PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Gaza: UK Assessment - 14 May 2025 (Commons/Commons Chamber)
Debate Detail
The message yesterday was clear: the world demands that Israel stops and changes course immediately. With our allies, we are telling the Government of Israel to lift the block on aid entering Gaza now, and enable the UN and all humanitarians to save lives now. We need an immediate ceasefire now. Humanitarian aid must never be used as a political tool or military tactic, and the UK will not support any aid mechanism that seeks to deliver political or military objectives or that puts vulnerable civilians at risk.
The International Court of Justice case on genocide is ongoing. We support the ICJ. We support its independence. The ICJ issued a set of provisional measures in this case and we support those measures. Israel has an obligation to implement them. It is the UK Government’s long-standing position that any formal determination as to whether genocide has occurred is a matter for a competent court, not for Governments or non-judicial bodies. The UK is fully committed to upholding our responsibilities under domestic and international law, and we have at all times acted in a manner consistent with our legal obligations, including under the genocide convention.
The devastation from this conflict must end. Our complete focus is on lifting Israeli restrictions on aid, on freeing the hostages, on protecting civilians and on restoring the ceasefire. We will work urgently with our allies and partners on further pressure to make Israel change course.
The Security Council was told that civilians in Gaza have, again, been forcibly displaced and confined into ever-shrinking spaces, with 80% of the territory either within Israeli militarised zones or under displacement orders. Israeli airstrikes on the European hospital in Gaza yesterday killed 28 people, with further reports of at least 48 deaths overnight from strikes elsewhere. Can the Minister tell us whether the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office has conducted any recent assessment of its own on the risk that the Israeli authorities are committing genocide?
Last night, the UK’s ambassador to the UN rightly called on Israel to lift the restrictions and ensure a return to the delivery of aid in Gaza in line with humanitarian principles and international law. But that is not enough.
Notwithstanding the Government’s position that it is for judicial bodies to make a determination, what is the Minister’s response to the latest UN assessment that genocide is possible in Gaza? Can he confirm whether the UK stands by the obligation to prevent duty in the genocide convention? Parliament needs to know whether the UN emergency relief co-ordinator’s assessment will lead to a shift in the UK Government’s position. Why is it that when the horrors increase, the UK Government’s position stays the same?
Lastly, to echo the words in Tom Fletcher’s briefing:
“Will you act—decisively—to prevent genocide and to ensure respect for international humanitarian law?”—
or will you instead repeat—
“those empty words: ‘We did all we could’”?
The hon. Gentleman asks important questions, which have echoed in this Chamber yesterday and throughout this long and painful conflict. This Government have taken steps, whether restoring funding, suspending arms exports or working with our partners in the UN and elsewhere. But clearly we are in a situation today that nobody in this House would wish to be in—nobody on the Government Benches and, I am sure, nobody on the Opposition Benches either.
We will need to take more and more action until we see the change that we need, but the central question, as I have told this House repeatedly, is that aid is not being allowed into Gaza. While it is not allowed into Gaza, there is nothing that can be done to get the aid at the scale and in the manner necessary to save Palestinian life. It is on that point that we called the Security Council and on that point that we will continue to act.
This conflict would have been over long ago, had Hamas released the hostages, and the House should not be in any doubt that Hamas and their Iranian sponsors are committed to wiping out the state of Israel. Can the Minister tell us what steps are being taken, with international partners, to deal with the threat to peace, security and stability posed by Iran? We have constantly asked for a strategy to tackle Iran, so when will this come forward? The Government have shared our view that Hamas can have no role in the future governance of Gaza, so can we have an update on the practical steps the Government are taking to secure this outcome and end the misery that Hamas are inflicting on Gaza and the threat they pose to Israel?
We have debated aid access to Gaza on several occasions, including in recent days, so can the Minister tell us exactly how much UK-funded aid, both directly and indirectly through multilateral organisations, is waiting to enter Gaza and give us a breakdown of what that aid is? The Government have known for a number of months about the concerns Israel has about the delivery of aid to Gaza and aid diversion, so can the Minister today explain what discussions have taken place with Israel, and what practical solutions Ministers have offered to support the delivery of aid that addresses its concerns? Has the Minister been directly engaged in the discussions that have taken place with Israel and the US over alternative ways to get aid into Gaza? Does he have a view on this and will the UK be participating?
We have also been clear that while we continue to press for humanitarian aid and accountability, we do not consider the actions in Gaza to constitute genocide. The case brought by South Africa to the International Court of Justice is not helping—
The right hon. Lady asks an important question about the proportion of British aid unable to get into Gaza at the moment. For almost two months, the horrendous answer is 100%. Even before then, there were significant restrictions on the aid that we wish to get into Gaza. I saw for myself the items that were unable to cross from al-Arish into Rafah. The proportions will be very high, but I will see with my officials whether I can break it down in greater detail for her.
