news

한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina

[text/observer network yan shanshan] after the uk announced the suspension of some weapons sales to israel, unlike israel's "jumping up and down", the united states remained restrained and downplayed the differences in its public response. however, some us media revealed that the biden administration was "angry and worried" about the british decision and complained that the british "went back on their word."

on september 3rd local time, the us magazine newsweek quoted robert peston, political news editor of the british independent television (itv), as saying: sources in washington revealed that the white house was "disappointed" with the british approach. one of the sources told him, "they (britain) had assured us that they would not do so."

u.s. state department spokesman matthew miller said on the same day that although washington respects britain's "decision made as a sovereign state", the united states will not follow suit and will conduct an assessment in accordance with u.s. law.

on september 2, local time, british prime minister starmer announced that britain would suspend the export of some weapons to israel on the grounds that these weapons could be used to violate international law.

on the 3rd, british foreign secretary lamy said in a speech to the british house of commons that because arms exports to israel may violate humanitarian law, the uk will suspend the issuance of 30 of the approximately 350 arms export licenses to israel, including weapons and equipment such as fighter jets, helicopters and drone parts.

but lamy added that britain continued to support israel's right to self-defense and that the latest move did not amount to an arms embargo and would not have a substantial impact on israel's security.

as the biden administration has spared no effort to promote aid to israel, and us vice president and democratic presidential candidate harris has also stated that support for israel will never waver, the uk's decision is seen by the outside world as a difference between the two countries in policy toward israel.

british sky news stated that this was the first time that britain had a "major disagreement" with the united states since the first round of israeli-palestinian conflict broke out on october 7 last year.

newsweek cited data from the gaza strip health department as saying that israel's continued attacks on gaza have killed more than 40,000 palestinians. the growing scale of civilian casualties has put israel's allies such as the united states and the united kingdom under great pressure, and many people have called for a reassessment of military aid to israel.

the report said that now, the uk has taken the lead in revoking 30 arms export licenses to israel. given that the uk is "one of israel's closest allies", the country's move is particularly critical.

however, while israeli prime minister netanyahu angrily denounced britain's move as "shameful" and israeli defense minister galant expressed deep frustration, the biden administration's public attitude was: respect britain.

john kirby, strategic communications coordinator of the u.s. national security council, declined to make specific comments on the matter on the 3rd, only saying that the united states continues to support israel's self-defense capabilities and has not yet confirmed that the israeli military's actions violated humanitarian law.

u.s. state department spokesman matthew miller confirmed that the united kingdom informed the united states before announcing the decision. "the united kingdom is a sovereign country and this is the decision they made."

miller said that the suspension of some weapons exports to israel was a decision made by the uk after evaluating british law, and it did not mean that the united states would change its position. the united states is still evaluating possible violations of international humanitarian law by the israeli army.

when asked "how do you think the british decision is seen by the outside world as the international community putting pressure on israel or sending a message", miller said he did not think so, and said that according to the british foreign secretary, the uk needs to comply with its applicable legal framework, "of course, they can make their own legal judgments based on their own systems and laws."

newsweek reported that although the total value of british weapons exports to the israeli army (42 million pounds in 2022) is less than that of the united states and germany, britain's latest decision "sends an important message" and "this move may encourage other western allies to reassess their military support for israel."

the us magazine time also believes that the uk's decision has "a certain symbolic significance". although the military impact of this move is limited, it will help israel's "frustrated allies" to further pressure israel to end the gaza war as soon as possible.

military reporters at israel's channel 13 worry that if other israeli allies follow britain's example, it will have a more serious impact on israel.

in the uk, this latest move has been criticized by pro-israel people and "disdained" by anti-war people.

on the one hand, some british politicians and jewish groups accused the labour government led by starmer of abandoning israel, which was tantamount to encouraging israel's enemies in the middle east. on the other hand, those who oppose the gaza war said that the british government has not done enough and that there are loopholes in the "partial arms ban". for example, britain can still provide israel with parts for f-35 fighter jets.

this article is an exclusive article of observer.com and may not be reproduced without authorization.