Sanctions imposed by the United Kingdom, France and Canada over Israel’s settlements in the occupied West Bank appear to have made little difference to voters ahead of October’s elections, analysts say.
Israeli politicians have responded angrily to the measures, with foreign minister Gideon Saar accusing his British counterpart, Ed Miliband, of spreading “outrageous lies” after he alleged that Israelis were ethnically cleansing the territory.
President Isaac Herzog also condemned the sanctions as “a gross interference in the democratic elections”. The measures have been presented by Israel’s political establishment as foreign pressure, rather than an issue likely to shift domestic opinion.
Settlement sanctions make little electoral impact
Polling suggests that support for the settlements remains firm among Jewish Israelis. An August survey found that more than half backed retaining the settlements in any future agreement on a Palestinian state, while nearly 40 per cent supported annexing the West Bank in defiance of international law.
At the time, 76 Palestinians had been killed in the West Bank during the year, according to the figures cited in the poll’s reporting.
“People just don’t care that settlements are illegal,” said Israeli political analyst Ori Goldberg. Referring to Mr Miliband’s comments about his Jewish heritage when announcing the measures, he added: “But we’re at the stage where Israelis aren’t even interested in the truth so much as they are the sentiment.”
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faces a serious electoral challenge, with several polls suggesting that parties opposed to him could secure a parliamentary majority. But analysts say the sanctions are unlikely to determine whether voters support him.
Michael Koplow, chief policy officer at the Israeli Policy Forum, said the government and opposition blocs were “pretty hardened”. He said voters were unlikely to move between them because of sanctions linked to the settlements, with Netanyahu’s record and public feelings about him expected to matter more.
“When people were asked what would determine their vote, security came first,” said sociologist Yehouda Shenhav-Shahrabani.
He said the settlements had become normalised in Israeli political discourse, including through the increasing use of the biblical term “Judea and Samaria” for the occupied West Bank. External sanctions, he added, did not necessarily translate into a domestic political cost and could be absorbed into an existing Israeli narrative about antisemitism.
Opposition parties also condemn sanctions
None of Israel’s leading politicians has criticised the government’s support for the settlements in response to international condemnation. Yair Lapid, a former prime minister and one of Mr Netanyahu’s main opponents, directed his criticism at the countries imposing the measures.
“Imposing boycotts and sanctions on Israel is a grave mistake,” Mr Lapid said. “This is a wrong and dangerous policy, at the wrong time and for the wrong reasons.”
Gadi Eisenkot, another leading rival of Mr Netanyahu, has not commented directly on the sanctions. His Yashar Party manifesto does not mention either the West Bank or Gaza, while Mr Netanyahu has not publicly addressed the measures despite his Likud party’s longstanding support for settlement expansion.
“The sanctions haven’t particularly hurt Netanyahu, at least not as far as we can see in terms of direct influence on … polling,” said Dahlia Scheindlin, a Tel Aviv-based pollster and public opinion researcher.
Instead, the campaign has focused on other developments, including the emergence of new right-wing challengers to Mr Netanyahu. Ms Scheindlin said there had been “no real backlash from the sanctions”, which were instead being interpreted through voters’ existing views of the prime minister.
