Israel at a crossroads as disapproval grows among allies

Understandably lost amid the other news last week, including the death of Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, the revelation that before the Conservatives lost to Labour at the UK general election in July, the then foreign secretary, and former prime minister, David Cameron, was “working up” proposals to sanction Israeli ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich is further proof of how much the political world has changed since Oct. 7, 2023.
It is almost unthinkable that a UK government would consider sanctions against a democratically elected minister of any friendly state and ally, let alone Israel around which a protective wall against any form of sanctions has existed for many years.
But the dam is breaking. UK authorities have now imposed their third set of financial and other sanctions against elements of the settler community in the West Bank. The official statement announcing them was damning. It cited an “unprecedented rise in settler violence” and said the “inaction of the Israeli government allowed an environment of impunity to flourish.”
It is one thing to sanction settlers, it would be quite another to sanction a friendly government’s ministers. I think there is more to this than simply these particular individuals, and now is the time to explore this.
It is not difficult to find the statements and activities of these two ministers that cause concern. From making clear that he believes the rights of Jewish Israelis trump the human rights of the Arab community in any circumstances, to questioning why Israeli security forces take prisoners rather than just shooting enemies, Ben-Gvir has long outraged decent opinion in Israel as much as anywhere else.
Smotrich’s stated belief that the war crime of starvation of 2 million people in Gaza is “moral” until the cruelly taken Israeli hostages are returned stunned even the US, and was described as “abhorrent” by UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer.
The noises from the British government highlight its growing awareness of a dilemma it can no longer ignore: What, practically, do you do about a friend who is going down the wrong path but to the aid of which you will still come if it faces an existential crisis? The UK is not alone in western Europe in asking this question.
The lengthy conflict that has followed the atrocities of Oct. 7 has sparked many unspeakable consequential horrors through Israel’s reprisals, which have resulted in disproportionate civilian casualties and the displacement of millions.
Yet Israel’s response has failed to shed any light on what its ultimate strategy might be in its efforts to deliver the legitimate right of its population to security. Despite the removal of Sinwar, Israel’s first declared remedy, the elimination of Hamas and Hezbollah, is far from complete as the length of the war in Gaza and its expansion into Lebanon demonstrates.

It is almost unthinkable that a UK government would consider sanctions against a democratically elected minister of any friendly state and ally, let alone Israel.

Alistair Burt

Attention is increasingly turning to what the next elements of the strategy might be. Evidence is mounting that the declared long-term aims of Smotrich, Ben-Gvir and their supporters — a destroyed Gaza from which the Palestinian population has effectively been driven out, and the annexation of the West Bank with the same effect on its Palestinian residents — are now also what the Netanyahu government sees as the answer and the only alternative to a Palestinian state, which is something it has pledged it will continue to oppose and prevent.
Is this expansionary Israel the type of country that those who have defended and backed it for decades, including the UK, are now prepared to continue to support? Or are the sanctions that have been imposed on settlers, perhaps to be followed by wider sanctions against settlements and economic activity throughout the West Bank, finally a sign that Israel’s allies see that the present direction it is taking offers neither a guarantee of its own security nor of an outcome that is remotely feasible for the future of the region, and that they will actively oppose it.
The conflict has surely finally destroyed the belief that Israel’s security can only come from the denial of a Palestinian state. What a moment it would be now for Israel to turn the tables on Sinwar’s cruel and impossible dream of eliminating the country by offering not an equally implausible, and potentially tragic, settler-controlled future for Gaza and the West Bank, but a horizon he never gave them.
Because there is, of course, another answer, as set out most recently by Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi at the UN: An end to the Israeli occupation and the creation of a Palestinian state that is accepted by Palestinians themselves, with the security of Israel guaranteed not only by its own forces, which must be its ultimate guarantor, but also by 57 Arab states he mentioned who are desperate to avoid the catastrophe of a perpetual conflict, which seems almost inevitable if the present trajectories continue.
If Safadi’s proposition is to be credible, these states and other allies need to demonstrate how physical threats to Israel would be dealt with. You cannot force people to feel safe, whether they are in Beirut, Rafah or Tel Aviv. You must give them the confidence that they are. This is no simple task at present. It cannot be accomplished, and therefore the conflict will not end, unless Israel now makes clear what its political offer is.
The regional diplomacy that was active before Oct. 7, through which wary states could reach out to each other in an attempt to de-escalate tensions and confrontations, must also play a part. The recent visits by Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi to Saudi Arabia and Egypt are not coincidental; just as there is no future for the region without Israel, nor is there one without Iran.
It is long past time for Iran to make clear its position on recognition of the state of Israel, if this recognition is accepted by the Palestinians alongside the establishment of their own state. Or, failing that, to explain what Iran’s purpose now is.
The choice is clear. The region can miss yet another potential turning point that might ease the wretched plight of all those who have suffered as a result of similar failures for far too long. Or maybe this time it can prove the doubters wrong and offer some hope to the next, fearful generation.

• Alistair Burt is a former UK member of Parliament who has twice held ministerial positions in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office; as parliamentary under secretary of state from 2010 to 2013 and as minister of state for the Middle East from 2017 to 2019. X: @AlistairBurtUK