Atrocities in Gaza
The United Kingdom government is facing legal action from a coalition of human rights organizations and NGOs, including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Oxfam, and the Palestinian legal rights group Al-Haq, over its continued export of military components to Israel amid the ongoing war in Gaza.
The case, currently being heard at London’s High Court, accuses the UK of breaching international law by supplying crucial parts used in the production and operation of Lockheed Martin’s F-35 fighter jets, which have been deployed by Israel in its aerial assaults on Gaza and the West Bank.
Al-Haq, with legal support from the Global Legal Action Network (GLAN), is seeking to halt the export of these British-made parts, which include the aircraft’s refuelling probe, laser targeting system, tyres, rear fuselage, fan propulsion system, and ejector seat.
Oxfam has stated that these components are essential for keeping the F-35 fleet operational, implying the aircraft would be grounded without the UK’s continued supply.
The legal challenge is the latest development in a prolonged effort to hold the UK accountable for its arms trade with Israel. According to GLAN, the UK government approved arms export licenses to Israel in December 2023, and again in April and May 2024 — even as the humanitarian situation in Gaza deteriorated.
Although the newly elected Labour government later suspended around 30 licenses in September 2024 following a review of Israel’s adherence to international humanitarian law, that suspension notably excluded F-35 components.
In its defence, a UK government spokesperson argued that suspending licenses for F-35 parts was not feasible without undermining the global F-35 programme, which has strategic importance for NATO and broader international security. The government maintains that it has acted within the boundaries of both domestic and international law, stressing its commitment to upholding its legal responsibilities.
Nevertheless, GLAN lawyers have labeled the exclusion of F-35 parts from the suspension as a legal “loophole,” which allows the UK to maintain its support for Israel’s military activities indirectly through the aircraft’s global supply chain.
Charlotte Andrews-Briscoe, a GLAN attorney, accused the government of deliberately bypassing its own legal framework to continue arming Israel, asserting that the F-35s are being used to drop multi-ton bombs on densely populated civilian areas in Gaza.
Sacha Deshmukh, Chief Executive of Amnesty International UK, criticized the UK government’s stance, saying it has “a clear legal obligation to do everything within its power to prevent genocide under the Genocide Convention.” He accused the UK of failing this duty by continuing to authorize arms exports despite overwhelming evidence of grave violations by Israel.
Al-Haq’s General Director, Shawan Jabarin, reinforced this sentiment, declaring: “The United Kingdom is not a bystander. It’s complicit, and that complicity must be confronted, exposed, and brought to account.”
The case, which unfolded over a four-day hearing, has yet to reach a final judgment. However, it could have far-reaching implications for the UK’s arms export policies, particularly regarding accountability in conflicts involving potential violations of international humanitarian and human rights laws.
