Category: arms trade

Amnesty Critiques High Court’s Decision on Arms Exports


High Court rules against action by human rights groups

June 2025

The High Court has ruled that sales of components for the F35 aircraft can continue to be sold to Israel. The judgement has come as a big disappointment for campaigning organisations including Human Rights Watch, Oxfam, Al-Haq and Amnesty. The judges said that the decision was properly for the government to decide. They said:

‘[The] issue is whether it is open to the court to rule that the UK must withdraw from a specific multilateral defence collaboration which is reasonably regarded by the responsible ministers as vital to the defence of the UK and to international peace and security, because of the prospect that some UK-manufactured components will or may ultimately be supplied to Israel, and may be used in the commission of a serious violation of international humanitarian law in the conflict in Gaza.’

Global Legal Action Network who brought the case with the support of the three British human rights

organisations which are parties to the case, argued that under the Arms Trade Treaty and the Genocide Convention, the UK, as a state party to both, is obligated to stop sending the parts and that, by failing to follow its obligations, is threatening the rule of law globally.

Amnesty statement

In response to the verdict, Sacha Deshmukh, Chief Executive of Amnesty International UK, said:

“We are disappointed by today’s ruling, but the court has been clear that while it does not have the authority to make a judgment on UK exports of F-35 arms parts, this does not absolve the executive and Parliament from their responsibilities to act.

The UK has a legal obligation to help prevent and punish genocide and yet it continues to authorise the export of weapons to Israel despite the clear risks that these weapons will be used to commit genocide.

This judgment does not change the facts on the ground, nor does it absolve the UK government of its responsibilities under international law. The risk that UK arms may be used to facilitate serious international crimes remains alarmingly high. If the courts will not intervene, then the moral and legal burden on the Government and Parliament to act – before more lives are lost and further irreparable harm is done – is even greater.

“The horrifying reality in Gaza is unfolding in full view of the world: entire families obliterated, civilians killed in so-called safe zones, hospitals reduced to rubble, and a population driven into starvation by a cruel blockade and forced displacement. These are not isolated tragedies; they are part of a systematic assault on a besieged population.

The UK must end all arms transfers to Israel if we are serious as a country about our commitments to international law and human rights.

Many of those who attend the weekly vigil in Salisbury will find this decision deeply disappointing.

Gaza documentary

The documentary Gaza: Doctors Under Attack is to be shown on Channel 4 on 2nd July at 10pm. The BBC declined to show it saying it did not meet its high editorial standards. Members of staff met Tim Davie the Director General of the BBC at a virtual meeting and many expressed their disquiet at the decision to pull the documentary. The BBC denies claims it is frightened to air such programmes.

Sources: Middle East Eye; Yahoo News; Reuters; Guardian.

Recent posts:

Thought of becoming a subscriber?

0

Appeal case – arms to Israel


Update on the case from Amnesty and Human Rights Watch

May 2025

Amnesty has issued an update on this case which is currently before the Appeal Court. There is a video clip attached.

See also a post from Human Rights Watch;

“How could they have allowed that to happen? This is the question everyone asks, years later, when looking back at mass atrocity crimes in the past. Everything’s so clear when it’s described in history books – war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide…  

It’s not that these things aren’t clear at the time exactly. In fact, in recent decades, they have often been well-documented in excruciating detail more or less as they happen. Yet, somehow, when these things are unfolding in real time, some folks seem unable – maybe, more often, unwilling – to accept the evidence of their eyes and ears. Various considerations distract international leaders in particular: prejudices, alliances, politics…  

There can never be any justification for the worst kinds of crimes known to humanity, but that doesn’t keep leaders from trying to offer some. And with that, you move toward the future answer to the future question: The world at the time had leaders who refused to take a stand and defend humanity when it mattered most.  

Today, everyone can see Israel has been committing atrocities in Gaza during hostilities since October 7, 2023. We’ve seen systematic destruction of homes, apartment buildings, orchards and fields, schools, hospitals, and water and sanitation facilities. Israel has also openly used starvation as a weapon of war.  

These actions amount to war crimes, crimes against humanity including extermination, and acts of genocide. Now, the Israeli government’s latest plan has made its intentions even clearer. They want to demolish what remains of Gaza’s civilian infrastructure and concentrate the Palestinian population (about 2 million people) into one tiny area. 

