National Jewish Assembly | 5 November 2026
The National Jewish Assembly welcomes the House of Lords’ decision to pass a motion of regret concerning the Government’s expanded sanctions regime, following a debate in which peers raised serious questions about its scope, consistency and consequences.
When Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband announced his measures against Israel on 8 September, the NJA warned that Britain was crossing a dangerous line. We expressed grave concerns about economic exclusion, double standards, the potential damage to Palestinian livelihoods and the risks posed to British Jews by increasingly inflammatory rhetoric surrounding Israel.
Those warnings have now found significant echoes in Parliament.
Lord Leigh of Hurley challenged the breadth and ambiguity of the regulations, while Lord Pickles and Lord Polak questioned their potential implications for legitimate commercial, charitable and property-related activities. Baroness Altmann warned of the dangers of singling out Israel for exceptional punishment at a time when British Jews are already facing deeply troubling levels of antisemitism.
The NJA has consistently maintained that the Green Line, established as an armistice demarcation in 1949, was never intended to constitute a permanent international border. Questions concerning the future of Judea and Samaria, including Jerusalem, cannot be resolved through unilateral economic restrictions that disregard their historical, legal and political complexities.
Nor should the Government overlook the potential consequences for Palestinians employed by Israeli businesses, or for British companies and financial institutions facing uncertainty over the boundaries of permissible commercial activity.
We remain deeply concerned about the wider direction of British policy towards Israel. While the Government insists that its sanctions framework is global, the questions raised by peers about consistency, proportionality and selective enforcement demand convincing answers.
The NJA unequivocally condemns violence against innocent civilians, irrespective of the perpetrators. But legitimate action against those responsible for violence must not become a vehicle for indiscriminate economic exclusion or measures that risk penalising people simply because of where they live.
Equally troubling is the domestic dimension. As we warned in September, the language employed by senior ministers does not exist in a vacuum. When Israel is repeatedly singled out for condemnation, the Government must consider how its words and actions may be interpreted by those who already conflate Israel, Zionism and British Jews.
The concerns raised by the NJA in September have now been echoed on the floor of the House of Lords. The Government can no longer dismiss these warnings as isolated objections.
The NJA calls upon the Foreign Secretary to address the questions raised in Parliament, provide clear safeguards for lawful commercial and charitable activity, and ensure that any further sanctions proposals receive proper scrutiny and a comprehensive assessment of their consequences.
Britain’s relationship with Israel, and the safety and confidence of its Jewish community, deserve a foreign policy founded upon consistency, fairness and responsible leadership.
