United Kingdom: Nations should stop to sell arms to Israel
The United Kingdom should stop supplying weapons to Israel. It is compulsory after the ICJ ruling. Every country should respect the UN’s advisory opinion. As the International Court of Justice recently announced that Israel illegally occupied the Palestine territory that also violates the international laws.
According to the court, the UN member states also don’t permit it to help the occupation. After all of this announcement the UK is under scrutiny of not obeying the court decision. This nation is still supplying arms to Israel, especially during its military actions in Gaza. They gave weapons to Israel during the period of October 7 attack that resulted in the deaths of many people living in Palestine. Prof Philippe Sands KC, who represented Palestine at the ICJ pointed out that the UK should also follow the ICJ rule. It is also the responsibility of this nation to follow international laws by not selling arms to Israel. Stopping this action also promotes peace and stability.
According to Sands, “ The most immediate issue is the obligation in the advisory opinion of the states, which includes the United Kingdom, not to aid or assist in the maintenance of the current situation in the occupied territories of the West Bank, including [East] Jerusalem.”
It is the legal responsibility of every nation to stop sellings harmful materials and weapons to Israel. This is because these equipment could help them to continue the war and occupy the Palestinian territories.
David Lammy, the foreign secretary, has directed officials to conduct a thorough and comprehensive review of whether Israel is adhering to international humanitarian law.
He also allowed the ban on arms sales to Israel if the review explored serious concerns. And this action is of priority for the United Kingdom as it breaks international laws. This strict action only wants Israel to stop illegally occupying the Palestinian territories.
Although this ruling by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) is an advisory opinion and not directly enforceable on the UK or other individual countries, it is still regarded as an important and authoritative legal statement. The United nation and its specific agencies also expected that every nation should follow this guidance seriously.
Sand basically is the law Professor at the university College London and Harvard. According to him, recent court rulings affect the legality of importing goods from Israeli settlements. He emphasized that weapons from these occupied regions might be banned if they support the illegal occupation.
Typically, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) opinions lead to a UN General Assembly vote a few months later. The position of the United Kingdom will be crucial on this vote. The UK also recently opposed the ICJ decision and submitted a detailed note against it.
Sands questions whether the UK will vote against or abstain from the upcoming opinion. He said that the UK should not vote against it, especially if this nation respects international laws.
The US is the nation that is also expected to vote against the opinion. Even though many judges belonging to the United States were part of the majority.
This issue could also create tension with the US, which is expected to vote against the opinion, even though the US judge was part of the majority
Sands stood in favor of Palestinian and argued strongly for the Palestinian right to self-determination at the ICJ hearing in February. The court also supported the view and said that every nation has the right to live independently and establish their own sovereign state including Palestine. This support from the court clearly highlights that the emotions of people living in Palestine are also equally important.
Meanwhile, Labour has committed to recognizing a Palestinian state, but they have not specified when this will happen. They have indicated that this recognition will be part of a broader peace process, aimed at achieving a two-state solution, which would help address ongoing conflicts and support peace efforts.
Furthermore, recognizing a state is more about politics as compared to strict legal rules. The ICJ clearly announced that Plaestince have the right to live independently in their own state. Despite this announcement only 150 countries out of 200 recognized Plaestine as a solo state. And the UK is the nation that does not accept Plaestine as a single state.
After the ICJ’s opinion, the UK Foreign Office said on July 19 that they are carefully considering their response and respect the ICJ’s independence.
