Key Takeaways
- Andy Burnham, mayor of Greater Manchester, is being tipped as a possible successor to Keir Starmer and could become the UK’s next prime minister.
- His leadership bid comes as Labour suffers vote losses to the Green Party and faces internal pressure over its stance on Israel’s war in Gaza.
- Experts say Burnham’s foreign‑policy position on Israel‑Palestine remains unclear; he has shown both pro‑Palestine gestures and support for Israel, suggesting continuity rather than a sharp break from Labour’s current approach.
- Beyond the Middle East, Burnham has criticised Brexit, defended NATO, questioned the Iraq war, and warned about the polarising nature of US politics.
- On domestic issues, he signals continuity with Starmer’s migration policies and warns that curbing protest rights undermines both domestic and international rule of law.
Background and Political Rise
Andy Burnham has served as the elected mayor of Greater Manchester since 2017, a role that gave him a high‑profile platform outside Westminster. Earlier this month he won the Makerfield by‑election, defeating a challenge from the far‑right Reform UK party and reinforcing his reputation as a vote‑winner in traditionally Labour territories. Before his mayoral tenure, Burnham held senior shadow cabinet posts, most notably as Shadow Home Secretary during the Brexit referendum period. He has twice sought the Labour leadership—in 2010 and 2015—demonstrating long‑standing ambition to lead the party. The recent resignation of Keir Starmer, prompted by intense pressure from Labour MPs and disappointing local election results in May, has opened the door for Burnham to mount a leadership challenge. Party insiders view him as a pragmatic figure who can appeal to both traditional Labour voters and the growing segment concerned with social justice issues, positioning him as a potential unifier in a fractured party.
Labour’s Electoral Woes and the Gaza Issue
Labour’s recent local elections showed a significant erosion of support, with many disaffected voters shifting to the left‑wing Green Party rather than to Reform UK. The Greens’ platform characterises Israel as an “apartheid” state and describes its military operations in Gaza as genocide, resonating with a segment of the Labour base that is increasingly critical of the government’s response to the conflict. Polling commissioned by Save the Children UK, Christian Aid, and Medical Aid for Palestinians revealed that more than 60 percent of Labour members are dissatisfied with the current UK stance on Israel, with a majority favouring tougher measures such as suspending all arms exports to Israel. Burnham’s leadership bid therefore hinges on how he addresses this divisive issue. While he has refrained from labeling Israel’s campaign in Gaza as genocide, he has expressed concern over the “disproportionate nature” of the destruction and called for a full investigation and accountability. His balancing act—acknowledging humanitarian worries without adopting the most confrontational rhetoric—reflects the broader Labour dilemma of retaining core supporters while avoiding alienation of centrist voters.
Expert Views on a Possible Policy Shift
Patrick Diamond, lecturer in public policy at Queen Mary University of London, cautioned that it is too early to predict whether Burnham would dramatically alter Labour’s foreign policy on Israel should he become prime minister. Diamond noted that Burnham would likely urge all parties to return to negotiations and seek a rapid cessation of violence, while remaining attentive to the electoral risk of losing voters over the Gaza question. Nimer Sultany, lecturer in public law at SOAS University of London, echoed this assessment, stating that Burnham’s overall position has not diverged markedly from Starmer’s, aside from a specific call for a ceasefire on 27 October 2023 when he broke ranks with the Labour leadership alongside London mayor Sadiq Khan and Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar. Sultany expects continuity rather than a radical departure, arguing that any Labour government under Burnham would stay within the existing framework of British policy toward Israel, which balances criticism of settlement expansion with a commitment to Israel’s security.
