US states threaten economic backlash over UK West Bank sanctions
Findings are available in the analysis below.1 finding We do not republish articles from The Jewish Chronicle. Our findings are below, each quoting the words it is about. Read the full article on the outlet's own site.
Read the original article on thejc.com (opens in a new tab)What we found (1)
The Jewish Chronicle reports the threat by thirteen Republican attorneys general to punish British businesses over the UK's settlement sanctions, and it attributes their claims clearly. But it writes the occupation of the West Bank as London's opinion ('as far as London is concerned'). It never says that the International Court of Justice has ruled the occupation unlawful and the settlements illegal. A reader is left thinking that whether the territory is occupied is one government's view, set against the attorneys general's claim of Israeli sovereignty.
Hedges the documented record
Severe
“territory that, as far as London is concerned, has been occupied since 1967”
- Why this matters
- The words 'as far as London is concerned' turn the occupation of the West Bank into the British government's position rather than a settled fact.
- The impression it gives
- A reader believes the occupation is a matter of opinion: London says the land is occupied, and the attorneys general say it falls under Israel's sovereignty, with no way to tell who is right.
- The context
- The International Court of Justice's July 2024 advisory opinion found Israel's occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem unlawful and its settlements illegal under international law. The article never mentions that ruling or calls the settlements illegal. So the attorneys general's claim that the sanctions 'interfere with Israel's sovereignty' stands against what looks like nothing more than a British view.
How we know
- On the recordThe International Court of Justice's July 2024 advisory opinion found Israel's occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem unlawful.icj-cij.org (opens in a new tab)
- On the recordThe International Court of Justice's July 2024 advisory opinion found Israel's settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem illegal under international law.icj-cij.org (opens in a new tab)
- Elsewhere in the article“the restrictions interfere with Israel's sovereignty”
- Checked against the whole articleIt never uses the words “illegal” and “Court”.
Written straight
The British government says the policy targets settlements rather than Israel itself, distinguishing trade with Israel from economic activity in the West Bank. Israel has occupied that territory since 1967, and the International Court of Justice ruled in July 2024 that the occupation is unlawful and the settlements illegal under international law.