Israeli government ministers couldn’t make things any more obvious. They say Israel is “finally going to conquer the Gaza Strip.” They threaten that Gaza will be “completely destroyed” and say its Palestinian population will “leave in great numbers to third countries.”  

Some Israeli officials say the Palestinian exodus will be “voluntary.” However, it’s hard to call it voluntary, when Israel has deliberately destroyed the area’s ability to sustain human life. 

If implemented, the plan would amount to an abhorrent escalation of extermination. In fact, Israel’s plan is so obviously extreme and has been made so extremely obvious, it should trigger international action under the Genocide Convention’s “duty to prevent.” 

The 1948 Genocide Convention is an international agreement that embodies the spirit of “never again.” It says a “duty to prevent” genocide arises as soon as a state learns, or should normally have learned, of a serious risk that genocide may be committed.  One hundred and fifty-three countries have signed up to the Convention. These include the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany. 

Yet, these are some of the very countries that have been supporting the government of Israel most throughout its carnage in Gaza, not least by continuing to provide Israel with weapons even after the atrocities were undeniable. 

Israel’s latest plan should finally, at long last, shake London, Brussels, Berlin, Paris, and Washington to their core. It should make them see beyond everyday politics, to their responsibility to humanity and history – and to their legal obligation to act. 

Without that, the question one day may indeed be, “How could they have allowed that to happen?” And everyone will know the answer.” Human Rights Watch

May 15th

0

Arms to Israel: the Appeal starts


Appeal in the High Court over arms to Israel starts

May 2025

The appeal against a lower court’s decision on the question of the UK government’s decision to continue supplying arms to Israel started in the High Court yesterday, 13th May and is expected to last 4 days. The appeal has been brought by al Haq and supported by Amnesty, Human Rights Watch, Oxfam and Global Legal Action Network.

The question of arms sales and sales to Israel causes difficulties for government since it is heavily invested in the trade. It actively supports the industry with arms fairs such as DSEI, with diplomatic support and sometimes members of royalty are deployed to cement relations particularly with the Gulf states. Many jobs depend on the industry. With current government desperate to promote growth, issues of morality and sales to unpleasant regimes are a less significant factor despite government protestations to the contrary. Over 52,000 have been killed in Gaza so far and a major build-up is being planned by the IDF.

Report issued

Meanwhile, a report has been issued and circulated by CAAT which has examined the UK’s exports of arms to Israel using Israeli tax records. Called Exposing UK Arms Exports to Israel it has been produced by the Palestinian Youth Movement, Workers for a Free Palestine and Progressive International. By examining the coding of the imports they are able to determine the nature of what we are exporting to Israel.

‘No observable decrease‘

Government ministers have claimed that ‘much of what we ship is defensive in nature’ (Hansard, 28 October 2024) and ‘no one would suggest we should not sell helmets or goggles to one of our closest allies‘ (Hansard 20 September 2024). However, the analysis shows however that 8,630 shipments have taken place in the category bombs, grenades, torpedoes, mines and missiles. There have been 299 shipments of tanks and armoured vehicles. It notes that there has been no observable decrease in shipments since September 2024.

Of particular importance, and the matter which has received most attention, is the sale of F-35 parts. This aircraft is used to drop 2,000 pound bombs on Gaza causing indiscriminate destruction and death. The government could not stop these without causing a major upset with US partners. It would ‘undermine US confidence in the UK and NATO‘ the Defence Secretary said. The licensing restrictions should have led to a reduction in aircraft parts being sent to Israel. The report shows that parts are being sent from RAF Marnham to Tel Aviv airport. There does not appear to be any reduction in shipments. At the Appeal Court hearing, UK government lawyers will argue in court this week that preserving the British role in the F-35 jet fighter programme takes precedence over the need to comply with UK laws on arms export controls, or any UK obligation to prevent a genocide in Israel.

Questions for David Lammy

Selling arms seems to take precedence over other considerations. The oft-repeated statement that the UK has ‘robust controls’ seems at variance with the facts. It claims ‘the UK’s robust export licensing criteria states that the government will not issue export licences if the items might be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of International Humanitarian Law’. A report in the National (Scotland) said that 40 Labour MPs have written to the Foreign Secretary, David Lammy, quoting the above report and claiming that he has misled the House. He has been challenged to come to the House of Commons and make a statement about his alleged false claims. Indeed he twice made those claims on the BBC Radio4 PM programme on 8 May and was fortunate that he was not challenged by Evan Davies.

