Recognising Palestine is the first step to peace in the Middle East

The primary reason bilateral negotiations have repeatedly collapsed is the hopelessly lopsided power relationship between a solidly established independent state and a very dependent non-state entity.’ Photograph: Hazem Bader/AFP/Getty Images

"First, though, Britain would have to join
the 139 states that have already recognised Palestine.”

Your editorial (The Guardian view on moving the British embassy to Jerusalem: don’t do it, 27 September) argues that moving the British embassy to Jerusalem would tear up the commitment to any meaningful two-state solution. But it could have the opposite effect if such a move were preceded by the simultaneous recognition of West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and East Jerusalem as the capital of the prospective Palestinian state. First, though, Britain would have to join the 139 states that have already recognised Palestine.

The primary reason bilateral negotiations have repeatedly collapsed is the hopelessly lopsided power relationship between a solidly established independent state and a very dependent non-state entity. In recognition of this gross disparity, early proponents of the two-state idea after the 1967 war, myself included, envisaged two states to be as much about a vital negotiating framework as eventual outcome.

Any government that claims to support a two-state solution and a final resolution of the conflict, but continues the decades-old pattern of refusing to take the first essential step, is guilty of not just gross hypocrisy but also logical deficiency.

Dr Tony Klug
London