The United Kingdom’s decision this week to impose personal sanctions on two Israeli cabinet ministers, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, is a grave error – not only strategically, but morally. In concert with Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Norway, Britain claims this move defends human rights and opposes settler violence. In truth, it represents a striking double standard, a capitulation to domestic partisan pressures, and even a step towards decreased relevance on the international stage.
The UK is posturing for domestic political gain
The contrast between Britain’s treatment of Israeli ministers and its posture towards the enablers of terrorism is glaring. Palestinian Authority officials who openly glorify terrorism and finance convicted terrorists face no such measures. The PA continues to operate its notorious pay-for-slay programme, distributing monthly stipends to convicted terrorists and to the families of those killed while attacking Israelis – a policy repeatedly defended by president Mahmoud Abbas himself. PA-controlled media and official ceremonies frequently glorify terrorists responsible for the mass killing of civilians, such as Dalal Mughrabi, whose attack on a civilian bus killed 38 people, including 13 children. Yet British sanctions remain reserved not for these enablers of violence, but for elected Israeli ministers.
Qatari leaders, whose state has long served as a financial and political lifeline to Hamas, are courted by Britain, not sanctioned. The UK accepts Qatari money with open arms, despite well-documented links to Hamas — including more than $1.8 billion (£1.4 billion) in financial support over the past decade and safe haven provided to Hamas’s political leadership in Doha, which celebrated the 7 October attacks. Documents seized in Gaza have further revealed Qatar’s role in funding Hamas operations aimed at sabotaging American-led peace efforts. The Foreign Secretary David Lammy remains quite silent about all that.
Against this backdrop, targeting two democratically elected Israeli ministers, however controversial their rhetoric or political stance, is not a principled stand. It is a political manoeuvre.
Britain’s actions will achieve nothing positive in the region. Quite the contrary. They will not advance a ceasefire, nor will they strengthen human rights protections. Instead, they risk undermining Israel at a moment of existential struggle against an enemy whose motivating ideology we must also oppose, and from which we are at increasing risk of attack ourselves. As Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar rightly warned, the UK’s Labour government’s increasing pressure aims to end the war before its objectives are achieved, leaving Hamas in power and Israeli security imperilled. These sanctions are a calculated move, timed alongside other diplomatic offensives in international forums, designed to constrain Israel’s legitimate war aims and to prevent its absolute victory.
Crucially, Britain’s stance runs directly counter to that of its most important ally. US State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce delivered a forthright rejection of the sanctions: “We find that extremely unhelpful. It will do nothing to get us closer to a ceasefire in Gaza,” she said. Instead she urged allies to focus on supporting US special envoy Steve Witkoff’s efforts to achieve the release of the remaining hostages, rather than taking steps which would further isolate Israel:
“UK, Canada, Norway and New Zealand should focus on the real culprit which is Hamas. Hamas put the people of Gaza in this situation by launching the horrific attacks of October 7th which killed six British citizens and 46 Americans and continue to hold hostages of course including the bodies of four Americans.”
In short, the United States is taking a pragmatic, morally coherent approach which Britain would do well to emulate.
By contrast, the UK is posturing for domestic political gain. Labour now governs with a large majority, but in last year’s general election, strong anti-Israel sentiment among Muslim voters proved decisive in several key constituencies. Labour lost seats to independent candidates running explicitly on an anti-Israel platform — a thinly veiled appeal to sections of the so-called ‘Muslim vote’. Today’s sanctions serve to placate these same constituencies, burnishing Labour’s image among anti-Israel activists while damaging Britain’s alignment with its allies.
That the targeted ministers are controversial is undeniable. Their rhetoric has often been seen as inflammatory and unhelpful within Israel as well as internationally. But they remain elected members of Israel’s cabinet in a time of war – a war forced upon Israel by a brutal and unrepentant enemy. They are certainly not an irrelevance, but they also do not set Israel’s war policies. To single them out while ignoring the architects and funders of Palestinian terror is not moral leadership; it is moral hypocrisy.
And the consequences may well be lasting. Britain has now isolated itself from the United States on this critical issue. It has signalled to Israel that it is a less reliable partner. More broadly, it diminishes its standing on the world stage, reducing its capacity to influence events in the Middle East and beyond. Treating ministers of a democratic ally fighting jihadist terrorism worse than the terrorists and their tyrannical state backers only erodes Britain’s global credibility.
At this moment, Britain should be standing firmly with its allies, defending the principles of democracy and the right of sovereign states to protect their citizens from terror. It should be pressing for the release of hostages and the defeat of Hamas – not indulging in dangerous tokenistic gestures that embolden terrorists, sow division among the West, and embolden extremist forces closer to home.
In the face of an existential threat to Israel and a broader regional struggle against extremist Islamic terrorism, the United Kingdom has chosen a risky path of posturing and hypocrisy. It has embarked on a course of false and sanctimonious virtue signalling that brings us no honour.
Comments