How US response shows UK sanctions on Israeli settlements are much more than hollow symbolism

Has the United States blinked? For the past week the British media landscape has been full of reports that the Trump administration was strongly opposed to the UK government's plan to sanction illegal Israeli settlements. Numerous opposition politicians and political commentators in Britain criticised the Andy Burnham government on the grounds that its plans would isolate and weaken the UK by angering its most important ally. And sources close to government told MEE that US officials did indeed lobby Andy Burnham's government not to go ahead with Tuesday's announcement. Last week US President Donald Trump even suggested the US might not back Britain if Argentina invaded the Falkland Islands, an intervention which - it was widely speculated - was linked to the UK's planned sanctions. US ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, even accused the British government of "Jew hate" over the weekend in another apparent escalation. He later warned that US states could sanction British companies. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters But when it the moment came and Burnham briefed Trump of his plans on Monday afternoon, the president reportedly didn't push back. By this point, the US would have learnt that Britain would not go it alone: France and Canada, two more key American allies, had agreed to follow Britain in banning Israeli settlement goods on the same day. Burnham and Miliband had pulled off a major diplomatic coup, which would blindside the Israeli government on Tuesday. Besides France and Canada, nine other countries - Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Ireland, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain and Sweden - signed a joint statement with Britain published on Tuesday. They said that they "confirm their intention to introduce national and/or support European restrictions on trade in goods with settlements which are illegal under international law, or that they are actively considering these and other measures, in accordance with their national procedures". That was a remarkable show of international force which not only meant Britain was far from a lone actor but also served as a notable rebuke to American policy in the Middle East. 'We share the goal of stability' On Tuesday, British Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband said in parliament that the government recognised the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in the occupied West Bank. He declared the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory illegal and announced both comprehensive sanctions on Israeli settlements and a ban on all arms licences and other exports that "materially contribute to the occupation". As night follows day, Israel responded with fury. Foreign Minister Gideon Saar announced Israel would close the British consulate in East Jerusalem and ban 11 British MPs, among other sanctions. But crucially, the reaction from the US was muted. Analysis: Ed Miliband is becoming the UK's most formidable foreign secretary in decades Read More » "We were made aware that they [Britain] were going to make this decision," Secretary of State Marco Rubio sanguinely told reporters while on a trip to Colombia. "We heard their argument as to why, but look, we share the goal of stability. We don't want to see some uptick in violence or an uptick in conflict or tensions in the West Bank at a very tenuous time. In the region, there's always tenuous times." Significantly, Rubio did not criticise the British decision. This situation may change and the US may yet publicly rebuke Britain. But for now it seems as though that isn't happening. Trump has not commented yet, which in itself suggests that he is not willing to publicly condemn three key allies - the UK, Canada and France - over the issue together (even though the US and Canada are at loggerheads over other matters). For the UK, there is strength in numbers. Bloomberg reported on Tuesday that British diplomats privately assured their US counterparts that the sanctions were symbolic. In a sense, this is undoubtedly true. The sanctions are hardly going to cripple Israeli settlements. The economic toll wouldn't be enough to make Israel change course. But if the sanctions are theatre, they are nonetheless a hugely consequential form of theatre. A tectonic shift For one thing, the British government has adopted a new language about Israel, saying there is "ethnic cleansing" in the West Bank and evidence of war crimes in Gaza. The heightened intensity of government rhetoric will need to be matched by stronger policies in the near future, or Burnham and Miliband will open themselves up to charges of hypocrisy or incoherence. Government sources privately insist the measures announced this week should be understood as a new beginning, and a laying of the groundwork for future policies. Second, the huge rise in hostility to Israel's settlement expansion from western states is diplomatically isolating the Netanyahu government. Britain and France, in particular, are close historical allies of Israel, which helps explain the particularly virulent anger shown by Israeli ministers over the new measures. In Europe, strong support for Israel is simply no longer the norm. This is a tectonic shift that means Germany now appears to be an outlier in its relatively strong backing for the Israeli government. 'Standing up for freedom': British politicians react to UK sanctions on Israeli settlements Read More » Yet sanctions also have implications beyond the Middle East. Last year Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney outlined what has been called the Carney Doctrine - effectively a call for an alliance of middle-ranking nations. Although not stated explicitly, this would serve as a counterweight to the great powers, in particular the US. Tuesday's sanctions represent Britain successfully building an alliance of nations independently of the US, and over an issue on which the Americans take the opposite position. For this reason, the sanctions have successfully projected British soft power and influence. Notably Qatar and Jordan, two close British allies in the Middle East, were quick to issue statements welcoming the British sanctions. The Arab League soon followed. Far from embarassing the UK on the world stage, as opposition parties accused Burnham and Miliband of doing, taking a bold stance on Israel is likely to be a boon for Britain's standing. Already it seems to be establishing the UK as an independent actor - and crucially, one which sets agendas and leads other countries - on the world stage. It now remains to be seen whether the Trump administration remains publicly relaxed about the sanctions - and if it does not, whether Burnham and Miliband can stand firm in the face of much stronger pressure. That would be a test they have not yet had to face.