Burnham’s Historical Record on Israel‑Palestine
Burnham’s engagement with the Israel‑Palestine issue has shown fluctuations over the years. In 2012 he visited the occupied West Bank with Labour Friends of Palestine, signalling early sympathy for Palestinian aspirations. By 2015, however, he had joined Labour Friends of Israel and, during his unsuccessful leadership bid that year, pledged to make Israel his first foreign destination as prime minister. He criticised Benjamin Netanyahu’s 2015 re‑election as “depressing” due to the premier’s pledge to expand West Bank settlements, arguing that Palestine needed greater international support. That same year Burnham backed the recognition of Palestinian statehood as a right, while condemning illegal settlement expansion as a key obstacle to a two‑state solution; he simultaneously opposed boycott campaigns, describing them as “the wrong response.” Upon becoming mayor of Greater Manchester in 2017, he characterised Israel as a “democracy that has a long history of protecting minorities and promoting civil rights.” More recently, during the Makerfield by‑election campaign, he avoided calling Gaza’s military campaign a genocide, stating that he could not judge such enormity from his mayoral position but insisted on the need for investigation and accountability. This pattern illustrates a pragmatic, at times shifting, approach that seeks to accommodate both pro‑Palestine and pro‑Israel constituencies within the Labour coalition.
Broader Foreign‑Policy Positions
Beyond the Middle East, Burnham has articulated a distinct outlook on several international matters. He has been a vocal critic of Brexit, arguing that the UK’s departure from the European Union has inflicted economic damage that his own party has failed to acknowledge adequately; he has expressed hope that Britain could eventually re‑join the bloc. On transatlantic security, Burnham has steadfastly supported NATO, refusing to serve under former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn when the latter hinted at withdrawing from the alliance. Reflecting on the 2003 Iraq war, Burnham acknowledged that removing Saddam Hussein had a strategic rationale but condemned the ensuing conflict for causing massive civilian harm, criticising the lack of post‑invasion planning and the haste with which the intervention was undertaken. In early 2024 he warned that the United States’ increasingly polarised and toxic political climate could serve as a cautionary tale for Britain, suggesting that unchecked partisanship risks eroding democratic norms. While he has refrained from directly naming former President Donald Trump, he criticised the broader trend of divisive politics and defended Starmer’s decision to deny US forces the use of UK bases for strikes on Iran, emphasising that disagreement with an ally does not preclude frank communication.
Domestic Policy, Migration and Rule‑of‑Law Concerns
On domestic affairs, Burnham signals alignment with Starmer’s approach to migration. He is understood to back the continuation of policies that curb undocumented migration, including the possible ending of permanent refugee status, and has indicated his intention to retain Shabana Mahmood as Home Secretary—a move that would cement continuity with the current government’s strict asylum stance. Mahmood has faced criticism for proscribing Palestine Action, an activist group labelled a “terrorist” organisation, a decision that many Labour members view as an infringement on the right to protest. Sultany warned that keeping Mahmood in her post would be a marker of continuity that risks undermining both domestic and international rule of law, arguing that restrictions on speech and protest weaken the UK’s ability to meet its legal obligations to prevent genocide and dismantle apartheid structures. Burnham himself has expressed concern that the government’s efforts to curtail protest rights are part of a broader pattern whereby domestic legal safeguards are eroded to conceal failures on the international stage, thereby threatening the very principles of accountability he advocates in foreign affairs.
Conclusion: What a Burnham Leadership Might Mean
Should Andy Burnham succeed Keir Starmer as Labour leader and eventually become prime minister, his premiership would likely be characterised by a cautious, pragmatic foreign policy that seeks to de‑escalate conflicts—particularly in Gaza—while avoiding abrupt ruptures with established Labour positions. His record suggests a willingness to listen to grassroots concerns about Palestinian rights, yet also a reluctance to adopt the most confrontational language or policies that could jeopardise electoral support. On broader international issues, he would probably maintain a pro‑NATO, sceptical‑of‑Brexit stance, continue to critique past military interventions, and warn against the dangers of political polarisation exemplified by the United States. Domestically, his leadership would likely preserve the current government’s restrictive migration agenda and its approach to protest rights, raising concerns among civil‑society groups about the protection of free expression and the rule of law. In sum, a Burnham‑led Labour government would promise continuity on many fronts, tempered by occasional efforts to balance humanitarian pressures with political pragmatism.