In May 2008 I wrote to my local MP, who happens to be Nick Clegg the leader of the Liberal Democrats, asking him to put pressure on the government to halt its sales of military equipment to Israel. I also asked him to make this part of his own party’s policies. I cited some of the numerous condemnations of the Israeli government’s actions against the Palestinians and against Gaza in particular. A drawn out correspondence has followed between myself and David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, with Mr Clegg passing letters between us. Apart from an initial comment saying "we believe that the Government must initiate a wholesale review of the arms trade between the United Kingdom and Israel", Mr Clegg did not engage in the exchange.

Mr Miliband attempts to justify the ongoing sale of military equipment to Israel by saying that "we do not believe the current situation in the region would be improved by imposing an arms embargo on Israel", and by saying that all export licence applications are individually assessed and that this includes taking into account the fact that Israel has breached its assurance that UK originated equipment would not be used in the Occupied Territories.

Mr Miliband also assures me that they follow the Consolidated EU and National Arms Export Licensing Criteria [1]. Of these 8 criteria I would reckon Israel fails at least 4:

  • No. 2: … if there is a clear risk that the proposed export might be used for internal repression …

  • No. 3: … which would provoke or prolong armed conflicts or aggravate tensions or conflicts in the country of final destination.

  • No. 4: … the existence or likelihood of armed conflict between the recipient and another country; a claim against the territory of a neighbouring country which the recipient has in the past tried or threatened to pursue by means of force; whether the equipment would be likely to be used other than for the legitimate national security and defence of the recipient; the need not to affect adversely regional stability in any significant way …

  • No. 6: … its compliance with its international commitments, in particular on the non-use of force, including under international humanitarian law applicable to international and non-international conflicts; its commitment to non-proliferation and other areas of arms control and disarmament …

Apparently the UK government doesn’t think that Israel fails these criteria, despite the Israeli governments armed occupation of the Occupied Territories; its repression of the Palestinian people; it’s attacks upon Lebanon and others; its occupation of the Golan Heights and so on. You can see some of the equipment the UK government allows to be sold to Israel in its annual reports [2]. In 2008 255 new licences were granted, worth nearly £31 million, 15 were refused and 1 revoked. Items licensed include components for assault rifles, components for combat aircraft, components for semi-automatic pistols, equipment for the production of unmanned air vehicles and many more. The 2009 report is not yet available, but the quarterly reports for the first half of the year indicate less new licences. Licences are usually valid for 2 to 3 years.

How is it that the UK government’s licence granting process approves such licences to Israel, given the above criteria? How does this process work? Can it be challenged?

After repeated enquiries on this front it seems that records of licensing decisions are stored electronically, but are not all available to the public. I was informed that parts of them can be viewed via a searchable database [3], but I could glean no more from this than was available in the government reports. Licensing decisions are reviewed by the Committee on Arms Export Controls, a Parliamentary Select Committee. Select Committees are apparently selected by the Select Committee of Selection, no really I’m not making this up. They too cannot publish information without the government’s permission. Reading their latest report [4] it seems that this committee is satisfied with the government’s assurances on this issue.

So apparently we have a system whereby the UK Government can approve export licences for military products, apparently in defiance of export control criteria. It is not possible for a member of the public to see how they justify this unless they choose to tell you and a committee of MP’s set up to review these decisions doesn’t seem to be challenging them.

You can add this to your list of reasons to vote for none of the biggest political parties next election. I recommend the following: look at the manifestos of all the parties standing in your region and vote for the one that you agree with most; don’t vote for the main parties, their track records speak for themselves on this and any number of other issues.

