Burnham defends Israel sanctions claiming he is standing up for ‘underdog’ Palestinians as Labour is accused of risking the lives of British Jews
Andy Burnham defended the UK Government's decision to impose trade sanctions on illegal Israeli West Bank settlements, telling MPs that Britain would always "stand with the underdog" against injustice. The move, announced by Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband, has provoked a diplomatic and domestic backlash, with Israel closing a British consulate in East Jerusalem and banning a dozen MPs from entering the country, while Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis condemned the sanctions as "gesture politics" that could embolden anti-Semitism.
The sanctions, coordinated with allies including France and Canada, target companies and individuals linked to the occupied territory as part of a renewed push for a two-state solution. Rabbi Leo Dee, whose wife and two daughters were killed by Palestinian terrorists in 2023, accused Miliband of hypocrisy, while Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch claimed Labour was risking domestic anti-Semitism to win back voters lost to the Greens ahead of the Holborn and St Pancras by-election. Miliband, describing himself as "a proud British Jew," said he disagreed with the Chief Rabbi but remained confident that security cooperation with Israel would continue, while the Government awaits a response from Donald Trump.
- Burnham defends West Bank settlement sanctions as standing up for Palestinians
- Israel retaliates by closing consulate, banning a dozen UK MPs
- Chief Rabbi and Tories accuse Labour of risking rise in anti-Semitism
New here? Start with this
Andy Burnham, the Mayor of Greater Manchester, has spoken out in support of the UK Government's decision to place trade sanctions on companies and individuals linked to Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, which are considered illegal under international law. The sanctions were announced by Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband and were coordinated with other countries, including France and Canada, as part of efforts to revive prospects for a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians.
The measures have caused significant tension, with Israel responding by closing a British consulate in East Jerusalem and barring a number of British MPs from entering the country. They have also stirred debate within the UK, with the Chief Rabbi, Ephraim Mirvis, warning they amount to gesture politics that could fuel anti-Semitism, while critics, including Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch, have questioned the Government's motives and timing.
At the centre of the row are competing views on how Britain should respond to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and concerns about the impact of the debate on British Jewish communities. Ed Miliband, who has described himself as a proud British Jew, has defended the policy, while the Government also awaits a reaction from the United States under President Donald Trump.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters argue the sanctions are a measured, long-overdue response to settlement activity that successive UK governments and international law have deemed illegal, targeting only those companies and individuals directly implicated rather than Israel as a whole. They see this as consistent with Britain's stated commitment to a two-state solution, coordinated with allies such as France and Canada to give diplomatic weight to Palestinian self-determination. For advocates like Burnham, standing with a population living under occupation and settlement expansion is a matter of principle and fairness, not hostility towards Israel or Jewish people, and need not be read as diminishing security cooperation or empathy for victims of terrorism.
The case against
Critics contend the sanctions are a one-sided gesture that punishes Israel while offering no comparable consequence for Hamas or Palestinian violence, making the policy feel less like principled diplomacy and more like political theatre timed to a difficult by-election. They warn that singling out Israel in this way, especially while security cooperation and trust with a key ally are damaged, risks conflating the actions of an Israeli government with British Jews generally, thereby heightening domestic anti-Semitism at a vulnerable moment. For voices such as the Chief Rabbi and bereaved families, the sanctions appear to prioritise symbolic positioning over practical benefit to Palestinians, while imposing real reputational and safety costs on British Jewish communities.