THE UK Government has suspended some arms export licences to Israel as ministers believe there is a risk that British-made parts could be aiding potential war crimes in the bombardment of Gaza.
Foreign Secretary David Lammy told MPs on Monday that around 30 licences were being suspended out of a total of approximately 350, including parts for fighter jets, helicopters and drones as well as ground weapons.
He said: "It is with regret that I inform the house today that the assessment I have received leaves me unable to conclude anything other than that for certain UK arms exports to Israel there does exist a clear risk that they might be used to commit or facilitate a serious violation of international humanitarian law."
But he added: "This is not a blanket ban, this is not an arms embargo."
He specified that the suspension only applied to items being used in the “current conflict” – but confirmed that licences for F-35 jets, which are believed to have been used in a recent deadly Israeli attack on civilians, were exempted.
SNP foreign affairs spokesperson Brendan O’Hara (above) questioned why Lammy had not imposed a “blanket ban” on arms sales in response to the statement.
He said: “He will be aware there is no legal definition between what is an offensive weapon and what is a defensive weapon, so why and on what basis – if there is in his words a clear risk of the violation of international humanitarian law – why has he not imposed a blanket ban on Israel until that risk has gone away completely?"
READ MORE: Partly UK-made jet used in Israeli attack that killed Gaza civilians – campaigners
Lammy replied that the assessment of risk had to take place in what “clear risk in the theatre of conflict”, in this case Gaza, and that a blanket ban would be detrimental to Israel’s security in the face of threats from Hezbollah in Lebanon or Houthi rebels in the Red Sea.
Campaigners have called for a complete arms embargo on Israel, such as was imposed by Margaret Thatcher during the war with Lebanon in 1982.
Tim Bierley, campaign manager at pressure group Global Justice Now, said: "You wouldn’t deal with a dangerous arsonist by simply reducing their petrol supply.
"This announcement doesn’t go nearly far enough. Britain is still providing military goods to a government accused of genocide.
"That position is morally reprehensible, and has very little support from the British public. The Government must implement full and complete arms embargo."
Polling by JL Partners for the British Foreign Policy Group found that 44% of Britons back suspending arms sales to Israel compared to 27% who oppose ending arms sales, Politico reported.
The LibDems have also called for a blanket ban, with Orkney and Shetland MP Alistair Carmichael saying Britain's support for Israel "is not and never can be a blank cheque".
Elsewhere, the Foreign Secretary said that Israel's assault on Gaza had led to "immense loss of civilian life, widespread destruction of civilian infrastructure and immense suffering".
He added: "In many cases, it’s not been possible to reach determinative conclusion on allegations regarding Israel’s conduct or facilities in part because there is insufficient information, either from Israel or other reliable sources to verify such claims.
"Nevertheless it is the assessment of His Majesty’s Government that Israel could reasonably do more to ensure life-saving food and medical supplies reach civilians in Gaza in light of the appalling humanitarian situation."
The Government had been facing the threat of a court challenge over continued arms sales to Israel and campaigners who had been preparing for a legal battle have claimed victory.
Global Legal Action Network senior lawyer Dearbhla Minogue said the Government had been “backed into a corner”.
READ MORE: Independent MPs, including Jeremy Corbyn, form 'alliance' to challenge Labour
Lammy said the Government believed there were “credible” claims Israel had mistreated detainees and noted that the Red Cross had been prevented from investigating the accusations – fears which the Israelis had not responded to “satisfactorily”.
It comes after reports that a partly-British made jet had been involved in an Israeli attack which killed dozens of civilians in Gaza.
Israel is said to have confirmed that an F-35 stealth fighter – parts for which are built in Britain – was involved in an attack on July 13 near the Al-Mawasi refugee camp in southern Gaza.
In a separate statement, Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said the UK Government was not suspending licences for F-35 fighter jet parts because it is "it is not currently possible" to do so without "prejudicing the entire global F35 programme".
The UK does not directly supply F-35 parts to Israel but rather to the global programme "including its broader strategic role in NATO and our support to Ukraine".
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel