For decades, the UK government has consistently stated that ‘Israeli’ settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories are illegal under international law. Yet it has taken no action to prevent British trade and financial dealings with businesses operating in the West Bank. Then, in June, former Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper strengthened the government’s guidance to businesses, but still stopped short of introducing a ban. In a statement, she said:
“British citizens and businesses should not conduct any economic or financial activities in illegal Israeli settlements… We believe that settlements are a fundamental barrier to peace and a flagrant breach of international law, and that violent settler groups should not be profiting from the land they have seized from Palestinians.”
Growing pressure on government to ban any trade with settlements in West Bank
The Council for Arab-British Understanding (CAABU) has campaigned for a ban on UK trade and financial dealings with illegal Israeli settlements for many years. Chris Doyle is CAABU’s director. He tells the Canary the government needs to change its language from businesses “should not become economically involved with settlements” to businesses “must not” do so.
“In other words, there needs to be a criminal cost to it. This is even more important given the record pace of Israeli settlement expansion in recent years, and the massive levels of settler violence against Palestinian communities assisted by the Israeli army. The aim of a ban should be clear – that Israel should withdraw from settlements. They are illegal, and a ban should ensure that all of that ends.”
The pressure on the government is growing. In June, 137 Labour MPs signed a letter calling for an end to trade with settlements. This figure represented more than one-third of the party’s Commons representation. 238 MPs from across Parliament have also expressed support for a ban on trade and financial dealings with settlements.
In July, Labour MP Abtisam Mohamed secured a Commons debate on ending trade with Israeli occupation settlements. MPs from all parties except the Conservatives and Reform UK argued that Britain’s existing policy was inconsistent with its stated position on the illegality of settlements.
UK businesses helping to sustain ‘Israel’s’ system of domination and dispossession against Palestinians
One of those MPs was Andy McDonald. He is Labour MP for Middlesbrough & Thornaby East and Co-Chair of the Britain-Palestine All-Party Parliamentary Group. He tells the Canary that Parliament expects the law to reflect the government’s own stated position:
“The Government rightly says Israel’s settlements in Palestine are illegal under international law. But even after the former Foreign Secretary said last month that she had strengthened overseas business risk guidance, that guidance goes no further than saying ‘Businesses should not engage in economic and financial activities in Israeli settlements’. It does not say that trading with settlements is unlawful, and it does not say that such trade, financial services or investment are prohibited. The government cannot say settlements are illegal while allowing British commerce to help sustain them. It must use every available tool to uphold international law, and I will continue to urge them to do so.”
Prime Minister Andy Burnham has said his administration is considering “further measures” to deter settler violence. He is expected to make a decision once Parliament returns from its summer recess on 1 September. But it is not yet known what form such a ban could take. It may be limited to the import and export of goods from the occupied West Bank and other illegal settlements. But it could also extend to services provided between the UK and illegal Israeli settlements. It could potentially cover financial services, investment, tourism, construction, property transactions and other economic activity connected to the settlements.
There is also the possibility the government could back away from a ban altogether. Or it may delay a decision until after the Israeli elections in October. A new Israeli occupation government could create a different political atmosphere. And this could potentially give the UK government another reason to argue the time is not right for further measures.
Usual claims of victimisation by Israeli occupation
But Doyle believes the government is seriously considering a trade ban with West Bank settlements, although the change in ministerial teams has caused some disruption and delay. He says:
“I think what might trigger further movement is yet more aggressive Israeli announcements, such as moving forward with the tenders for constructing the 3,401 units in the E1 area. What is interesting is that, in contrast to the debate say four years ago, the government has for some time now not raised any ethical issues about doing this. Their position is not one which it used to be – ‘Oh, we don’t do BDS, we don’t do sanctions.’ They have sanctioned, maybe not as far as many of us would like, but we are away from that. They do not come back with ethical reasons, but tend to come back with technical reasons instead, such as ‘We’re not sure how to implement it.’”
The proposal has met opposition from Zionist organisations. Labour Friends of Israel (LFI) says it opposes the settlement project. But a paper it published in July argues that sanctions should not go beyond “violent extremist settlers and organisations”. It also describes a UK ban on trade with illegal West Bank settlements as “practically and politically impossible.” And claims it would become “a de facto boycott of all of Israel”.
LFI also implies that such a policy could be perceived by the Jewish community as antisemitic and:
“a further example of the government singling out and targeting Israel for punitive action and harsh rhetoric.”
The accusations from these genocide supporting lobby groups are incorrect. There has been no “singling out” of ‘Israel’ by the UK government. It has imposed sanctions on many other countries but as yet has taken no action against the Israeli occupation.
A ban on settlement trade and services would ensure British companies and consumers are not economically supporting illegal settlement activity. Many argue this is the bare minimum we should be implementing, and much broader economic sanctions against ‘Israel’ are necessary. But taking this action would at least be an important first step, and is crucial.
“Israel can avoid wider economic consequences by doing what international law demands”
Regarding the allegation of antisemitism, Peter Frankental, Amnesty International UK’s Economic Affairs Director, tells us:
“There is nothing antisemitic in holding Israel accountable for its genocide in Gaza, its ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from the West Bank, and its brutal system of apartheid. A settlement trade ban should only impact companies operating in settlements and those doing business with them. This is by definition illegitimate business which should be stopped. Israel can avoid wider economic consequences by doing what international law demands – ending its illegal occupation and the grave human rights violations that go with it.”
