At first blush, reasonable people around the world may look at Tuesday’s decision by the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Norway to sanction far-right Israeli ministers Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir as understandable.

After all, they might say, these are extremists who have said some truly hateful things about Gaza and Palestinians. Surely, barring them from travel and freezing their assets is a proportionate response.

But then a second blush should follow – and with it, the realization that this is an unprecedented diplomatic step: sanctioning ministers of a democratic ally not for their actions but for their words. For rhetoric.

This marks a striking departure from longstanding diplomatic norms and holds Israel to a standard no other country is held to.

Israel is not the only democracy that has had extremists in government. The Netherlands’ Geert Wilders comes to mind. So does Italy’s former interior minister, Matteo Salvini. Even some US officials have made comments that raise eyebrows. Yet none of them have been sanctioned.

People demonstrate on the day of a vote on the motion calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, in London, Britain, February 21, 2024. (credit: REUTERS/Isabel Infantes)
People demonstrate on the day of a vote on the motion calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, in London, Britain, February 21, 2024. (credit: REUTERS/Isabel Infantes)
Why not? Because until now, that was considered a bridge too far.

Democracies have generally reserved sanctions for autocracies – countries like Russia, Belarus, or Myanmar. The unspoken rule was that democracies, while occasionally electing officials who say outrageous things, have internal systems – elections, courts, free media, and public opinion – to deal with them.

If someone crosses a line, their own public institutions will respond.

That assumption just got tossed out the window.

For the first time, five democratic countries sanctioned elected officials from another democracy. And not for what they did, but for what they said. Their verdict? Israel can’t deal with this itself and needs them to step in.

What arrogance!

Sanctions cross a line

This is more than just a diplomatic rebuke. It’s a line-crossing moment. We’re no longer talking about punishing bad actors for bad behavior – we’re now in the territory of sanctioning speech.

And that raises a tricky question: Who gets to decide when rhetoric, no matter how ugly, becomes grounds for international punishment?

A joint statement from the five countries said the sanctions were due to the ministers’ incitement of violence against Palestinians in the West Bank.

It also added: “We are steadfastly committed to the two-state solution, which is the only way to guarantee security and dignity for Israelis and Palestinians and ensure long-term stability in the region, but it is imperiled by extremist settler violence and settlement expansion.”

In other words, it wasn’t only hateful rhetoric that was the target here, but also the ministers’ rejection of the two-state solution. Australia’s Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said as much, stating that comments by the sanctioned ministers are an “impediment” to a two-state solution.

Well, here’s a news flash: about 85% of Jewish Israelis, according to a recent INSS poll, now oppose a two-state solution. Why? Because they’ve been mugged by reality – first by the Second Intifada and more recently by October 7.

The vast majority of Israelis no longer see two states as a viable path to peace, not because of ideology, but because of bitter experience.

That doesn’t mean Smotrich and Ben-Gvir’s inflammatory rhetoric is defensible. We find some of their remarks not only irresponsible but morally wrong.

However, these sanctions extend beyond disapproval of rhetoric and into the realm of sanctimonious virtue signaling. If these governments want to condemn Ben-Gvir and Smotrich’s speech, that’s their prerogative. But the double standard here is deafening.

These countries are saying they won’t engage with the far-right ministers because of incitement to violence, but they have no problem sitting down with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, whose government pays monthly salaries to terrorists – and their families – who murder Israelis.

If these countries want to be taken seriously, perhaps they should start by addressing the inciteful rhetoric heard on their own streets – chants like “Globalize the Intifada,” “Free, free Palestine,” or “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.”

Going after Israeli ministers while ignoring this isn’t virtuous; it’s hypocritical. And it should be called out as such.We commend US Secretary of State Marco Rubio for rejecting the sanctions and making it clear they are anything but constructive.

As he put it, the sanctions “do nothing to promote a ceasefire in Gaza, bring the hostages home, or end the war.” Then he added, “We remind our partners not to forget who the real enemy is.”

Sound advice, indeed.