Leader of the Conservative Party, Kemi Badenoch, has launched a scathing attack on Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s decision to formally recognise the State of Palestine, branding it ‘absolutely disastrous.’

Badenoch argued that the move rewards terrorism, leaves hostages in Gaza abandoned, and fails to address the humanitarian crisis in the Middle East.

Naijaonpoint reports that in a post on her 𝕏 handle on Sunday, Badenoch, who represents North West Essex, accused Starmer of lacking a coherent national strategy and instead pandering to “the hobby horses of the Labour left.”

“Rewarding terrorism with no conditions whatsoever put in place for Hamas leaves hostages languishing in Gaza and does nothing to stop the suffering of innocent people caught in this war,” she wrote.

Badenoch linked Labour’s recognition of Palestine to what she described as a broader pattern of misguided policies.

“They cannot fix the NHS, so they push assisted suicide. They cannot create jobs for young people, so they give them votes at 16. They cannot sort out immigration, but they will recognise Palestine instead,” she added.

The Conservative leader also revisited Starmer’s foreign policy record, recalling the £35bn reparations to Mauritius and the surrender of the Chagos Islands, which she described as evidence of poor judgment.

“Everything we are seeing is a consequence of a Prime Minister who has no plan for the country and no judgment. He will spend the next four years delivering the hobby horses of the Labour left to stay in power and leave a huge mess for us to clean up,” Badenoch said.

Starmer Defends Move

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Starmer, who represents Holborn and St Pancras, has defended the recognition of Palestine, describing it as an attempt to revive peace efforts in the region.

“The UK’s recognition of Palestine is aimed at reviving the hope of peace for the Palestinians and Israelis, and a two-state solution,” Starmer said earlier.

The announcement has sparked heated debate across the political spectrum, highlighting the deep divisions in Britain’s foreign policy outlook.