The British newspaper The Guardian says that the announcement by British Prime Minister Liz Truss to Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid of her intention to consider moving the British embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem has raised concerns among the Palestinians and also constitutes a breach of the international consensus.

Writer Donald Macintyre sees that "this is what Liz Truss’s policy looks like after being freed from the constraints of EU membership. She may be unconcerned – or even happy – that her intention to move the British embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem has upset the Palestinians, but perhaps she should be more cautious about the impact on Britain's global standing because this step would represent a departure from the international consensus that was unilaterally violated by Donald Trump – the former US president – among leaders of advanced democracies, not to mention that it would represent a departure from the firm stance adopted by previous British governments since the Six-Day War in 1967, including Boris Johnson’s government."

The writer reminds Liz Truss "that the rejection of establishing an embassy in Jerusalem before achieving a just peace between Israel and the Palestinians aligns with international law and every UN resolution calling – over five decades – for ending the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem."

The writer points out that the annexation of East Jerusalem by Israel after the 1967 war is considered illegal from the world's perspective, even that all European countries, including Britain, still regard East Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state.

The writer reviews US President Joe Biden's praise of Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid for promoting the two-state solution in his speech to the United Nations General Assembly, but expresses surprise at Lapid's condition "to impose Israeli sovereignty over East Jerusalem and the Jordan Valley, which are far less than what the Palestinians could accept in any negotiations."

The writer warns that if the British embassy move to Jerusalem proceeds, it will help bury the idea accepted by previous Israeli leaders such as Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert, and even Lapid himself before changing his stance, which advocates dividing Jerusalem into two capitals, Israeli and Palestinian, side by side.

The writer also sees that the danger of moving the embassy is that it will directly help "empower the Israeli right-wing to continue its ongoing expansion of illegal settlements not only in East Jerusalem but also in the West Bank, squeezing the Palestinians and leading to their expulsion."

The Guardian sees that, based on Britain’s historic role in the Middle East – not just its permanent membership in the United Nations Security Council – this gives it a unique advantage in seeking justice for the Palestinians. Much of the Palestinian public actually blames the present hardships on the British Balfour Declaration of 1917 which called for establishing a “national home for the Jewish people” on the land of Palestine.

The writer expects that Truss's intention to move the embassy to Jerusalem is a prelude to concluding an early trade deal with Israel or to boost her friend Lapid's chances to win the Israeli elections in November.

Then the writer concludes that "the mere announcement of the intention to move the embassy has already caused significant damage to Britain’s long-term interests, damage that can only be avoided by a reversal and a firm rejection of any aspiration to move the British embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem under the current circumstances."