I continue to struggle with the actions of the Labour government.
Yesterday we learned that it has banned some sales of arms Israel, but not the majority of them. Around ninety per cent of all export licences remain in place.
This is because Labour cannot, apparently, decide whether Israel is acting in breach of its international humanitarian legal obligations.
David Lammy did, apparently, commission a review on this issue on the day he became Foreign Secretary. So far it would appear that the review is generally inconclusive even though it is clear the United Nations and international courts are certain that Israel is in breach of such conditions.
I cannot help but compare what is happening with what happened in 1997 when Robin Cook became Tony Blair's Foreign Secretary. He declared at the time that he would lead an ethical foreign policy, and to his credit, that is what he tried to do before eventually resigning, on a point of principle, over the invasion of Iraq.
I am not, for a moment, claiming Robin Cook set a standard by which all other should be judged. What I am saying is that he explicitly brought ethics into his decision-making. So far, David Lammy appears to be as far removed from this position as it is possible to be, for two reasons. The first is that I cannot identify his ethics. The second is that I cannot identify his decision-making.
We are, as a consequence, still a country supporting the supply of arms to a government that is commanding its armed forces to undertake genocide. I can only presume that Starmer, Lammy and others within Labour can reconcile themselves to this because of their explicitly stated Zionist beliefs.
My suspicion is that this will, however, very rapidly become an untenable political position with those supporting it likely to be condemned as roundly as Tony Blair, Jack Straw, and others were over Iraq.
If that were to happen, it would be justified. Those who permit the export of arms to a state undertaking genocide have to, in my opinion, accept responsibility for their actions, the consequences of which are quite hideous.
How in that situation Labour thinks its position justifiable is exceptionally hard to work out. If their version of ethical foreign policy is fence-sitting of this sort the public will not accept it for long.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Be careful Richard. This could happen to you!
https://www.facebook.com/730085809/posts/pfbid0Z8DVtmccRjbbpsjCsgFXoAwZZWTaCqCrwUBGLBHE34X76fnjqpKJXsaDZy2pnYWsl/?
Maybe
See also
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/sarah-wilkinsons-arrest-online-posts-worrying-sign-britains-deepening-authoritarianism
Until fairly recently I would have thought this suggestion fanciful, but now I fear it is a real possibility.
I suggest that the actions of the State of Israel are not only damaging its long term future but that of the Jewish people who irrespective of their views on the State of Israel will also face the consequences of its actions.
What I dont understand though is why Labour has allowed itself to be so thoroughly infiltrated by The Zionists and at the same time so lacking in any moral judgement that it cannot condemn the actions of both sides in this conflict.
It’s not just the Labour party, all three major parties have been infiltrated by the Israeli lobby.
Back in 2009 the journalist Peter Oborne did a C4 Dispatches program that asked the same question you ask of the Tory party. It’s still available on Youtube, but it has largely been ignored. More recently the former MP Alan Duncan tried to expose the influence the Lobby had on the Tory party, not surprisingly using the usual tactics of smear, innuendo and intimidation by lawfare, unkown forces tried to discredit him. Not to be cowed he fought back and was eventually cleared of the charges of antisemitism. This has all been ignored by the mainstream mafia.
https://youtu.be/XVV3ZfzAnls
I won’t go into what happened after 2015 when the Labour membership democratically elected Jeremy Corbyn as leader, it’s all been documented by two Al Jazeera series, The Lobby and The Labour Files. You can watch them and question if what occurred has been exaggerated, but I can tell you from my own experience as an active Labour member during this period, they are not. The content of these two series have also been supported by a leaked report made during Corbyn’s leadership. It’s shocking, exposing Labour staffers attitude to Corbyn and the left of the party and that they most probably sabotaged the 2017 general election. The leaked report was subsequently investigated at Starmer’s request by the eminent KC Martin Forde who was asked to look into who leaked the report. Martin Forde KC’s report has been buried. It does not make for good reading.
It’s a democratic scandal that the MSM have ignored this period.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/leaked-labour-report-should-have-been-explosive-scandal/
What’s happening at the ICC? The Judges were looking at issuing arrest warrants against the culpable some time ago but that has gone quiet over the summer.
There will be no possibility of fence-sitting if, and when, they are issued. There will be no ambiguity at that point to exploit; they will be clearly complicit in genocide and, very possibly, subject to arrest themselves.
I don’t understand what the removal of licences in 10% of arms sales is supposed to achieve and Lammy won’t explain it.
