I live in Britain; I grew up in Israel. It's painful to say, but we need real UK sanctions to save Gaza
For many months now, Israel's far-right government has been unambiguous in its words and actions. It has made Gaza uninhabitable through the destruction of the built environment and infrastructure. The plan, repeatedly stated by Benjamin Netanyahu and his ministers, is the ethnic cleansing ('voluntary emigration') of the bulk of Gaza's population. It is now clear that the Israeli government is willing to slow down this campaign temporarily, but it will not stop unless it is forced to, by international pressure. Such pressure has been entirely inadequate.
The UK has scaled up its rhetoric, to words such as 'appalled' and 'horrified'. It has also limited arms shipments to Israel, and placed sanctions on ministers Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben Gvir. Yet surely a G7 member, the world's sixth largest economy and a close ally of Israel can do more. 'Netanyahu only listens to Trump, and even then only sometimes,' says Emily Thornberry, implying there's little to do beyond pleading with the US president.
This is a profound misunderstanding of Israel, and an underestimation of the UK's options. Indeed, Netanyahu and his ministers would not listen to the UK. But Netanyahu is not an all-powerful dictator like Vladimir Putin, and Israel is no North Korea. Its economy is highly globalised, and its society cherishes its ties to the world. It has deep material and emotional investments in those connections, including to the UK. From the banking system to defence cooperation, from trade to tourism and academia, the UK is connected to Israel in myriad ways. By continuing business as usual, Israel's international partners are allowing the Israeli government to continue with its genocidal campaign with no consequences beyond symbolic gestures of disapproval and statements.
After 7 October 2023, the horror of Hamas's massacre prompted western governments to support Israel as it launched its retaliation against Gaza, effectively giving the far-right government carte blanche. Despite unprecedented international criminal court arrest warrants against Netanyahu for the crime of starvation, international sanctions on Israel remain extremely limited. The Israeli government is banking on this. 'We can kill 100 Palestinians every night in Gaza and no one in the world cares,' said one member of the coalition recently. Sadly, so far he has not been proved wrong.
Over the past 21 months, tens of thousands of Israelis have taken to the streets to demand a ceasefire and hostage release deal. While polls show overwhelming support for ending the war, the fragmented and demoralised opposition has not been able to bring the government down. This is partly because, despite pleas from the hostages' families and activists, Israel's key economic powerbrokers in the finance and IT industries and trade unions have been reluctant to take an active stand against the government, even if many of them are deeply opposed to it.
This reluctance stems, at least in part, from the fact that Israel's economy has proved surprisingly resilient. True, Israel's credit rating was downgraded and the government deficit has ballooned. But at the same time, since July 2024, the Tel Aviv stock exchange has risen by close to 30%. Growth in 2026 is expected at 4.6%, and unemployment is extremely low. The war has even benefited key economic sectors: Israel's defence exports are booming, and the UK is one of those export destinations. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, between 2020 and 2024 Israel was the second largest supplier of arms to the UK.
In the UK and Europe, there are new mobilisations of Israelis against the genocide, calling for sanctions. In December 2024, more than 500 Israelis in the UK called on the government to sanction Ben Gvir and Smotrich. In the past couple of months, a new group of Israelis in the UK, Mi-Neged – with which I am involved – called on Keir Starmer and David Lammy to impose far-reaching sanctions on Israel, not only on a few 'bad apples' but systemically. Such measures would include suspending the Trade and Partnership Agreement (TPA) and halting military cooperation.
For many of us, this is a deeply painful moment. Calling on our government to sanction the state where we grew up, to which we are closely attached and where our families and friends live is not an easy step. But we are horrified not only by what has happened but also by what is likely to happen if we do not take such steps.
UK suspension of Israel's preferential trade access could push the EU in the same direction. As a trading bloc, the EU is Israel's largest export destination, accounting for a third of Israeli exports. Proposals to suspend articles in Israel's EU association agreement are on the table.
For now, there is an Israeli middle and upper-middle class receptive to external pressure. That constituency has sufficient power and influence to translate this into political action. Israeli civil society is still able to mobilise and challenge the government. Yet Netanyahu's clampdown on protesters and the press is intensifying: the government's power grab is rapid and far-reaching. There are serious fears that the next Knesset elections would not be free or fair. The less democratic and the more messianic Israel becomes, the less effective sanctions would be. The time to act is now.
