Tag: arms sales

Palestinian state recognised


UK recognises the state of Palestine

September 2025

Today, 21 September, the UK government announces that it is to recognise the state of Palestine. It has joined the majority of countries around the world and joins Canada and Australia who did the same today. The decision has come after months of hesitation and was delayed until after the visit to the UK by President Trump who does not agree with it. To an extent, the government’s hand was forced. The disproportionate response to the horrific attack by Hamas on October 7th with the destruction of huge parts of Gaza, a death toll now over 65,000 many or whom are women and children and the deliberate introduction of siege conditions leading to more deaths by starvation, has left the government little option but to take action. Public opinion has also been a factor and the images of emaciated children have horrified many.

Britain’s decision is more than symbolic since the 1917 Balfour Declaration was instrumental in the creation of the state of Israel. The declaration was vague however since although it recognised that Arabs and Palestinians already lived there and said ‘nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine‘ it made no provision for protecting their claims or rights.

Some argue this is symbolic since with American support and ever increasing violence by settlers in the West Bank, the prospects of an actual state on the ground are receding. Some suggest that this means the conditions for statehood as set out in the 1933 Montevideo convention are not achievable. The Israeli government has rejected the decision saying ‘it categorically rejects the one-sided declaration of a Palestinian state by the UK and some other countries.’ It claims the decision does not promote peace. A spokesman for the British Board of Deputies interviewed on the BBC was critical of the decision and said it would cause deep dismay across the Jewish community in the UK. It says it is a reward for Hamas violence.

Implications

What are the implications? It will take some while for the implications to percolate through the claims and counter claims of the various political interests. It will enable the Palestinians to open an Embassy in the UK which will improve their status. It will enjoy diplomatic rights which will be significant. Up until recently, the Israelis have enjoyed almost uncritical support from governments but its continued violence in the West Bank and Gaza is seeing that support melt away.

It is unlikely to bring a peace deal any closer. Wars end because a kind of exhaustion sets in and the population goes weary of war-time restrictions and the loss of soldiers. This shows no sign of applying in Israel. Seemingly limitless weapons supplies from America and a huge military advantage in weapons and materiel mean any exhaustion is a long way off. IDF deaths are modest 464 [Jewish News Syndicate, 18 September]. The far right members of the Knesset such as Bezalel Smotrich see Gaza as a ‘property bonanza’ and claim the ‘demolition phase is over’.

Recognition will make it harder for the UK government to continue its support of Israel – open and covert – with RAF overflights for example, and ignore the plight of the Palestinians. It may even see some more robust reporting from the BBC whose lamentable performance has slowly begun to change.

Amnesty has said it is a ‘hollow gesture’ and without meaningful action to end the genocide, end violence in the West Bank and ending the Apartheid system against the Palestinian people. Real action needs to be taken to end arms sales and divest from companies which continue to sell arms to Israel. A report by CAAT sets out the details of arms export to Israel.

0

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 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

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

The Middle East conflict


Current phase of the conflict a year old and little sign of an end

October 2024

There has been an exchange of letters in the Salisbury Journal concerning the conflict in the Middle East. Two letters have focused on the issue of Britain continuing to supply arms to Israel. Although a limited embargo is in place, we still for example supply components for the F35. These aircraft are being used to deadly effect in both Gaza and Lebanon. Over 42,000 are dead in Gaza and more than 2,000 in Lebanon.

The word ‘genocide’ has been used to describe Israel’s action in Gaza and South Africa has launched an action in the International Criminal Court. The allegations make grim reading. There are huge numbers of forced evacuations. A significant part of the population is being forcibly moved. The death toll, particularly among women and children, is rising. Medical aid is failing to reach the population. Tens of thousands are living in make-shift accommodation (the link provides a more detailed picture). In the past day or two, evidence has been put forward to the effect that the starvation of those remaining in north Gaza might be an act of deliberate policy. This is said to be the ‘Generals’ Plan’.

Are these actions genocidal? The problem for the ICJ will be the question of intent. Is the destruction however terrible, a justifiable answer to the atrocious actions of Hamas most particularly on October 7th last year? Is Israel justified in going after the terrorist organisations who continually lob salvos of rockets into their territory? Or is it way over the top and disproportionate? One of the problems the Israelis have made for themselves is not allowing foreign journalists or observers into the area. Last month, the offices of al Jazeera were closed down and done so aggressively. Israel justifies the destruction of buildings, including schools and hospitals. It claims these buildings are used by Hamas to fire rockets into Israel and to prepare for terrorist activities. It claims that the deaths are because Hamas are using the population as ‘human shields’. Very little evidence is provided to justify these claims. One might expect that a year into this conflict, we would see evidence of these alleged activities, evidence that outside observers could verify. Entire buildings have been demolished with massive 2000 pound ‘dumb’ bombs because it is alleged Hamas operatives are present within them.

