The UK bans Cenk Uygur and Hasan Piker, the US welcomes Bezalel Smotrich

2 June 2026

The UK government has banned two US critics of Israel, both prominent on social media, from entering the UK, including to participate in a debate at Oxford University’s debating society. The critics are Cenk Uygur, founder of the Young Turks channel, and his nephew, Hasan Piker. Both are more or less aligned with Bernie Sanders, who in a more even-handed Democratic race would have been the challenger to Trump in 2016 rather than Hillary Clinton. The stated reason for the restriction is their presence “may not be conducive to the public good.” This clearly means there’s a risk they’ll say something about Israel that the public agrees with.

According to reports about the decision, Cenk Uygur and Hasan Piker also use “antisemitic tropes” in their commentary. This is complete nonsense, because they direct their criticism towards Israel and the Zionist lobby (which is made up of non-Jews as well as Jews) and not Jews per se. Further, the commentators have framed Israel’s actions as genocidal. This simply places them in line with majority opinion within international academic, human rights, legal and political circles.

Uygur commented: “I’ve been banned from the UK. I tried to get on a flight to London to attend SXSW London and give a speech at Oxford. I’ve been banned for criticising Israel. Are we free anymore? This is oppression of Western citizens by our own governments on behalf of a different country!”

It’s hard to remember that Keir Starmer came to power promising to return the UK to the rule of law, both domestically and internationally. He appointed as Richard Hermer attorney general, breaking the convention of selecting a candidate from within parliament in order to do so. One-time shadow foreign secretary Emily Thornberry, a previously senior barrister, was widely expected to get the job by those who didn’t know about Starmer’s close friendship with Hermer.

Tweedledum and Tweedledee go back to Hermer’s first day in Doughty Street chambers, where Starmer was a founding member. Hermer has described Starmer as a “mate”—a euphemism for a close friendship based on political alignment and allegiance. Since Labour returned to power they’ve constantly manipulated and indeed broken the law in order to enable Israel to continue its genocide—a genocide they continue to refuse to acknowledge.

In this context the ban on Uygur and Piker merely amounts to Starmer’s latest co-option of the state apparatus to bend everything to Israel’s nonstop rampage: the increase in the sale of military weapons, the provision of spying information obtained via the airbase at Akrotiri, Cyprus, the proscription of Palestine Action and the rigging of the PA retrial, the multi-level clampdown on the solidarity movement and independent journalism, and now the banning of non-UK critics of Israel.

But what law is being broken when one criticises Israel, or describes Israel attempt to forcibly remove and murder the Palestinians of Gaza (and beyond) as a genocide? The only available answer: the unwritten law that places Zionism above the law and Zionism’s critics in handcuffs.

The Uygur-Piker ban brings the Starmer government in line with Germany, which prevented and disrupted visits by the British-Palestinian surgeon Ghassan Abu-Sittah, UN Special Rapporteur for the occupied Palestinian territories Francesca Albanese, professor Nancy Fraser and activist Greta Thunberg. Angela Merkel liked to declare Israel’s security to be part of Germany’s Staatsräson (reason of state). Nevertheless according to a YouGov poll released in May, net favourability for Israel in Germany is -44 (18% in favour, 62% against). This is a highly combustible scenario that’s spreading throughout Europe and the US.

The ban contrasts sharply with the warm embrace and flowing red wine—apparently not a blood libel metaphor for once!—extended by Starmer to Isaac Herzog, president of Israel, who has made actual genocidal statements. Leaping across the Atlantic, it contrasts even more sharply to the welcome afforded to Netanyahu in the US and, last Sunday, to several Israeli ministers: Bezalel Smotrich (Finance), Amichai Eliyahu (Heritage), Yitzhak Wasserlauf (Negev, Galilee & National Resilience), Amichai Chikli (Diaspora Affairs) and Ofir Sofer (Immigration & Absorption) plus Amir Ohana (Knesset speaker). As recently as May Smotrich declared that Gaza “will be entirely destroyed” and its population would “start to leave in great numbers to third countries”—widely decried as advocating ethnic cleansing.

Meanwhile in the run-up to the parade as well as on the day itself participants insisted that Zohran Mamdani is an antisemite for declining to attend. There has been a systematic, incendiary campaign intended to destabilise his mayoralty, rooted in the argument that Zohran is somehow betraying New Yorkers, even though he won a landslide victory while being candid about his views on Israel and its genocide.

It’s understandable that diasporic, ethnic and religious communities will want to gather to celebrate their togetherness and living culture. But what other form of national grouping organises in support of such a violent regime and so brazenly? Invites foreign guests who are participating in a genocidal action and making genocidal statements? Seeks to overthrow a mayor elected on a landslide because he doesn’t support their point of view, even though he was explicit about his position during the election campaign?

This is fanatical behaviour. It amounts to a direct threat to whatever is left of democracy. Those who criticise Israel should be banned—including in the UK.

Yet in many respects this is all a distraction. Democracy is under attack, we defend democracy, the mass media comes to Zionism’s defence, we feel more under threat, we struggle harder to make ourselves heard in the noise. All of which is perfect for Israel because the more we’re distracted from what’s happening in Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon the more Israel can carry out its ethnic cleansing and genocidal projects in the shadows.

These days Gaza and the West Bank are hardly covered in the mainstream press. Lebanon is receiving more attention but coverage comes through the treacherous perspectives of Israel, the US and the Lebanese government—and most certainly not Hezbollah. Meanwhile the Gaza “ceasefire” that somehow awarded Israel 50% control of the already-tiny strip has now morphed into 60% Israeli control. In the meantime Israel has murdered close to a thousand Palestinians while failing to honour basic commitments regarding the delivery of aid. Malnutrition and disease run rampant, rats stream through the tents of Gaza. This is a genocide rolled out not just by direct murder but by removing the conditions needed to survive. In some ways it’s the most repulsive stage of all.

Then a few days ago Netanyahu casually announced his future plans for Gaza. “We were at fifty, we moved to sixty,” he said. “My directive is to advance–we will go step by step.” When members of the audience chanted for a 100% takeover he responded: “First 70%. Let’s start with that.” With the ceasefire never honoured by Israel and now completely dead, the Zionist state is moving to complete the genocide in Gaza—and barely a single politician even commented. Instead the focus has been on Zohran refusing to join the ultra-nationalist if not semi-fascistic Israel Parade.

It’s a desperate situation, yet we also know that the attempt to censor the criticism of Israel demonstrates that the Zionist movement is in crisis. The argument has been won. They can’t bully us into submission, try to win the argument by calling us antisemites and liars, or stamp us out. Cenk Uygur and Hasan Piker will take part in the Oxford Union debate remotely. I’ll be tuning in.