Andy Burnham has called for Israel to be held accountable for war crimes in Gaza and urged for sanctions and restrictions on weapons, criticizing the delay of Keir’s government.
Policy Shifts and Domestic Pressure on Arms Exports
The debate over UK arms sales to Israel has intensified as international bodies and domestic critics raise concerns regarding the conduct of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). While the UK government maintains that its arms export licensing criteria are among the most robust in the world, the Department for Business and Trade has faced mounting scrutiny.
In September 2024, the UK government announced the suspension of 30 out of 350 existing arms export licenses to Israel. According to Foreign Secretary David Lammy, the decision followed a review that identified a "clear risk" that certain items could be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of international humanitarian law. However, critics, including various human rights organizations and political figures like Burnham, argue that the partial suspension does not go far enough. They advocate for a total embargo, citing the scale of civilian casualties and the destruction of infrastructure in Gaza.
International Legal Context and Accountability
Burnham’s call for accountability reflects a broader discourse concerning the role of international courts in the Gaza conflict. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is currently hearing a case brought by South Africa alleging that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza—a charge Israel has categorically rejected, asserting its right to self-defense under international law.
The UK government has historically maintained that it is not the role of the British executive to determine whether war crimes have been committed, deferring such legal determinations to international judicial bodies. Despite this, the pressure to adopt a more restrictive stance on military exports remains a significant point of contention within the Labour Party. Supporters of a total ban emphasize that the UK’s continued supply of components for fighter jets, despite the partial suspension, undermines the government’s stated commitment to international law.
Comparing UK and Global Export Stances
The UK’s approach to arms licensing differs from several other European nations. While the United States continues to be the primary provider of military aid to Israel, other countries have taken varying positions:
| Country | Stance on Arms Exports to Israel |
|---|---|
| United Kingdom | Suspended 30 of 350 licenses; maintains exceptions for F-35 components. |
| Germany | Significantly reduced export approvals throughout 2024 amid legal challenges. |
| Netherlands | Halted export of F-35 parts following a court order citing risk of international law violations. |
| United States | Continues the majority of military aid, citing security obligations. |
Future Implications for the Labour Government
For Prime Minister Starmer, the challenge lies in balancing traditional security alliances with the demands of a party base increasingly vocal about the situation in the Middle East. Burnham’s intervention suggests that the government will continue to face internal friction unless it provides greater transparency regarding the legal assessments underpinning its remaining export licenses. As the conflict continues, the intersection of domestic political pressure and international legal obligations is expected to remain a defining feature of the UK’s foreign policy landscape.