The British government has received advice from its own lawyers stating that Israel has breached international humanitarian law in Gaza but has failed to make it public, according to a leaked recording obtained by the Observer.“I remain convinced the government has completed its updated assessment on whether Israel is demonstrating a commitment to international humanitarian law, and that it has concluded that Israel is not demonstrating this commitment, which is the legal determination it has to make,” she said. “Transparency at this point is paramount, not least to uphold the international rules-based order.”The revelation will place Lord Cameron and prime minister Rishi Sunak under intense pressure because any such legal advice would mean the UK had to cease all arms sales to Israel without delay.Legal experts said that not to do so would risk putting the UK in breach of international law itself, as it would be seen as aiding and abetting war crimes by a country it was exporting arms to.
“They have not said it, they haven’t stopped arms exports. They have done a few very small sanctions on Israeli settlers and everyone internationally is agreed that settlers are illegal, that they shouldn’t be doing what they’re doing, and the ways in which they have continued and the money that’s been put in.”Kearns told the gathering that both she and Cameron believed strongly in Israel’s right to defend itself. “But the right to self-defence has a limit in law. It is not limitless,” she said, going on to suggest that Israel’s actions put its and the UK’s long-term security at risk.“Some of the ways in which Israel is prosecuting this is making their long-term security less certain. It is making our long-term security less certain. I’m amazed that our national threat level has not gone up. And it breaks my heart because I know it could be done differently.”
@ISIDEWITH2mos2MO
What are your thoughts on the balance between a country's right to defend itself and the limits imposed by international law?
@9L7WQR82mos2MO
Israel has no right to exist and no right to defend itself, but that is irrelevant because they are not defending themselves. They are actively comitting genocide.
I think a country should be able to defend itself with potent weapons, but weapons that are to dangerous (pose an imminent threat to humanity like microbots) should be banned
@DynamicT3rritorialGreen2mos2MO
Worth pointing out that this and and other governments receiving such advice and failing to act upon it (ᴴᵃˡˡᵒ ᵈᵉᵘᵗˢᶜʰᵉ ᶠʳᵉᵘⁿᵈᵉᵎ) by immediately halting arms transfers etc become not only culpable for those crimes—but also liable for them.
@MandateJellyfishRepublican2mos2MO
Hamas numbers and information is not worth the paper its written on.
@DynamicT3rritorialGreen2mos2MO
Hamas is bad. That doesn't excuse crimes against the civilian population.
@MandateJellyfishRepublican2mos2MO
I Agree to great extent that crimes against civilians are not excused but even here there are questions on how and why things happens. You cant make and celebrate an terror attack and not expect consequences. Weapons in hospitals, fighters in civilian clothing, not evacuate >
@ISIDEWITH2mos2MO
How do you feel about a government not publicly sharing legal advice that could impact international relations and humanitarian law?
@9L7VVP52mos2MO
It is important to stay informed about legal information.
I do not believe Israel is violating International law, however I agree with your assessment that if england thinks they are violating international law and continues to support them militarily they too are culpable, good point.
@YearningVettedVoteGreen2mos2MO
It's pretty indisputable.
@ISIDEWITH2mos2MO
@ISIDEWITH2mos2MO
@ISIDEWITH2mos2MO
The historical activity of users engaging with this general discussion.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...