Emily Thornberry: ‘If Trump brings peace to Gaza, we should all wear MAGA hats’
Emily Thornberry backs Keir Starmer's plan to recognise a Palestinian state, and says that if the UK takes a peace proposal to Trump, he could be the one to make it happen – suggesting "we should all be wearing MAGA hats" if he succeeds.
Listen to this article
Read time: 4 minutes
In brief:
- Keir Starmer announced plans to recognise a Palestinian state in September 2025 if certain conditions are not met, including Israel ending suffering in Gaza, not annexing the West Bank, and Hamas releasing hostages and disarming.
- Emily Thornberry believes Donald Trump could be key to achieving Middle East peace, suggesting he has the "raw power" to pressure Israel into a peace process, especially if incentivised by potential recognition like a Nobel Peace Prize.
- Starmer’s policy shift appears driven by mounting pressure from Labour MPs, select committee reports, and public opinion, rather than being purely principled, though Thornberry argues it's part of a genuine peace plan involving Britain, France, and Gulf states.
What’s the story?
Emily Thornberry believes Donald Trump could be the person to finally bring peace to the Middle East - despite saying he is not in the same “camp” as European countries pushing to recognise a Palestinian state.
Trump has previously said doing so would be “rewarding Hamas.”
On Tuesday (25 July 2025) Keir Starmer announced plans to recognise a Palestinian state in September - if certain conditions are met. It follows France’s unconditional recognition announced by Emmanuel Macron.
Thornberry, a long-time Labour MP, tells The News Agents the PM has “the right approach” and it is “welcomed” news, adding that the UK has historically had an “old fashioned” view of the issue and stuck too close to the US.
That said, she believes it is “canny” that Starmer sought approval on the announcement from Trump during his visit to Scotland, acknowledging that the US will need to be involved down the line.
“In order for it to work, we have to have American involvement,” she tells Emily Maitlis and Jon Sopel.
She says Starmer’s announcement is the first part of the process, whereby Britain and France work with Gulf states to do the “heavy lifting” in putting together an international plan, which they then put to Donald Trump.
It’ll be up to Trump to then lean on the Israelis and convince them to sign up to a peace process - something she believes he has the power to do.
“The fact that he is prepared to use raw power is a positive,” she says.
“If we can persuade him this is the right thing to do, actually, of all American presidents, he might be the one.”
She adds that Trump might be incentivised to get a peace process in motion if there’s recognition in it for him.
“Biden had the power to do it, but he wasn't doing it. But Trump, I think might, particularly if there are Norwegians behind the door with a peace prize,” Thornberry says.
“And I'll tell you what, if he manages to pull this off, we should all be wearing MAGA hats.”
Was Starmer’s commitment to a Palestinian state performative?
Starmer has previously opposed recognising Palestine as a state, and said that doing so would be performative - but now his 180 degree spin has left critics questioning whether the announcement was made on principle, or because of growing pressure.
“There’s a suggestion being made that this actually has nothing to do with Palestine. It's all to do with party management, internal differences within the Labour Party, pressure from the cabinet. Growing restiveness on the backbenches,” Jon says.
He adds that this wasn’t helped by David Lammy’s announcement alongside Starmer’s, in which he referenced “the hand of history” on his shoulder.
Thornberry denies that Starmer’s stance is performative, saying it’s not an empty statement, but rather is "attached to a renewed commitment to a peace process.”
But she doesn’t deny that it was partly born out of pressure.
“Of course, there's pressure,” she tells Jon.
That pressure included a report written by her select committee, calling for a new peace process, a letter signed by 200 MPs, and, she adds, pressure from the British public.
“They can see that there will be no Palestinian state unless, unless we do something,” Thornberry says.
Is Starmer’s plan counterproductive?
Starmer’s willingness to recognise a Palestinian state was not unconditional, in fact - it had several conditions attached to it.
He said the UK will recognise a Palestinian state in September if Israel doesn’t end the “suffering” in the region, if it promises not to annex the West Bank and if Hamas releases all remaining hostages, disarms and agrees to have no more involvement in governing.
But there are questions over whether these conditions are counterproductive, if releasing hostages, ending the war, and helping starving Gazans would then mean statehood is then off the table. “Lets say magically, Israel does listen. Let's say they do take immediate steps to end the crisis in Gaza. Let's say the hostages are miraculously released. Let's say that the Gazans are not starving. Then what happens?” Emily asks.
“Then Keir Starmer says: ‘Ok, well, I'm not going to recognise Palestine’.”
Thornberry believes that if the conditions Starmer laid out are met, rather than not recognise Palestinian state, he will “look again at the timetable in relation to it.”
“It's part of a plan, right?” she tells Emily.
“There is a plan. Now it might not work. I'm not saying it will work, but it doesn't stop us from trying. We really should try. We can't just keep looking away and saying: ‘This is too hard’.”