Why do you think David Cameron lied over legal concerns about arms sales to Israel?
David Cameron: he has talked himself into a corner over arms sales to Israel. Would it have been better for him to have a rule that, if such a transaction could in any way possibly break International Humanitarian Law, it should not be approved?
The UK’s Foreign Secretary, David (Lord!) Cameron, seems to be trying to confuse us about his decision to allow arms sales to Israel after the Foreign Office raised concerns about the legality of the transations.
According to a government document filed in the High Court, defending against a challenge by legal and human rights groups that are trying to stop the UK selling arms to Israel for use in Gaza, said the Foreign, Commonwealth, and Development Office unit that assessed Israel’s commitment and capability to comply with international humanitarian law (IHL) raised concerns to Cameron in multiple reports between November 10 and December 8 about Israel’s compliance with the law.
The unit appeared satisfied on some counts, such as Israeli officials’ insistence that the Israeli military had incorporated Internation Humanitarian Law “into all aspects of military operations”.
But other points, including a lack of Israeli response about “the reasons for restricting the quantity of supplies of food, water, and medical supplies”, raised concerns.
The unit said it was possible that this was due to disagreement about what the law requires, rather than an intentional disregard of the law.
Cameron, on the other hand, told the parliamentary Foreign Affairs Committee that he could not “recall every bit of paper” put in front of him and it was not his job to make a “legal adjudication” when asked if government lawyers had advised him that Israel had breached the law.
But the document shows that the final decision of whether Israel was committed to complying with the law was left to Cameron.
So the decision on whether to sell Israel these arms, for use in a conflict that potentially breached International Humanitarian Law, was left to Cameron – and he went ahead with the sale.
Here’s a thought:
Wouldn’t it be better to have a rule that, if there is any doubt about the legality of such a transaction, it should be automatically disallowed – on a “better safe than sorry” basis?
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical
3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com
5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/
6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical
7) Feel free to comment!
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
Cruel Britannia is available
in either print or eBook format here:
The Livingstone Presumption is available
in either print or eBook format here:
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
Cameron acts in the same way as his fellow fascist tories because laws don’t apply to them. Profits and yet more profits is their sole obsession and why would Cameron bother to read pieces of paper when he decided selling arms to that terrorist fascist state Israel is okay because his buddies will earn huge profits!