David Lammy’s ceasefire in Israel could have devastating consequences for the British army | Politics | News

British Foreign Secretary David Lammy has announced the suspension of 30 arms export licenses to Israel, a move that has failed to impress calls for a total ban on all arms sales to the country, nor the Israeli government itself.

While this decision may seem to have only a minor impact, it could have a significant impact on the UK’s defence capabilities and its relationship with one of its key defence partners. As ever, it seems that the second and third order consequences of the move have not been thought through.

First of all, British arms exports to Israel represent less than one percent of Israel’s total arms imports, a drop in the ocean compared to what Israel receives from the US, Germany and Italy. In fact, Britain exports about 25 times more weapons to Saudi Arabia than to Israel, highlighting how relatively insignificant the British contribution is.

On the other hand, Israel is Britain’s third largest arms exporter and its defence technology plays a crucial role in the British military arsenal.

Major imports from Israel include Watchkeeper drones (modeled on the Elbit Hermes 450), the M-113 Spike-NLOS, an Israeli fourth-generation fire-and-forget anti-tank guided missile, and active protection systems (APS) for armored fighting vehicles. As for the APS, the new British Challenger 3 tank will use this Israeli technology to protect itself against various types of anti-tank missiles.

It is clear that Britain is more dependent on Israel to equip its armed forces than vice versa. If Israel reacts to Lammy’s actions by banning arms exports to Britain, Britain will be the loser. The consequences could be devastating.

Britain may have to grapple with replacing the high-tech Israeli systems on which its armed forces rely. The sophisticated technology Israel supplies is not easy to obtain elsewhere, especially at short notice. A sudden halt to Israeli imports could leave Britain vulnerable and weaken its military readiness at a time when global tensions are rising.

Unlike the US, Britain is not Israel’s weapons reserve, quite the opposite. Lammy’s measures to ban some exports are only political gestures, but could have serious consequences for the British armed forces.

So it seems that he is trying to run with the fox and hunt with the hounds at the same time, and he has not satisfied either side of the argument. He seems to have caved in to the loud, populist and, above all, left-wing demands, and to have underestimated the consternation that was unleashed in Tel Aviv just as the six hostages murdered by Hamas were being buried.

As a direct result of such a blunt decision, the UK could face the unintended consequences of what was intended to be a simple symbolic gesture. The UK armed forces could be left grappling with filling critical gaps, and the UK’s reputation as a reliable defence partner has undoubtedly been damaged.

The Labour Party may find the transition from opposition to government more difficult than expected.

Lt Col Stuart Crawford is a political and defence commentator and former army officer. Subscribe to his podcasts and newsletters at www.DefenceReview.uk