In 2014, the British city of Leicester decided to boycott some Israeli products; the city council of Lancaster adopted a similar resolution in 2021. On Monday, the House of Commons voted in favor of advancing a bill that would stop such actions by local governments. The vote followed the bill’s second reading, which means those who object to its particulars could have voted for it, and then sought to have it amended before it is considered for passage. Nonetheless, the entire Labor party and 84 Tories abstained, while 70 MPs voted against it. Melanie Phillips comments:

The opposition to the bill is deeply disingenuous. Critics say that it’s so wide-ranging, it will prevent boycotts of places like China or Russia. Yet exemptions would permit boycotts of those countries. . . . Not once . . . did any of these critics acknowledge the malevolent use of libelous falsehoods against Israel, nor the BDS strategy of annihilation.

No less stomach-turning was the handwringing concern that the bill would promote anti-Semitism. Dame Margaret Hodge, known for her unremitting attacks on Israeli policies but who declared herself to be a “proud Zionist,” said the bill “plays into the hands of anti-Semites” by singling out Israel “as the one place that can never be boycotted.” This was beyond perverse, [as well as inaccurate].

The claim that the bill will foment anti-Semitism echoes those in the Jewish community who say any robust defense of Israel foments anti-Semitism. What Hodge and her ilk are actually doing is weaponizing anti-Semitism against Israel.

The number of Tories opposed to it is dismaying. As for Labor, Britain’s Jewish community leadership seems to think it’s safe to support the party once again because its inner viper of Israel-bashing Jew-hatred has been decapitated. Such a judgment would appear to be distinctly premature.

Yesterday, the Iranian foreign minister flew to Geneva to meet with European diplomats. President Trump, meanwhile, indicated that cease-fire negotiations might soon begin with Iran, which would presumably involve Tehran agreeing to make concessions regarding its nuclear program, while Washington pressures Israel to halt its military activities. According to Israeli media, Iran already began putting out feelers to the U.S. earlier this week. Aviram Bellaishe considers the purpose of these overtures:

The regime’s request to return to negotiations stems from the principle of deception and delay that has guided it for decades. Iran wants to extricate itself from a situation of total destruction of its nuclear facilities. It understands that to save the nuclear program, it must stop at a point that would allow it to return to it in the shortest possible time. So long as the negotiation process leads to halting strikes on its military capabilities and preventing the destruction of the nuclear program, and enables the transfer of enriched uranium to a safe location, it can simultaneously create the two tracks in which it specializes—a false facade of negotiations alongside a hidden nuclear race.