Jewish officials and organizations quickly denounced the British government for considering a trade ban on Israeli settlements. Upon close examination, their arguments against this policy make little sense and contradict their own stated positionsDaniel Bral September 02, 2026The U.K. government is examining a new policy banning trade with Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank. As expected, the very discussion of such a policy drew swift condemnations from Jewish establishment figures, both in Britain and the United States. Their criticism reveals a fundamental contradiction: Jewish officials and organizations who profess opposition to the ongoing expansion of the settlement enterprise, oppose with even greater vigor any attempts to slow it down.Loading...Click the alert icon to follow topics:Jewish DiasporaIsrael settlementsWest BankU.K.CommentsLoading...In the NewsIn the News: Live UpdatesNetanyahu October 7Settlement Sanctions Israel-U.K.EisenkotJD VanceBen-GvirGazaIsrael ElectionHaQuizHaaretz PodcastJohn Malkovich Cancels Israel Performance Over Quotes Falsely Attributed to HimTrump: Iran War Will End 'Immediately' After the U.S. Midterm ElectionDenisovan Culture Revealed in Bat Cave in ChinaU.S. Jewish Umbrella Group Condemns Import Ban on Goods From Israeli SettlementsEarliest Known Drug Use and Its Consequences Discovered in IndonesiaRemembering and rebuilding two years laterICYMINetanyahu Got an Explicit Warning Before Oct. 7. He Didn't Brief Security ChiefsThink Bibi Is Bad? Meet Sara NetanyahuIMDb Replaces the Name Israel With 'The Occupied Palestinian Territories'Netanyahu Was Warned About October 7. Will Haaretz's Exposé Change Anything?Water Crisis Triggered by Gaza's Ruin: Israel Is Paying the Price of DestructionNetanyahu Says He Will Sue Haaretz Following Oct. 7 ExposéMore Stories to Explore
Opinion | Settlement apologists in the Jewish community are on the wrong side of history
Jewish officials and organizations quickly denounced the British government for considering a trade ban on Israeli settlements. Upon close examination, their arguments against this policy make little sense and contradict their own stated positions










