Over the weekend, the 'Daily Mail' broke the story that the British government had implemented a “secret arms boycott” of Israel by freezing weapons export licenses, despite purporting to delay its decision on instituting an embargo against Israel. Even after civil servants froze licenses to Israel, Foreign Secretary David Lammy continued to claim that no decision would be made on weapons exports before “careful assessments of the law” and the conclusion of a “comprehensive review” that he requested.
Quite apart from the damage to the credibility of the British Government, revealed to be speaking from both sides of its mouth, the revelations also deal a substantial blow to the UK’s authority on legal matters.
The previous government maintained arms exports to Israel on the basis of its careful and continuous legal assessments of Israel’s commitment to compliance with international humanitarian law. While the foreign and trade ministers declined to publish the legal advice, in accordance with longstanding convention, the conclusions they drew from it were publicized. Those conclusions were also consistent with the public position of the United States and repeated assurances to the press by State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller that the US had not found violations of international humanitarian law and that their view was “informed by [their] ongoing assessments.”
It has quickly become apparent that under the present UK government, the facts and the legal analysis are far less important in their formulation of policy towards Israel. In seeking to win back extreme voters whom Labour lost to rival parties, the easy fix is to take an aggressive stance towards Israel and pursue policies which many attribute to the party’s troubled history of antisemitism. The law be damned, much to the glee of Iran, Hamas, and Hezbollah.
We have seen this pattern in every aspect of the Labour government’s approach towards Israel since Sir Kier Starmer took up residence in Downing Street, from the re-funding of UNRWA, despite its complicity in terrorism, to the withdrawal of the UK’s representations to the International Criminal Court (ICC) on jurisdiction, despite foreign office lawyers seeking to advance those submissions in the British national interest. Politics have prevailed over the promises Starmer made before his victory, which included combatting antisemitism, discrimination, and inequality and supporting a secure Israel.
To the extent that the UK will seek to ground its further abandonment of Israel upon recent dictates of international legal institutions, it is important that these lawfare initiatives be robustly called out. These include a recent non-binding Advisory Opinion from the International Court of Justice based upon abject falsehoods, manipulation of international law, and a misapplication of history and geography that sought to wipe Israel off the map. Equally troubling are the false allegations in every sentence of the ICC Prosecutor’s public summary of his application for arrest warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant, including the canard of starvation in Gaza, which has been resoundingly debunked in a new report by UK Lawyers for Israel.
Israel stands at the forefront of combatting the Iran-led ‘Axis of Resistance,’ which is driven by hatred of the West, including the United Kingdom and its democratic ideals. We must not forget that citizens of the UK were among those murdered and kidnapped by Hamas terrorists during the October 7 massacre.
The United Kingdom has fought against the Houthis’ attacks on international shipping and helped defend Israel from Iran’s missile and drone attacks in mid-April. It should recognize the danger posed by arms embargo rhetoric and the encouragement this gives to the UK and Israel’s common enemies.
If the UK continues down this path, then one of the past foremost champions of international law will join those states that are seeking its undoing, all in pursuit of an inexplicable agenda against the Middle East’s only beacon of democracy and liberalism. While Israel will survive this current onslaught, the same may not be the case either for the UK’s standing and leadership on the world stage or the credibility of the international legal system.
Natasha Hausdorff is a barrister in London and Legal Director of UK Lawyers for Israel Charitable Trust (UKLFI Charitable Trust).
This op-ed is published in partnership with a coalition of organizations that fight antisemitism across the world. Read the previous article by Dr. Anan Wahabi.