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued an Advisory Opinion, in July 2024. It ruled ‘Israel’s’ continued presence in the occupied Palestinian territory to be illegal. The Court also concluded states have obligations not to recognise the unlawful situation or give aid or assistance in maintaining it.
LFI says a trade ban with these settlements would “affect all Israeli businesses operating in the settlement blocs, as well as East Jerusalem and the Old City.” This is exactly what should be happening, as these businesses are operating illegally in occupied Palestine- whether in settlement blocs, or the Old City of East Jerusalem.
LFI also claims Palestinian livelihoods would be affected by steps against settlement trade. What the lobby group fails to mention is that ‘Israeli’ policies have intentionally destroyed Palestinian businesses and the economy. Palestinians very often face huge financial difficulties. So they have no choice but to work for their occupier, in a settlement built on stolen Palestinian land. The vast majority of Palestinians working in these places are exploited. And regularly have no contracts, working long hours, and often endure unhealthy, unsafe conditions.
London based Zionist news outlet the Jewish Chronicle is also trying to sell the case against a UK trade ban with settlements. It recently ran a story with the headline: Exclusive– Trade embargo against Israeli settlements runs risk of damaging the NHS. 3600 medicines produced by ‘Israeli’ drugs company Teva are used in the UK, while it produces one in every seven medicines prescribed by the NHS. Its products include anti-cholesterol medication, antibiotics, painkillers, cancer treatment and respiratory drugs. According to Declassified UK, the company also has a close relationship with Israeli occupation forces (IOF).
Arguments in support of UK trade with West Bank settlements are not convincing
The Jewish Chronicle argues:
“a practical difficulty in separating goods and services produced by the settlements and East Jerusalem from the rest of Israel”
It says it could mean these “vital supplies” to the NHS could be blocked if a UK trade ban with the settlements takes place. The Jewish Chronicle also says finding alternatives could:
“force the health service into paying out billions of pounds extra from taxpayer coffers.”
Firstly, the claim that a ban on settlement goods and services would be too “difficult” is not convincing. The UK already bans the import of goods from territories in Ukraine occupied by Russia. This includes Crimea and specified occupied areas of eastern and southern Ukraine. So the UK should have no problems implementing a comparable ban on goods produced in ‘Israeli’ settlements in occupied Palestinian territory.
Also, under the UK-‘Israel’ Free Trade Agreement, procedures already exist to distinguish ‘Israeli’ goods from those produced in settlements. Settlement goods are not entitled to the preferential tariff treatment available to qualifying goods produced within ‘Israel’. If the UK can distinguish settlement goods for the purpose of determining whether they qualify for preferential tariffs, it should also be possible to use those procedures as the basis for refusing entry to settlement goods altogether.
An investigation by Global Echo found one in every six agricultural shipments to the EU, UK, Norway and Switzerland was sourced from settlements. Its report, Importing Occupation, suggests the main problem is not an inability to identify settlement goods. Instead, shipments may be mis-declared or insufficiently checked before entering European markets.
But the issue goes beyond whether individual products can be identified. If the UK government wants to impose meaningful sanctions, it must also ensure critical supply chains are not dependent on human rights abusing companies or states.
No business with human rights abusers, we must have alternatives
Doyle argues the UK should be working now to diversify its supply chains and develop alternatives to critical products and components. He says:
“This shows us we are far too exposed. We need to ensure we are not stuck in a situation whereby we are dependent on, and cannot impose certain sanctions or bans against, a country like Israel who abuses human rights laws in a really serious fashion and violates international law. We should be looking to ensure our citizens are not dependent on key components that come from states with appalling human rights records.
We must be able to source alternatives. It takes time and there will be a cost, but it’s really important. That’s also why it’s important no future contracts in critical areas such as defence, key NHS facilities, and cyber, should be taken with Israeli state enterprises. They simply do not pass muster, in terms of their human rights record. We should instead be fostering industries at home, and also with states whom we have a much better sense of trust, in terms of their record.”
Slovenia’s new conservative government has lifted its ban on settlement imports. And efforts to introduce EU-wide sanctions on Israeli settlements have stalled. But several European countries have moved ahead with restrictions of their own, with Ireland, Belgium, the Netherlands and Spain introducing measures targeting settlement goods. The upcoming parliamentary session will show us whether the UK is also prepared to implement a ban.
Settlement expansion, settler violence, land confiscation and the displacement of Palestinian communities are interconnected elements of the same land-grabbing settler-colonial system. One in which successive Israeli occupation governments have tried to consolidate control over Palestinian land, restrict Palestinian movement and development, facilitate displacement and further fragment Palestinian territory.
Settlements therefore contribute to the ongoing ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in the occupied West Bank. So allowing British businesses to trade with, invest in and provide services to them, helps sustain an unlawful occupation and the system of dispossession and displacement that accompanies it. It is time the UK government says no.
Featured image via the Canary
By Charlie Jaay
