BDS co-founder calls for UK to end all trade with Israel, not just settlements

Omar Barghouti, who helped found the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions movement two decades ago, sat down with The Guardian to deliver a stark message to Britain: half-measures will not suffice. The UK government, he argued, cannot satisfy its legal and moral obligations by merely banning trade with Israeli settlements or sanctioning individual extremist ministers. Those steps, he said, amount to theater—a distraction from what international law actually demands.

Britain's Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband had just promised a "comprehensive reset" of UK policy toward Israel, with reports suggesting the government would move to prohibit commerce with illegal settlements in the West Bank. Miliband had specifically condemned plans for the E1 settlement, which would involve constructing 3,400 homes across the heart of Palestinian territory in a way that critics argue would make a two-state solution impossible. The timing was urgent: tenders for these settlements were set to be distributed just days before Israeli elections scheduled for October 27, potentially locking in the development irreversibly.

Barghouti rejected this approach as insufficient. Sanctions targeting settler groups or extremist politicians, he said, are a "smoke and mirrors cop-out and distraction." What international law actually requires, he argued, is far more comprehensive: a complete end to all UK support for Israel, encompassing arms exports, trade agreements, and even academic relations that might "directly or indirectly enable Israel's illegal occupation" of Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem. He grounded this demand in two major rulings from the International Court of Justice. In July 2024, the ICJ determined that Israel's entire occupation of Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, is unlawful and violates international prohibitions on racial segregation and apartheid. Months earlier, in January 2024, the same court found there exists a plausible case that Palestinian rights have been violated under the Genocide Convention—a finding that, Barghouti emphasized, triggers obligations for third states to prevent genocide by ending their complicity.

The distinction matters legally and morally, Barghouti insisted. When the ICJ identifies a plausible risk of genocide, international law does not wait for definitive proof. The obligation to prevent is triggered immediately. "How do you prevent a genocide?" he asked. "You stop enabling it. You end all forms of complicity." He pointed out that dozens of UN human rights experts have outlined the minimal steps required: a full military embargo, restrictions on dual-use exports and transfers, and the termination of all trade, diplomatic, economic, and academic relations that facilitate Israel's occupation.

When pressed on whether UK sanctions would actually change Israeli behavior, Barghouti was blunt. Such measures, he said, are "totally performative" because they have no concrete effect in holding Israel accountable or pressuring compliance with international law. He acknowledged a practical complication: Israel has effectively annexed the occupied Palestinian territory, making it nearly impossible to distinguish between "settlement goods and services" and other commerce. This reality, he suggested, underscores why partial bans are inadequate.

The political terrain in Britain is complicated. The Board of Deputies of British Jews and the Jewish Leadership Council have warned Miliband that a UK ban on settlements could fuel antisemitism domestically. A third Jewish organization, Yachad, met with Miliband to voice concerns about "the growing entrenchment of occupation and effective annexation of the West Bank." Meanwhile, Israel's Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar issued a direct warning: "If Britain acts against the state of Israel, the state of Israel will act against Britain. We have the tools." He added that the era when nations could act against Israel without consequence had ended.

Barghouti framed the BDS movement's work not as economic coercion for its own sake but as accountability. Sanctions, he said, must be legal and ethical—they must target the perpetrators, whether entities or individuals involved in international crimes. They are measures of accountability, not symbolic gestures. He acknowledged the colonial origins of international law but argued that law is not static. "Humanity has agency to evolve and expand international law," he said. The BDS movement, he explained, pushes the boundaries of how international law is interpreted, holding states, corporations, and institutions responsible for ending their own complicity rather than waiting passively for international courts to enforce compliance. Yet he was clear that legal mechanisms alone are insufficient. "We need people power to achieve liberation," he said. "There is no other way." As Miliband prepares his policy reset in the coming weeks, Barghouti's challenge stands: whether Britain will embrace the full scope of its international obligations or settle for measures that, in his view, leave the fundamental architecture of occupation intact.