One of the writers to the Salisbury Journal asserts that the Hamas Covenant of 1988 calls for the obliteration of Israel. A subsequent charter in 2017 distinguishes between Jews and Zionists confining its more violent actions towards the latter. He failed to mention the statement by the Israeli Minister Amichae Eliyahu suggesting a nuclear bomb be dropped on Gaza. Bezalel Smotrich suggested recently that it would be ‘justified and moral’ to starve the population of Gaza. Both have been disavowed. Israeli minister Ben Gvir has said that his right to move around the West bank is superior to freedom of movement for Palestinians. The point being that aggressive and bloodthirsty statements have been made by both parties.

It is largely forgotten that Netanyahu supported Hamas for a period of several years as a means to weaken the PLO. And this is close to the heart of the problem: the desire for a Palestinian state and Israel’s refusal to countenance this. The desire for a greater Israel and the violent actions by the Israelis (misleadingly called settlers) on the West bank are a key element in the conflict. Another misunderstanding is to claim that the violent actions of October 7th were the start of the current hostilities. The roots go back to 1948 nakba at least and elements can be traced back to the Balfour Agreement and further back still. October 7th is but the latest manifestation of long term hatreds.

What makes the conflict hard to unpick is that in effect there are two wars going on. Firstly, that between Israel and Palestine and the former’s resolute stance not to allow a two state solution. Secondly, Iran’s role. This has history going back to the Shah. They have supported Hezbollah, Hamas and the Houthis in Yemen as proxies to attack Israel. But the seat of their aggression is again the Palestinian state and a belief that Israel has usurped Arab lands.

A key feature is the imbalance of power. Israel, with a largely unquestioning US support, is the regional superpower. It can project its power over the region. It can do this both militarily and with superior intelligence. This intelligence was seen with the spate of assassinations of Hezbollah leaders in Lebanon recently. None of the other states can match this. The US is sending manpower and more equipment this week. This makes it unwilling to compromise its position simply because it doesn’t need to. The world is waiting for Israel to respond to the rocket attacks from Iran of a few weeks ago. Israel has the capacity to inflict real damage on Iran’s military infrastructure. Iran by contrast, cannot do this. Despite the huge number of missiles hurled at Israel, the damage was minimal.

One major shift is the international attitude towards Israel. The world was shocked by the horrific attack on October 7th. The ensuing destruction of huge chunks of Gaza and the appalling death toll and squalor has seen sympathy for Israel drain away. Western media reporting was largely pro Israel arising partly from a fear of being labelled ‘antiSemitic’ for any criticisms. It has become more balanced and robust as time has gone by. Occasionally, commentators have mentioned the apartheid policy in the West bank. Amnesty, Human Rights Watch and B’Tselem have all published detailed reports on this and Israel has accused them of being anti-Israel. Reporting is hampered by a lack of access to the conflict zones. Claims and counter claims cannot be independently checked.

Conclusions

Should the UK stop sending arms to Israel? From the purely practical point of view, doing so will make little difference. We are a small supplier anyway and so ceasing supplies will not stop or help resolve the conflict. The political position is rather different. The UK is a member of the Security Council and still an influential force around the world. Other countries like Spain, Canada, Belgium, the Netherlands and Italy have stopped their supplies. The moral case is rather more compelling. Are we content to see the destruction of a vast swathe of both Gaza and increasingly Lebanon? Are we content to see thousands of children die or receive terrible wounds. Can we stand by and accept the use of starvation as a weapon of war? The answer should be ‘no’. If genocide is pronounced, the UK will be obliged to stop all weapons sales.

The imbalance of power is a major factor in the continuation of this conflict and we are contributing to this. We also help Israel with overflights from Cyprus. Wars have to end sometime. Few have mentioned the economic cost of this conflict bearing mind Israel’s population is around 9.5 million 75% of whom are Jews. How long can they sustain this even allowing for massive US aid?

Yesterday’s killing of Yahya Sinwar (17 October), the leader of Hamas, has led the Americans and others to hope that this is some kind of ‘moment of justice’. They hope this is the opportunity for negotiations to begin. It is unlikely. Netanyahu is holding on in the hope that Donald Trump will win the election. Since the US is powerless to rein in Israel and Hamas and the other terrorist groups ignore them, the possibility of an outside force successfully engineering some kind of peace seems remote. Frequent efforts by Qatar came to nought.

An end

Wars end because exhaustion sets in. Another reason is the parties see no hope of gaining victory. Thirdly, the loss of treasure becomes too great to bear and a kind of armed truce takes place. The public may become tired and the initial euphoria turns to boredom or frustration. Unfortunately, in the case of this conflict, these factors which researchers* have identified in other conflicts, may not apply. As argued above, outside forces most particularly the USA, are the drivers here enabling Israel to continue for a long period. In many respects this is a proxy war both by USA and Iran. Israel’s losses are minimal and containable. But the greatest factor is the abiding hatred that seems to exist between the parties.

Being surrounded by enemies, some of whom are committed to its destruction, has a powerful effect on Israel. Nevertheless, it had agreed peace treaties with several countries such as Jordan and Egypt. The Abraham accords were also a positive step. It can be done. Trump’s ending of rapprochement with Iran was a backward step.

