I think it's only appropriate to give praise where praise is due, and it was yesterday to Ed Miliband and to Andy Burnham for letting him say what he did in the House of Commons on a new foreign policy approach to Israel.
It can be argued that the sanctions that Ed Miliband announced yesterday may have little economic impact.
It can be said that more might have been announced.
Both of these things might be true, but the fact is that this was an enormously significant statement and a substantial rebuff to Keir Starmer, explicitly rejecting the comments that he made when Israel began its occupation of Gaza using inhumane methods of abuse. No wonder he wanted to quit the Commons.
It is very welcome that the UK government has made some important distinctions.
It has said that criticising anyone for being Jewish is unacceptable. At the same time, it has made entirely clear its view that criticising the Israeli government is not an act of antisemitism, because, of course, it never could have been.
It has made clear that Israeli occupation of the West Bank is illegal, which as a matter of fact, it is.
It has said that Israeli action in Gaza amounts to ethnic cleansing, because that is what it is and what it has been from the outset.
It has not yet said that the Israeli government has committed genocide, but it has made very clear that it is inclined to think that is the case and that it would support legal action to confirm that opinion.
These are major restatements of UK foreign policy, and without exception they are welcome.
The Tories, Labour Friends of Israel, and others did, of course, condemn Miliband for what he had to say. It is very difficult to condemn a Jewish man whose grandmother sought sanctuary in Israel after World War II for not being Jewish enough, but these charlatans tried to do just that. Concern for human life, the rule of law, and the rights of Palestinians, which are as important as the rights of Jews, matter nothing to them. Flag-waving to support the neo-fascism of Netanyahu and Trump does, and it is that flag-waving that Ed Miliband called out yesterday.
I was delighted to note that other countries, including France and Canada, have agreed to support the UK in this initiative. A realignment of international opinion around Israel has been long overdue. It would appear that we are going to get it.
I might be critical of Andy Burnham for his failings on economics, and his obvious endorsement, through his Chancellor of the Exchequer, of neoliberal economic policy that will be profoundly harmful to this country in the months and years to come, but he has made a difference by letting Ed Miliband make this statement, and by very publicly supporting him in an article in the Guardian this morning.
As I said at the start of this article, I think it is appropriate to recognise when praise is due, and on this occasion, it most definitely is.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
It is certainly possible to say that Milliband did not go far enough, but as a starting point I think I go with Thornberry’s comment: ‘At last’! I wonder how long Burnham has been planning this, because it shows that Milliband as foreign secretary was a really good choice.
Agreed, a welcome change in policy.
Yes Richard – has to be acknowledged – and quite surprising<p>
The BBC quizzing of Miliband R4 this morning was entirely from the ‘official’ deep state perspective of Israel ‘ – is it antisemitic, will it work, is it just a gesture?, etc etc<p>
BBC could have asked ‘what took you so long? there are seven hundred thousand settlers in the occupied West bank, the international court has said the occupation is illegal years ago, the two state solution is already dead’. But of course the BBC would never do that. The deep state official perspective remains the ‘objective’ perspective.<p>
But yes Richard , EM and AB have done the right thing and should be acknowledged.
I saw the BBC 24 hours news and it included an interview with a Jewish lady from an organisation which approved the govt. measures. She said her synagogue had been fire bombed and she took turns in guarding it but still thought the govt. was right. I doubt she will appear on BBC One news.
November 2024 100 BBC journalists signed a document saying the BBC coverage was biased in favour of Israel. I suspect there is a struggle within the corporation about the presentation of the news. Jeremy Bowen and Orla Guerin often give me the impression they are not saying all they would like to.
For example, I don’t think was reported by the BBC but it rather dispels the idea Miliband is engaging in ‘gesture politics.’ https://www.france24.com/en/middle-east/20260822-former-french-uk-diplomats-urge-governments-to-act-against-israeli-settlement-policies
Katya Adler also seems constrained too often. She would, I think, be a good replacement for Laura K.
I am pleasantly surprised – and I commend the government for these belated, small steps.
