Britain risks reduced access to Israeli intelligence after it imposed an import ban on goods from illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank, Middle East insiders believe.
Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband announced the sanctions on the mainly agricultural produce from the occupied territory in response to what he said were the unlawful actions of Israeli settlers which in some cases amounted to “ethnic cleansing” of Palestinians.
The decision – and incendiary language – immediately sparked a major diplomatic row with Benjamin Netanyahu’s government and plunged UK-Israeli relations to their worst level for decades.
The hefty cost of Burnham’s slick social media campaign
Andy Burnham is spending up to £1m a year on expanding No 10’s social media operation, The i Paper can reveal, as the Prime Minister tries to connect with audiences on TikTok and Instagram.
Here’s where that money is going.
Where do the figures come from?
The Cabinet Office advertised 13 roles in July
Lowest salary – £37,922
Social videographer.
Highest salary – £80,342
Head of social and creative production.
Total cost – £1.04m
if everyone is paid the highest band offered, including pensions and national insurance.
7 min read
Where is the money going?
What do colleagues think?
Burnham’s dedication to promoting the Government’s work on social media has been celebrated by Labour colleagues, after his predecessor, Sir Keir Starmer, was criticised for a lack of communication skills while prime minister.
One such Labour MP told The i Paper: “Burnham’s just got that touch when it comes to communication. … We’re getting way more cut-through already.”
2 min read
Burnham vs Starmer
- In his first 90 days on TikTok, Starmer received 59.3 million views to Burnham’s 78.1 million.
- Burnham has hit 752,000 Instagram followers since taking office, with his predecessor peaking at 852,000 after two years.
3 min read
France artwork heist – multiple pieces stolen from Renoir Museum
Two thieves tried to steal four artworks from a museum dedicated to the impressionist Pierre-Auguste Renoir in southern France on Tuesday, dropping two paintings as they fled the scene.
What we know
Two thieves carried out the raid at the museum in , near Nice, on Tuesday morning, officials have said.
- Wire fencing was cut for access, and museum alarms went off at 5:48am local time, according to the local mayor.
- However, the pair .
Cagnes-sur-Mer’s mayor, Bryan Masson, described the perpetrators as”well equipped” and “well informed” when speaking to the media on Tuesday.
In comments translated from French, he said the thieves “were wearing helmets, gloves, and combat gear” and carried “an electric knife and hacksaw” to cut the fence and gain access to the garden.
Video footage then showed the group cutting through structures holding the paintings’ frames in place before they began their escape, Masson said.
The stolen works
The four works initially targeted in the heist – Portrait of Madame Pichon (1895), Portrait of Madame Colonna Romano (1910), Coco Lisant (1905) and Jeune fille au puits (1886) – were valued together at over £7.7m, according to reports from France.
According to an update from the local mayor’s office later on Tuesday morning, the two pieces the thieves made it out with were: (left above) and Jeune femme au puits (next slide).
Also missing: Jeune fille au puits
- Prior to the robbery, the Renoir Museum was home to 12 paintings by the artist, who died in 1919.
- The museum was opened in 1960, in Renoir’s last home before his death.
- This heist comes less than a year after eight items valued at about £76m were stolen in a daylight robbery from the Louvre in Paris.
2 min read
Watch more from The i Paper
How the King’s pointed letter ‘surprised’ Harry and Meghan
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were “surprised” by the release of a letter on behalf of King Charles, which clarified their status as “akin to private citizens”, a spokesperson for the couple has said.
Here’s what we know.
No titles, little warning
- A top Buckingham Palace official sent the letter to military officials and Government departments on Monday.
- It stated that as non-working royals, the Sussexes will not use the titles of “His and Her Royal Highness”.
- The couple “were a little surprised not to have been told about this in advance,” their spokesperson said.
- Their team was still seeking guidance when it was released, The i Paper understands.
2 min read
No chance for clarification
The Sussexes did not have enough time to clarify any points before the guidance was issued to the media, it is understood.
- The letter’s contents were reportedly shared with their team at 1:59pm.
- Team Sussex replied to Buckingham Palace at 2:19pm, seeking clarification on one or two points.
- The letter was revealed to the media at 3:06pm on Monday.
- Harry was in a meeting and could not be contacted until 3:09pm.
- Team Sussex received confirmation at 3:11pm that the letter had been sent to the media.
Why are the titles important?
The reference to the HRH title was seen as an attempt to slap the Sussexes down amid concerns that the couple may want to monetise their royal status, including via Meghan’s lifestyle products brand, As Ever.
The title was seen in a video Meghan posted accompanying a podcast last year.
6 min read
Harry, a ‘private citizen’?
- The letter clarified that “in short, their position is akin to private citizens with commercial and charitable interests”.
- But a friend of the couple previously told The i Paper that Harry, as the King’s son, could never be an entirely private citizen.
- “Some people will say, ‘But they’re private citizens.’ Nonsense. Utter nonsense. They are two of the most high-profile people in the world,” the friend added.
