UK Foreign Office advises against all travel to Israel
Conflict in the Middle East continues to escalate as Israel has threatened even greater force as some Iranian missiles evaded Israeli air defences to strike buildings in the heart of the country.
The region braced for a protracted conflict after Israel's surprise bombardment of Iran's nuclear and military sites on Friday (June 13) killed several top generals and nuclear scientists, and neither side showed any sign of backing down.
Today (June 15), the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) has said it advises 'against all travel' to Israel, following the latest travel update.
UK Passport Renewal Guide
It comes as areas around Gaza, the West Bank and the Golan Heights were already classed as 'red zones'.
Latest UK Foreign Office travel advice to Israel
Failure to follow the latest travel advice from the Foreign Office, which covers Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, means your travel insurance could be invalidated.
A statement on the government website says: "Iran has launched multiple rounds of missile and drone attacks against Israel.
"On 13 June a nationwide state of emergency was declared in Israel.
"This followed Israeli strikes against nuclear and military facilities in Iran. Israeli airspace remains closed."
Can you still use a red passport in 2025?
It added: "We recognise this is a fast-moving situation that poses significant risks. The situation has the potential to deteriorate further, quickly and without warning. The current situation has disrupted air links out of the country and may disrupt road links."
The Foreign Office also shared: "The interception of missiles over Israel and the OPTs may result in falling fragments or debris.
"If you encounter any projectile debris or fragments you should move away from them immediately and contact local authorities."
See the latest updates on the government website.
Recommended reading:
Sir Keir Starmer confirmed on Saturday (June 14) that more RAF planes are being deployed, amid the escalating hostilities between Israel and Iran.
Additional refuelling aircraft have been deployed from UK bases and more fast Typhoon jets will be sent over, it is understood.
Asked whether the announcement from the Prime Minister means the UK is at war, Rachel Reeves told Sky News: 'No, it does not mean that we are at war.
'And we have not been involved in these strikes or this conflict, but we do have important assets in the region and it is right that we send jets to protect them and that's what we've done.
'It's a precautionary move.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
23 minutes ago
- Times
No concessions on benefits reform, Starmer tells rebels
Sir Keir Starmer has warned Labour rebels there will be no concessions on cuts to disability benefits as he vows to press ahead with reforming a welfare system he says is 'not working for taxpayers'. The prime minister said he has 'got to get the reforms through' as ministers prepare to publish legislation this week that is likely to prompt Starmer's biggest backbench rebellion yet. While ministers insist they are confident of avoiding defeat, there is nervousness in government after 170 Labour MPs raised concerns about reforms which will make it harder to claim personal independent payments (PIP), the main disability benefit. But Starmer insisted that even critics agreed that 'we've got to reform the welfare system', saying: 'The principles remain the same: those who can work should work; those who need support into work should have that support into work, which I don't think they are getting at the moment; those who are never going to be able to work should be properly supported and protected, and that includes not being reassessed and reassessed.' Speaking on his way to the G7 summit in Canada, Starmer said: 'We need reform and we will be getting on with that reform when the bill comes.' About 800,000 people will lose thousands of pounds a year under the reforms and MPs are alarmed by official estimates that a quarter of a million people will be pushed into poverty as a result. • Thanks to the PIP benefit I could work. So why remove it? Last week ministers offered rebels a £500 million 'olive branch', promising that those who lost PIP would have 13 weeks before their payments stopped, and that the same three-month transition period would also apply to 150,000 people who stand to lose a carer's allowance linked to a cancelled PIP claim. Ministers say this is longer than any other transition payment and will mean that no one loses out before 2027. They say there can be no change to the main thrust of the reforms, which will make it harder to qualify for help with everyday tasks such as washing and dressing. They are alarmed by the soaring cost of sickness benefits, which have risen by £20 billion since the pandemic and which will rise by another £18 billion by the end of the parliament. This is despite reforms that will save £5 billion. Asked if there would be any softening of the bill before a vote expected at the end of the month, Starmer said: 'We've got to get the reforms through. I've been clear about that from start to finish — the system is not working. It's not working for those that need support. It's not working for taxpayers. Everybody agrees it needs reform. We've got to reform it and that's what we intend to do with the bill.' • A quarter of Britons now disabled Leading rebels have dismissed last week's attempts at reassurance, saying they want a fuller impact assessment and an immediate review of PIP criteria. A wider review promised by ministers is not expected to be completed until after tougher rules come into effect in November 2026. Neil Duncan-Jordan, a leading backbench critic of the bill, agreed with ministers last week that the extra transition periods were 'not a concession', and confirmed he would vote against it. He said MPs should recognise the cuts 'will make disabled people poorer. No amount of warm words mask the reality — cuts don't create jobs, they create austerity'. Brian Leishman, another backbench leftwinger, attacked the reforms as 'a complete insult to disabled people and against everything a Labour government should ever do to people that need help'. Ministers believe that less hardline critics will be persuaded to fall into line by evidence that the government is listening to concerns. A suggestion by Kemi Badenoch, the Tory leader, that her party would vote against the bill is also seen as helpful by party managers who say Labour MPs will not want to walk through lobbies alongside Conservative MPs. An extension of free school meals to all pupils on universal credit has also helped as ministers have pointed out that this will lift 100,000 children out of poverty, twice the number pushed into poverty by welfare cuts.
Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
Does the BBC doubt Iran wanted a nuke?
I don't monitor this stuff all the time. It would be soul destroying. All that happens is that I tune in, often by accident, and here something. Something which once again betrays the long term, institutional, anti-Israel bias of the BBC. So, Friday night's television news and the Middle East Correspondent Lucy Williamson. Reporting on the Israeli rocket attack upon Iran's nuclear bases, Lucy told us that Israel 'says' Iran is working towards a nuclear bomb. Attribution, you see. Let us hear what the International Atomic Energy Agency had to say in its report on 9 June this year. 'As you know, the Agency found man-made uranium particles at each of three undeclared locations in Iran – at Varamin, Marivan and Turquzabad – at which we conducted complementary access in 2019 and 2020. Since then, we have been seeking explanations and clarifications from Iran for the presence of these uranium particles, including through a number of high-level meetings and consultations in which I have been personally involved.' And later in that report: 'The rapid accumulation of highly enriched uranium – as detailed in my other report before you: Verification and monitoring in the Islamic Republic of Iran in light of United Nations Security Council resolution 2231 (2015) – is of serious concern and adds to the complexity of the issues I have described. Given the potential proliferation implications, the Agency cannot ignore the stockpiling of over 400 kg of highly enriched uranium.' The IAEA believes Iran is working towards a bomb. So do the governments of virtually every other country on earth. Israel says?
Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
Why Russia wants war between Israel and Iran
Israel's assault on Iran represents a double helping of good news for the Kremlin. Years of two-track diplomacy have allowed Vladimir Putin to position himself both as a friend to Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and to the Iranian leadership. That will make Russia an indispensable partner for the US once it embarks on the long process of patching up the new political realities of the Middle East in the wake of this war. Though Israeli planes have so far carefully avoided striking Iran's oil export infrastructure, the war has inevitably spooked markets and boosted sagging crude oil prices – and with them, Putin's war chest. Over three months of inconclusive negotiations with the Trump administration over ending the Ukraine war, Russian negotiators always insisted that Ukraine was just one part of a global package of military, economic and political issues where Washington's fundamental interests could align with Moscow's. Now it's happened. In the wake of the Israeli strikes, Putin was the only world leader to speak by phone to Netanyahu, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and Donald Trump. Thanks to Israel's devastating military strikes, Washington now faces a multi-dimensional challenge as it simultaneously tries to prevent a global oil price shock, a bilateral war between Iran and Saudi Arabia, and blowback against US military and civilian targets by Iranian agents or proxies. Russia, with its military and diplomatic ties to Tehran, will inevitably be part of that diplomatic balancing act. All of a sudden, pressuring the Kremlin into winding down operations in Ukraine seems like small potatoes compared to helping prevent the whole Middle East from going up in flames. Russia has, of late, been cosplaying as an ally of Iran. In the immediate aftermath of the Israeli strikes, Russia's Foreign Ministry issued a strongly worded statement condemning the attacks as 'categorically unacceptable' and warning that 'all the consequences of this provocation will fall on the Israeli leadership'. Moscow also urged both parties 'to exercise restraint in order to prevent further escalation of tensions and keep the region from sliding into a full-scale war'. But that alliance of convenience is, in the Kremlin's eyes, very much secondary to Russia's more important role as a global power player that can stand alongside the US and China as an arbiter of world affairs. Putin may have signed a 'comprehensive strategic partnership' treaty with Iranian President Pezeshkian in January, but he has his eyes on a far larger diplomatic prize – to boost his own standing as a power broker in the Middle East. In his conversation with Netanyahu, Putin 'emphasised the importance of returning to the negotiation process and resolving all issues related to the Iranian nuclear programme exclusively through political and diplomatic means'. He also offered his mediation 'in order