David Cameron, former Conservative foreign secretary, disclosed his plans to sanction Israeli ministers Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir due to their extremist actions and remarks. He argued that such sanctions would send a crucial message to Israel regarding adherence to international law. However, these plans were shelved amidst concerns of political ramifications during the election and U.S. opposition. Cameron emphasized the need for the UK to influence Israel through sanctions instead of suspending arms exports while advocating for humanitarian aid access to Gaza.
David Cameron, the former Conservative foreign secretary, has revealed plans he developed before the recent general election to impose sanctions on two Israeli ministers: Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir. He described both individuals as “extremist,” contending that sanctions would signal to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that certain actions are unacceptable and must cease. Cameron criticized Smotrich for suggesting it might be “justified and moral” to starve Gazans and for urging Palestinian residents to vacate their areas to allow for Israeli settlement. Despite having prepared a case for a travel ban and asset freeze, the plans were shelved due to concerns about the political ramifications during the election campaign. Sources indicated that the decision to delay was influenced by apprehensions about provoking violence in constituencies with polarized views regarding the Middle East and by the U.S.’s opposition to sanctioning the two ministers. Current UK Foreign Secretary David Lammy has condemned remarks made by Smotrich and Ben-Gvir as “entirely unacceptable” and has stated that the UK is prepared to act if necessary. However, the Foreign Office does not comment on potential future sanctions. Notably, while discussions regarding sanctions against Smotrich and Ben-Gvir have been ongoing, there is an understanding that implementation may be postponed until after the U.S. elections. Cameron has articulated that while the UK seeks to support Israel’s right to self-defense, it must simultaneously ensure that humanitarian aid is allowed into Gaza and that international laws are upheld. He expressed that the recent restrictions on arms sales to Israel, in light of concerns regarding their potential misuse, present a contradiction when coupled with the UK’s commitment to protect Israeli interests from Iranian threats. Cameron asserted that the UK must influence Israeli policy through targeted sanctions rather than suspending arms exports altogether, as the latter approach fails to align with the goal of achieving a sustainable resolution to the ongoing conflict. Cameron’s statements highlight a significant shift towards considering accountability among allies, as imposing sanctions on government officials represents an unusual step in international relations but could send a vital message about adherence to international standards of behavior.
The article centers on the revelations made by David Cameron regarding his plans to sanction two Israeli ministers as a form of political pressure to encourage Israel’s compliance with international law. It discusses the history of remarks and actions attributed to Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir that Cameron views as extreme. The British government’s foreign policy, particularly in relation to Israel and its ongoing conflict with Palestine, reflects the complexities of international relations, especially when balancing support for allies with the obligation to uphold international legal standards. The potential for sanctions reflects the increasing scrutiny of Israeli governmental actions and the UK’s approach to exerting influence within a volatile geopolitical climate.
In summary, David Cameron’s statements underscore the necessity for the UK to reconsider its diplomatic strategies in response to the conduct of certain Israeli officials. While sanctions could serve as a critical tool for signaling disapproval of extreme actions that contravene international norms, concerns about domestic political consequences and international alignment, particularly with the U.S., have led to a cautious approach. The ongoing dialogue surrounding the UK’s foreign policy towards Israel highlights the intricate balance between support and accountability.
Original Source: www.bbc.com