Not a quiet word in your ear, not a private memo; no, this was a formal, blunt statement of fact sent to Harry on his father’s orders. Ouch! There is to be no doubt: the King is not going to be bounced into accepting any change in the Sussexes’ status just because they have chosen to return to the UK.
2 min read
3 min read
No ‘half in, half out’ option
Charles and Prince William are said to be worried that family members doing business deals alongside official duties for the state opens themselves up to the sort of abuse of position accusations facing the King’s brother, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor.
- This led to them clarifying that Harry and Meghan won’t be attending state functions or official engagements.
Who will fund the Sussexes’ security?
The couple returned to the country for what they called an extended period on 26 August, after quitting royal duties in 2020. Their children have reportedly been enrolled in English schools.
The row over who will pay for their security is ongoing, with the couple currently paying for it but lobbying the Royal and VIP Executive Committee (Ravec) – which is set to meet this week – for taxpayer-funded police protection.
Watch more from The i Paper
In retaliation, Israel closed the British consulate in East Jerusalem – the main point of contact between the UK government and Palestinians – banned 12 Labour, Green and independent UK MPs from entering Israel, including Jeremy Corbyn and Diane Abbott, and kicked Britain out of the US-led post-Gaza mission.
Decision could cause ‘friction’ for security arrangement
But Middle East analysts believe the decision by Andy Burnham and Miliband could also cause “friction” for the UK’s security relationship with Israel, under which the two countries have shared intelligence on threats to their interests in the Middle East and in Britain for years.
Although it is not expected that Israel would cut off intelligence links with Britain altogether, it could mean information typically passed directly from Tel Aviv to London being diverted via the US.
A regional analyst suggested the flow of information may have already slowed over the past two years since Labour came into office, due to previous policies announced by Sir Keir Starmer’s government on Israel and the war in Gaza.
The analyst said: “My assessment is that some of the damage has already been done, over the last couple of years. The intimacy that was once there is not necessarily there any more.”
It is understood, however, that the British Government does not believe this intelligence sharing will stop. Officials pointed out that the exchange of information cuts both ways.
Impact on efforts to find a two-state solution
The closure of the British consulate and the removal of UK personnel from the US-led International Gaza Support Centre will probably have an impact on decades-long British efforts to find a two-state solution for the Middle East.
The i Paper understands the British consulate will be instructed to close within seven days. Some staff may be deployed to Tel Aviv although no decisions have been made.
The trade ban itself is likely to take six to nine months to implement fully.
It is also expected there could be further response from the US administration, after Donald Trump’s ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee said before the announcement that the plans showed Burnham’s Government “hates Jews”.
The Prime Minister raised the trade ban when he spoke to the US President on Monday evening, but it is not known if Trump warned Burnham not to go ahead with the plans.
It is understood that Miliband began building an international coalition for sanctions against West Bank settlers as soon as he was appointed Foreign Secretary in July.
France and Canada have joined the UK in imposing a ban on settler produce, as 12 countries in total backed restrictions on trade.
In a joint statement from all three countries, Burnham, Emmanuel Macron and Mark Carney said: “A two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is critical for peace, stability and security in the Middle East and beyond. It is a fundamental national interest for the UK, France and Canada to protect and secure this outcome.
“Systematic settlement expansion in the West Bank, including the government of Israel’s latest decision to progress the E1 settlement, as well as the dramatic increase in settler violence, pose a direct and urgent threat to that vision for peace.”
A separate statement backing a two-state solution from 12 countries said: “Today, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Iceland, Ireland, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the UK confirm their intention to introduce national and/or support European restrictions on trade in goods with settlements which are illegal under international law.”
Chief Rabbi calls it a ‘dark day’
The UK’s chief rabbi, Sir Ephraim Mirvis, said the decision to issue a raft of sanctions against Israel represents a “dark day” for British Jews and will “further embolden” those who use “hatred as a weapon” against the community.
Israeli foreign minister Gideon Sa’ar said “a hostile Labour government is in office, systematically acting against the state of Israel, and it has left us with no choice but to finally respond to its hostile actions”.
He accused Burnham and Miliband of trying to interfere with the Israeli election next month and to pander to the left of the Labour Party ahead of the Holborn and St Pancras by-election, which the Greens are vying to win.
Richard Pater, chief executive of Bicom, which fosters links between Britain and Israel, said Miliband’s remarks about ethnic cleansing were “offensive to the Israeli side and certain to further ratchet up the tension. They will do nothing to create a better dialogue that we would like to see”.
He added: “It is deeply disappointing that the UK Government has chosen performative actions to suit its own domestic needs over responsible diplomacy, especially during the sensitive period in the lead up to an Israeli election.
“The new government policy also weakens the UK’s influence in the region and undermines its ability to serve as an honest broker in any potential peace process between Israel and the Palestinians.”
The Green Party of England and Wales, whose five MPs are now all banned from entering Israel, welcomed the sanctions but urged the Government to go further.
A Green spokesperson said: “Banning our representatives only strengthens our resolve. The British Government must stand firm and follow these overdue restrictions with a full arms embargo and wide-ranging sanctions.”