UK civil servants oppose government stance on Israel, urged to resign

In the United Kingdom, over 300 personnel from the Foreign Office expressed their dissent regarding the government's stance on the Gaza conflict. On May 16, 2023, these civil servants, comprising both senior and junior members stationed in London and various embassies around the world, sent a letter to Foreign Secretary David Lammy. The letter criticized the UK’s arms sales to Israel, arguing that such support violates international law and called for a suspension of the free trade agreement between the two nations. The protest letter highlighted concerns that humanitarian aid was being obstructed from reaching the people of Gaza, with some members alleging that the Israeli government allowed Hamas to commandeer the aid for profit. In response to the civil servants' letter, prominent officials in the Foreign Office conveyed that the government has maintained that it rigorously applies international law within the context of the war. They stated that if employees profoundly disagree with government policies, they should consider resigning from their positions, framing it as an honorable decision. This incident is not isolated, as it marks the fourth letter of protest sent by Foreign Office staff since hostilities escalated following the Hamas-led attack on October 7, 2023, which resulted in numerous casualties and widespread condemnation. The Labour-led government has straddled a complex position, displaying both support and simultaneous condemnation of Israel's actions throughout its tenure since taking power in July. In recent months, the government has taken steps to suspend discussions on a free trade deal while restricting 29 arms licenses to convey its dissatisfaction with Israel’s conduct during the Gaza conflict. However, exceptions were made for specific military supplies that the government claimed could not be halted due to NATO obligations, indicating a complicated relationship. While the UK government has acknowledged that Israel is at risk of breaching international law, it maintains that determinations on legality are best left to international courts, a lengthy process that could extend for years. The lack of direct accountability via the UK underscores ongoing debates regarding government policies on foreign arms sales and the legal implications of international support for countries engaged in conflict. The civil servants’ protest and the subsequent official response underscore the tensions present within the UK government regarding external military support and its moral implications, particularly as the humanitarian situation in Gaza continues to escalate. It raises crucial questions about the ethical responsibilities of governments worldwide when aligning their foreign policies with military support amidst international law considerations.