Sources: BBC; CAAT; The Nation; Government statement (others in the text).

The Report can be read here:

REPORT-ExposingUKArmsExportsToIsrael-05072025Download
0

Arms trade news


Grim reading in Campaign Against the Arms Trade’s latest newsletter

May 2025

The CAAT Newsletter (Spring 2025, Issue 272) has details of what’s happening in the world of arms sales a world in which the UK is a big player. Our previous post discussed the continuing sale of arms to Israel which is subject to an Appeal Court hearing starting on 13th. Also we mentioned the role of the RAF in carrying out hundreds of flights over Gaza and quite what is being done with the information gleaned is not revealed.

Arms sales are important for several reasons. Weapons have an enormous capacity to do great harm in the wrong hands. Governments need to exert great control over licensing to ensure that arms do not fall into such hands. British governments are frequently to be heard claiming it exercises ‘robust’ controls. It is doubtful that this is the case and CAAT have often noted the considerable use of open licences which means little effective control exists.

The current Labour government has a policy of growth which seems to dominate thinking. As the court case will reveal, and papers have already revealed, this seems to trump considerations of human rights. CAAT News has the following examples:

  • The Defence Secretary has held meetings with counterparts in Saudi Arabia and Turkey to discuss opportunities for expanding military cooperation which is likely to involve arms sales. Both countries have woeful human rights records. Saudi has a full array of violations including public executions, use of torture, restrictions on women’s rights and repression of any opposition or free speech. Turkey has carried out baseless prosecutions against journalists, human rights defenders and opposition leaders, thousands of whom are in gaol.
  • Eurofighter sales – which the UK co-produces – are planned for Qatar and Turkey. The latter is involved in bombing Kurdish groups in its own country and Iraq. Qatar is another repressive Gulf state and is highly corrupt.
  • We have noted before the question of the Revolving Door where politicians, ministers, senior civil servants and military personnel leave their posts and head off for lucrative appointments/directorships/consultancies with arms firms. It is an open invitation for corruption and the ACOBA system seems powerless to stop it. The Aerospace, Defence and Security Group, (ADS) the trade body for the defence industry representing all of the major arms makers, holds an annual dinner at the Grosvenor House Hotel in which, in the words of CAAT ‘The dinner’s purpose is to introduce them to one another and allow them to schmooze and entertain their powerful friends from Parliament and the Civil Service‘ … These kinds of dinners are where relationships are formed and built and where the next round of arms deals are made, over fine food and wines.’
  • And it doesn’t end there. The Defence and Security Equipment International (DSEI) resumes in September at the ExCel Centre in London. This may be the largest such exhibition in the world. It is popular because the UK government invites representatives from a wide range of countries including those with appalling human rights records, some even on its own watch list. The thousands of attendees will be met by ‘a cast of compliant senior civil servants and politicians on hand to make sure things run smoothly’ (CAAT).
  • … or even there because the Farnborough International Exhibition and Conference Centre is to host Security and Policing run by the Home Office. Again, a range of countries with dreadful human rights are cordially invited to view the latest in surveillance, tear gas and ammunition. Journalists are banned. Britain seems happy to be host to regimes who use this equipment to repress and intimidate oppositions, journalists or human rights people.
Growth or rights?

The government seems keen to actively support these activities and to do all it can to promote arms and surveillance equipment to repressive regimes. It does this while piously claiming that:

This Government is fully committed to the protection of human rights both at home and abroad. We are committed to the international human rights framework and the important role that multilateral organisations like the Council of Europe play in upholding it. (Ministry of Justice, November 2024, ref: CP 1192)

It is hard to square the multi-level activities to promote arms sales and in the process currying favour with some of the world’s worst regimes, with their stated desire to be upholders of human rights and the wellbeing of those at the end of it all. While politicians, civil servants, military brass and ministers ‘schmooze’ with the arms manufacturers in expensive London hotels, it may be hard for them to empathise with those who have been bombed, starved, driven from their homes or incarcerated, tortured or executed for no reason. All facilitated by the weapons and equipment they so admire whilst quaffing the Bollinger. Is it growth above all else?

