What’s happened: The UK announced sanctions against two far-right Israeli cabinet ministers, Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich.
- The announcement was made in a joint statement by Foreign Secretary David Lammy and the foreign ministers of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and Norway. The sanctions include an asset freeze and a travel ban.
- The new joint statement justified the measures by alluding to acts of settler violence in the West Bank and accusing the two sanctioned ministers of directly inciting it. However, the ministers went on to confirm their commitment to Israel.
- The move was condemned by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who wrote “We reject any notion of equivalence: Hamas is a terrorist organization that committed unspeakable atrocities, continues to hold innocent civilians hostage, and prevents the people of Gaza from living in peace. We remind our partners not to forget who the real enemy is. The United States urges the reversal of the sanctions and stands shoulder-to-shoulder with Israel.”
- In Israel, the move was condemned by government ministers, and some opposition figures, including Benny Gantz, who wrote “I vehemently disagree with Ministers Smotrich & Ben-Gvir on a wide range of issues – but the imposition of British sanctions on Ministers in the one and only democracy in the Middle East the State of Israel is a profound moral mistake and sends a dangerous message to terrorists around the world. While the State of Israel defends itself as an outpost of the free world from murderous terror groups & regimes in the region – pressure should rather be directed at Hamas, Iran and its axis of evil.”
- Foreign Minister Gideon Saar went further in his criticism, noting that this move, like various other gestures designed to pressure Israel, strengthen Hamas: “The political pressure on Israel, which manifests itself in various ways, has one goal: to bring about an end to the war without achieving its goals, while Hamas still controls Gaza and continues to endanger Israel’s security. This is pressure, well planned and timed, that includes a series of moves by various countries, decisions in international forums, and proceedings in the so-called ‘international courts.’ The actions and decisions against Israel also contribute to hardening Hamas’ stance in the negotiations for the hostage deal – and distance it and the ceasefire.”
- This morning he reportedly refused to accept a phone call from his counterpart David Lammy.
- The joint statement reiterates that the sanctions “do not deviate from our unwavering support for Israel’s security and we continue to condemn the horrific terror attacks of 7 October by Hamas. Today’s measures are targeted towards individuals who in our view undermine Israel’s own security and its standing in the world. We continue to want a strong friendship with the people of Israel based on our shared ties, values and commitment to their security and future.”
Context: This latest announcement follows a series of actions by Lammy and Prime Minister Starmer indicating a harder line on Israel, including suspensions of some weapons exports, ending free trade talks, and a previous joint statement with Canada and France condemning Israeli actions in Gaza, which was praised the next day by Hamas.
- Individual sanctions of this sort were previously announced for some Russian officials. It’s highly unusual for such action to be taken against ministers in an allied government, and no such action has been considered for officials from Turkey and Qatar, with regimes with close ties to the UK who openly back Hamas.
- Though the announcement is billed as a direct response to Israeli actions on the West Bank, it is the war in Gaza, and frustration with Israel’s conduct of the war, that is largely driving the move. The joint statement mentions the war in Gaza only in the last paragraph and reiterates the three principles that have been largely in consensus among western governments regarding the war since it began: access to aid must be unfettered; displacement of population constitutes “unlawful transfer”; and no territorial loss for Gaza can be accepted.
- Critics in Israel and elsewhere hold that all three principles are bespoke inventions for this war and exist nowhere in international law or practice — and that they remove any leverage Israel might have to pressure Hamas to release the hostages it took on October 7, while trapping civilians inside a war zone, making attacking Hamas targets more difficult and granting Hamas a propaganda victory when any attack is carried out.
- Settlements and settlers are extremely unpopular in western diplomatic circles, and are widely viewed as Israel’s biggest contribution to the absence of peace in the region. The issue of settlements did not figure in the failure of final status talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority in the past 25 years. In all rounds, Israel agreed to evacuate most settlements in exchange for minor adjustments to the pre-1967 borders to accommodate three blocs of settlements built close to the line. Each round of talks collapsed when the Palestinians turned down offers of statehood conditioned on a full reconciliation and termination of claims, particularly on the refugee issue. Settlements were simply not the reason why peace talks failed or why a two-state solution was not effected.
- Nor were settlements the reason for the October 7 attack and the subsequent war. There were no settlements in Gaza when Hamas launched its attack. All Gaza settlements were evacuated in 2005 when Israel withdrew from the 20% of the Strip still under its control under the terms of the Oslo Accords. And despite the war raging for 20 months now, and the IDF placing under its direct control large swathes of territory in the Gaza Strip, not a single settlement has been established anywhere in Gaza, not even in areas that were designated for Israeli control under the Oslo agreements.
- Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich head two far-right religious nationalist parties which ran together on a joint list in the most recent elections and secured 14 seats in Israel’s 120-member Knesset. Recent polls show Ben-Gvir’s party at roughly nine seats and Smotrich’s failing to cross the electoral threshold, making their participation in the future government less likely.
Looking ahead: The Israeli government will soon convene to formulate a response.
- Opposition parties announced this morning that they would table a motion to dissolve parliament and hold early elections. This comes on the backdrop of a crisis in the governing coalition around draft exemptions for the ultra-Orthodox community. The ultra-Orthodox parties have threatened to bolt the coalition if they are not granted significant concessions in a draft law, while one Likud lawmaker, Yuli Edelstein, has blocked the legislation that would open to the path allowing exemptions to continue.
- For the opposition, the decision to bring the motion up for a vote now is a dilemma. If it fails, a new motion to dissolve the Knesset cannot be introduced for another six months.
- For the ultra-Orthodox parties who are threatening the coalition, the stakes are just as high. If they carry out their threat and topple the government, they may very well find themselves in opposition in the next Knesset.


