🔗 Share this article

Recently, a UN commission concluded that Israeli forces is committing systematic destruction in the Gaza Strip. The finding is unsurprising, given that seldom do countries in history have been so explicit about their intentions.

For instance: Earlier this year, Bezalel Smotrich declared that “Gaza is to be entirely destroyed”; a week later, the country’s premier boasted that Israel is “destroying more and more houses across Gaza,” leaving civilians with no place to go.

Government’s Stance

At the beginning of this month, Labour’s deputy prime minister issued a communication to the chair of a parliamentary body, stating that “ministers has carefully considered the possibility of genocide” and has not determined that Israel is acting with destructive aims. Why would separate organizations reach contrasting findings?

The British government refrains from reaching a conclusion on genocide since should it, it would need to confront its role.

Alignment with Allies

In terms of foreign and military policy, ministers coordinates closely with the US, Tel Aviv’s key partner. The UK continues to furnish Israel with key parts for F-35 jets attacking the strip and its residents.

Military jets carrying out aerial attacks have been permitted to touch down in the UK. Ministers continues to provide information with Israel. Britain operates relentless surveillance flights over Gaza.

Instead of enacting comprehensive restrictions, British ministers promote commerce with Israeli entities worth billions a year.

Double Standards

While Isaac Herzog – whose genocidal utterances about collective Palestinian guilt – is awarded the recognition through diplomacy, numerous activists holding placards denouncing violence are detained as though they are security threats.

Each step directed at Israel has been superficial, in order to reduce demands for intervention from the people. In fact, most the public believe it’s possible Israel has breached humanitarian standards, over half backs an military restrictions, a small fraction consider Israel’s operations in Gaza is justified, and more than 50% advocate for legal action against the leader for possible violations.

Individual Tragedies

Well-being of those from Gaza are deemed secondary than maintaining relations with Israel and, through association, the US. At the personal level, this stance unfolds in the harshest of ways.

One individual, a voter of a senior politician, met her on a few instances. They met at his business in 2019 and appeared together, declaring “solidarity with Gaza”. They toured on a visit to government buildings.

Not long after the violence erupting in October 2023, his parent, brother, relative and two children were died due to an attack. Seeking to rescue his loved ones – who had been injured in strikes repeatedly – he contacted the official on two occasions to seek help.

He claims he got no reply. Months later, he was present at a Labour fundraiser where he got to his feet, clutching images of his lost family, urging for a end to hostilities and stating tearfully, “I lost my family in Gaza”.

The whole tawdry episode was filmed: he was forcibly removed from the event and outside. Rayner took no action, only stating “thank you, you’ve made your point”. Subsequently distanced herself on online platforms.

Days later, she was featured by media, where the incident was portrayed as an example of threats politicians face, associating it with the killings of elected officials. From that point, so many of his relatives have been slaughtered that the victims take up three pages of a record.

Imagined Scenarios

Suppose an individual from Israel had been aggressively ejected from the event of a politician they were acquainted with, after clutching photographs of their dead relatives and begging for the conflict to cease. Instead of being labeled an example of threats faced by politicians, the resulting uproar would be featured in newspapers and dominate headlines.

Final Thoughts

Our government is avoiding hard facts. Officials reject genocide, because recognizing it would mean confessing their role. The truth, in the end, will emerge.