Sources include: CAAT, The Canary, Amnesty

1

High Court to decide on arms to Israel


The appeal is to be heard on May 13

May 2025

UPDATE: 8 May. The Foreign Secretary, David Lammy was interviewed on the PM programme yesterday evening [BBC Radio 4] and made the claim, twice, that he had decided to suspend arms sales to Israel. This was not true and regrettably, he was not challenged on either occasion by the interviewer, Evan Davies. Mr Lammy should be thankful that he had such an unchallenging interview, not just on this falsehood but on a range of other matters as well.

The appeal against the government’s decision to continue to supplying Israel with arms – and in particular, components for the F-35 – will be heard in the High Court starting on May 13th. The government is in something of a bind. The actions by Israel in Gaza are widely deplored and many contend amount to a war crime and genocide. But to offend the Americans by curtailing supplies of components for the F-35 used in Gaza is almost unthinkable for the government desperate as it is to curry favour with the Americans.

The action is being brought by Al Haq a human rights organisation based in Ramallah, and Global Legal Action Network consisting of lawyers and investigators which identifies and pursues legal actions against those involved in human rights violations. They have been joined by Amnesty, Oxfam GB and Human Rights Watch.

The latest edition of Campaign Against the Arms Trade (Issue 272, Spring 2025) discusses the issue of continuing military aid to Israel. It notes that ‘even our government has been forced to admit that is assesses Israel is not committed to complying with International Humanitarian Law‘. The case will be the biggest legal test of UK exports to Israel to date. They highlight an article in the Guardian by a former Foreign Office diplomat who described continued attempts by ministers to stonewall or play down evidence of what is happening in Gaza.

Over 52,000 have now been killed in the conflict. There are now reports of 57 deaths due to malnutrition mainly of children, the sick or the elderly. No aid is allowed in including food and necessary medical supplies. This has been the case now for over 60 days. Aid agencies stocks are depleted. A gloomy picture is painted on the situation in Haaretz.

We will follow the court case with great interest.

In addition to the supply of arms, there is the question of involvement of the RAF which has carried out over 250 overflights of Gaza (Declassified says 500). The chief of defence staff, Sir Tony Radakin was asked by a reporter from Declassified whether the RAF’s activities meant they were participating in Israel’s operations in Gaza? Answer came there none. They are not alone and the article reports that backbench MPs have sought answers without success. It is disturbing that the RAF are seemingly deeply involved in what is happening.

0

Ex-diplomat alleges Britain ‘complicit in war crimes’


Britain’s system of arms control ‘broken’

February 2025

Allegations by an ex diplomat that officials were instructed to manipulate findings of misuse of weapons by allies will not come as shock to readers of this site. We have frequently questioned the oft repeated statement from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office that ‘Britain’s export licensing controls are some of the most robust in the world’ as palpable nonsense. We have regularly featured items published by the Campaign Against the Arms Trade, CAAT.

In this case, featured on the front page of today’s Guardian newspaper (10 February), the ex-diplomat claims that officials are ‘bullied into silence’. Processes are manipulated to produce politically convenient outcomes. The article suggests that probably the most significant of his allegations was that officials had demanded the toning down of evidence that UK arms had been used to commit war crimes. This would appear to be a clear example of manipulation of what was intended to be an objective exercise. One tactic was to say they are ‘waiting for more evidence’ as cover for inaction. The FCDO office denies these allegations.

Palestinians returning to north Gaza have been shocked to see almost total devastation of their homes, communities, medical facilities and much else. What greets them are piles of rubble where once they lived their lives. The bombing of civilian targets using dumb bombs and the killing of thousands of non-combatants including many women and children, is clear evidence of a war crime. Israelis have been able to do this with weapons such as the F-35 parts of which are manufactured in the UK. Yet the UK government refuses to ban these exports.

The ‘revolving door’ enables corruption to continue

As we have argued before, the UK is in a kind of trap when it comes to these sales. Arms exports are one of the few areas where we do well from an economic perspective. Many jobs depend on these sales and a proper regime of controls would hit the industry. Arms firms employ many lobbyists to promote themselves. CAAT have spoken of the ‘revolving door‘ whereby senior staff from the civil service, the military and government retire and emerge as consultants or directors of these firms. Such senior staff have a clear incentive therefore, to sing the industry’s songs so as not to destroy the opportunity for lucrative employment post retirement. It is as close to corruption as you can get. We must not forget however, the end result of this corruption and manipulating processes as alleged, is the death, destruction, maiming and general mayhem as the weapons are used to destructive effect.

