A London bus outside the Houses of Parliament. Photo: public domain.

Border security and a visa policy. There isn’t a single sovereign state in the world that doesn’t have both.

The United Kingdom certainly does — a robust one, no less. For Palestinians, a visa is mandatory to enter the UK, whether for tourism, family visits, business, or study — short stay or long.

In addition to a visa, Palestinians must present a valid passport, proof of accommodation (hotel booking or invitation from a local host), evidence of financial means (bank statements, employer letter, etc.), and a return or onward travel ticket. Processing is time-consuming, often expensive, and far from guaranteed.

The irony of this, however, has been lost on British Labour MPs Abtisam Mohamed and Yuan Yang, who apparently believed their parliamentary status placed them above the entry requirements enforced on ordinary visitors when they arrived in Israel earlier this month.

Upon landing at Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion Airport and telling border authorities they were on a “parliamentary delegation to visit humanitarian aid projects in the West Bank,” they were found to have misrepresented the nature of their visit, denied entry, and promptly deported — just like anyone else who flouts standard entry procedures.

The two MPs were, in fact, on a trip arranged by Caabu — the Council for Arab-British Understanding — a lobby group that specializes in escorting British parliamentarians on carefully choreographed “fact-finding” tours of the West Bank.

According to NGO Monitor, Caabu’s stated aim is to “counter the Israel lobby” in British politics — a mission it advances by promoting inflammatory, evidence-free accusations of “ethnic cleansing” and “apartheid,” under the guise of educational outreach.

In the aftermath of Hamas’ October 7 massacre, Caabu’s director, Chris Doyle, stopped just short of defending the atrocities outright, instead casting them as the inevitable “reaction” to decades of Israeli policy. “Hell in Gaza,” he warned, “will never equal heaven in Israel.” A grimly revealing insight into Caabu’s wider agenda.

For Mohamed, though, this wasn’t a matter of border policy, as she told the House of Commons, but an act of “control and censorship” — part of a broader effort, she claimed, to suppress those trying to “expose” Israel.

She went further still, casting her routine deportation as political repression and invoking the familiar antisemitic dog whistle: “No state, however powerful, should be beyond criticism.”

One must assume, then, that Mohamed also views the UK’s visa system — which requires Palestinians to navigate layers of bureaucracy and reserves the right to deny them entry — as an example of a state’s unrestrained power.

Mohamed and Yang landed in Israel at 2:30 p.m. on Saturday, April 5, on a flight from Luton, accompanied by two aides. During questioning, the two MPs — both vocal supporters of BDS — claimed they were part of an official parliamentary delegation. That claim was reportedly untrue: no Israeli authority had received notification of such a delegation, nor had any approval been granted, according to Israel’s Interior Ministry.

Interior Minister Moshe Arbel denied entry to all four individuals “in accordance with the law,” noting their intent to cause harm to the state.

The Israeli embassy in London issued a statement explaining: “These individuals had accused Israel of false claims, were actively involved in promoting sanctions against Israeli ministers, and supported campaigns aimed at boycotting the State of Israel.”

The UK’s own Foreign Office, it’s worth noting, explicitly states that foreign nationals can legally be denied entry to Israel if they’ve publicly called for a boycott or belong to an organization that has. It’s right there on the government’s website — advice Mohamed and Yang might have reviewed before confirming their airline tickets.

But their apparent disbelief that Israel would actually enforce its own laws has been matched, headline for headline, by the British media’s hyperventilation over the supposed diplomatic scandal.

Sky News has breathlessly tracked every twist of the saga, with headlines about the “furious row” over the Labour MPs denied entry and helpful explainers outlining “what the MPs said about the war in Gaza” — just in case anyone was still wondering why they might not be welcomed with open arms.

The Guardian is doing its best to amplify the manufactured indignation, leading its coverage with Foreign Secretary David Lammy’s condemnation of Israel’s decision as “unacceptable, counterproductive, and deeply concerning.”

Curiously, it failed to mention Lammy’s own support, back in 2008, for banning Israeli MPs from entering the UK — a rather pertinent omission, as noted by journalist Stephen Pollard in The Spectator.

Labour MP Emily Thornberry weighed in with her characteristic self-importance, declaring that the deportation was particularly egregious because Mohamed and Yang were, in her words, “potential leaders” of the UK.

“They are highly respected parliamentarians,” she told the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg, “and Israel is badly advised to try to alienate them, to humiliate them, and to treat them in this way, because people listen to what these two young women say — and they will do for decades to come.”

This would be the same Emily Thornberry, chair of the UK Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee, who once told Sky News that, if Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited the UK, she’d have no problem arresting him. Apparently, arresting a current leader is fine — but deporting two “potential” ones is beyond the pale.

So while the BBC blares about how “astounded” these MPs are, and The Independent frets about the “escalat[ing] diplomatic row,” let’s take a moment to remind the media — and our stunned British lawmakers — of a basic principle:

It’s called the law, and it applies to everyone. And as the Brits themselves might put it, this is nothing more than a storm in a teacup.

The author is a contributor to HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.