Will Israel’s deportation of UK MPs shift Starmer’s stance on the Middle East – turning him against the brutal regime he has supported for too long?
When Israel barred two UK Labour MPs from entering the country, it did more than provoke a diplomatic backlash – it reignited a long-overdue debate about Labour’s position on Israel-Palestine—one that Keir Starmer has tried hard to keep contained.
The MPs, Yuan Yang and Abtisam Mohamed, were part of a fact-finding delegation to the occupied West Bank, intending to observe humanitarian aid projects and meet with local communities.
Israel denied them entry under a 2017 law banning foreign nationals who support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement.
Buy Cruel Britannia in print here. Buy the Cruel Britannia ebook here. Or just click on the image!
The Israeli government claims BDS is an attempt to delegitimise the state; many others see it as a peaceful, rights-based campaign to hold Israel accountable for its treatment of Palestinians.
Foreign Secretary David Lammy called the move “unacceptable” and “counterproductive.” Labour’s Emily Thornberry, who chairs the Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee went further, branding it “an insult to Britain and an insult to Parliament.”
Starmer, notably, has so far remained silent – but silence might not be a sustainable strategy for much longer.
There is a growing sense that this was no accidental diplomatic kerfuffle. These MPs—both vocal on Palestinian rights and aware of Israel’s BDS law—must have known there was a risk of being turned away.
If that was the intention, then the outcome was predictable: turn a routine parliamentary visit into a headline-grabbing moment that draws attention to Israel’s increasingly authoritarian handling of criticism, and exposes Labour’s own ambiguity.
The BDS movement itself deserves honest discussion. Launched by Palestinian civil society in 2005, BDS seeks to pressure Israel to end its occupation, grant full equality to Palestinian citizens of Israel, and uphold the right of return for Palestinian refugees.
Supporters view it as a non-violent campaign inspired by the anti-apartheid struggle. Opponents—including the Israeli state and many of its allies—say it is discriminatory or even anti-Semitic. Whatever one’s view, banning elected officials from entry for supporting such a campaign sets a dangerous precedent, especially when the law is used to shut down scrutiny of human rights abuses.
And those abuses are no longer deniable. Since October 7, 2023, Israel’s military operations in Gaza have led to tens of thousands of civilian deaths, the destruction of vital infrastructure, and the obstruction of humanitarian aid. Independent observers, including prominent legal scholars, have raised the alarm about likely war crimes.
In the West Bank, settler violence and displacement of Palestinians continue largely unchecked.
Yet despite this, Starmer’s Labour has largely stood by Israel. While some of that may stem from a desire to avoid the factional chaos of the Corbyn years, it increasingly looks like moral evasion. The party’s official line—supporting a ceasefire only after months of escalating violence—felt not just cautious but complicit.
Now, the deportation of two of his MPs puts Starmer in a tight spot. If he speaks out against Israel’s actions, it will appear to be capitulating to pressure from within his party. If he remains silent, he risks further alienating voters who are appalled by the UK’s inaction in the face of ongoing atrocities. The strategic ambiguity that once seemed like clever politics now reads as evasion.
Crucially, the British public is not where Starmer is. Polling consistently shows increasing sympathy for Palestinians, especially among young people and minority communities. There is growing demand for the UK to take a stronger stand against occupation, apartheid, and indiscriminate violence. For many voters, neutrality is not neutrality—it’s endorsement.
Perhaps this incident was staged to force a reckoning. If so, it has worked. The silence can no longer hold. Labour must make a choice: continue equivocating, or take a principled stand that reflects international law and the values it claims to represent.
Starmer doesn’t have to endorse BDS to say that banning MPs for supporting it is wrong. He doesn’t have to abandon Israel to insist on accountability for war crimes. But he does have to stop sitting on the fence while people are dying.
The deportation of two MPs may seem like a footnote in the chaos of Middle East politics. But in the UK, it could become a turning point.
If Labour is serious about governing with moral authority, this is the moment to prove it.
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (bottom right of the home page). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical
3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com
5) Follow Vox Political writer Mike Sivier on BlueSky
6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical
7) Feel free to comment!
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
Cruel Britannia is available
in either print or eBook format here:
The Livingstone Presumption is available
in either print or eBook format here:
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
Will Israel’s deportation of UK MPs shift Starmer’s stance on the Middle East?
Will Israel’s deportation of UK MPs shift Starmer’s stance on the Middle East – turning him against the brutal regime he has supported for too long?
