When We Are the Last to Know.
The British Museum, Erasure, and the Politics of Silence
I hope some of you have been following the story of the British Museum removing references to Palestine from parts of its exhibitions.
The story has now “developed,” but in a way that is anything but satisfactory to us Palestinians.
Recently, in an unseen and unpublished email or private exchange between the director of the British Museum and William Dalrymple, Dalrymple claimed the director denied the museum ever removed the word Palestine—implying that the press and UK Lawyers for the occupation fabricated the whole thing.
I have two problems with this, and I’ll start with the technical one.
There is no proof of this alleged conversation.
No screenshots.
No statement.
No transparency.
Just a convenient, quiet dismissal designed to make people move on.
We have no evidence that the museum did not do what was demanded of them by the occupation, despite their sudden claims to the contrary.
Meanwhile, multiple newspapers reported that the museum did remove the term.
So who is telling the truth?
It wouldn’t be the first time newspapers lied—and it certainly wouldn’t be the first time an institution tried to cover its tracks.
And as usual, Palestinians are the last to know.
Our story is discussed in articles, in private emails, in back‑channel conversations—and we hear about it only after decisions have already been made.
Our story.
Our name.
Our history.
And we are the last to know.
But let me be clear: it isn’t only Palestinians who are kept in the dark.
The general public is also informed only after decisions have already been made behind closed doors.
When something finally appears in a newspaper, it means the decision was taken long before anyone outside the institution had any idea.
This isn’t transparency.
It’s damage control.
And here is the part that cannot be ignored:
UK Lawyers for Israel themselves issued a formal statement confirming that the British Museum is “reviewing and updating” its labels.
Reviewing and updating what, exactly?
The only logical conclusion is the one eight major newspapers reported:
that the museum was altering or removing references to Palestine.
If the museum now claims otherwise, the burden of proof is on them—not on us.
Until they provide evidence that these changes did not occur, the campaign I launched
https://www.change.org/stop-erasing-palestine
stands exactly as it is.
And let me add something crucial here: Even the Palestinian Embassy in the United Kingdom publicly condemned the British Museum’s actions.
They stated clearly that removing the word Palestine—or even entertaining such pressure—is part of a wider pattern of erasing Palestinian identity and history.
The embassy demanded transparency, accountability, and a full explanation from the museum.
So when people rush to accept a private, unpublished reassurance from a British author, they are not only dismissing Palestinians—they are dismissing the official Palestinian diplomatic position as well.
My second issue is this:
The moment Dalrymple said it was all a misunderstanding—that his friend was upset, that the press was wrong—people immediately accepted it. No questions asked.
No evidence.
No proof.
Just the word of a well-meaning white saviour.
No one asked Palestinians if we were okay with this.
Well, we aren’t.
If the museum wants to resolve this, it must:
Issue a full public statement
Apologise to the Palestinian people
provide evidence that they did not comply with demands from the occupation
And, if the newspapers truly lied, show proof that they are taking action against them
Until then, nothing has changed.
And as for the deeper issue—the dominance of white saviours in our narrative—I don’t know what the solution is. We are sidelined, ignored, wheeled out as symbolic props at rallies, but when something important happens, our voices are pushed aside.
I can share a piece of information about our story, and it barely gets noticed.
A white celebrity says the same thing, and suddenly it’s:
Amazing. Incredible. Thank you.
The saviour is celebrated, and the Palestinian is invisible.
This British Museum incident has exposed that dynamic perfectly—not only in the erasure of Palestine through bombs and words, but in how we are treated when we try to speak about our own history.
And let me add this clearly:
When a decision appears in a newspaper, it means it was already made long before we ever saw it.
We are always informed last.
The public is informed late.
And people still wonder why we are angry.
I wish you could feel the frustration and anger that I, and I know a lot of my Palestinian brothers and sisters, feel over issues like this.
Taghrid Al-Mawed.
Writing from Wales, but with my soul in Palestine.
Share widely — but please credit my writing
