The BoD and Lisa Nandy are discussing an "even handed approach to Israel". In practice this means apologia for the one sided occupation, apartheid and the repeated injustices inexperienced by Palestinians.

Given the BoD's characterization of the massacre of Palestinians at the great march of return an act of self defence, this can be seen as nothing more than the affirmation of violent, settler colonial racism.

It's easy to imagine a world in which Starmer's labour would withdraw its support for the JCPOA - I bet if the BoD demanded hard enough they'd fold.

The national discourse is so reactionary, so deferential that the Labour party will largely cease to make its own decisions on FP in respect to Israel. I don't mean this in a conspiratorial way, look at Rebecca Long Bailey's speech at the JLM hustings.

The national conversation is so full of excused intimidation that even parts of the left can't maintain logical coherency. It's self defeating, if you can't defend why it was necessary to clarify the parts of IHRA that squashed not just free speech, but fair and morally necessary

speech, then the only explanation for the previous refusal to admit is some kind of antisemitism. If you won't articulate the case for Palestine now it betrays those who made it in the past - gives all the bad faith arguments their power.