I see it as significant that they have (at last, after more than half a century)
1. Declared the occupation illegal.
2. Referred to the W Bank settler violence as terrorism.
3. Described what is happening in the W Bank to be ethnic cleansing.
So, I wonder what happens to any person or organisation “supporting” settlements, or supporting settlers, or the occupation, either financially, or verbally/with a banner/placard? What happens to the protester who says “I support the Israeli occupation – I support the West Bank settlers – I support the removal of Palestinians from Judaea and Samaria”. 14 years in jail?
And how long will it take the government’s speech therapist to help them get their tongues round the “g” word?
Gentle – General – genuflect – gentian – genetic – and – deep breath – just spit it out – genocide. There – not so difficult after all.
I also remain deeply suspicious. But its a start.
Agreed
Fully agreed. The difference between Stymied’s stance and this one could not be more stark and adds credence to the copious writing that has taken place about the subterfuge and dirty tricks of the Starmer Brigade.
Next stop: Burnham meets Trump.
My thoughts entirely. Seeing last night’s news, I said “At last they’re doing something useful!” And the Opposition’s response was woeful – they should have welcomed the government’s change of policy.
Woeful, indeed.
Thanks for this. I felt Ed Milliband was really genuine and the fact he is a Jew added to the gravitous. It was a welcome step change and as you rightly say whilst Burnham might not have initiated it, he had to agree to it. Whilst some of the my measures may not go far enough, the UK has stepped out and said enough is enough and hopefully this will put more pressure on Israel as the wider international community starts to openly condemn their actions.
I was unsure about Ed Milliband as foreign secretary. It didn’t feel a natural role for him, but if he carries on like this I’m all for it.
It’s fair to give credit for a change in rhetoric, but aren’t we missing the bigger picture here? How can we call this a meaningful breakthrough when the core policy is so deeply conflicted?
Can you really separate the settlements from the state? The blog praises the sanctions on the occupied territories, but how does that work in practice? Israel’s government actively funds, protects, and expands these settlements. Sanctioning goods from the West Bank while keeping up standard trade and diplomatic relations with Tel Aviv feels less like a firm stand and more like performative theater.
What about Gaza? If ministers are willing to call out ethnic cleansing in the West Bank and acknowledge the horrific reality in Gaza, why draw an artificial line at trade with settlements? By continuing military and economic cooperation with the state driving these policies, aren’t we effectively bankrolling the very apparatus we claim to condemn?
Is this actual accountability or just political cover? Settlement trade makes up a tiny fraction of the economy. Does a targeted ban actually pressure the Israeli government to change course, or does it just allow politicians to look principled without taking any real risks?
If the occupation of the West Bank and the assault on Gaza are driven by the exact same government policies, can this announcement really be seen as anything more than a clever whitewash?
I think you are rather missing the point.
The sanctions, we know, are weak.
The rhetoric is what matters on this occasion.
I look forward to hearing the Government’s rhetoric if the Israeli Government ignores the criticism of several of its allies and goes ahead with the new settlement anyway. This seems highly likely given the outrageous threats made by Foreign Minister Gideon Saar, who according to the Quds Network said, “if Britain acts against Israel, Israel will act against Britain,” saying Israel has “tools” and declaring the era of acting against Israel without a response “over.” Incidentally I didn’t know there was an era when Israel didn’t respond to anyone who they perceived to be acting against them.
I have been musing on why we had an air traffic control outage this week.
It is said that Ed Milliband believes that Israel is ‘self destructing’ and that what is happening on the West Bank is part of this – something I agree with
Now Milliband and Burnham have acknowledged the important role of the International Court of Justice, hopefully they will go full steam ahead on the procecution of Netanyahu. and the IDF and Israeli air force for the genocide in Gaza and possibly Lebanon.
It can’t have been easy to do the right thing when the right-wing vitriol was bound to come pouring out immediately. But we live in a country where the press tried to undermine him as Labour leader by criticizing the way he as a jewish man, ate a bacon sandwich, and then subsequently attacked the next Labour leader for being antisemitic. It’s long past time we gave the right wing press any credit in the ability to make “moral” judgements.
