The UK’s disastrous decision to boycott Israel

The United Kingdom’s new policy of boycotting Israeli goods is not only discriminatory; it is disastrous. It will increase antisemitism, strain relations with an important ally, and do nothing to address the myriad problems plaguing the country today.On Sept. 8, British Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband gave a lengthy speech before Parliament calling for a “reset” in relations between the United Kingdom and Israel. The speech was as disgraceful as it was disingenuous.Miliband began by identifying himself as a “proud British Jew” and “someone with the deepest gratitude to the state of Israel.” He went on to call antisemitism a “scourge” and an “evil” and to decry its growing presence in the U.K. But then Miliband proceeded to feed that evil by calling for a “ban” on Israeli goods made in what he called the “illegally occupied West Bank.” Miliband put the onus for the failure of a “two-state solution” solely on Israel.The foreign secretary might claim to have “deep gratitude” and respect for Israel, but his tirade in Parliament shows a stunning disregard for both truth and consequences. And his assertion that the “ban” isn’t part of the boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement, which singles out the Jewish state for opprobrium, is flat-out false.The areas that Miliband calls “occupied Palestinian territory” are no such thing. In fact, no sovereign Palestinian Arab state has ever existed.The status of the lands is, at best, disputed. After the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, Article 6 of the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine called for “close Jewish settlement on the land” west of the Jordan River, and both the 1920 San Remo Conference and the 1924 Anglo-American Convention further enshrined these claims.Indeed, the land itself was historically called “Judea,” which means “land of the Jews.” The term “West Bank” only fell into popular usage after Jordan seized it during a war against the nascent Jewish state in 1948. Jordan occupied the territory until losing it after waging another war against Israel in 1967.Notably, during this 20-year period, Jordan made no effort to establish a Palestinian Arab state on the land, and the U.K. didn’t encourage it to do so.Support for the so-called “West Bank” becoming part of a Palestinian Arab state only picked up steam after Israel gained the land in the 1967 Six-Day War. That is, it wasn’t so much that Palestinian Arabs should have their own state; it was that Jews shouldn’t be allowed to rule over their ancestral lands.Israeli rule in what Miliband calls “settlements” does not violate international law, as Miliband claims. As legal scholar Eugene Kontorovich has documented, Israel is the obligatory military ruling authority in these lands pending a final-status resolution.A final resolution hasn’t happened for one reason only: the intransigence of Palestinian Arab leaders.The foreign secretary didn’t mention it in his lengthy speech, but Israeli leaders, both right and left, have made numerous proposals to create a Palestinian state, including in 2000 at Camp David, in 2001 at Taba, and in 2008 after the Annapolis Conference.Yet all were rejected out of hand by Palestinian rulers who refused to make peace with and recognize Israel. Put simply, the existence of so-called “settlements” and what Miliband calls an “occupation” are merely the byproducts of Palestinian Arab irredentism.For its part, Hamas, the Palestinian terrorist group whose charter quotes Hitler, hailed Miliband’s speech and called it “an important step in the right direction.” The state media of Iran, the world’s chief state sponsor of terror, praised it as a “step towards the end of Israel.” These are the de facto allies of this proud statesman in his new endeavor.REMEMBERING THE WORLD VIEW THAT INSPIRED 9/11In September 2025, the preceding Labour government formally recognized a “State of Palestine.” Two weeks later, terrorists targeted the Hebrew Congregation Synagogue in Manchester. A growing number of British Jews are leaving the country, taking their families, talents, and perhaps Britain’s future with them.The U.K. is plagued by anemic growth, an obtrusive regulatory state, and growing social and cultural fissures. There are a number of reasons for this state of affairs, not the least of which is unfettered immigration by people who neither assimilate nor share Western values. Attempting to appease these voters by targeting Israel won’t solve the nation’s problems; it will only deepen them.