Balfour University: Britain Owes Palestine

(c) Gretel Ensignia


On 29 October, days before the 109th anniversary of the Balfour Declaration, scholars behind the University of Edinburgh’s Decolonised Transformations review and Britain Owes Palestine (BOP) came together in support of apology, divestment and repair.

BOP submitted a 400-page document to the UK Government in September 2025 calling for an apology for international law violations they committed in Palestine between 1917 and 1948, dating back to the Balfour Declaration.

Arthur Balfour was Britain’s Foreign Secretary and Chancellor of the University of Edinburgh on 2 November 1917 when he issued the Balfour Declaration, which established Palestine as a “national home for the Jewish people.”

The Student attended the event and spoke to Dr Victor Kattan, legal advisor to BOP, and Nicola Perugini, Senior Lecturer at the University of Edinburgh, about their work.

Dr Victor Kattan highlighted BOP’s view that “historically speaking, Britain was not just a bystander, it created this conflict.

“The Balfour declaration was named after the Chancellor of this university. That declaration was made in London. It was British policy.

“It resulted in British occupation, mass settlement of Jews in Palestine. The second clause of the declaration regarding protecting civil and religious rights of what they call ‘non-Jewish communities’ was not upheld.”

Nicola Perugini told The Student that the findings of his research for the university’s Race Review, alongside Shaira Vadasaria, found that Balfour’s imperial legacy is “impossible… to disentangle” from his legacy as Chancellor of the University of Edinburgh.

Their research shows that Balfour “celebrated the construction of Jewish colonies on stolen Palestinian land, including a colony named after him, ‘Balfouria,’ while simultaneously inaugurating the Hebrew University wearing a University of Edinburgh robe.”

Aside from seeking a formal apology from the British Government, Dr Victor Kattan told The Student that BOP “would like to see more work done on education in the UK around this subject. It’s not taught properly in schools, and yet it’s so important — it’s always on the news.

“It’s become a very divisive topic. People are very passionate, yet they’re not so well informed. And part of that is because it’s not taught in schools… or in museums.”

He highlighted that “[the] petition is a way to put this information in the public domain, both on the website, and in giving talks like these [today].”

Regarding the outcome of the petition, Dr Victor Kattan said: “We are awaiting a response. We hope it’s positive, but the British government may feel uncomfortable apologising because it might fear setting a precedent for other colonial territories.”

Turning to the University of Edinburgh, although it has addressed its colonial ties in the past, Nicola Perugini noted that this was “a very timid and generic apology… [which] has not dealt specifically with Balfour’s legacy.”

Nicola Perugini told The Student that the Palestinian component of their Decolonised Transformations research has been framed by senior leadership as “more controversial to debate on campus.”

Discussing immediate actions to make reparations, Nicola Perugini called on the university to “issue a clear and unequivocal apology to the Palestinian people,” “withdraw its adoption of the IHRA definition of antisemitism,” and to “divest from genocide.”

The IHRA definition of antisemitism is seen by Nicola Perugini, and many other scholars, to prohibit an understanding of Israel as a “racist regime of settler-colonial apartheid” — something that “human rights organisations, as well as UN reports and courts, have been denouncing for decades.”

Regarding divestment, Nicola Perugini stated that in “interactions with the University’s senior leadership, we have witnessed a systematic refusal to engage with evidence and basic human rights standards…

“We must divest from all situations of violation indiscriminately. When the University of Edinburgh divested from South Africa in 1971, we did not ask ourselves whether human rights applied to Black South Africans.”

Image by Gretel-Ensignia, Provided to The Student for Press Use.