A four-day pause in the fighting between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip began at 7am local time on Friday that allows the release of dozens of Israeli hostages and Palestinians detained in Israel.
Ms Weisfeld said the truce must be “leveraged long-term, sustainable ceasefire, and an end to the ongoing war” in a statement on Friday.
By combining the emotional attachment that many British Jews have for Israel with the call for a resolution to the decades-long conflict, organisations like Yachad have been able to influence mainstream thinking on Israel and Palestine.
Yachad has pressed the UK government to do more to hold Israel accountable for its actions, and to push towards a two-state solution. The UK has reiterated its commitment to the peace process, and voted in favour of a UN motion which deemed Israeli settlements illegal.
But this response has so far been “not good enough”, Ms Bett added. “They haven’t said they recognise the Palestinian state,” she said. “[The UK] hasn’t done anything to pressure Israel, which is the stronger and more stable state, in implementing its two-state solution.”
Without this, the UK’s policy on Israel risked being reduced to “visits, discussions and statements”. “In the short term we want the international community to work towards managing the war, and stopping it from erupting into a regional conflict. We have to start thinking about what happens when the fighting ends,” said Ms Bett.
“The international community puts out statements and holds prayers, but this isn’t enough. Forms of peace process are being neglected and the international community has a role to play.”
Their words echo those of Israeli historian Noah Yuval Harari, who in the week after the attack urged the international community to “help maintain a space for peace … because we cannot hold it right now”.
In the days after the war, the UK-based New Israel Fund launched an emergency appeal to support villages attacked by Hamas, but also to prevent violence in Israel's mixed cities.
Among the voices calling for peace is Magen Inon, a London-based Israeli whose parents were killed by Hamas, and who has become a leading voice for promoting coexistence in Israel.
Speaking to a packed auditorium at a Jewish cultural centre in London in November, Inon described how his family had enjoyed good relations with Bedouins and Palestinians living in Israel as citizens.
But this coexistence is now threatened. Some of Inon’s Palestinian friends living in northern Israel were too scared to drive south for Inon’s condolences, fearing for their safety, he recalled.
His priority was to restore “the shared life within” Israel’s borders, though it may be “too early” to talk about reviving a dialogue between communities on the southern border and Palestinians in Gaza.
“It’s already quite difficult to maintain those ties within Israel. I hope that one day we can dialogue with the other side of the border,” he said.
British rabbis had come together to think about their Jewish values, and how these can guide their understanding of the conflict.
Together they drafted a statement, highlighting their commitment to a two-state solution. While it stressed Israel’s right to defend itself, it also called on the country’s leadership to do so within “the laws of war” – “which place clear limits on what harm can be done to civilians”.
The letter was signed by leading rabbis and thought leaders, and received over 2,000 signatures within a week of publication.
Rabbi Jeremy Gordon, of the New London Liberal Synagogue, is one of the statement’s co-authors. He urged the British political leadership to “make the case that the ultimate future of the region has to be a shared vision based on stability”.
Over the past month, he has spoken and taken part in vigils in London, with a message directed at “anybody” who could help the release of hostages. “The hostages must be released. It is appalling that these people are being held and they must be released immediately,” he said.
While he “understands” the call for a ceasefire, he does not call for it himself. “It leaves Hamas on the southern border ready and articulately committed to doing this again. That cannot be left in place. No country would ever accept that,” he said.
Others have taken a more critical stance on Israel's war in Gaza and are actively calling for a ceasefire. Among these are the British collective Na'amod, which was formed in 2019 and brings together a broad spectrum of views from the Jewish left.
Since the attack, members of Na’amod have sought to balance grief for Israel’s loss and the plight of the hostages, while also speaking out against Israel’s war in Gaza.
“It’s a different kind of movement now, a much more fraught struggle. We’re trying to be active but also sensitive because people are grieving,” said London-based filmmaker Lia ten Brink, a campaigner with Na'amod.
Ms ten Brink helped to organise a vigil marking 30 days since 1,200 Israelis were killed by the Hamas attack, which also commemorated Palestinians killed in Gaza and the West Bank. Of the 200 people who attended, she believed that around 40 people had lost someone they knew. “We organised a vigil because some people have felt too overwhelmed to join protests,” she said.
Some of Na’amod’s members have also joined the Palestine marches, where the organisation is part of a Jewish bloc. “The call for a ceasefire is not just humanitarian, it’s a political position. We don’t believe that you can defeat an ideology through the barrel of a gun,” Ms ten Brink said.
She fears that the continuing war will not achieve its objectives and only fuel radicalisation. “Hamas is a political idea. It’s a mistake to equate its physical destruction [in Gaza] to the end of the movement,” she said.
Activists on the left are also having to grapple with the rifts that have emerged in the wider movement’s response to the October 7th attacks.
“We campaign against the occupation and apartheid in Israel-Palestine out of a commitment to the universality of human rights and equality. For us, that has meant being as robust in our criticism of Hamas’ atrocities against civilians as the Israeli state’s,” she said.
One UK-based activist spoke of a disappointment as some critics of Israel's occupation appeared to disregard the casualties of October 7.
“The downplaying of the Hamas attacks was a fringe response but it was disturbing. It left the Israeli anti-apartheid movement feeling isolated,” they said.
But the extent to which they can influence the British government’s thinking may have its limits, with both the ruling party and opposition supporting Israel’s war in Gaza.
This is further complicated by the rise in anti-Semitic incidents in the UK, which rose 14-fold in the first month following October 7.
“Calling for a ceasefire or for peace process, is much harder when there is the issue of anti-Semitism,” said Prof Yossi Mekelberg, associate fellow at Chatham House.
“There’s no constituency for now. It is not about supporting the war against Hamas, but accepting the civilian death toll it exacts.”
Daniel Levy, one of the founders of the US Jewish peace movement J-Street, said the UK was a “different political terrain”, owing partly to the size of the community.
Internal politics played a key role in shaping the opposition’s current stance on Israel. Labour leader Keir Starmer has sought to distinguish himself from his predecessor Jeremy Corbyn, who took a pro-Palestinian stance but was accused of being soft on anti-Semitism within his party.
“You can only understand it in the context of a post-Corbyn Labour party turmoil. This also influences how the Conservative party does its politics. They see the divisions in Labour as something they can play with,” said Mr Levy.
But differing views among the Jewish peace groups in the UK could help shape Labour’s future policy.
“This where the different Yachad and Na’amod positions can come in to give more space for Labour to develop its position, move closer to what is the correct place to be, and move further away from the government,” Mr Levy said.
Yet the war risks leaving the debate could “even more polarised”, Prof Mekelberg feared.
“Some people will say security cannot be achieved through blockade and occupation, others will say the only way is to hit them as hard as possible,” he said.
“It will be a long road; we’ve reached such a low point. But we should start it.”
