For decades, the Palestinian cause has found its most receptive audiences on the political left. Progressive movements, human rights organisations and anticolonial traditions have offered language, solidarity and moral clarity. That alignment made sense. It still does. But in today’s political landscape, it cannot on its own shift policy.If policy is shaped in spaces dominated by security thinking and conservative power, then advocacy must reach those spaces too.Across much of the West, decisions on military aid, diplomatic positioning and protest law are shaped less by activist pressure and more by security-driven political calculations. The language that dominates these arenas is not primarily moral or historical. It is strategic, legal and institutional. In that context, a strategy that confines engagement largely to sympathetic spaces may preserve solidarity, but it does little to alter the centres of decision-making.The Palestinian movement has achieved unprecedented visibility, particularly since the start of Israel’s latest genocidal war on Gaza, which has killed tens of thousands of civilians and reduced much of the Strip to rubble. Public awareness has grown. Legal scrutiny has intensified. International institutions have been drawn into the debate. Yet visibility has not translated into leverage. Arms continue to flow. Diplomatic cover persists. Restrictions on pro-Palestinian protests have expanded in several Western states. Moral clarity alone has no …