Yair Wallach is a reader in Israeli studies and head of the Centre for Jewish Studies at Soas University of London
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
13 minutes ago
- The Independent
What might a surrender deal for Hamas look like?
The horrors of Gaza have finally come to haunt the world's policy-makers. Yesterday, the British government grasped at the talisman of recognising a Palestinian state, without explaining how this might stop the violence. Enter Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, three Arab countries that have demanded that Hamas now frees the remaining Israeli hostages, lays down its arms and ceases governing Gaza, for the sake of enabling Palestinian statehood and the chance of achieving a two-state solution. Let's not get our hopes up. The three Arab states have joined 14 other countries at a three-day conference at the United Nations in signing up to a French initiative that also requires Israel to agree to a ceasefire, end its blockade and recognise a Palestinian state in 'all occupied Arab lands' – a point that is certain to be rejected by the current Israeli government since it means withdrawing from the West Bank and East Jerusalem where so many Jewish settlers live. But having the Arab world calling the very future of Hamas into question for the first time is a potential game-changer for the Middle East. It's certainly a nail in the coffin for the terrorist group. President Trump's Abraham Accords, signed at the tail end of his first term in the White House, were supposed to isolate Hamas by drawing Arab states into mutual recognition of Israel, with the promise of a web of trade deals and security guarantees against their mutual enemy, Iran. However, Saudi Arabia had been cautious about opening diplomatic relations with Israel, even before the events of 7th October, 2023 made that an impossibility. The rampage by Hamas terrorists that day was intended to kill any chance of a Saudi-Israeli rapprochement by provoking a brutal Israeli response that would outrage Muslim opinion. Israel's bombing and blockades had that effect, though less so with Arab regimes. Egypt has long been deeply hostile to Hamas. In 2013, when President Sisi toppled its democratically elected president, Mohammed Morsi, he came to power over the corpses of hundreds of Muslim Brothers, a group affiliated to Hamas. Qatar has been the odd monarchy out. It has housed Hamas's exiled leaders in Doha for decades, and Qatar's energy wealth subsidised Gaza after Hamas established itself In power there after 2006, when other oil-rich Gulf states pulled their aid. In 2017, Saudi Arabia's crown prince led his allies and Egypt in blockading Qatar as a 'sponsor of terrorism' – meaning Hamas in particular. Until now, Qatar's absolute ruler has acted as a go-between for Israel, the United States and Hamas. The Gulf state's shift will put real pressure on Hamas, which is battered but unbowed by Israel's fightback since 7 October. So what might a surrender deal for Hamas look like? The last four decades of Middle Eastern history might have an answer – of sorts. In 1984, the brutal war in Lebanon which had started when Israel invaded to stop raids across its border by the Palestine Liberation Organisation, ended when Israel agreed to let the PLO be exiled in Tunisia. But it's far from a failsafe blueprint for peace. Today's Tunisian government is vocally critical of Israel, but there is no sign that President Kais Saeed is keen to provide a refuge for Hamas fighters, even if they were willing to leave Gaza. Nor would France and Italy be happy to see battle-hardened veterans move west along the Mediterranean coast. Gulf states who remember how PLO leader Yasser Arafat's supporters in Kuwait backed Saddam Hussein's invasion there are not going to warmly welcome refugees from Gaza. Plus, Arab states' vocal condemnation of Benjamin Netayahu's war doesn't extend to housing its victims. Another word of caution. Without US backing, it is hard to see how the Franco-Saudi plan will bring a quick end to the war. Israeli opinion is split on Netanyahu, but there is little sign of a revival of support for a 'land for peace', a settlement whereby Israel withdraws from the occupied territories in exchange for peaceful coexistence with a neighbouring state of Palestine. Europeans and Gulf Arabs may be weary of the Gaza war, but Hamas and Israeli hardliners are not exhausted yet.