I wish they would get on with this
A C Bruce
“There will be no possibility of fence-sitting if, and when, they are issued. There will be no ambiguity at that point to exploit; they will be clearly complicit in genocide and, very possibly, subject to arrest themselves. ”
The issue of arrest warrants has absolutely no effect on whether those to be arrested have committed genocide, any more than arresting someone in the UK for murder is proof they have committed murder.
The very strong likelihood that those governments supporting Israel’s (allegedly) genocidal behaviour by selling arms are complicit in genocide is true, whatever the state of the Hamas/Israel arrest warrants. I look forward to seeing the warrants issued for Biden, Sunak and Starmer in the very near future.
Richard said:
“How in that situation Labour thinks its position justifiable is exceptionally hard to work out.”
In characteristic fashion Richard is examining the issue ‘in the round’ and from the perspective of a human being with good intentions and clear ethical values.
May I be as bold as to suggest that this is not the standard to which the Westminster Regime is accustomed to being held to account?
I suggest that it if one abandons that Human and Ethical perspective then it becomes trivially easy to work out why they have taken this position.
They have calculated that what they have announced is the minimum possible change they could get away with and plausibly claim to have addressed the issue that their inaction leaves them individually and collectively vulnerable to legal action.
The (international) legal position is as black-and-white clear as these things can ever be and has been written about extensively elsewhere so I will not rehash that.
This is a cynical move to do the least possible and avoid the very real threat of negative consequences _for_them_.
I don’t think you have to be a cynical observer to see that, although perhaps ongoing exposure to the cynical actions of the powerful will engender increasing cynicism in the observer!
Illegitimi non carborundum Richard. 😉
Although the meagre restriction of some arms sales to Israel is a small step in the right direction, the whole issue is treated by Labour with extreme caution as they are dominated by pro-zionist Labour Friends of Israel members. David Lammy ‘regrets’ having been forced to acknowledge the genocidal attacks on Gaza ‘may’ be breaking international law and now the West Bank but refuses to stop the supply of parts for the deadly F 35 jets which have been pounding Palestine for months. Anyone seeing the utter destruction in Gaza will know that international law has been broken and you dont have to have a Phd in international law to see the blindingly obvious.
Agreed
Well said, Richard. I fully agree with you.
I tried to send this link to a friend in Facebook but I have been stopped!
Noted….
Lammy and much of the front bench are supporters of Labour Friends of Israel (LFI); some are or have been officers of this Israel lobby group (eg Reeves, Reynolds). LFI does not disclose its funders.
Yesterday, LFI issued a statement opposing restrictions on arms sales to Israel. This puts LFI’s supporters such as Lammy and Reynolds in the conflict of lobbying against themselves.
As Owen Jones says, it is too little, too late.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=C37ckSzn2XM
And the result of this small move away from facilitating genocide is that Netanyahu lambasts the Labour government, saying, “Instead of standing with Israel, a fellow democracy defending itself against barbarism, Britain’s misguided decision will only embolden Hamas.”
in making his statement about arms, Lammy reiterated that he is a Friend of Israel.
It appears to be a rather one-sided friendship.
My view is that anyone who had any sense would see that that Palestine was human tragedy wrapped up in a Gordian knot of lies.
Any government – and that includes ours – needs to keep away from being associated with enabling this war.
Advocating for peace, helping the victims – of both sides if necessary, sure – but this is not something we should seen to be taking sides on.
Oh, for a truly independent and ethical British foreign policy……………the company we keep will only contribute to the collateral damage to come.
And it will be ordinary, innocent people who will pay – not those leaders of ours who consort with genocide.
Regarding the suspension of 8% of UK arms export licences to Israel. Ex-Ambassador Craig Murray tweeted “Lammy and Starmer’s hand forced by threatened resignation of five FCDO Legal Advisers”.
He tweets that the BBC know this but won’t report it.
What goes around?
The Draft Declaration on Rights and Duties of States with commentaries, comprises a
Text adopted by the International Law Commission at its first session, in 1949, and
submitted to the General Assembly of the UN. – “During the preparation of the foregoing draft Declaration, the Commission took into account certain guiding considerations. It was felt that the draft Declaration should be in harmony with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations: that it should be applicable only to sovereign States; that it should envisage all the sovereign States of the world and not only the Members of the United Nations; and that it should embrace certain basic rights and duties of States.”
It comprises 14 Articles, all of them breached by “Israel”, since it’s inception as a “state” by acts of genocide against the incumbent people of Palestine.