Good for them, standing up against very powerful bullies and finally doing the right thing. I hope it lasts.
This is a really interesting development in the humane direction.
It was to be expected to see someone like Mike Huckabee calling this a “discrimination against Jews”.
Showing perfectly that those people do not want to understand at all.
A Jew wanting to discriminate himself?
I’m wondering if some of the english newspapers are currently already planning another batch of Stürmer-like antisemitic caricatures like in May against Polanski.
I consider them stupid enough.
Given the ruling of ICJ on “plausible genocide” and their earlier on-the-record call for signatories, NOW, to take action to “prevent” genocide, any weasel words/formulations about leaving definitions of genocide to legal bodies (whose rulings will be years away), are just attempts to obfuscate and delay.
There is an obligation NOW, to take action to prevent genocide, and the UK government must start:-
1. Talking about genocide
2. Acting to prevent genocide.
Their refusal to do this must be challenged every time they try it on. It is a hypocritical, deceitful refusal to honour our IHL obligations.
Fair comment.
Earlier you agreed with Robertj that avoiding legal accountability is “deceitful obfuscation,” yet you dismissed my point by claiming “rhetoric is what matters.” Is empty government language a deceitful betrayal or a historic triumph—or does it just depend on who happens to be commenting?
I am sure you enjoy point scoring, but I am not engaging in it. Gameplay is for those who do not want to effect change.
Just seen this interesting analysis in Al-Jazeera
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/9/9/what-are-the-holes-in-the-uks-ban-on-imports-from-israeli-settlements
So it is impossible to police. Let us hope a) a way is found, on threat of a trade ban with Israel – some hope – and b) the Israelis don’t find a way to block Palestinian goods along with their own. That would be a bad own goal.
I never knowingly buy Israeli goods.
When you look at the other countries that are also taking action could this be the start of the “Middle Powers” asserting themselves? I for one would welcome an abandonment of Washington, and the Washington consensus, and Britain moving away from the pretense at being a world power and not just a vassal in America’s orbit.
As a humanitarian, I am disgusted by both Hammas and the Israeli gov. Israelis, Palestinians, jews, and muslims all deserve better from their leaders. I join in applauding our gov for calling out the extremists who have deliberately undermined the prospects of harmony in both Israel and Palestine. There is never any just cause for terrorism of any sort and the international community has also condemned the actions of the Israeli gov and, of, course, Hammas.
Many people in the UK are confused by what is going on in the Middle East. They need to realise that the conflict has a very long history, much older than that of these islands. Unfortunately, there are a minority of muslims in the UK who cannot accept that jewish people in general are not the enemy and conflate the Israeli gov with moderate jews. By the same token, there are a minority of jewish people here who see all muslims as terrorists. Both positions are ridiculous. Anyone holding such views need to ask themselves why.
Finally, amongst the Israeli gov, Hammas, and the people I have mentioned, there are some very deranged individuals who are bordering on the psychopathic. They are the ones who are causing disturbing headlines which confuse and irritate those of us who are spectators to this endless saga. I think Ed Milliband spoke yesterday on behalf of these bemused spectators. Throughout history, wiser people have maintained that religion should be kept apart from the state. Wisdom indeed.
I am sorry but I must contest your framing of the criminal situation in Occupied Palestine. Under international law an illegally occupied people have a right to defend themselves, including violently. An occupying state does not have that right. To conflate the legal actions of an oppressed people with the illegal actions of a terrorist state is wrong. Hamas have been accused endlessly by Zionists and their tame media of mass rape, indiscriminate murder, even burning alive and beheading of babies, all of it debunked, often by Israeli witness statements which have also confirmed that orders were given to adopt the Hannibal directive which allows the Israeli military to knowingly kill their own to prevent capture. Everything that moved towards Gaza was blown up by the Israeli air force and homes with Israelis in them were targeted with tank fire. The evidence against Israel has been proven in the highest world court.
It is incorrect to see equivalence between the resisting Palestinians and their illegal occupiers. This is not a war, it is a genocide and ethnic cleansing carried out by a ethno nationalist state against the people they are legally bound, as occupiers, to provide for. A massive military versus a population.