BBC News
14 minutes ago
- BBC News
The delicate politics behind the UK's move on Palestine
Sir Keir Starmer is familiar with Emily Damari's ordeal. Over the 15 months that she was held hostage in Gaza, the prime minister mentioned her several times when talking about the war, including describing phone calls he held with her British mother Mandy when she did not know whether Emily was still alive. So it will no doubt feel unpleasant, to say the least, for the prime minister to find himself on the receiving end of sharp criticism from Emily today. Responding to Sir Keir's announcement that he was willing to recognise a Palestinian state in September, Ms Damari accused him of "moral failure".She said he risked "rewarding terror" and "prolonging the conflict". Her intervention echoed a statement from representatives of 10 hostages who are being held or have been held in Gaza, who are either British or have close ties to said that they took no position on the "wider politics" of the war, but they were concerned that the UK's new position would remove incentives for Hamas to sign up to a ceasefire and release the remaining hostages, because it could now make recognition of a Palestinian state less concern of the hostage families is based on one of the prevailing interpretations of what the prime minister said in Downing Street after Tuesday's emergency cabinet that UK recognition of Palestine would be determined only by whether Israel met various conditions in the intervening weeks: agreeing to a ceasefire, making it clear it will not annex the West Bank, taking "substantive steps" to end the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, and committing to a long-term peace government sources today have been pointing additionally to another element of the prime minister's statement on Tuesday."Our message to the terrorists of Hamas is unchanged and unequivocal," he said. "They must immediately release all the hostages, sign up to a ceasefire, disarm and accept that they will play no part in the government of Gaza."We will make an assessment in September on how far the parties have met these steps."Parties plural - that's to say, both Israel and Hamas. This, Downing Street sources argue, shows that the question of whether the UK ultimately presses ahead with recognition will be based not solely on Israel's actions but those of Hamas too, and means that their approach will not disincentivise Hamas to release the hostages after all. But that position has not been consistently articulated. For example, speaking to the BBC today, Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander said that "the ball is in the Israeli government's court". Asked whether recognition would still happen if Hamas is in control of Gaza in September, she replied by speaking only about the need for Israel to meet the government's conditions. The bottom line is this: nobody I have spoken to in Labour expects the government to do anything other than recognise Palestine in all the uncertainty about the precise conditions for getting there, and the mechanics of the assessment process the government will carry out, that is the significance of what Sir Keir said on that is a hugely significant shift in the UK's diplomatic posture, both across governments of different stripes, and compared to what this government was saying just a few days ago. Sir Keir has long said that he wants to recognise a Palestinian state, but only when it would make the biggest contribution to bringing about a two-state solution – which, it had generally been assumed, meant after the end of this delicate politics involved in changing position is one reason why the government has ended up in a slightly convoluted position was also undoubtedly involved in the government's decision to change course. Political gravity Sir Keir's own rhetoric, especially as regards the humanitarian situation in Gaza, has been publicly hardening for a little the mood of the parliamentary Labour party was moving faster. By the start of this week, more than half of Labour's MPs who don't hold government positions had signed a letter urging the government to recognise Palestine. Cabinet ministers were finding ways to let it be known that they agreed some in government, there was concern that when MPs return from their summer break in September, an opposition party would find a way to force a vote on the issue - and Starmer would have to climb down then, if he had not done so gravity was always going to take effect before long. There is a risk, though, that the government could fall between two stools. There are those, including some of those in Labour who have been pushing to recognise Palestine most loudly, who argue that if Palestinian statehood is the inalienable right of the Palestinian people, then it should not be conditional on actions taken by the Israeli is also the position taken by the Liberal Democrats, the Green Party, and independents such as Jeremy the other side, there are those who argue that this is gesture politics, and statehood should not be entertained until Hamas has released the hostages - even though ultimately the Palestinian state the UK envisages would be governed by the Palestinian Authority, not Hamas. That's the position of a few in Labour, though more prominently of the Conservatives and Reform above all, a change in the government's position became inevitable because the middle of the Labour Party - those who have not necessarily always been vocal on this issue, and have generally backed Sir Keir's judgment - wanted a change. They are happy fragile political peace is based on a universal assumption that this is all merely a staging post to inevitable recognition of Palestine in just a few weeks. Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to keep up with the inner workings of Westminster and beyond.
The Herald Scotland
28 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
How much more will it take for these so-called leaders to take action?
