On Tuesday, an international inquiry determined that the Israeli military has carried out genocide in Gaza. This verdict comes as no shock, given that rarely have nations in history have been so brazen about their intentions.
For instance: Months ago, Bezalel Smotrich stated that “Gaza is to be entirely destroyed”; a week later, prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu asserted that its forces are “demolishing more and more houses in Gaza,” leaving Palestinians with nowhere to return.
UK Response
At the beginning of this month, a senior UK minister issued a communication to the chair of a parliamentary body, stating that “the government has carefully considered the potential of genocide” and has not determined that Israel is acting with destructive aims. Why would separate organizations reach opposite conclusions?
The British government refrains from reaching a verdict on genocide as if it was to, it would need to confront its involvement.
International Partnerships
At the level of international relations, the UK works in alignment with the United States, a major backer of Israel. Officials persist in supply Israel with crucial components for military planes incinerating the strip and its residents.
Israeli planes carrying out aerial attacks have been allowed to land in the United Kingdom. Ministers continues to share intelligence with Israeli officials. Britain operates constant monitoring operations over the region.
Instead of enacting comprehensive restrictions, British ministers facilitate trade with Israel worth significant sums a year.
Contradictions
Whereas Israeli president – whose genocidal utterances about group accountability – is awarded the honour of an official visit, numerous peaceful protesters displaying placards denouncing violence have been arrested as though they are radical elements.
Every action regarding Israel has been performative, aimed to reduce demands for intervention from the people. After all, a large majority the public feel it’s probable Israel has violated international law, over half favors an arms embargo, only a fifth consider Israel’s assault on Gaza is acceptable, and more than 50% advocate for Netanyahu’s arrest for alleged violations.
Human Cost
The lives of those residing in Gaza are deemed of lower priority than upholding partnerships with Israel and, indirectly, the US. In human terms, this policy is evident in the harshest of ways.
Dalloul al-Neder, a resident of former deputy prime minister, met her on multiple times. They met at his establishment in 2019 and took photos, stating “solidarity with Gaza”. He joined her on a trip to Westminster.
Within weeks the genocide beginning in last year, his parent, brother, sister-in-law and two family members were lost in an Israeli airstrike. Seeking to rescue his wife and daughter – who had been trapped in debris on multiple occasions – he reached out to Rayner on two occasions asking for support.
He claims he got no reply. Earlier this year, he was present at a party gathering where he spoke out, showing images of his dead mother, urging for a halt in violence and stating tearfully, “I lost my family in Gaza”.
This entire unfortunate event was recorded: he was forcibly removed from the gathering and on to the street. She took no action, merely commenting “thank you, you’ve made your point”. Subsequently cut ties on online platforms.
Not long after, she was questioned by a broadcaster, where the event was framed as an example of security concerns for leaders, linking it to the killings of elected officials. Since then, so many of the man’s family members have been killed that their names take up extensive notes of a notebook.
Contrasting Treatment
Consider an Israeli citizen had been forcibly removed from the fundraiser of a leader they knew well, after showing images of their dead relatives and begging for the violence to end. In contrast to being described as an example of harassment suffered by politicians, the outcry would be splashed on the press and be widely reported.
Conclusion
Our government is shirking away from difficult realities. There is refusal to admit genocide, because admitting it would mean confessing their role. The truth, in the end, will emerge.