I would advise reading the views of Francesca Albanese the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories for an authoritative professional opinion and also the recently published The Gaza Tribunal: Britains Complicity in Genocide. The reality is very different to the propaganda that we have been fed by the mainstream media and our governments.
Might this (apparent) considerable change of a prominent policy raise questions about the internal communications of the ruling Labour Party?
Elaborate?
Who Profits – The Israeli Occupation Industry – Financing Land Grab https://share.google/VxqqM9O9XpwCc346a
Many Israeli banks are supporting developments in the West Bank.
These should be included and those UK banks that are linked to these investments.
British rabbis have publicly supported Miliband, something expected as Chief Rabbi Mirvis represents less than a third of British Jews. This being reported is the big news; when it happened before, there was a news blackout.
@Alex Wickham, UK political editor for Bloomburg writes:
“Exclusive: British diplomats have privately told the US that the new sanctions Ed Miliband is imposing on Israeli settlements today are largely symbolic and will have no material impact on the UK’s wider relationship with Israel on trade or security A behind-closed-doors diplomatic effort is underway to soothe the Trump administration’s response, amid fears that the sanctions could provide the first major setback in US relations for Andy Burnham, people familiar with the matter said.
Burnham spoke to Trump by phone on Monday afternoon and told him what was coming The reality that Britain’s relationship with Israel will largely continue as is, despite stronger rhetoric from ministers about a fundamental reset, may disappoint some on the left who the announcement is designed to win over.”
Rhetoric indeed
Maybe.
Rhetoric matters.
And it is rhetoric that is being supplied to Trump as well.
I couldn’t help feeling that Milliband’s statement, though welcome, is motivated by other factors. It just seemed unlikely to me, with all that we know about this lot, that altruism has suddenly made an appearance in Westminster. So I did a bit of digging. And I found money. The policy shift seems to represent a calculated economic trade-off, prioritizing the burgeoning partnership with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) over the smaller bilateral trade ambitions with Israel.
By taking a stand on the West Bank settlements, Milliband and Burnham are seeking to untangle a major diplomatic knot. They’ve chosen to safeguard the £50 Bn framework with the six Gulf nations, accepting the freeze of the much smaller trading relationship (around £6 Bn) with Israel as the necessary price.
Well done them. Karma in any other words.
I listened to EM’s speech with great joy, and I agree with his statement that it is antisemitic to hold British Jews responsible for the actions of the Israeli Government. However, I want to point out that anyone who supports the actions of the Israeli Government whether they are Jews or not need to be challenged about their views by anyone who encounters them.
@Simon Everett
https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2026/09/09/giving-praise-to-burnham-and-miliband-when-it-is-due/comment-page-1/#comment-1092667
Simon, your comparison & response to Richard, may have missed the fact that owing to a chronic and incurable case of verbal diarrhoea, I posted TWICE on this topic (08:48am & 1:34pm), putting both points – first, YES, its significant progress, and second, NO, it isn’t anywhere near enough.
Thank you
Here is a limited elaboration of a previous comment.
Assuming that Mr Milliband’s statement is a considerable contrast to the public order acts of 2023 and 2026 with the multiple arrests of those sitting to hold signs expressing support for Palestine Action and the apparent zero arests of mobile, masked protesters at principal ports, it seems odd for the follwing reasons/projections:
1) Lack of reported. discussion in the Labour Party
2) The apparent extent of the change
3) The possible appropriateness of treating significant political decisions to “below the surface” analysis
A few days after the attack on Israel on 7Oct2023 and after watching on TV the ruthless bombing and killing of people living in Gaza I commented, in the Independent I think, that the only solution to the horrific saga would be for the Israel government to start being ‘nice’, and fair. Netanyahu chose the opposite, probably with his own future in mind. I acknowledged at that time that such a possibility was pretty unlikely.
I am not claiming that my comment was particularly clever but surely it needs saying? If you are having a dispute with a neighbour you are more likely to get a good result if you meet him in a pub to talk it over than if you send him a solicitor’s letter.