This is forced starvation. The World Health Organisation reports that in this month 63 deaths were caused by malnutrition and that the position of [[Gaza]] is on a 'dangerous trajectory'. More than 100 non-Government organisations across the world have, rightly, called this mass starvation and pleaded for world-leaders to put pressure on Israel. Read More: How much more will it take for these so-called leaders to take action? Instead of the necessary and radical interventions we need – we are thrown a few crumbs to give the illusion of decisive action from Donald Trump and Sir Keir Starmer when they feel public opinion turning too far and too quickly. A few crumbs whilst Gaza starves. Donald Trump managed to call it 'real starvation' during another bumbling press conference. But what he failed to say was that this is a man-made horror that America and Israel are responsible for. The 'Gaza Humanitarian Foundation' is an American 'non-profit' working with the Israeli Government, and it has enabled aid to be used as a weapon of war. Israeli forces have killed almost 1000 people who were desperately queuing for aid and who assumed they are entering a safe zone. Many Gazans leave to search for food for their families who are waiting in make-shift shelters, but never return to them. The failed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation issued a 'women-only' aid pick-up invitation to desperate civilians this week, in an attempt to prevent scenes of chaos, and to manufacture the idea that chaos and deaths were being caused by Gazan men. But it did not stop the killing. Pepper spray and stun guns were used on the women queuing, some with their children. Multiple women were killed as security forces shot directly at them. Perhaps now will be the time when those individuals and groups who purport to care about women's lives across the world will raise their voices for the women of Gaza? Given some of their silence for 21 months, perhaps not. The chaos is not caused by desperate and starving civilians, it is caused by an aid agency that has never fully met the needs of the desperate and starving and a Government pursing any means available to them to erase the Palestinian people. Keir Starmer has called it 'unspeakable and indefensible' despite having repeatedly defended Israel's action; he stated that Israel had the right to stop Gazans having access to life-saving clean water in October 2023. Starmer has announced that 30 children in need of emergency care will be evacuated by the UK. The United Nations estimated that 33,000 children have been injured. The Prime Minister has also announced that the UK will be facilitating air drops of aid, which humanitarian charities have called a 'grotesque distraction' and a method that will do nothing to curb the growing levels of starvation. Israel has issued a 'pause' in high populated areas of Gaza for 10 hours a day since Sunday to allow air dropped aid to enter. But aid agencies have warned this will be a negligible amount gives the scale of starvation, especially whilst the hundreds of trucks needed for daily aid continue to be blocked at the border. In a moment that felt particularly cruel, Starmer announced that the UK will recognise Palestine as a state, unless [[Israel]] takes moves on a ceasefire; using statehood as a negotiation tool and a threat. Starmer said to Labour members in an email released last night 'I've always said that [[Palestine]] statehood is the inalienable right of the Palestinian people' Really? Then why is that right based on conditions linked to its oppressor? If world leaders want to take decisive action, the answers have been in front of them since the start. End arms sales to Israel, recognise Palestine as an independent state, demand a permanent ceasefire, apply pressure on Israel through trade and economic sanctions. These are evidenced and proportionate responses that have been applied to other nations, why not now? During apartheid in South Africa, the UK repeatedly vetoed UN resolutions calling for immediate economic sanctions, it was not until the late 1980s that the UK and US passed laws in support of trade sanctions against South Africa. The UK and US appear to have learnt no lessons, and are repeating the same mistakes. Whilst they may be ignorant of their own histories, neither the UK nor the US can say that they were unaware of the realities on the ground in Gaza. Beyond the devastating pictures released daily, the language from Israeli officials has been clear in their intention from the start. In the International Court of Justice hearing on probable genocide by Israel, over 500 statements were entered into the record as evidence of 'intention' of genocide. These public statements were from Israeli officials and included Israel's president, Isaac Herzog, who stated that 'It's [Palestine] an entire nation out there that is responsible.' Netanyahu has himself said that the 'war' will continue until all of Gaza is under Israeli military control. The intention has been clear, and the perpetrators have been able to continue with impunity as a consequence of the cowardice of so-called 'world leaders.' As author Omar El Akkad said; "One day, when it's safe…when it's too late to hold anyone accountable, everyone will have always been against this." Talat Yaqoob, is an independent consultant, researcher and campaigner, see