Bibliography

1: Consolidated EU and National Arms Export Licensing Criteria, http://www.fco.gov.uk/resources/en/pdf/3849543/eu-arms-export

2: Stategic Export Controls, http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/about-us/publications-and-documents/publications1/annual-reports/export-controls1

3: Strategic Export Controls: Reports and Statistics, https://www.exportcontroldb.berr.gov.uk/eng/fox/sdb/SDBHOME

4: Scrutiny of Arms Export Controls, http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmquad/178/178.pdf

 

Just an ordinary man who can't stay silent in the face of the lies and injustices we swim in.  What I write and the web site I maintain are part of my attempt at

"loosing the chains of injustice and untying the cords of the yoke, setting the oppressed free and breaking every yoke",

which is part of

"loving your neighbour as yourself".

 

My web page (a work in progress):

www.us-uk-interventions.org

My other blog:

world-newsreal.blogspot.com


ZNetwork is funded solely through the generosity of its readers.

Donate
Donate
Leave A Reply

Subscribe

All the latest from Z, directly to your inbox.

Institute for Social and Cultural Communications, Inc. is a 501(c)3 non-profit.

Our EIN# is #22-2959506. Your donation is tax-deductible to the extent allowable by law.

We do not accept funding from advertising or corporate sponsors.  We rely on donors like you to do our work.

ZNetwork: Left News, Analysis, Vision & Strategy

Subscribe

All the latest from Z, directly to your inbox.

THE WIND CRIES FREEDOM

The Wind Cries Freedom, the new book from Z co-founder Michael Albert, is a sweeping oral history of a future American revolution.

Through thirty interconnected chapters, it draws out the strategies, failures, turning points, and hard-won wisdom of a movement that called itself the Revolutionary Participatory Society. These are not the polished memoirs of politicians: they are the unfiltered accounts of people who organized in neighborhoods, hospitals, universities, stadiums, courthouses, and places of worship, and kept a shared vision alive through cynicism and exhaustion.

The result is speculative political fiction that reads like history: messy, human, and quietly hopeful in the way that only real experience and long thought can produce.

Get your copy and peruse more features on the book’s website below.

“Read it, argue with it, but don’t look away. The future it recalls is one we must still fight to deserve.”

Yanis Varoufakis

“The most unusual and intriguing combination of prophecy, manifesto, and movement building manual that I have ever encountered.”

Bill Fletcher Junior

“This work fills a huge gap in our social movement literature.”

Cynthia Peters

You've just read your article on Z this month.

DOES Z'S SURVIVAL MATTER?

You keep coming back for a reason: serious political analysis, movement reporting, and debate beyond the priorities of corporate media. Today, Z is in a precarious financial position. If Z is part of how you understand the world, help keep it going. The readers who give monthly are the reason this work survives between fundraisers.

Z is in a precarious financial position. If it’s part of how you understand the world, help keep it going.

Number of donors707
Our goal1,000

Sustainers at $9/month or more receive the digital Z Magazine.

Already a sustainer? Click here and we won’t ask again. Thank you!

Your reading count is stored only in your browser and is never sent to us.

Sound is muted by default.  Tap 🔊 for the full experience

CRITICAL ACTION

Critical Action is a longtime friend of Z and a music and storytelling project grounded in liberation, solidarity, and resistance to authoritarian power. Through music, narrative, and multimedia, the project engages the same political realities and movement traditions that guide and motivate Z’s work.

If this project resonates with you, you can learn more about it and find ways to support the work using the link below.

Z is in the most precarious financial position in its history.

Z is a place to think beyond the limits of the present.

For decades, Z has brought together political analysis, movement reporting, debate, and visions of a different future from writers and activists around the world. That work is more than journalism. It is movement infrastructure: movements need places to develop ideas, test arguments, learn from experience, and imagine what comes next.

In the first two days of this fundraiser, 19 donors and 8 new monthly sustainers stepped up. Help us reach 1,000 donors who keep Z independent, for everyone.

For decades, Z has published the analysis, debate, and visions movements need, free of paywalls, ads, and billionaire owners. If that work should continue, Z needs your support now.

Number of donors707
Our goal1,000

Sustainers at $9/month or more receive the digital Z Magazine.

Subscribe

Join the Z Community – receive event invites, announcements, a Weekly Digest, and opportunities to engage.

Exit mobile version