As a number of Members have pointed out, the UK is a party to international agreements that provide a positive obligation to act to prevent genocide and torture and protect the rights of others. We have an obligation, as a member of the United Nations Security Council and a state party to the Geneva conventions, to promote peace and security. What advice has the Minister taken on the liability that will attach to him as a decision maker? Have the Government received advice on whether the Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary, any senior officials or previous Ministers may be exposed when the reckoning comes?
I can understand why many Members may feel frustrated by the F-35 carve-out. Perhaps they also feel frustrated about our continuing to sell arms that do not risk a violation, according to the assessment that has been much discussed here. We think it right that we, for example, continue to provide body armour that might be used by non-governmental organisations in Gaza, or provide parts of the supply chain that could end up in the hands of NATO allies. We have taken far-reaching action on arms. That is important work that we are proud of.
“tenable view that no genocide has occurred or is occurring”.
It appears that the Government—whether they have told the Minister so or not—have already made a determination, and that explains why they have no intention of asking for an independent assessment of whether a genocide is likely. The Government know that if they did ask for one, it would reveal an unpalatable truth that would prevent them from supplying Israel with the weapons that it needs to continue its merciless onslaught. It really is as grubby as that, isn’t it, Minister?
“For those killed and those whose voices are silenced: what more evidence do you need now?...Will you act—decisively—to prevent genocide?”
What is the Minister’s answer to that question?
Every week that we come back to this House the horror is greater. Many of us woke up this morning to a spokesperson for the Israeli Government on the “Today” programme denying that there is hunger in Gaza at all. This House knows the reality: we are 10 weeks into a blockade of aid by the Israeli Government, and one in five are starving. The Minister will know that Tom Fletcher spoke passionately and with purpose yesterday at the UN about the collective failure of the UN to speak out previously. How do we avoid that this time? What more evidence do we need before we take action, and what more action can be done?
“to stop the 21st century atrocity to which we bear daily witness in Gaza.”
What action will the Government take if, in the next 24 hours, Israel does not allow aid into Gaza?
It is the anniversary of the murder by Israeli forces of Shireen Abu Akleh, the renowned journalist. Alongside her on that day was another journalist, Ali Samoudi, who was shot in the back. Two weeks ago, the Israeli forces arrested him and dragged him from his home, and Ali is now in detention somewhere, but we do not know where. Under international law, journalists are afforded special protection. Will the Minister immediately take up with the Israeli Government the question of where Ali Samoudi is and seek to do everything we can do to secure his release? He works for CNN, Reuters and Al Jazeera, and all he was doing was simply reporting on some of the war crimes that are taking place.
“Forcible movement of the Gazan population out of Gaza would be forcible displacement”.—[Official Report, 6 May 2025; Vol. 766, c. 588.]
Forcible displacement is a war crime; it is already happening and it is about to accelerate. Will he say in turn, as the head of UNRWA said this week and as the former Israeli Defence Minister, Moshe Ya’alon, said last week, that Israel is committing war crimes in Gaza?
“No evidence has been seen that Israel is deliberately targeting civilian women or children”,
and that there is
“also evidence of Israel making efforts to limit incidental harm to civilians.”
If the Government need to be shown evidence that Israel is deliberately targeting civilians, I suggest the Minister and his colleagues review the footage captured by the BBC of yesterday’s bombing of Gaza’s European hospital, the footage emerging from the Nasser hospital, the millions of hours of livestreamed footage available since 7 October, or the thousands of reports and articles published since. The past 18 months have seen a total war on all of Gaza, with acts of ethnic cleansing and extermination, according to the UN. Does the UK deny the existence of that evidence, and if so, have the Government committed perjury?
I have already rehearsed some of the arguments in relation to recognition.
“with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group”.
That is exactly what the Hamas terrorist group state in their foundational charter: the intent to destroy Israel and Jews worldwide, as they actively sought to do on 7 October. If they wanted to end the war, Hamas would release the 58 hostages they continue to hold. How is the Minister supporting our friend and ally, the democracy Israel, in its fight against this genocidal terrorist group?
Although I recognise the Minister’s sincere compassion in the way he has expressed himself on this issue, it is clear that he comes to this Chamber with a straitjacket around him. What we need here is the Prime Minister, who can make the decisions; otherwise, we are not going to see any action on arms supplies, on trade or in any other area, including recognition of the state of Palestine. If the Minister cannot do those things, can he at least recognise the right of Palestinians to statehood?
“the systematic dismantling of Palestinian life”.
There is therefore a risk that we are witnesses to genocide. The Minister’s Government can reinstate airlifts of aid along the lines of those arranged last year, which would send a powerful message. Will the Minister act now and enable aid airlifts?
I am not suggesting to the hon. Member that what we have done is enough—no one could hear this discussion and think it is enough; no one could have listened to the UN Security Council yesterday afternoon and think it is enough. But there is a difference between saying that there is more to be done and saying that nothing has been done.
Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.