• The UK government has suspended 30 out of 350 arms export licenses to Israel, citing legal concerns about their use in Gaza, drawing both praise and criticism
• Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu condemned the decision calling the move “shameful”, while Palestinian leaders and human rights groups have called for further action
The UK government has finally taken a step towards humanity by suspending a portion of its arms exports to Israel, a move that has sparked intense diplomatic fallout and widespread debate.
The decision, which affects 30 out of 350 arms export licenses, comes at a time of heightened tension in the Middle East, with Israel engaged in a brutal military campaign in Gaza. Netanyahu, facing mounting domestic pressure, particularly after the recent discovery of six dead hostages in Gaza, has been criticised for his handling of the situation. Protests have erupted across Israel, with many accusing Netanyahu of prioritising his political survival over the lives of the hostages. This is due to some political analysts suggesting that Netanyahu needs this war in order to unite Israel and stay in power. In response, Netanyahu has apologised to the Israeli public for failing to bring the hostages home alive.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu condemned the UK’s decision, labelling it as “shameful” and warning that it would only serve to embolden Hamas. On social media, Netanyahu insisted that Israel would prevail in its fight against what he described as a “genocidal terrorist organisation” with or without British arms. He portrayed the conflict as a critical battle not just for Israel’s security but for the safety of “western civilisation” in order to discourage other allies of Israel to follow in the footsteps of the UK.Claiming that this genocide is for the safety of “western civilisation”, seems like a fearmongering tactic given that Hamas is more concerned with the nation of Palestine rather than having global ambitions.
The UK government defended its decision, emphasising that the suspension does not equate to a full arms embargo nor a reduction in support for Israel’s “right to self-defence”. UK Defence Secretary John Healey reassured that Israel’s security would not be compromised, describing the move as a legally necessary measure rather than a political statement. Healey explained that the suspension was specifically targeted at equipment that could be used (and have been used) in Gaza in ways that violate international humanitarian law, such as parts for fighter jets, helicopters, and drones. This, despite being worded very cautiously, shows that even the strongest of Israels allies understand that there are severe violations of international humanitarian law being committed by Israel.
Foreign Secretary David Lammy added that the decision was driven by a legal review, which determined that continuing to export these arms could lead to their use in operations that might breach international law. Lammy emphasised that while the UK remains a staunch ally of Israel, it must also adhere to its legal obligations under both domestic and international lawwhich is a massive statement coming from the British government and a blow to the already ruined reputation of Israel in the eyes of the international community.
The suspension, however, has not been without controversy within the UK itself.
Amnesty International UK has criticized the government’s actions as inadequate, arguing that the suspension affects less than 10% of the UK’s arms exports to Israel and leaves numerous loopholes open.
Sacha Deshmukh, Amnesty’s Chief Executive, accused the government of “gesture politics,” stating that while the suspension acknowledges potential war crimes by Israel, it still leaves the UK vulnerable to being complicit in these actions.
The timing of the UK’s announcement has also raised eyebrows. The decision was made public on the same day that Israel held funerals for six hostages killed by Hamas in Gaza, a coincidence that has drawn criticism from various quarters. Former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson accused the government of “abandoning Israel,” and other political figures, including former shadow foreign secretary Emily Thornberry, described the timing as “unfortunate”.
The F-35 jets have been a focal point in the debate. Despite the suspension, components for these advanced fighter jets remain excluded from the ban. Healey defended this decision, explaining that the F-35 jets are used by over 20 countries and it would be “hard to distinguish” which components would go into Israeli jets. Critics, however, argue that these jets are among the most lethal weapons in Israel’s arsenal and their continued supply undermines the suspension’s effectiveness.
The Palestinian leadership has welcomed the UK’s decision. Husam Zomlot, the Palestinian ambassador to the UK, praised the suspension as an “important first step” towards meeting the UK’s legal obligations. Zomlot emphasised that the UK should continue working towards a full arms embargo on Israel to prevent further escalation of violence and to hold Israel accountable for its actions in Gaza.
The UK’s suspension of arms sales, therefore, comes at a critical juncture. It reflects the growing unease among Western governments about the humanitarian toll of Israel’s military actions in Gaza. The move is likely to have far-reaching implications for UK-Israel relations, as well as for the broader international community’s approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
As the situation continues to evolve, the UK’s decision may set a precedent for other countries grappling with similar dilemmas. Whether this suspension will lead to a more comprehensive arms embargo or serve as a catalyst for renewed diplomatic efforts to end the conflict remains to be seen.
