Sources say Richard Hermer, the attorney general, has told Foreign Office officials he will not approve a decision to ban some weapons sales until they can say for sure which could be used to break international humanitarian law.
David Lammy has launched a review into whether the UK should continue selling weapons to Israel as the country continues its assault on Gaza. The foreign secretary has talked about banning the sale of “offensive” weapons but allowing arms manufacturers to keep supplying “defensive” ones, saying that such a move would enable Israel to defend itself.
Last week a group of human rights lawyers submitted a case to the high court accusing the government of acting irrationally by refusing to ban arms sales. As part of their claim they submitted more than 100 pages of witness testimony containing allegations that Palestinians had been tortured, left untreated in hospital and were unable to escape heavy bombardment.
…until they can say for sure which could be used to break international humanitarian law.
Any that can be used intimidate, harm, torture, or kill people surely.
What a weird justification to require. Maybe he’s trying to force them to be precise about the classification of “offensive” and “defensive” weapons.
They are trying to argue semantics to keep sending weapons to israel. They know they are violating international law, but by tacking on these BS investigations they can keep stalling and delivering weapons to israel.
Israel perpetrating war crimes in plain sight in Gaza, says ex-UK diplomat
“Anybody who has a kind of basic understanding of these things can see that there are war crimes being committed, not once, not twice, not a few times, but quite flagrantly and openly and regularly.”
Smith’s exit became public over the weekend after a resignation email was leaked in which he accused senior members of the Israeli government of “open genocidal intent”. In a message that was sent to hundreds of officials and advisers, Smith said there was “no justification for the UK’s continued arms sales to Israel, yet somehow it continues”.
Smith, who says he previously led a government assessment of the legality of arms sales to different countries, said on Monday he had raised his concerns with the foreign secretary and at “pretty much every level of the organisation”. Asked what response he had been given, he replied: “I resigned because of this issue, so you can put the pieces together. But suffice to say that any response was not satisfactory.”
That’s certainly an interpretation if you wish to assign malicious intent. Thing is, this attorney general is a non-political appointee. The reason to appoint him was his objectiveness.
Mr Smith who just quit certainly thinks there is no possible explanation than malicious intent. And that objectiveness has been disposed of by the Starmer administration.