This stage of the conflict will come to some kind of an end, or should we say pause. The answer to the arms question is clear. Britain should suspend deliveries and use its diplomatic power to push for a two state solution. It would give Israel the security it needs and it would weaken the power and influence of the terrorist groups.

*MIT Research

0

Impactful Lancet Study: Up to 186,000 Dead in Gaza, alarming Figures


Study by the Lancet estimates as many as 186,000 dead in Gaza.

July 2024

The figures previously quoted by many (and reproduced on this site) are of just under 38,000 dead in Gaza. The figures are produced by the Gaza Health Ministry and the way they are reported by British media implies that they are not necessarily true and may be exaggerated. It now appears from this study that they are far from being exaggerated and are a considerable underestimate and that the true figure may be an astonishing, not to say shocking 186,000. Claims that the figures are ‘fabricated’ are implausible and are accepted by the UN, WHO and the Israeli intelligence services.

The Lancet study explains in detail the problems in producing a reliable figure in a war zone. The previous data came from hospitals but with almost all of them destroyed this is no longer reliable. Thousands remain buried in the rubble of destroyed buildings and others are dying for want of medical attention or starvation. About the only agency able to deliver aid is UNWRA and they have been subject to considerable restrictions.

These figures have intensified calls on the (new) government to stop further aid going to Israel. Private Eye (No: 1627 p41) reports the closeness between the (previous) government and the Israel arms firms Elbit which has plants in the UK. They reveal undisclosed meetings between Professor Julia Sutcliffe, appointed by Kemi Badenoch, and the firm in an attempt to encourage them to invest £100m in the UK. The article ends by saying “The enthusiasm of the UK government departments for Elbit not only raises ethical issues – Elbit’s chief executive told investors it was “very much involved” in Gaza and was going to build weapons with “lessons learned from the war” – but also puts extra pressure on the UK not to limit arms exports to Israel of arms purchases from it”. The firm has previously been quoted as saying that drones built in the UK are not being used in Gaza.

Sources: The Lancet, al Jazeera, Private Eye

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

Arms to Israel


UK continues to issue arms licences to Israel

June 2024

The conflict in Gaza continues and 36,700 Palestinians have died and well over 80,000 have been injured many seriously. In the last four months alone, 12,300 children have been killed. The death toll inflicted on Gaza is out of all proportion to the atrocity committed by Hamas on October 7, 2023. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has found that there is a plausible case for Israel’s actions in Gaza amount to genocide. The response by the deputy foreign secretary Andrew Mitchell is to say that ‘the ICJ does not have jurisdiction [over Israel]’ (source, Government briefing, ‘UK Arms Exports to Israel,’ May 2024). Lord Cameron, the foreign secretary, is quoted as saying that Israel ‘is committed to complying with International Humanitarian Law’ and hence did not recommend that licences be suspended. Today, 12 June 2024, the UN has issued two reports accusing both Israel and Hamas of committing war crimes and crimes against humanity including the use of torture.

Meanwhile, over 100 licences for arms have been issued to Israel since October 7, 2023. Quite what is licensed is difficult to discern. Eight are ‘open’ licences and the statistics do not give the value of the exports. In 2022, the value of arms exports to Israel amounted to £42m. The UK is not a major supplier and the US sends around ten times as much including fighters and artillery.

The ICJ action raises serious questions for the government which may well be different after July 4th. Essentially, governments continuing to arm Israel risk being complicit in genocide which is a specific crime under the convention.

Amnesty, Human Rights Watch and a Palestinian human rights organisation al-Haq, have joined a legal action by Global Legal Action Network for a judicial review. The position of the Labour Party (who may be in government soon) is unclear but the party has had a difficult relationship with Israel and has had to weather many accusations of antisemitism which it is keen to dispel.

There are signs of movement and in March, over 100 MPs and a number of Peers signed an open letter to the government calling for and end of arm sales to Israel. Lord Cameron has been critical of them commenting on the blocking of aid and turning away entire lorries on spurious grounds such as shipments containing ‘dual use’ items (medical scissors).

The question is largely a moral one. Should we continue to supply arms to a state which is causing such damage, bombing entire blocks of apartments, almost destroyed all hospitals and killed so many men, women and children? By not allowing journalists entry, objective assessments of Israeli claims of targeting Hamas fighters is hard to verify and we simply have to rely on IDF statements.

However, the conflict shows no signs of coming to a satisfactory conclusion. A hard-line Israeli government – which has become even more so after the recent resignation of Benny Grantz – is determined to see the complete extinction of Hamas, an objective almost impossible to achieve. The violence in Gaza will be breeding the next generation Hamas fighters. Violence on the West Bank has grown markedly worse. A two-state solution looks impossible to achieve. The continued supply of weapons principally by the US but also by the UK, is simple adding fuel to the fire. More important perhaps than the actual supply of military materiel, is the implicit support that the the licences give to the Israeli government, a government which is disinclined to end the violence.

Sources: CAAT, Guardian, Amnesty,

2

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