Israeli Prime Minister’s Office spokesman Doron Spielman has criticized the British Labour government for policies that he says undermine a critical security relationship with Israel. In a recent appearance, Spielman noted that the British security establishment has repeatedly acknowledged the value of Israeli intelligence in helping to prevent terror attacks and save British lives each year. He described the government’s actions as absurd given the practical benefits of the partnership.

Spielman argued that Israel provides vital counter-terrorism support at a time when threats from Iran, Hezbollah and related networks remain active. He pointed out that heads of British intelligence agencies have recognized the contribution of Israeli information in disrupting plots on UK soil. By taking steps that strain diplomatic and security ties, he said, the Labour government is putting at risk a relationship that has concrete benefits for the safety of British citizens.

The comments come amid a sharp deterioration in official relations following the UK’s decision to impose sanctions on goods from West Bank settlements and related measures. Israel responded by closing the British consulate in Jerusalem, removing British personnel from certain coordination roles, ending training programs for Palestinian Authority forces, and barring a number of British officials from entry. Israeli officials have framed these countermeasures as a necessary reply to what they view as a hostile and one-sided policy.

Spielman and other Israeli representatives have consistently distinguished between the Labour government and the British people, many of whom they say continue to support close ties with Israel. At the same time, they have warned that political decisions in London carry real costs for security cooperation. British ministers have insisted that intelligence sharing on issues such as Iran will continue, yet concerns persist among some former security officials about the longer-term impact of the diplomatic rift.

The exchange highlights the tension between political signaling and practical security needs. For Israel, the intelligence relationship is part of a broader strategic partnership that includes technology, defense and shared threats. For Britain, access to high-quality intelligence from a capable partner in a volatile region has long been viewed as an asset. Spielman’s remarks place the current dispute in the context of that mutual interest.

As the two governments navigate the fallout from the sanctions and countermeasures, the status of intelligence cooperation remains a sensitive point. Spielman’s public comments serve as a reminder from the Israeli side that the relationship delivers tangible benefits in protecting lives. Whether the political differences can be managed without lasting damage to security ties will be tested in the months ahead.