The government is facing questions over suggestions it has ignored longstanding official advice in pursuit of sanctions against Israeli settlements.
Ed Miliband, the foreign secretary, announced on Tuesday that the government was introducing measures which he described as a “comprehensive sanctions regime” to emphasise that the government views the Israeli occupation of and settlements in the West Bank as illegal.
However, on Thursday the Times reported that Britain’s embassy in Israel had advised the government that sanctioning Israeli settlements was unworkable.
A source told the paper that, prior to Andy Burnham becoming prime minister, the Embassy in Tel Aviv had said that “this is not possible, but the minister said we are going to do it anyway”.
Three different sources, including a former Conservative minister, have told the JC that, for a number of years, official advice has been that sanctioning Israeli settlements was impractical.
Questions are now being asked about why Labour appeared to deviate from official advice.
A Conservative Party source told the JC: "Labour have questions to answer. They must come clean and tell us what advice they had and whether they were told this policy would ineffectual.
“Otherwise, voters will understandably assume that this is policy by ideology, not practicality."
At prime minister’s questions on Wednesday, Andy Burnham defended the government’s actions, saying they amounted to “leadership” on the world stage.
He told MPs: “There have been Conservative politicians at this dispatch box, Labour politicians too, for decades, who've talked about the importance of the two-state solution between Israel and Palestine.
“Words from any politician about a two-state solution will be only words if it's not backed with action, and leadership is about taking action where there is injustice, where we need to correct unfairness, people being driven out of their homes, losing their homes, being intimidated in their daily lives.”
During the session’s final question, veteran Conservative backbencher Sir Bernard Jenkin questioned what advice the government had taken regarding the anti-settlement measures.
“What advice was the Foreign Office giving Ministers on this matter, and what advice were the security services giving about our national security interest before this decision was taken?”, the MP for Harwich and North Essex asked.
The prime minister retorted that the government had given “the most careful consideration to all of the issues involved, and indeed all of the risks”.
He told the Commons: “The foreign secretary and I took close advice from the security services and, of course, officials in the Foreign Office and in our embassies. The risk of the collapse of the two-state solution and the effect that would have on the middle east should concern us all. The risk is that it is dying before our eyes, and that requires us to have the courage to act. In the world that we are in, if Britain loses the confidence to lead on the world stage, where will we be? Where will this country be? It is right that we have taken this action”.
Writing in the JC on Tuesday ahead of the widely-expected announcements, Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch said Labour had an “obsession with Israel” and linked the announcement to domestic politics, rather than international affairs.
“Labour’s obsession with Israel is rooted in UK politics. It’s got less to do with peace in the Middle East, and more to do with trying to keep the peace in the Labour party”, she wrote.
The former head of MI6 Sir Richard Dearlove has also warned that the measures, which he dismissed as “virtue signalling”, and risked making the UK-Israel “intelligence and security relationship more difficult”.
The Foreign Office has been approached for comment.
To get more Politics news, click here to sign up for our free politics newsletter.