- UK’s legal stance on arms sales to Israel clarified
- Labour demands transparency on legal advice regarding arms exports
- Ethical concerns arise despite legality of arms transactions
According to the deputy prime minister, it remains lawful for the United Kingdom to maintain its arms sales to Israel.
There have been demands for the United Kingdom to cease its provision of arms to Israel after the loss of seven aid workers in Gaza this week.
Oliver Dowden implied that the United Kingdom would cease arms deliveries to Israel if the country were to be judged to have violated international law.
He maintained, however, that Israel was engaged in a “legitimate” conflict.
In the interim, Labour demands that Foreign Secretary David Cameron respond to parliamentary inquiries regarding the legal counsel he has obtained.
This week, Israel was met with censure from its allies following an airstrike by an Israel Defence Forces (IDF) unit against a convoy of World Central Kitchen vehicles, which resulted in the fatalities of seven individuals, three of whom were British military veterans.
The deputy prime minister stated that guidance regarding British arms transactions remained unchanged as for the legality of Israel’s actions.
Later, however, Mr Dowden’s advisors clarified that he was not referring to independent legal advice but to the counsel Lord Cameron provided to business secretary Kemi Badenoch regarding arms sales.
Mr Dowden stated that Israel was “continuing to confront this existential menace posed by Hamas” and was “engaging in a lawful conflict in self-defense.”
“The determining factor is whether or not it is permissible to sell arms to Israel.” “Therefore, that position has not changed, although that is indeed the case,” he confirmed.
Obviously, we shall adhere to our legal obligations about the sale of armaments.
Former Supreme Court justices were among the 600 solicitors who urged the government earlier this week in a letter that the United Kingdom risks violating international law due to the “plausible risk of genocide” in Gaza if it continues to export weapons to Israel. Israel rejects the claim of genocide as “completely unfounded.”
Alicia Kearns, chairman of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee for the Conservative Party, stated on Friday that the United Kingdom had “no choice” but to halt arms sales to Israel.
When queried about Ms. Kearns’ assertions, Mr. Dowden responded that the government had obtained advisory legal counsel stating that Israel had violated international humanitarian law; however, this counsel was merely advisory.
The deputy prime minister refrained from explicitly denying the allegations, instead expressing apprehension regarding the disclosure of legal counsel received by the government and cautioning against delving into specifics.
Mr Dowden stated that the United Kingdom had “certain concerns” regarding Israel’s treatment of assistance workers and civilian deaths and that “Israel has taken steps to address those concerns.
Additionally, he lashed out at “the sort of delight” he claimed specific individuals were taking in criticising Israel, stating that they were “holding Israel to standards we would not even remotely apply to other nations.”
He stated that “the horrors of six months ago”—when Hamas launched its deadly cross-border attacks on October 7—were “all too easy” for the world to forget. Approximately 1,200 individuals were slain, and 253 were taken hostage.
According to the Hamas-run health ministry, over 33,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza since then, and approximately 129 Israeli hostages remain unaccounted for, of which 34 are presumed deceased.
Six months after the assault, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak declared on Sunday that “the entire United Kingdom is shocked by the bloodshed” and demanded a “humanitarian pause” to permit aid to reach Gaza’s civilians.
According to Lord Cameron, the United Kingdom’s backing of Israel’s right to defend itself is “not unconditional”, and the country is required to adhere to the principles of international humanitarian law.
Lord Cameron argued in a Sunday Times column, however, that arms shipments should continue because “Hamas has thus far rejected a deal” for a cessation of hostilities.
He stated, “I believe that failing to prepare for continued conflict will result in additional suffering and avoidable loss of innocent lives; however, we must all continue to work towards this objective.”
The United Kingdom stands poised to contribute.
“Is it good, even if it’s the law?”
David Lammy, the shadow foreign secretary for Labour, has written to the government urging the foreign secretary, who would ordinarily be questioned in the House of Lords as a peer, to appear in the House of Commons so that Members of Parliament can question him regarding the legal advice on British arms exports to Israel.
Mr. Lammy expressed grave concerns that our responsibilities under international humanitarian law may have been violated.
It is of the utmost importance that the United Kingdom does not facilitate a violation of international law, he added, “I will remain concerned until I see that advice.”
“Take a step towards financial freedom – claim your free Webull shares now!”
Concerning arms sales in Israel, BAE Systems, Lord Mark Sedwill, a former high-ranking civil servant of the United Kingdom and current non-executive director at the same organisation, acknowledged that there exist ethical in addition to legal inquiries.
The question is distinct, he stated. Regardless of legality, does the continuation of these arms transactions make sense?
Could they potentially serve as a means to exert pressure on Israel regarding how they are carrying out this campaign?
David Cameron’s statement that our assistance is not unconditional suggests that he is contemplating matters in that manner.
Baroness Amos of the Labour Party, endorsing Mr Lammy’s demand that the government disclose legal counsel to the public, urged them to “publish it and get it over with it,” just as the Labour government concluded with legal counsel regarding the Iraq War during her tenure in the cabinet.
She stated, “The public desires legal counsel because they have lost faith in the government and its statements.”
