Board of Deputies claims UK settlement trade ban could have ‘harmful consequences for British Jews’

The Board of Deputies has spoken out against Andy Burnham’s government’s plan to introduce sanctions banning UK trade with West Bank settlements.

The Board’s President Phil Rosenberg claimed the move could “further damage UK–Israel relations, encourage a wider boycott of Israel, and have harmful consequences for British Jews.”

Jewish News understands a trade ban, alongside further sanctions, could be announced by Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband in a statement in the Commons as soon as the week beginning Monday, September 7.

In a statement, Rosenberg explained that the Board had engaged with the government and community partners over the long-anticipated move.

He said the Board had “urged the UK government to avoid irreversible steps that could further damage the UK-Israel relationship and hurt the UK Jewish community, especially in the run-up to an Israeli election that has the potential to bring significant political change.”

Rosenberg added: “Our community overwhelmingly condemns violence by extremist settlers and opposes actions by any party that undermine the prospects for future peace between Israelis and Palestinians.

“Nonetheless, we have significant concerns about the unintended consequences for our community of policies the government is understood to be considering in relation to settlements.

“These include the risk of harming the legitimate connection between British Jews and places of great religious and cultural significance. There is also the risk of encouraging a wider boycott movement that rejects Israel’s very existence, and which marginalises and stigmatises British Jews for our close cultural, emotional, and personal ties to the world’s only Jewish state.”

The Board president continued: “We have also stressed to government that any approach to the conflict which focuses narrowly on the actions of the Israeli government, and does not sufficiently address the actions and responsibility of Palestinian leaders and malign actors in the region, fuels a climate of hatred not only towards Israel but towards British Jews.”

Earlier this month, Miliband and the Israeli government began a war of words over a controversial settlement project in the occupied West Bank.

He summoned Israel’s charge d’affaires – the country’s top diplomat in the UK – on Wednesday to set out the UK’s “profound objection” to Israel publishing a tender for the construction of about 1,200 homes, as part of the E1 programme of “expansion”.

Miliband called it an “unacceptable and destructive act” and said the UK would not “stand back and accept the destruction of the two-state solution”, as he demanded “an immediate reversal”.

Miliband added that the UK will set out a “comprehensive set of measures” in the coming weeks in response to Israeli government policies to protect the viability of the Palestinian state, which the Starmer government formally recognised last September.

Plans to build on the E1 area have been mooted for decades and have long been internationally condemned, with settlements deemed illegal under international law.

Jewish News understands that Miliband has attempted to assure communal organisations that he retains a personal connection to the state of Israel, having visited on several occasions, and having family living there.

He has argued that he feels it necessary for the UK government to act, both because of our historical ties to the region, and critically out of the need to preserve the possibility of a two-state solution. It is understood he stressed he continues to oppose BDS.

In an article for the Sunday Times, former UK ambassador to Israel Matthew Gould argued that the settlement project “was and remains in large part an effort to frustrate a two-state solution, and entrench Israeli sovereignty and control over the West Bank (or ‘Judea and Samaria’ as it is called by those who wanted to be part of the ‘Greater Israel’).”

But he claimed: “Not all settlements are created equal, and there is a hierarchy of damage that they cause.

“At the most inoffensive end of the spectrum are the large settlements such as Ma’ale Adumim and Gush Etzion, which sit just the wrong side of the green line (the boundary between Israel and the West Bank).

“About 300,000 people live in these settlements—three-fifths of the settler population. Most are there for economic rather than ideological reasons: the houses are cheap, and the commute to Tel Aviv is short.”

Critics reject this, saying calling some settlements “inoffensive” creates a false distinction.

Under the Fourth Geneva Convention, all Israeli settlements built beyond the 1967 Green Line are equally illegal under international law, they add.

Groups like Peace Now and B’Tselem claim expanding big blocs like Ma’ale Adumim into the E1 corridor risks cutting the West Bank in two—threatening any future Palestinian state’s territorial continuity.

Spain became the first major European nation to implement a ban on imports originating from Israeli settlements.

The Dutch government approved a formal decree banning the “import, purchase, and sale of goods originating from unlawful Israeli settlements”.

The policy is scheduled to take full legal effect on 22 September 2026, carrying potential prison sentences for violators, though it faces domestic legal challenges from pro-Israel groups.

It is understood that a move by the UK to introduce a ban on settlement trade could trigger further announcements, including from France, Germany and the European Union.