PHILADELPHIA, Pennsylvania — Impeccable timing for the Brits.
On Sunday the world learns that six Israeli hostages are shot to death by Hamas monsters inside one of their tunnels. The very next day, the newly named British foreign secretary, David Lammy, announces that a fraction of arms shipments to Israel will be reduced for fear that Israel might employ the equipment to violate international law.
Maybe Lammy and friends fear that a vengeful Israeli government will take out its anger on more Palestinians in Gaza. Israel was chastised when it dropped 2000-pound bombs on Gaza though it could have accomplished its mission with 500-pound bombs.
Jewish leaders denounced Lammy’s decision while posters on Facebook pages accused the Labour-run Parliament of betraying Israel at a critical moment. Critics of Israel would probably claim that Britain’s move is long overdue and America should follow suit.
The Labour Party’s action brings to the forefront other significant issues surrounding arms for Israel. Questioning weapons for Israel is fair game. However, I do not hear anyone telling Iran to cease its endless supply of weapons to its proxies close to Israel’s borders – like Hamas, Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, and the Houthis in Yemen.
It is typical hypocrisy of Israel-bashers to demand restraints on Israeli weapons when they ignore Iran’s steady supply of arms to its allies. Granted, there is room for legitimate concern over Israel’s use of weapons shipments from the West. Yet so long as Iran can provide whatever weapons it wants for its proxies, Israel should be able to use all weapons that its allies can supply.
If we must debate civilian deaths, remember that Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis were created to kill innocent people, mostly Jews but also anyone who is not Muslim. They deploy their weapons to eliminate Israel. In fact, Israel deploys its weapons to intercept arms that are transported to terrorist organizations.
Silence over this is the same kind of quiet that benefits Hamas when it attacks Israel and forces its own people to serve as human shields.
We should care about Gazan civilians whose lives are endangered, but as this author has said before, how can we take seriously critics whose sympathies are one-sided?
Critics of Israel assume that the billions of dollars America spends on weapons would be better diverted to social needs here. Chicago teachers who marched at the Democratic National Convention in August argued in part that these funds could be used for their students.
We are not dealing with a rob-Peter-to-pay-Paul scenario. We can pay Peter and pay Paul simultaneously. It is just that one political party wants to enact policies to help vulnerable Americans and the other party does not. Republicans in Congress consistently assert power to block Democratic legislation and in fact seek policies that will cut benefits for Americans.
Israel fares well because both parties support the Jewish state.
Republicans control the House of Representatives, allowing them to introduce legislation, and the GOP has de facto control of the Senate because of the filibuster, which requires 60 votes to authorize majority votes on bills. Democrats control the Senate numerically, but at least two Democratic or independent senators refuse to defang the filibuster.
What Britain did on our Labor Day was to suspend 30 of its 350 arms export licenses with Israel the day after we learned that six hostages had been shot dead. Many licenses approved after Hamas massacred 1,200 Israelis on Oct. 7 and kidnapped 250 more of them were for items listed for “commercial use” or non-lethal items such as body armor, military helmets or all-wheel drive vehicles with ballistic protection.
Reuters reports the items suspended will be components for military aircraft such as fighter jets, helicopters and drones. Parts for F-35 fighters will be exempted, except going directly to Israel, as the government asserted that it could not suspend these without prejudicing the jets’ full global program.
The British do not give arms directly to Israel but instead assigns licenses for companies to sell weapons, according to Reuters.
Political considerations are suspected even though Labour recaptured control of Parliament in a landslide in July. The party nonetheless sustained setbacks in areas with large Muslim populations, which propelled some Labour members to pressure Prime Minister Keir Starmer to be firmer with Israel. In addition, Labour’s recent history is marked by a sweeping wave of antisemitism.
Lammy explained, “The assessment I have received leaves me unable to conclude anything other than that for certain UK arms exports to Israel, there does exist a clear risk that they might be used to commit or facilitate a serious violation of international humanitarian law.”
His concern is understandable, given the thousands of civilian deaths in Gaza which occurred under Israeli attacks during the past 11 months. As long as the world remains silent over Iran’s arm supplies to terrorists, why should Israel’s supporters care?
*
Bruce S. Ticker is a Philadelphia-based columnist.
The data on civilian casualties in Gaza used by the international community — including the United Nations and Britain — are provided by the Hamas-run government and have been proven to be deliberately inflated to maximize global sympathy.