Former foreign secretary reportedly overlooked evidence of UK complicity in Gaza breaches, as labour government acts on arms licenses

David Cameron, the former Foreign Secretary, faces allegations of ignoring critical advice regarding breaches of international humanitarian law (IHL) in Gaza. According to a former adviser from the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO), Cameron was informed of clear evidence that the UK risked being complicit in these breaches due to arms exports to Israel. The adviser, who helped draft the advice, claims that despite warnings dating back to February, the issue was not addressed until the Labour government recently acted by suspending 30 out of approximately 350 arms export licenses.

The leaked advice reportedly emphasized that the breaches of IHL by Israel, as the occupying power, were significant enough to warrant immediate suspension of arms licenses to avoid UK complicity. The FCDO source lamented that the government’s response was delayed, questioning how many lives could have been saved if action had been taken sooner. The memorandum published by the Labour government, which reflects similar concerns, used less urgent language compared to earlier drafts.

In response, a former member of Cameron’s government argued that while legal advice was similar on issues of detainee treatment and humanitarian aid, it was not explicitly clear that arms sales needed to be suspended to avoid breaching IHL. The debate over the delayed response and the nature of the legal advice raises questions about the effectiveness of governmental oversight and the influence of political considerations.

The timing of the Labour government’s decision to ban certain arms exports has drawn criticism from Israeli officials. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu condemned the move, framing it as detrimental to Israel’s efforts against Hamas. Netanyahu’s statement, which came shortly after a Hamas attack that resulted in Israeli casualties, reflects a broader strategy to rally domestic support and counter international criticism.

Israeli sources acknowledge that relations with the UK are strained but do not foresee immediate practical reprisals. The UK’s decision to exclude components for the F-35 fighter jet from the ban has been criticized as a loophole that could undermine the effectiveness of the arms embargo. This exclusion aims to balance relations with Washington while addressing concerns over the UK’s role in the Gaza conflict.

In the broader Middle East context, Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi praised the UK’s decision but called for a more comprehensive boycott. UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer also engaged in diplomatic discussions with UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan, emphasizing the UAE’s role in Middle Eastern stability and Palestinian diplomacy.

Internally, the FCDO faces criticism for its handling of the situation. The source highlighted issues of internal coherence and disputes between different government departments, reflecting broader challenges in managing arms export policies amidst humanitarian concerns. The handling of the arms export issue is set to be scrutinized further in a high court hearing, scheduled for November, focusing on the legality of UK arms sales and the exclusion of certain evidence from the ban.

THE GUARDIAN

Former UK Foreign Secretary David Cameron faces criticism for allegedly delaying action on evidence of breaches of international humanitarian law (IHL) in Gaza. According to a former adviser from the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO), Cameron was informed that the UK risked complicity in these breaches if arms export licenses were not suspended.

The adviser revealed that from February 2024 onwards, the Foreign Office received drafts indicating serious IHL violations by Israel in Gaza. However, a recent government memorandum published by Labour indicated that arms licenses were only suspended in September due to similar concerns. The delayed response raises questions about the potential impact on humanitarian outcomes and the UK’s international stance.

In reaction, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu criticized the UK’s decision, asserting that it would not alter Israel’s resolve against Hamas. The timing of the UK’s announcement, following recent hostilities, has further strained relations with Israel.

UK arms exports to Israel, including components for the F-35 fighter jet, remain largely unaffected by the ban, a point of contention for pro-Palestinian groups. The UK government aims to balance its stance to avoid angering key allies, notably the United States.

The broader implications of the UK’s handling of arms exports and adherence to IHL are under scrutiny, with ongoing legal challenges and debates over the adequacy of the response to humanitarian concerns in Gaza.

BBC

UK Defence Secretary John Healey has defended the government’s decision to suspend 30 out of 350 arms export licences to Israel, asserting that the move “won’t have a material impact” on Israel’s security. The suspension, which affects a small fraction of Israel’s total arms imports, comes as part of a broader effort to address legal and humanitarian concerns related to the ongoing conflict in Gaza.

Healey described the decision as “agonizing,” particularly given the recent deaths of six Israeli hostages, and emphasized that the timing of the announcement, coinciding with their funerals, was driven by legal considerations rather than political calculations.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has condemned the decision as “shameful,” arguing that it will only “embolden Hamas” and undermine Israel’s defensive efforts. This criticism reflects broader frustration within Israel over perceived international bias.

In contrast, the Palestinian Mission to the UK welcomed the UK’s action. The Hamas-run health ministry in Gaza has reported significant casualties, with over 40,000 people having died since the escalation began in October 2023.

Former national security adviser Lord Peter Ricketts described the suspension as “long overdue,” though he acknowledged it would not likely alter Netanyahu’s stance on the conflict.

The US remains the largest arms supplier to Israel, and UK arms sales represent just 1% of Israel’s defense imports. The UK’s decision to only partially suspend arms sales is seen as a balancing act intended to uphold international law while maintaining support for Israel’s right to self-defense. This approach has drawn criticism from various quarters, reflecting the complex and contentious nature of international arms diplomacy.

SKY NEWS

The UK and US have notably diverged in their approach to arms sales to Israel following the escalation of violence after the October 7 attacks by Hamas. On September 2, 2024, UK Foreign Secretary David Lammy announced the suspension of 30 out of 350 arms export licences to Israel. This decision reflects concerns about compliance with international humanitarian law and the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Gaza.

The suspension, affecting only a small fraction of Israel’s arms imports, was intended to address legal and ethical concerns while maintaining support for Israel’s right to self-defense. UK Defence Secretary John Healey defended the move, emphasizing that the suspension would not have a significant impact on Israel’s security capabilities. The UK government’s action has been criticized by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as “shameful,” arguing it would only embolden Hamas.

In contrast, the US has maintained its strong support for Israel. Vice President Kamala Harris reaffirmed the US commitment to Israel’s defence, and State Department spokesperson Matt Miller stated that the UK’s decision does not influence US arms sales policy. The US has also taken legal action against Hamas leaders, further illustrating its continued backing of Israel.

The UK’s decision and the ongoing protests in Tel Aviv highlight the complex international dynamics at play. Israeli protests, fueled by criticism of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s handling of the conflict and the failure to secure the release of hostages, underscore the internal and external pressures on both the UK and Israeli governments. This situation exemplifies the challenges faced by allied nations in balancing diplomatic relations, humanitarian concerns, and national security interests.