Downing Street has rejected David Lammy’s assessment that Israel has broken international law by blocking aid to Gaza, in a rare public censure for the foreign secretary.
A spokesperson for the prime minister said on Tuesday morning Israel was “at risk” of breaching humanitarian law, despite Lammy having told the Commons on Monday that the country had definitely done so.
The remarks, hours after Israel launched a wave of airstrikes on Gaza, mark a climbdown after Lammy appeared to have changed the government’s position on one of the most sensitive foreign policy questions it faces.
The public rebuke came less than 24 hours after Lammy told the Commons he believed Israel’s actions broke international law – a key test for whether the UK can continue to sell weapons to the government of Benjamin Netanyahu.
Jeremy Corbyn said that when he was labour leader, he’d been asked to support Israel without reservation. Blanket support. He said no. Starmer obviously said yes, as did kamala Harris and trump.
Christ. The Zionist snake in Number 10 really is a piece of shit.
I wouldn’t even say that Lammy got rebuked. Just look at the language. They’re pretty much just saying “This is the FO’s/David Lammy’s view, we do not technically endorse it. Please speak to them.”
Well done David Lammy! He just earned a bit of respect from me. We could have easily woken up to the news that he’d ben shuffled off or even sacked for this. Or he could have said nothing at all in the first place.
In the context of the govts relationship with Israel I think this is actually good news.
I wouldn’t even say that Lammy got rebuked. Just look at the language. They’re pretty much just saying “This is the FO’s/David Lammy’s view, we do not technically endorse it. Please speak to them.”
But when you add.
They added: “The government is not an international court, and, therefore, it is up to courts to make judgments.”
Id say that was very much the equivalent of. “Oi Lammy you are not in a position to make such statements as an official. Wind your neck in a bit.”
The foreign secretary later said he “could have been clearer” in the chamber, when asked in an interview with Bloomberg if he regretted making the statement.
Could even be interpreted as “neck retracted one click.”
In the context of the govts relationship with Israel I think this is actually good news.
When you consider the. “Israel’s actions in Gaza are at clear risk of breaching international humanitarian law”
Yeah, I’d agree they may at least be worrying a little about the need to re-evaluate the relationship, depending on Israels continuing actions.
The thing is, the ICC already has an arrest warrant out for Netanyahu. who else are they waiting for?
The thing is they have to be found guilty for the UK to be breaking the law supplying arms to Israel.
An arrest warrant is not evidence of guilt just suspicion. And the UK gov seems determined to ignore it as long as they possible can.
International law is nothing more then a collection of treaties between national governments. And depends on those governments willingness to cooperate to actually have any real meaning.
They might be waiting to see the outcome of Duterte’s ICC case.
Is this one of those things where they’re using technical legal language or is it an actual walking back of Lammy’s comments?
EDIT: I mean like if this was a domestic criminal case in progress, they’d always say ‘the suspect’ in an official statement, even if it was overwhelmingly clear that ‘the suspect’ was the perpetrator. Is something similar happening here?
Directly contradicting it. Lammy said Israel was in active violation yesterday:
https://lemmy.ml/post/27344501
Foreign Secretary David Lammy said that while Israel “quite rightly must defend its own security”, the ongoing blockade of goods and supplies to the strip was a “breach of international law”.
