2LT International News

LONDON, UK – In a significant shift in policy, the British government has formally determined that Israel is not committing genocide in its military operations in Gaza. The conclusion was detailed in a letter from then-Foreign Secretary David Lammy to the chair of Parliament’s international development committee, dated September 1st.

This move marks a departure from the UK’s previous stance, which held that such a grave determination could only be made by a competent international court. It is the first explicit declaration from the UK government that Israel’s actions, while drawing severe criticism, do not legally constitute genocide under the terms of the 1948 Genocide Convention.

The letter, addressed to Labour MP Sarah Champion, acknowledged the UK’s duty under Article I of the Genocide Convention to prevent genocide if a serious risk is believed to exist. Lammy stated this duty was carefully considered during the government’s preparations for a recent judicial review case brought by the Palestinian rights group Al-Haq, which sought to halt UK arms exports to Israel.

While describing the humanitarian situation in Gaza as “utterly appalling” and insisting that Israel “must do much more to prevent and alleviate the suffering,” Lammy outlined the legal reasoning for the government’s decision. He emphasized that the crime of genocide requires a “specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group.”

“The Government has not concluded that Israel is acting with that intent,” Lammy wrote. He also noted that while the International Court of Justice (ICJ) had warned of a “plausible risk” of genocide in its preliminary ruling in January, it has not found Israel to be in breach of its obligations under the convention nor to be actively committing genocide.

The decision was welcomed by supporters of Israel. Rt. Hon. Sir Michael Ellis KC, a former Attorney General for England and Wales, told The Jerusalem Post that the government had been “forced to admit that the hateful rhetoric frequently published about Israel committing genocide is false.”

However, Ellis criticized the manner of the announcement, suggesting it was buried in an “obscure letter released at midnight on a Friday during a ministerial reshuffle in the hope no one would notice.” He further accused the government of irresponsibly repeating slurs that ramp up hatred against Israel while failing to hold Hamas accountable, thereby prolonging the conflict.

F-35 Exports and Strategic Considerations

Lammy’s letter also addressed the contentious issue of UK arms exports, specifically concerning the F-35 fighter jet program. He defended the government’s decision to continue supplying parts for the global F-35 program, in which Israel participates, citing broad strategic security concerns.

“We are facing a critical moment for European security and war on our continent,” Lammy wrote, alluding to the conflict in Ukraine. He described the F-35 partnership as “the largest defence programme in the world,” and argued that “undermining the programme would significantly disrupt international peace and security, NATO deterrence and European defence.”

He clarified that this strategic imperative was the sole reason for continuing exports to the multinational program, noting that the UK has halted all direct exports of F-35 parts for use by Israel.

The government’s statement is likely to be cited extensively in the ongoing international debate over the legal characterisation of the war in Gaza, providing a clear example of a key Western ally applying the strict legal definition of genocide and finding it unmet.