Feed aggregator

UK Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband has pushed back against Chief Rabbi Sir Ephraim Mirvis’ warning that Britain’s new sanctions targeting Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria could heighten the threat of antisemitism faced by British Jews.

Mirvis issued a forceful condemnation of the government’s move, calling its announcement a “truly dark day” and arguing that the policy risks emboldening the very extremist forces it is ostensibly intended to confront.

Miliband responded by invoking his own Jewish identity, saying that as a “proud British Jew,” he nevertheless disagreed with the Chief Rabbi’s conclusions.

“We all need to do more to tackle antisemitism,” Miliband said, maintaining that the government could simultaneously fight antisemitism at home and uphold what it regards as British principles in its foreign policy.

During an appearance on BBC Radio 4’s Today program, Miliband emphasized his respect for Mirvis while making clear that the two differed over the ramifications of the sanctions. He also said that blaming Jews in Britain or anywhere else for policies pursued by Israel’s government is itself antisemitic.

Mirvis, however, charged that the British government was resorting to political gestures that intensify anti-Israel sentiment. He warned that punitive action directed at Israel could provide further encouragement to people who channel hostility toward Israel into hatred of Jews.

The clash erupted after the British government unveiled sanctions affecting trade associated with Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria.

Prime Minister Andy Burnham defended the policy during an appearance in Parliament, arguing that Britain has an obligation to stand for “fairness against injustice” and to support people being displaced from their homes.

The Palestinian presidency praised Britain’s decision, characterizing the sanctions as a measure aimed at challenging what it called Israel’s “colonial system” and alleged Israeli violations against Palestinians.

Britain’s Jewish communal organizations have responded differently to the government’s decision.

The Jewish Leadership Council expressed concern that the sanctions could ultimately evolve into an effective boycott of Israel and accused Miliband of yielding to pressure from extremist factions within British society.

The Board of Deputies of British Jews focused in particular on the government’s decision to make the announcement shortly before Rosh Hashanah, saying worries over security were especially acute within the Jewish community at that time. The organization further cautioned that deteriorating ties between London and Jerusalem could contribute to increased tensions inside Britain.

At the same time, the Board of Deputies pointed out that it had previously communicated concerns to the Israeli government about violence perpetrated by settlers.

Figures from the Community Security Trust showed 1,926 antisemitic incidents across Britain during the first six months of 2026, representing a 21% rise from the same period a year earlier.

Greater Manchester Police, meanwhile, announced that it would deploy additional personnel during the Jewish High Holy Days in an effort to provide increased security and a greater police presence around Jewish communities.

Not all British Jewish organizations opposed the sanctions. Na’amod backed the government’s action, arguing that British Jews do not hold a single unified position on Israel and rejecting the contention that the new policy would fuel antisemitism.

The Movement for Progressive Judaism took a similar position, saying concerns about the safety and vulnerability of British Jews deserved serious attention but arguing that policies targeting Israeli communities should not automatically be characterized as measures directed against Jewish people.

The British action has also led to a widening diplomatic confrontation with Israel. Israel responded by shutting Britain’s consulate in eastern Jerusalem and prohibiting 11 members of Parliament and a campaigner from entering the country.

Israeli Diaspora Minister Amichai Chikli later called for further British-affiliated individuals and organizations to be barred from entering Israel.

Addressing Parliament, Miliband said the government’s change in policy was driven by proposed development in the E1 area. He additionally accused what he called “settler terrorists” of driving Palestinians from their land and charged that Israel’s government had repeatedly failed to take sufficient action against them.

Under the planned sanctions, businesses and individuals involved in providing services connected to Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria—including construction and financing—will be targeted. The measures will also prohibit the advertising in Britain of properties located in those communities. Miliband said putting the new restrictions fully into effect could require as much as nine months.

Canada and France have announced similar prohibitions on products originating from Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria as part of coordinated international measures.

The International Atomic Energy Agency’s Board of Governors voted Wednesday to refer Iran to the United Nations Security Council over Tehran’s failure to cooperate fully with an investigation into uranium particles found at locations Iran had not declared as nuclear sites.

The decision represents the first time in two decades that the IAEA’s governing board has sent the Iranian nuclear matter to the Security Council over such concerns.

Western governments have raised questions about whether the unexplained uranium traces are connected to a covert Iranian nuclear weapons effort believed to have operated until 2003. Tehran has consistently rejected allegations that it has pursued an atomic bomb, insisting that its nuclear activities are exclusively peaceful.

