Truss and Jerusalem

Summary: the prime minister has told her Israeli counterpart that she is reviewing the UK’s position on moving the embassy to Jerusalem, an action in contravention of international law and UN resolutions and one that would upend decades of British policy.

This content is locked

Login or Register To Unlock The Content!

1 thought on “Truss and Jerusalem”

  1. Many thanks for an excellent assessment of Liz Truss’s stance on Jerusalem and the political calculus behind it. However, I think there is one related point missing which, perhaps, makes her stance somewhat less “astonishing” than you suggest, ie her seeming willingness to tear up the Northern Ireland Protocol which not only brings with it the threat of a trade war with the UK’s biggest trading partner (on top of all the former’s existing economic travails) but also – and in common with her statements on Jerusalem – demonstrates a serious disregard for international obligations which risks seriously damaging the UK’s credibility as a partner/player across the board. In the context of ‘Trussonomics’, the BBC’s Rob Watson opined on BBC World yesterday that “many in financial markets don’t think these are serious people”. I guess we all know what he meant by that and that most of us would agree with him. However, his use of the word “serious’ is, perhaps, a little misleading in that Ms Truss is a serious ideologue whose world view, as Martin Wolf wrote for the FT on 2 October, is underpinned by a seemingly unshakeable belief (conscious or otherwise) that “reality must adapt to [her] desires, rather than the other way around”. As Martin continues, such a characteristic in a political leader is undoubtedly very dangerous for her/his country.

Comments are closed.

Scroll to Top

Access provided by the Bodleian Libraries of the University of Oxford