Apart from Gaza, another area where Britain turned a blind eye and pretended not to know was Yemen. We continued arming Saudi and provided support and advice stopping just short of arming the planes thus avoiding claims of being mercenaries.

Listening to ministers opine about peace ring hollow when its own staff are allegedly manipulating evidence to enable arms sales to continue.

0

Arms trade news


Campaign Against the Arms Trade was established 50 years ago

January 2025

CAAT was formed 50 years ago, (the same year our local Amnesty group was formed). Their overriding vision is “A just, peaceful and sustainable world built on foundations of equity and solidarity“. Their latest News Letter is published, issue 271, and amongst other things contains a review of events with an arms perspective over the half century since they were formed. We feature their work from time to time on this site because arms are a key element in conflicts around the world. Looking at wars in Sudan, Ukraine, Gaza and other theatres, we see the destruction weapons cause to communities, women, children and other non-combatants. Buildings are destroyed and people are killed or injured by the weapons used. The UK is a major supplier of weapons and claims, somewhat dubiously, to have a ‘very robust regime’ of controls, while at the same time granting ‘open’ licences enabling arms dealers to circumvent them. Human rights are greatly damaged by the arms industry.

The review reminds us of the war in Nigeria and it is probable that younger readers may not be aware of the war there which focused on Biafra. It took place between 1976-70 and was around the desire by the region of Biafra to form its own state. Britain had been the colonial power and was a major arms supplier to the country. The effects were terrible and a blockade led to the death of millions of Biafrans. Between half a million and 2 million Biafrans died in the conflict. It was one of the first wars to be televised and images of the suffering were seen around the world. Apparently, the malnutrition disease Kwashiorkor, was called the ‘Harold Wilson syndrome’ after the then UK prime minister. Images of children with distended bellies, which is a symptom, shocked the world.

A lot has changed over the 50 years: or has it? The fall of the Soviet Union, the rise of China, the ‘global war on terror’ following the attack on the Twin Towers in New York are just some of the key events. Britain, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, SIPRI, has steadily slid down the ranks of arms sellers and now lies approximately seventh. However, taking into account components and military services not counted by SIPRI, the nation is around fourth and on a par with Russia. CAAT do not directly draw attention to the significant role of the City of London which facilitates the movement of money around the world.

Political factors

What has remained constant over the years is the role of the arms industry and its close links to government of all stripes. Arms sales are important for several reasons. Firstly because of the jobs it creates. CAAT for example has a feature on the county of Lancashire in England where BAE Systems is based at two sites in Warton and Samlesbury. The company has developed close links with Lancaster University. Secondly, exports and arms are one of the few areas which show a trade surplus.

The industry has a huge lobbying operation and previous CAAT newsletters have highlighted the revolving door – or open plan office as they are now terming it – through which a large number of senior military personnel, civil servants and some politicians pass through on their way to lucrative directorships or consultancies with the arms companies. This is an invitation to corruption. The arguments over arms supplies to Israel has revealed government ministers reluctant to call a spade a spade. Frightened of upsetting both the industry and the Americans, they continue to allow components for the F-35 despite its use to cause devastation to large parts of Gaza. The industry enjoys too much power and the interests, lives and rights of those who suffer from its wares are barely considered.

1

Arms sales and the revolving door


New report from the Campaign Against the Arms Trade reveals extent of this activity

November 2024

[ADDED: 16 December] If you want to see ministers squirm in front of a select committee when discussing arms sales to Israel (via USA) watch this YouTube video. Usual claims of ignorance and unable to answer basic questions. Even though the RAF is regularly flying over Gaza, it seems they are unaware of the destruction as the purpose they say is to look for hostages.

The question of arms sales has risen up the political agenda partly because of the question of whether we should continue to sell weapons to Israel. It also cropped up with the decision recently to award a GCVO to the King of Bahrain presented by King Charles. It was also an issue during the war in Yemen where British weapons and personnel were involved in helping Saudi in their ferocious bombing campaign in that country. All these and other examples revealed an industry with considerable political influence. They result in a distortion of our political process and an almost complete disregard for the effects of the arms on people at the end of them. The destruction being carried on in Gaza is facilitated by the continuing sale of F-35 aircraft elements of which are made in the UK. An ‘ethical dimension’ to our policy seems to be a thing of the past. There is little sign that arms sales are restricted to states which ignore human rights or International Humanitarian Law.

