Meanwhile in Palestine… Illegality Continues in Plain Sight

International Relations

By Vijay Makhan

As the world’s attention is absorbed by Iran and Ukraine, settlement expansion and humanitarian suffering in Palestine continue with little restraint. Britain’s promised action may signal a change — but only if words on legality are finally matched by consequences.

At a time when the world’s attention is fixed on the Iran conflict, the disruption of sea lanes and the continuing war in Ukraine, there is a real risk that Palestine may once again be pushed to the margins.

That must not be allowed to happen.

For while new crises dominate the headlines, the old Palestinian tragedy continues unabated. Gaza remains in the grip of a humanitarian ordeal; restrictions on aid persist; and, in the West Bank, Israel’s settlement policy proceeds relentlessly, creating new facts on the ground and steadily narrowing the space for any future Palestinian state.

It is in this context that Britain’s new Foreign Secretary, Ed Miliband, has propounded a “comprehensive reset” of his country’s approach towards Israel and the occupied Palestinian territory. He has indicated that the United Kingdom will act to prevent British companies from financing, building or promoting unlawful Israeli settlements. A ban on trade with settlement goods is also envisaged.

This is potentially significant. The essential question now is whether this new policy will be followed by measures capable of making a difference, notwithstanding the scathing opposition from Washington and Tel Aviv.

It is not clear whether the settlement issue was raised when Ed Miliband met US Secretary of State Marco Rubio in Washington last month. Advance reports indicated that Gaza’s humanitarian crisis would be among the matters discussed, but the official statement issued after the meeting referred to Ukraine, European security and the strength of the transatlantic alliance, without mention of Gaza, the West Bank or settlements. That omission may be explained by the pressure of other crises, but it also illustrates how easily Palestine is displaced from the central diplomatic agenda. It is now known that Andy Burnham and Donald Trump exchanged on this on Monday (7th) night.

The immediate trigger is the Israeli decision to proceed with the E1 settlement project. The term sounds technical, almost innocuous. Its consequences are anything but.

E1 is the area lying between occupied East Jerusalem and Ma’ale Adumim, one of the largest Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Israel’s plan is to build thousands of housing units and related infrastructure there. Its practical effect would be to strengthen the link between Ma’ale Adumim and Jerusalem, while cutting across Palestinian territory.

Why does this matter so much? Because E1 would make the West Bank still more fragmented. It would obstruct the natural link between its northern and southern parts and further separate East Jerusalem from the rest of Palestinian territory. The result would be a Palestinian entity broken into disconnected pieces—hardly the basis for a viable and sovereign state.

That is why the E1 project has been described as a ‘red line’. It is not merely another settlement scheme. It is part of a wider process through which occupation is transformed, gradually but steadily, into a permanent territorial reality.

The legal position is clear. Israeli settlements in the territories occupied since 1967 have repeatedly been declared illegal under international law. The United Nations Security Council has stated that they have no legal validity. In July 2024, the International Court of Justice went further, finding Israel’s continued presence in the occupied Palestinian territory unlawful and recalling the responsibility of other states not to recognise or help maintain that situation.

This is the broader background against which Miliband’s announcement must be judged.

A ban on settlement goods would be welcome. It would at least signal that Britain is no longer prepared to treat commerce with illegal settlements as normal business. But, as Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territory, has pointed out, it cannot stop there. She has given a guarded welcome to the proposed British move, rightly describing it as an important first step. But she has also warned that a limited ban on goods alone may amount to little if the wider network sustaining settlement expansion remains untouched. Finance, insurance, construction, technology, investment and other forms of commercial involvement deserve equal scrutiny.

Her argument is difficult to dismiss. It would make little sense to prohibit products made in a settlement while permitting the financial and commercial arrangements that allow settlements to expand in the first place.

Palestinian groups, for their part, have reacted with understandable caution. They welcome the indications that Britain may be moving beyond words. But they are withholding final judgment until the details are known. They have seen too many declarations of concern, too many appeals to international law, and too few consequences for violations that continue openly and with impunity.

The reaction from the United States Ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, has been both unfortunate and revealing. His accusation that the British government’s position reflects “Jew hatred” is a distortion. Opposition to settlement-building, concern over the denial of humanitarian aid, and insistence on international law are not expressions of hostility towards Jews. They are legitimate objections to policies that have brought suffering to Palestinians and made peace ever more distant.

To suggest otherwise is to make serious discussion almost impossible.

And what of the countries of the Middle East? It would be unfair to say that they have remained wholly silent. Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Türkiye, Indonesia and Pakistan have collectively condemned the E1 project and called for it to be halted. Their statement is welcome.

However, statements alone cannot halt bulldozers, protect Palestinian land or revive a political process that is visibly being dismantled since 1947. The greater challenge for the region is to turn its declarations into sustained diplomatic action and, where possible, meaningful leverage.

The Iran conflict has understandably concentrated minds throughout the region. So too have the threats to energy supplies, shipping and economic stability. But Palestine cannot be treated as an issue to be revisited only when the regional agenda becomes less crowded. The Palestinian question is not separate from Middle Eastern instability—it lies at its very heart.

This is why the announced British measures matter. They will show whether London is prepared to give practical content to the principles it has long proclaimed. They may also encourage others to move from ritual condemnation towards action.

The world may be distracted. But Palestine remains. And while the world looks elsewhere, illegality continues in plain sight.

8 September 2026

Mauritius Times ePaper Friday 4 September 2026