‘Outrageous lies’: How Israeli voters are shrugging off Western sanctions | Israel-Palestine conflict News
Israeli politicians have expressed strong opposition to recent sanctions imposed by several countries, including the United Kingdom, France, and Canada, on Israel’s settlements in the occupied West Bank. Observers noted that these measures reflect Israel’s increasing isolation due to its treatment of the Palestinian population, but analysts suggest that public sentiment may not shift significantly ahead of the elections scheduled for October.
In a response to UK Foreign Minister Ed Miliband’s allegations of ethnic cleansing in the West Bank, Israeli Interior Minister Gideon Saar criticized the claims as “outrageous lies” and accused foreign officials of attempting to influence the upcoming election through external pressure.
Israeli President Isaac Herzog also condemned the sanctions, describing them as a “gross interference in the democratic elections” of Israel. Despite these official denunciations, a poll conducted in August revealed that a significant portion of the Israeli public supports the continuation of settlements. More than half of Jewish Israelis favored retaining these settlements in any future agreements regarding a Palestinian state, while nearly 40% supported the annexation of the territory, defying international law.
Israeli political analyst Ori Goldberg remarked on the prevailing attitude among the populace, stating, “People just don’t care that settlements are illegal.” He also noted that public interest seems to center more on sentiment than on legal nuances or factual accuracy regarding settlements.
As Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu approaches a pivotal election, he faces the potential risk of losing to a coalition of opposing parties, with polls showing a competitive political landscape. However, experts agree that sanctions related to settlements are unlikely to significantly influence voter preferences.
Michael Koplow, chief policy officer at the Israeli Policy Forum, indicated that voters’ allegiance is well-established, and the sanctions will not likely compel many to switch political loyalties. Instead, Koplow emphasized that voters would be more impacted by Netanyahu’s governance record and their perceptions of security.
Israeli sociologist Yehouda Shenhav-Shahrabani noted that the normalization of settlements in public discourse—including the use of biblical references to the West Bank—has contributed to the current political climate. He added that external sanctions often do not translate into electoral consequences domestically, as many Israelis view foreign pressure through the lens of narratives of anti-Semitism.
Prominent Israeli politicians have largely refrained from criticizing government policies related to settlements, instead directing their critiques toward those imposing sanctions. Yair Lapid, a former prime minister and key opposition figure, labeled the sanctions a “grave mistake,” asserting that they represent a flawed approach at an inopportune time.
Similarly, Gadi Eisenkot, another challenger to Netanyahu, has not addressed the sanctions directly in his campaign, while Netanyahu himself has remained silent, despite the Likud party’s long-standing support for settlement expansion.
Pollster and public opinion researcher Dahlia Scheindlin indicated that the sanctions have not significantly affected Netanyahu’s standing among voters. Instead, political attention has shifted to various other developments in the lead-up to the elections, including the rise of new challengers from the right. “We aren’t seeing any real backlash from the sanctions,” Scheindlin concluded, noting that public sentiment is less about the sanctions themselves and more a reflection of existing perceptions of Netanyahu’s leadership.