When Israel barred two UK Labour MPs from entering the country, it did more than provoke a diplomatic backlash – it reignited a long-overdue debate about Labour’s position on Israel-Palestine—one that Keir Starmer has tried hard to keep contained.
The MPs, Yuan Yang and Abtisam Mohamed, were part of a fact-finding delegation to the occupied West Bank, intending to observe humanitarian aid projects and meet with local communities.
Israel denied them entry under a 2017 law banning foreign nationals who support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement.
Buy Cruel Britannia in print here. Buy the Cruel Britannia ebook here. Or just click on the image!
The Israeli government claims BDS is an attempt to delegitimise the state; many others see it as a peaceful, rights-based campaign to hold Israel accountable for its treatment of Palestinians.
Foreign Secretary David Lammy called the move “unacceptable” and “counterproductive.” Labour’s Emily Thornberry, who chairs the Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee went further, branding it “an insult to Britain and an insult to Parliament.”
Starmer, notably, has so far remained silent – but silence might not be a sustainable strategy for much longer.
There is a growing sense that this was no accidental diplomatic kerfuffle. These MPs—both vocal on Palestinian rights and aware of Israel’s BDS law—must have known there was a risk of being turned away.
If that was the intention, then the outcome was predictable: turn a routine parliamentary visit into a headline-grabbing moment that draws attention to Israel’s increasingly authoritarian handling of criticism, and exposes Labour’s own ambiguity.
The BDS movement itself deserves honest discussion. Launched by Palestinian civil society in 2005, BDS seeks to pressure Israel to end its occupation, grant full equality to Palestinian citizens of Israel, and uphold the right of return for Palestinian refugees.
Supporters view it as a non-violent campaign inspired by the anti-apartheid struggle. Opponents—including the Israeli state and many of its allies—say it is discriminatory or even anti-Semitic. Whatever one’s view, banning elected officials from entry for supporting such a campaign sets a dangerous precedent, especially when the law is used to shut down scrutiny of human rights abuses.
And those abuses are no longer deniable. Since October 7, 2023, Israel’s military operations in Gaza have led to tens of thousands of civilian deaths, the destruction of vital infrastructure, and the obstruction of humanitarian aid. Independent observers, including prominent legal scholars, have raised the alarm about likely war crimes.
In the West Bank, settler violence and displacement of Palestinians continue largely unchecked.
Yet despite this, Starmer’s Labour has largely stood by Israel. While some of that may stem from a desire to avoid the factional chaos of the Corbyn years, it increasingly looks like moral evasion. The party’s official line—supporting a ceasefire only after months of escalating violence—felt not just cautious but complicit.
Now, the deportation of two of his MPs puts Starmer in a tight spot. If he speaks out against Israel’s actions, it will appear to be capitulating to pressure from within his party. If he remains silent, he risks further alienating voters who are appalled by the UK’s inaction in the face of ongoing atrocities. The strategic ambiguity that once seemed like clever politics now reads as evasion.
Crucially, the British public is not where Starmer is. Polling consistently shows increasing sympathy for Palestinians, especially among young people and minority communities. There is growing demand for the UK to take a stronger stand against occupation, apartheid, and indiscriminate violence. For many voters, neutrality is not neutrality—it’s endorsement.
Perhaps this incident was staged to force a reckoning. If so, it has worked. The silence can no longer hold. Labour must make a choice: continue equivocating, or take a principled stand that reflects international law and the values it claims to represent.
Starmer doesn’t have to endorse BDS to say that banning MPs for supporting it is wrong. He doesn’t have to abandon Israel to insist on accountability for war crimes. But he does have to stop sitting on the fence while people are dying.
The deportation of two MPs may seem like a footnote in the chaos of Middle East politics. But in the UK, it could become a turning point.
If Labour is serious about governing with moral authority, this is the moment to prove it.
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (bottom right of the home page). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical
3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com
5) Follow Vox Political writer Mike Sivier on BlueSky
6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical
7) Feel free to comment!
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
Cruel Britannia is available
in either print or eBook format here:
The Livingstone Presumption is available
in either print or eBook format here:
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
you might also like
If British organisations worked with the Israeli embassy to achieve that country’s aims and not our own, what should we call it?
Here’s why people are afraid to denounce the genocidal brutality of the Israeli regime
Israeli prime minister demands support for racist apartheid law