A Tale of Two Letters: UK and Switzerland Reply to ACLJ’s Letters Urging Stricter Sanctions Against Iran for Its Unwarranted Attack on Israel

As we informed you, the Islamic Republic of Iran – which is already the number one state sponsor of terrorism in the world – recently took its tyranny a step further, forgoing its usual modus operandi of letting proxies (terrorists) do its dirty work, and launched more than 300 drones and cruise and ballistic missiles directly at Israel. Thankfully, this attack was unsuccessful in its goal of inflicting mass casualties in Israel. But it was still an egregious violation of Article 2(4) of the U.N. Charter and the universal prohibition on acts of aggression. As we told you, the ACLJ recently sent demand letters to 43 countries urging them to impose strict sanctions against Iran.

So far, at least at the time of this writing, two countries have responded to our letter – the United Kingdom and Switzerland. Sadly, their replies didn’t quite exemplify their nations’ steadfast support of Israel or her people.

Our letter urged sanctions against Iran, reminding global leaders that: “Security Council Resolution 1373 condemned terrorist attacks, reaffirmed the inherent right to self-defence, and required that all Member States ‘prevent and suppress the financing of terrorist acts,’ as well as freeze funds and other financial assets or economic resources, to anyone who participates, or facilitates terrorist acts.”

Switzerland’s reply acknowledged the threats facing Israel and noted that it had implemented sanctions against Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps members:

Thank you for your letter dated 23 April, to which I reply on behalf of Federal Councillor Ignazio Cassis.

I share your concern about the situation in the Middle East and the recent attacks on Israel. Switzerland has condemned the Iranian military attacks in the UN Security Council on 14 April as they considerably increase the risk of further escalation in the region. Switzerland has been using its bilateral contacts with Iran since 7 October 2023 to make it clear to the Iranian government that it should refrain from attacks and provocations, and use its close ties with armed groups in the region to prevent further regional escalation. As part of its mandate as a protecting power, Switzerland also keeps open the channel of communication between the United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran in order to help defuse tensions and avoid misunderstandings and miscalculations.

For many years, Switzerland has participated in all UN sanctions and a large number of EU sanctions against Iran, including financial and travel sanctions. As recently as 18 October 2023, Switzerland maintained sanctions against individuals and entities involved in Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs, as well as sectoral measures (originally stemming from the JCPOA Annex) based on EU measures. Also, with regards to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), many of its members, including high-ranking officers are sanctioned in Switzerland and are therefore subject to travel restrictions and financial sanctions. The IRGC itself - as well as the Qods Force - and many other IRGC-related entities are also subject to financial sanctions. Switzerland prosecutes and condemns terrorism of any origin and form, including acts of preparation and support, as a serious criminal offence.

I can assure you that Switzerland will continue to stand up for the observance of human rights and against violence in Iran. We use the regular and critical dialogue with the Iranian government to persistently demand precisely these points, as we did for the last time on 22 April 2024 during the political consultations with Iran in Bern. The FDFA discussed the regional situation with the Iranian delegation and called on Iran to cease all violent actions against Israel and in the region in general, including via Iran-affiliated groups such as Hezbollah or groups in Syria and Iraq.

It’s a start and important to note that Switzerland holds a unique diplomatic position with Iran, even serving as a conduit for U.S. backdoor diplomacy with Iran. So for Switzerland to take a bold stance condemning Iran’s attack on Israel is important. But unfortunately, that’s not likely going to make Iran change course.

Sadly, the response from England appeared unwilling to condemn – or even mention – Iran.

The British response gave only a fleeting mention of the attacks on Israel, even refraining from making specific references to identify that specific terror campaign. Even more disturbing, Britain’s letter essentially reads like an “ode to poor Palestine.”

Britain’s Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office wrote back a tragic tale of all the “bad things” it feels Israel has done in Gaza while conveniently glossing over the unprovoked savagery Israel has suffered:

All parties must act within International Humanitarian Law (IHL), which is why we continue to call for IHL to be respected and civilians to be protected. A shocking number of civilians have been killed and we want to see Israel protecting civilians and their property. Israel is the occupying power in Gaza, it is responsible and that has consequences, including when we look at if Israel is compliant with IHL, which is why we keep advice on Israel’s adherence to IHL under review.

The U.K.’s response to our letter then goes on to list Britain’s demands on Israel that it wants to see before it’s willing to even consider supporting the Jewish state:

We have set out very clearly five steps that Israel needs to take, including: An immediate stop in fighting to get more aid in and the hostages out; increased capacity inside Gaza to fully enable the UN’s operating requirements; increased access for aid through land routes and to fully open Ashdod Port; an expansion of the types of aid allowed into Gaza; and, the provision of electricity, water and telecommunications, to both the north and the south of Gaza.

Based on this letter, it seems the British government would rather blame Israel and make one-sided demands than actually make an effort to shut down terrorist activity and blatant human rights violations by Iran. The question is, why? What is motivating this extreme pro-Iran, pro-Hamas, and clearly anti-Israel stance?

But the two responses verify our letters are being received. Even if they aren’t quite the strong resolutions to act that we might have hoped for, the countries cannot say they didn’t know. We will continue to urge international leaders to defend Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East, and enforce strict sanctions on Iran to stop supporting, let alone committing, acts of violence and terror against Israel, as well as any other country.