The United Kingdom and thirteen partner governments issued a joint statement on 24 December condemning the Israeli security cabinet’s approval of 19 new settlements in the occupied West Bank. The text urges Israel to reverse the decision in line with UN Security Council Resolution 2334, framing the approvals as a breach of international law.
The governments warn that unilateral settlement steps risk fuelling instability and could undercut implementation of a wider plan for Gaza, with negotiators attempting to advance to “phase two” of that process. The statement also reiterates opposition to annexation and flags concern over the E1 project and the approval of thousands of additional housing units.
Signatories are Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Iceland, Ireland, Japan, Malta, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain and the United Kingdom. Each has aligned behind the call for a negotiated two‑state outcome with secure and recognised borders, reaffirming Palestinians’ right to self‑determination.
Resolution 2334, adopted by the UN Security Council on 23 December 2016, states that Israeli settlement activity in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has “no legal validity” and constitutes a “flagrant violation” under international law. It demands an immediate end to settlement activity and calls on all states to distinguish, in their dealings, between Israel and the territories occupied since 1967. The resolution also requires the UN Secretary‑General to report quarterly on implementation.
The reference to E1 is significant. UN humanitarian reporting describes the E1 plan, which would link Ma’ale Adumim to East Jerusalem, as a move that would sever territorial continuity between the northern/central West Bank and the south and heighten the risk of forcible transfer for nearby Bedouin communities. These concerns explain why E1 routinely attracts coordinated diplomatic pushback.
The UK’s legal and diplomatic position has been consistent. In a Security Council statement delivered in New York, the UK described settlement expansion as “wholly unacceptable and illegal” and called for an immediate halt, alongside steps to reduce settler violence and to re‑establish a credible path to a two‑state solution.
The “Comprehensive Plan for Gaza” cited in the joint text reflects ongoing work among partners on a phased stabilisation, governance and reconstruction track. Downing Street in July set out the UK’s support for a comprehensive plan establishing transitional governance and security arrangements to enable sustained humanitarian delivery and a longer‑term political settlement; Ireland has likewise welcomed an Arab‑led recovery and reconstruction proposal. The joint statement argues that accelerating settlement activity risks derailing this sequence.
This intervention also sits alongside a widening UK sanctions posture related to West Bank violence. Since February 2024 the UK has designated extremist settlers and groups implicated in abuses; in 2025 ministers expanded measures to include sanctions on two Israeli cabinet ministers cited for incitement and, in May, formally paused free trade negotiations with Israel while targeting outposts and organisations that support violence.
For public authorities and firms, the legal baseline remains that Resolution 2334 calls on states to distinguish in their relevant dealings between Israel and the territories occupied since 1967. Compliance teams should ensure procurement, labelling and supply‑chain due diligence reflect that requirement, and that activity is screened against UK sanctions designations relating to settler violence.
Monitoring will continue at the UN. The Secretary‑General’s 2025 reports and briefings to the Security Council document sustained settlement advancement, while UN humanitarian updates have flagged renewed movement on E1 over the summer. The effectiveness of the latest joint démarche will be measured against whether approvals are reversed and whether steps are taken that support, rather than obstruct, the phased Gaza plan.