Prime Minister’s Office spokesman Doron Spielman has clarified that Israel’s recent countermeasures are directed solely at the British Labour government and not at the British people. Speaking on GB News, Spielman emphasized that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been clear on this distinction. He noted that many ordinary Britons continue to stand side by side with Israel despite the actions of their government. The statement seeks to separate criticism of specific policies from any broader hostility toward the United Kingdom as a whole.

The countermeasures were announced after the UK imposed sanctions on goods from Israeli settlements in the West Bank and leveled accusations that included ethnic cleansing. Israel’s response includes closing the British consulate in Jerusalem, removing British representatives from the International Gaza Support Center in Kiryat Gat, ending British training of Palestinian Authority security forces, and barring entry to a number of British elected officials. Israeli officials have described these steps as a necessary reply to what they view as a series of hostile and one-sided decisions by the Labour government since it took office.

Spielman and other Israeli representatives have repeatedly stressed that the dispute is with government policy rather than with the British public. They point to longstanding ties and public support for Israel among significant segments of British society. In their view, the Labour government’s approach represents interference in Israeli affairs and a departure from previous patterns of bilateral relations. The spokesman’s appearance on GB News was intended to reinforce that message directly to a British audience.

The deterioration in official relations has been marked by sharp language on both sides. British ministers have defended the sanctions as a response to settlement activity and the situation in Gaza and the West Bank. Israeli leaders have rejected the accusations as false and politically motivated, particularly in the context of Israel’s domestic election calendar. By highlighting support from many British citizens, Israeli officials aim to show that the current friction is limited to the governmental level.

The practical effects of the countermeasures are already unfolding. The consulate closure and the removal of personnel from coordination and training roles reduce British diplomatic and security engagement on the ground. The entry bans affect specific politicians identified by Israel as involved in activities it considers hostile. These steps signal that Israel is prepared to accept diplomatic costs in order to push back against policies it regards as unacceptable.

Spielman’s clarification leaves the Israeli position unambiguous. The response targets the Labour government’s decisions and the pattern of actions taken since it assumed power. At the same time, Israel continues to express appreciation for those in Britain who maintain support for the country. How the two governments manage the resulting strain, and whether public sentiment in Britain influences future policy, will shape the next phase of the relationship.