Labour is pandering to forces who need Israel wiped off the map

Citizens and states alike are increasingly under threat from ‘lawfare’ — the abuse of legal processes or institutions for political purposes.

Israel was yet again a victim of this practice in May when the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) vexatiously applied for arrest warrants against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Yoav Gallant for supposed war crimes.

A month later, the then Conservative Government asked for permission to challenge the ICC’s application, arguing that Israelis were outside the court’s jurisdiction and its Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan was guilty of overreach in seeking the arrest of two Israeli nationals.

Yet yesterday we learned that Sir Keir Starmer‘s new Labour Government would not pursue this issue any further, on the basis that applications for arrest warrants were a ‘matter for the court to decide on’.

The truth is that an anti-Israel agenda has prevailed in the Labour Party for some time. The fact that it recently emerged from an election in which five independent candidates defeated sitting Labour MPs by challenging their stance on Gaza will be fresh in the minds of the most senior figures in the party.

While they did their utmost to appease centrist voters, who take a more nuanced view of the conflict in Israel and Gaza, in the run-up to the election, the Government is no doubt keen to win back those more extreme voters they lost to rival parties. Taking an aggressive stance on Israel is an easy way to do this.

In dropping its legal challenge to the arrest warrants, the British Government is also breaking ranks with democratic allies such as the U.S. and Germany, who recognise how important it is to stand full-square behind a bulwark of democracy in the Middle East, which has consistently supported the West’s interests.

Make no mistake: the Government’s announcement this week will be music to the ears of Hamas, a proscribed terrorist organisation who are opposed not only to the rule of law but any peace process.

They are backed by Iran, a theocratic state determined to destroy Israel — then come after the rest of us.

It’s no exaggeration to say that Hamas and the murderous thugs of Islamic State are branches of the same tree. Israel stands on the frontline of a war that affects us all.

It is extraordinary to me that our Prime Minister Keir Starmer — a former barrister specialising in human rights, no less — did not have this at the front of his mind when he chose to rubberstamp the decision to walk away from the ICC challenge.

It’s a move that not only raises important questions about international law but now places those fighting a war on behalf of democracy and the West at risk of arrest if they step outside the borders of their home nation.

Starmer’s U-turn also raises the prospect of his Government changing tack on another vitally important matter: the issuing of arms export licences to Israel.

Under Rishi Sunak, the Conservatives made it clear that withdrawing these licences would be out of the question.

And so it should be. The benefits of the incredibly close co-operation between Israel and the UK on defence and intelligence matters cannot be overstated. If anything, we rely on their technology and intelligence more than they do on ours.

Our fighter jet fleet is so dependent on Israeli technology that one defence expert was recently quoted as saying that, without Israeli technology, the RAF could not get its planes in the air.

Meanwhile, Israeli intelligence on Iranian-sponsored Islamist terrorism has thwarted countless attacks here at home. Then there are the Israeli drones and armoured vehicles that protected British troops engaged in dangerous and difficult operations against terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq. While the impact of a ban on weapons sales to Israel would be negligible, a reciprocal move against Britain would be much more significant.

It has not yet come to this but yesterday’s announcement is, I believe, a worrying portent of what is to come.

I noted, too, that in her all-too-brief explanation of Sir Keir’s decision to drop opposition to an international arrest warrant application, his spokesperson insisted that ‘the Government feels very strongly about the rule of law internationally and domestically’.

How hollow this sounds now.

The Conservative Government’s challenge against the ICC had potential consequences that stretched far beyond Israel. It concerns a matter of law and the UK was — rightly — addressing whether international law and the ICC rules were and are being properly applied.

If they are not, and the ICC is acting outside its powers, then this is a matter of enormous concern not just for the UK, but also for other ICC member states.

This is why so many other countries also submitted their own objections, among them the U.S., Germany, the Czech Republic and Hungary, along with a number of organisations, including UK Lawyers For Israel (UKLFI).

These nations and bodies recognise that, as Palestine is not a state, it cannot sign up to the Rome Statute, which provides the founding principles that govern the court.

Israel, meanwhile, is not a member of the ICC and the court has no jurisdiction over its territory.

What’s more, the prosecutor’s application violates the principle of ‘complementarity’. This is a vital legal principle to which the ICC is meant to adhere, and which holds that the court will act only when a country’s own national legal systems fail to do so or a state is unwilling or unable to carry out its own investigation.

Neither of these can be said about Israel, a democratic state where the rule of law is robustly upheld and state institutions and politicians are accountable.

Worse still, the prosecutor’s public statement summarising his application advanced falsehoods in every single sentence, as highlighted in a submission to the Court by UKLFI and other NGOs.

Allegations included an assertion that Israel had imposed ‘a total siege over Gaza’ that involved ‘completely closing the three border crossing points’ for ‘extended periods’.

This, as with the other statements, is palpably and demonstrably false.

These actions can only be understood as an attempt to pander to sinister forces who would like to see Israel wiped off the map.

The Government should be ashamed of itself.

• Natasha Hausdorff is a barrister and legal director at UK Lawyers For Israel Charitable Trust.