to prevent further escalation of tensions', according to the Kremlin's readout. In his call to Trump on Saturday, Putin also signalled Russia's readiness to carry out 'mediation efforts to de-escalate the crisis' – and reminded Trump that Russia has actually been a long-time ally of the US over its years of negotiations with the Iranians over their nuclear programme. Moscow's relations with the Islamic Republic have always been very much an on-again, off-again affair. Back in the 1990s, Moscow helped Iran build its first Shehab long-range ballistic missiles and constructed Iran's first civilian nuclear reactor at Bushehr, which became operational in 2013. Russia and Iran pooled efforts to shore up Bashar al-Assad's government in Syria, with Russia deploying warplanes in 2015. Moscow also supplied S-300 air defence missile systems and has been importing thousands of Shahed drones, which it has fired indiscriminately at Ukraine. At the same time, Moscow was a signatory of the US-brokered Iran nuclear deal in 2015, which was scrapped by Trump two years later. This year, Moscow has offered to handle the enrichment of Iran's nuclear fuel as part of a possible updated nuclear deal. That arrangement could allow Iran to maintain a civilian nuclear energy programme while depriving it of any excuse to enrich uranium to weapons-grade. And despite their professed alliance, Russia has also dragged its feet over selling Iran advanced Su-35 fighter jets that might be a match for Israeli jets in the air. Israel, in return, has refused to provide Ukraine with weapons despite strong pleas from Kyiv. In the immediate aftermath of Israel's attack, oil prices jumped from under $60 to $75 a barrel as nervous traders feared disruption to Iran's ability to export crude. But it soon emerged that Israeli warplanes had not hit key infrastructure at the biggest Iranian oil terminal at Kharg Island, and traffic in the Strait of Hormuz at the mouth of the Persian Gulf appeared normal. Instead, Israel attacked Iran's domestic energy industry, including gas processing plants and petrol depots across the country – perhaps in an effort to spark price hikes that have spurred anti-regime protests in the past. US Energy Secretary Chris Wright tweeted that the US was 'working closely with the National Security Council to monitor the ongoing situation in the Middle East and any potential impacts to global energy supply'. Decoded, that means Washington will be urging Israel to hold off attacking Kharg to avoid catastrophic damage to the economy of Iran's main customer, China. At the same time, Israel is keeping the option of escalating against oil infrastructure in its back pocket as it negotiates with both enemies and allies. With every new conflict the importance of the Ukraine war to the West fades a little All of this is good news for the Kremlin, which was facing the prospect of falling oil prices pushing up deficits and stretching budgets. A major conflagration in the Middle East promises to occupy the bandwidth of the world's media – and with it the attention of electorates and politicians. 'The world's attention towards Ukraine will weaken,' tweeted Kremlin-aligned analyst Sergei Markov. 'A war between Israel and Iran will help the Russian army's success in Ukraine.' On the minus side of the ledger, Israeli warplanes have reportedly blown up Iran's Shahed drone factory in Isfahan just days after Ukrainian long-range drones damaged Russia's plant for producing their own Shahed clones, known as Geran, in Yelabuga. That will put a dent in Moscow's ability to continue its nightly swarm attacks on Ukrainian cities, which have seen as many as 450 Shaheds deployed in a single wave. But overall, that is a small price to pay for a conflict that suits the Kremlin down to the ground. Last month, the Trump administration made Putin what seemed like an excellent offer – to cash out his gains and call a halt to his assault on Ukraine with a de facto border along the current line of control and a promise that Kyiv would never join Nato. But Putin refused. Many observers were mystified as to why. Now the picture becomes a little clearer. With every new conflict – especially a major Middle Eastern conflagration – the importance of the Ukraine war to the West fades a little. And the more opportunity Putin has to leverage Russia's diplomatic weight and help Washington and Beijing solve the world's problems, the further he moves away from being a warmonger and towards his coveted role as senior international statesman. There is no way that Putin could have predicted Israel's full-scale attack on Iran months ago when he began stalling on Trump's peace deal. But he has always had the devil's own luck.
