Cameron advised on UK complicity in Gaza law breach
- David Cameron was advised by Foreign Office officials about the risk of UK complicity in breaches of international humanitarian law in Gaza.
- The UK government delayed action for ten months before suspending 30 arms export licenses, raising concerns about internal coherence within the Foreign Office.
- The Israeli government condemned the UK’s decision, framing it as a betrayal, while the UK faced legal challenges regarding the legality of its arms sales.
David Cameron, the former foreign secretary, received advice indicating that the UK risked complicity in breaches of international humanitarian law in Gaza. This advice was provided by Foreign Office officials and highlighted the deteriorating humanitarian situation. Despite this, the UK government took ten months to act, only suspending 30 out of 350 arms export licenses after a government memorandum was published. The delay raised questions about the internal handling of arms sales and the coherence of the Foreign Office's approach to humanitarian and legal issues. The Israeli government, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, reacted strongly to the UK’s decision, framing it as a betrayal and emphasizing Israel's determination to combat Hamas. Netanyahu's comments came shortly after Hamas killed six Israeli hostages, indicating the sensitive timing of the UK’s announcement. The Israeli leadership expressed disappointment, but did not foresee immediate reprisals against the UK. In the UK, the decision to suspend arms sales was met with mixed reactions. While some, including the Jordanian foreign minister, praised the move, others criticized the exclusion of British components for the F-35 fighter jet from the ban. This loophole was seen as a way to maintain relations with the US while addressing humanitarian concerns. The ongoing legal challenges regarding the arms sales ban highlight the complexities of the UK’s foreign policy decisions. Campaigners argue that the UK has acted unlawfully by not fully assessing the legality of military actions in Gaza and the West Bank, raising further questions about the ethical implications of arms exports in conflict zones.