Not so much a revolving door as an ‘open plan office’

Campaign Against the Arms Trade CAAT has campaigned on these issues for many years and their current magazine, Issue 270, Autumn 2024 contains a number of articles on the topic of arms. One concerns what has been known as the ‘revolving door’. In an article ‘Government and Arms Industry Joined at the Hip’, they explore the deeply compromising nature of this relationship. They have published a report From Revolving Door to Open Plan Office: the Ever Closer Union Between the UK Government and the Arms Industry. They argue that the arms industry has become so deeply embedded in the government that the boundary has almost disappeared. It is now not so much a revolving door as an ‘open plan office’. 40% of top military staff and civilian personnel leaving the MOD hold positions in the arms and security industries. Transparency International research shows that one company, BAE, had more meetings with ministers and with Prime Ministers than any other company.

Private Eye carried out an extensive survey in 2016. This went into great detail and named names.

Why does it matter?

It matters for three main reasons:

  • Firstly, arms cause great misery for millions of people. The harrowing images on news programmes of property destruction, dead bodies, lines of people on the move or rows of tents housing displaced people are the result of the activities of this trade,
  • The lobbying power is such that government ministers seem to fall into line almost as soon as they assume power. Grand statements by Sir Keir Starmer and David Lammy for example are quickly forgotten as the next trade deal is signed. The arms trade seems to wield enormous power and influence over government policy,
  • Thirdly, the ‘open plan office’ means senior staff in the Civil Service and in the MOD and armed services are keeping an eye on prospects as they approach retirement. Lucrative board appointments and ‘consultancy’ contracts await them. Are they going to ask uncomfortable questions or raise difficulties with an arms contract and jeopardise these prospects?

As CAAT put it:

‘When these ‘revolvers’ leave public service for the arms trade, they take with them extensive contacts and privileged access. As current government decision-makers are willing to meet and listen to former Defence Ministers and ex-Generals, particularly if they used to work with them, this increases the arms trade’s already excessive influence over our government’s actions.

‘On top of this, there is the risk that government decision-makers will be reluctant to displease arms companies as this could ruin their chances of landing a lucrative arms industry job in the future. Beyond individual decisions, the traffic from government to the private sector, and vice versa, is part of a process where the public interest becoming conflated with corporate interest, so that it becomes normal to unquestioningly meet, collaborate and decide policy with the arms industry, then take work with it.’

0

King Charles gives GCVO to King of Bahrain


Award of GCVO invites many critics because of poor human rights in Bahrain

November 2024

The award of the Grand Cross of the Victorian Order to King Hamad bin Isa al Khalifa of Bahrain by King Charles has brought criticism and controversy. The list of human rights failures in Bahrain is a long one. It includes the lack of a free press, no genuine political opposition, the use of torture, critics who are harassed and arrested and there are problems with an independent judiciary. Individuals are executed after confessions secured following the use of torture. There is little religious freedom. Freedom House has described the kingdom as one of the more repressive regimes in the region. Since violently crushing a popular prodemocracy protest movement in 2011, the Sunni-led monarchy has systematically eliminated a broad range of political rights and civil liberties, dismantled the political opposition, and cracked down harshly on persistent dissent concentrated among the Shiite population.

Of course it is unlikely that King Charles was directly responsible for this award and may even felt uncomfortable with it. It is almost certainly a political decision because Bahrain is a key defence ally. CAAT has described the range of contacts between the two kingdoms and the importance of Bahrain as a purchaser of arms.

This has become a feature of British foreign policy and ideas of an ‘ethical foreign policy’ seem a long time ago. The Royal family are frequently used to promote ties and friendly relations with the various monarchs who still rule most of the Gulf states. Arms sales and the supply of oil are crucial elements of the British economy and effectively means ethical and human rights issues have to take a back seat. The Secretary of State said in parliament on 21 October 2021 that ‘[t]he Government are clear that more trade will not come at the expense of human rights’. However, as CAAT notes, arms sales to Bahrain continue apace.