The resolution was approved by 23 members of the IAEA’s 35-nation Board of Governors during a meeting at the agency’s Vienna headquarters. Russia, China and Niger opposed the measure, eight countries abstained, and another country was unable to participate in the vote because of outstanding financial obligations.

The United States, Britain, France and Germany jointly introduced the resolution.

The latest action follows a June 2025 determination by the IAEA board that Iran was failing to comply with its nuclear nonproliferation responsibilities, with the agency pointing at the time to Tehran’s insufficient cooperation with its investigation.

Iran’s ambassador to the United Nations in Vienna, Reza Najafi, condemned Wednesday’s decision, describing the resolution as a “political tool.” He charged that the move damages confidence in the IAEA’s “independence, impartiality and credibility.”

Najafi further maintained that the continuing military conflict involving Iran, the United States and Israel has prevented Tehran from providing inspectors with the access they require at Iranian nuclear installations.

His comments came amid continued fighting in the more than six-month-old war. The United States destroyed five Iranian oil tankers this week, after which Iran attacked American targets in Jordan as the two sides continued exchanging strikes.

Under the resolution, IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi is asked to formally convey the agency’s concerns to both the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly, as provided for under the IAEA Statute.

The measure additionally demands that Tehran remedy its noncompliance and carry out steps sought by the nuclear watchdog so the agency can verify that Iranian nuclear material has not been diverted for prohibited purposes.

IAEA inspectors have been unable to access Iranian nuclear installations damaged by Israeli and American strikes since the 12-day war in June 2025. As a result, the agency has also been unable to establish the current condition and location of Iran’s inventory of uranium enriched to levels approaching weapons grade.

Najafi maintained that damage caused by the Israeli and U.S. attacks has rendered safe entry into the affected installations “materially impossible.” He said Iran has “neither stopped nor suspended its safeguards obligations,” while arguing that the continuing fighting and military threats have made it impossible for Tehran to fulfill those requirements at present.

Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister for Legal and International Affairs Kazem Gharibabadi also denounced the resolution in a statement posted on X.

“They attack Iran’s safeguarded nuclear facilities, disrupt the normal verification process, and then use that very disruption as a pretext for passing a resolution at the IAEA Board of Governors,” Gharibabadi wrote.

“With these attempts to create an atmosphere, you can neither compensate for the failure of your policies and actions, nor will you be able to achieve anything at the Security Council.”

IAEA figures put Iran’s stockpile of uranium enriched to 60% purity at 440.9 kilograms, or approximately 972 pounds. That enrichment level remains below the roughly 90% generally regarded as weapons grade.

Grossi has previously said that the quantity of highly enriched uranium in Iran’s possession could theoretically provide enough material for as many as 10 nuclear weapons if Tehran chose to pursue weaponization. He has also emphasized that having sufficient nuclear material for such a scenario does not establish that Iran currently possesses nuclear weapons.

President Donald Trump said Wednesday that he expects the war with Iran to end immediately following the November midterm elections, arguing that Tehran is deliberately trying to prolong the conflict in hopes of influencing the U.S. vote. Trump made the remarks as the seven-month conflict entered another period of escalating attacks.

“I think the war will end immediately after the election,” the President said, explaining that Iran “can’t hold out any longer.”

Trump contended that Tehran’s strategy is tied directly to the American elections, accusing Iranian leaders of hoping that political changes in Washington will ease the pressure they are facing. “They’re desperate to try and affect the election so that we could get a nice, weak group of people in there and leave them alone and let them have their nuclear weapon.”

The President’s comments came amid another escalation in hostilities between Washington and Tehran. Iran said Wednesday that it had targeted ships near the Strait of Hormuz following U.S. attacks on Iranian oil tankers, while oil prices climbed sharply amid fears of further disruptions to global energy supplies.

Trump also addressed the latest round of American military action against Iranian vessels and indicated that additional strikes could follow. “You’re going to see a lot more.”

The renewed fighting has added to economic pressures stemming from the conflict, with Brent crude climbing above $100 a barrel Wednesday for the first time since July. Trump said he believes oil prices will decline once the conflict comes to an end after the elections.

At the same time, Trump made clear that any future arrangement with Tehran would extend well beyond restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program. “I’m doing much more than a nuclear deal. There’s a lot more than nuclear… That’s 99.9, but there’s going to be a lot of other things on the table that wouldn’t have been on the table three months ago.”

Trump also left open the possibility that negotiations could eventually resume, although he indicated Wednesday that reaching a new agreement with Tehran is not currently a priority for his administration.