Starmer right to block arms sales to Israel, says Jewish peer

A senior Jewish peer and supporter of Israel in the Lords has backed Sir Keir Starmer’s partial suspension of the UK’s arms deal with Israel and hit out at those who condemned the move.

In a major intervention, Lord Carlile has written a devastating critique of the chief rabbi, Boris Johnson and others who attacked the prime minister’s decision after it was announced last week.

In an article for The Independent, the crossbench peer – who was the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation between 2001 and 2011 – describes how the Labour leader’s decision showed “courage and conviction... however difficult it is”.

Supporting Sir Keir’s decision to suspend 30 of the 350 arms exports licences to Israel, he bitterly lashes out at Benjamin Netanyahu for undermining attempts at reaching a peaceful solution.

Lord Carlile, who sits on the all-party committee for Israel, is also scathing about the previous government’s handling of the same legal advice used to justify the decision.

He has claimed that former foreign secretary Lord Cameron received the same legal advice as that acted upon by foreign secretary David Lammy last week but chose not to act on it.

He said: “The legal advice relied upon by Sir Keir Starmer and David Lammy has long been known to senior UK ministers. Lord Cameron as foreign secretary is said by officials to have known about the advice since February.”

The former Lib Dem peer went on: “Sitting on clear legal advice for more than a very short time cannot be justified. Starmer has shown courage and a conviction that the right thing must be done – however difficult it is.”

Instead, Lord Carlile turned his guns on Mr Netanyahu and the Tories for their criticism of Sir Keir last week.

The leading barrister described the prime minister as “one of the most able analytical lawyers of his generation” and said that former prime ministers such as Mr Johnson “should have known better” before making “wildly disproportionate” criticism of the decision.

He also joined other senior figures in being “dismayed” by chief rabbi Ephraim Mirvis’s attack on the suspension of a limited number of arms exports.

He noted: “Surprisingly, the critics have demonstrated astonishing ignorance of the position taken on the same Israel armaments issue by valued international allies – or, possibly, found it inconvenient to reference international decisions.

“Italy decided in January 2024 to enter into no new contracts to send armaments to Israel. The Dutch courts have declared illegal all direct exports of military materiel to Israel. The Belgian authorities have restricted such exports, and have called for an EU-wide ban. Spain’s refusal started on 7 October 2023, on legal grounds. In March, Canada halted future arms sales to Israel. Exactly the same conclusions on the law have been reached in those countries.”

Lord Carlile added: “It is crucial that the rule of law – which prevents the abuse of state power and applies to all – is not shouted down in an unruly way by people who are acting on prejudice, dressed up as principle. It is insidious that democracy, brought about by parliamentarians doing exactly what legal advice dictates, should be hijacked by populist sloganeering – especially when that comes from former prime ministers like Boris Johnson, who should know better.”

But his harshest criticism as a prominent British Jew is for the Israeli prime minister who he accuses of trying to undermine efforts to end the conflict.

“This issue has highlighted a broader problem for those of us in public life who do not respect Netanyahu. He bears a long and, in parts, unattractive political history.

“His stubborn resistance in recent months to sound advice given by IDF commanders, by the families of hostages who remain unaccounted for, and by senior international figures including the president and vice-president of the USA, to many of us signifies a person no longer fit for high office.

“Netanyahu and Hamas leaders alike have repeatedly undermined attempts at mediation determinedly and diligently pursued by Qatar, whose emir and prime minister merit international praise.”

A source close to Lord Cameron denied that he had not followed legal advice as foreign secretary.

The source said: “We set out the process that was taken in great detail to the FAC (foreign affairs committee) earlier in the year. I believe they published the letter.

“Several determinations were made by Lord Cameron and on each occasion maintaining existing licences was consistent with legal advice.”