Human rights violations and violence continue in the Kingdom and arms sales continue seemingly unhindered. Awarding the King an award is just icing on the cake. The problem is that it represents a kind of seal of approval. Is the Kingdom ever going to improve if it feels that Britain will continue to supply arms, use the Royal family in this way and make these awards? Or will it feel it can carry on persecuting its people and continue to deny basic rights with impunity? After all, the Bahrain’s own web site proudly proclaims ‘Bahrain is committed to safeguarding human rights, actively engaging in impactful initiatives that underscore its dedication to ensuring the well-being and freedom of its citizens and residents.’

Charles was told in a letter by the exiles: “It is personally difficult for us to view this honour as anything other than a betrayal of victims who have suffered at the hands of King Hamad and his brutal regime.”

Sources: Amnesty International; Human Rights Watch; Hansard; the US State Department; the Guardian; CAAT; Freedom House; Government of Bahrain; Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy.

0

CAAT News


Summer edition of Campaign Against the Arms Trade news highlights many troubling issues around the this trade

June 2024

UPDATE: 20 June 2024. This post mentions the ‘revolving door’ where senior military personnel, civil servants and politicians go off to lucrative posts in the companies they were supposed to be controlling before retiring. Private Eye has done extensive work on this (see link below) and in the current edition No: 1624, there is an article about the Israeli arms firm Elbit who have recently taken on Sir Mark Poffley, formerly of the MoD. He had senior positions in logistics and hence would have had a lot to do with contracts. MoD have awarded Elbit with contracts worth £57m.

There is supposed to be a 2 year gap between leaving and taking up a role and lobbying previous colleagues. Private Eye questions whether this two years has indeed elapsed since although he is supposed to have left in 2018, documents show he remained as master general of logistics in 2022. ACOBA (see below) say these posts are ‘honorary’ and so do not infringe the two year rule.

Elbit, make the drones which are a feature of the Gaza campaign. Elbit say the drones used over Gaza are not made in Bristol.

The arms trade has a severe impact on human rights in countries around the world. We have already highlighted the fact that the UK government is continuing to issue licences to the Israeli government despite the horrific death toll in Gaza.

A troubling development is the increase in the number of universities engaged in research programmes funded by, or in partnership with, arms companies. CAAT, in conjunction with Demilitarise Education has published a new report Weaponising Universities. The report describes the nature of the research projects and makes a number of recommendations for universities, faculties and students (p56ff). Protests by students have taken place at Bristol, Nottingham, Sheffield, Liverpool. Newcastle and Glasgow as awareness grows of what is happening.

Campaigners blocked access to the Bristol Arms Fair for a time. Among the exhibitors was Elbit, an Israeli arms company, which supplies weapons used in the Gaza conflict. The protest aimed to show that such firms were not welcome in the City.

There are two issues important in the arms industry: one is the lax control on what and to whom weapons are sold and two, the immense support offered by the UK government to the arms companies. The government claims it has robust controls in place yet weapons are sold to Turkey, Israel, Saudi, Qatar and other nations where abuses are taking place. There is a whole government department in place CAAT reports, called the UK Defence & Security Exports which uses public money to support the sale of arms around the world. The department’s title has a certain Orwellian feel to it with the use of ‘defence’ and ‘security’ to describe itself. Who could be opposed to defence or security? Unfortunately, what is sold is far from either of these things and are used to kill, or oppress.

Companies have almost limitless access to ministers and civil servants via extensive lobbying and countless meetings. Then there is the ‘revolving door’ which has been reported on in depth by Private Eye. This is the scandalous and cosy relationship between government and business, including the arms firms, whereby retiring military people, senior civil servants and ministers are offered lucrative positions or consultancies once they retire. It is an invitation for corruption. The Aerospace, Defence & Security Group (note those words again) hold lavish dinners for politicians and industry figureheads. Altogether, a multi-layered system of contacts enabling arms firms to exert considerable influence over politicians and civil servants. If any progress is ever to be made to put a stop to this deeply entrenched system of influence then at the very least, contacts should be reported on and there should be a considerably greater level of transparency. ACOBA, the toothless department which notionally controls the revolving door has to be radically strengthened. Essentially, instead of policing this system, the UK government is a willing participant and appears to have lost all objectivity. And remember, these are companies which sell weapons which kill.

CAAT News has much more on countries such as Saudi, Australia, Russia, China and more. There is also a piece on the Twickenham Arms Fair and is also a report on Barclays who are heavily involved in financing Elbit and BAE Systems with over £4bn in loans and financial services.

0

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