To ask His Majesty’s Government on what grounds they have barred officers from the Israel Defense Forces from participating in the Royal College of Defence Studies, and whether they apply the same criteria to other countries.
My Lords, the Ministry of Defence has decided to pause future Israeli participation in UK training courses, given our concerns regarding the Israel Defense Forces’ conduct in Gaza, particularly the decision to further escalate their offensive in Gaza City.
I thank my noble friend for that Answer, but I must say that, even in the current context of destructive tokenism from the United Kingdom Government over Israel, this decision or gesture seems particularly depressing and particularly likely to strike at the relationship between our countries, which I hope she will accept is vital for our long-term security and that of the British people. As she appears to be speaking for the Ministry of Defence here, can she say how these criteria have been applied, for example, to Qatar, which continues to sponsor Islamist terrorism, and China, whose treatment of the Uyghur people is an international scandal and which poses a clear risk to global security with its attitude towards Taiwan?
I am not speaking for the MoD; I am speaking for the Government. But I respect the noble Lord’s position on this. He clearly disagrees with the decision that the Government have taken, and that is absolutely his right. We understand, and this is not a decision that we have taken lightly.
The noble Lord asked about criteria; there is not a set criteria for this decision. It is an unusual position that we have had to take, but we are in an unusual situation. Israel, as he quite rightly reminds us, is a long-standing friend and ally; we have close links with Israel, through many historical ties, people-to-people ties and business ties. I very much hope that we can restore the arrangement as it was, because I think it is good for the United Kingdom, and for Israel too, but, as things are at the moment, the things that are happening on the ground in Gaza and the unwillingness of the Government of Israel to engage, listen and change course have led us to take this regrettable decision.
My Lords, could my noble friend tell the House whether this means that the Government operate a proscribed list—in other words, a list of proscribed countries—where the royal college is concerned? If there is a proscribed list, could that be provided to both Houses of Parliament?
My Lords, the Royal College of Defence Studies enjoys an enviable global reputation, and the summary ban on attendance at the college by defence personnel of an ally is, as far as I am aware, unprecedented, which makes it extraordinary. Although she is not speaking for the Ministry of Defence, which is unfortunate, can the Minister still clarify to this Chamber whether this decision was made by the Secretary of State for Defence? Why was there no ministerial Statement to accompany it, given the significance of what was being decided?
The noble Baroness is right: this is an unusual situation. It is a decision that has been made. I accept, to an extent, that this is in some way symbolic, but it is a reflection of the frustration and the deep concern that we have about the plight of people in Gaza, the decisions made by the Government of Israel about Gaza City, the withholding of sufficient quantities of aid and the designation of famine that we now find in Gaza. We are doing everything we can to try to persuade the Government of Israel to change course. This is part of that effort. We are not requiring students who are currently at the RCDS to return, nor their families; that would be unnecessarily disruptive to them and their lives. This is a situation that we want to see resolved. We want the Government of Israel to change course. We want to be able to reinstate the arrangements that, as she quite rightly says, matter a huge deal to us and to our allies.
My Lords, there is a case for overseas military students to be exposed to British military training on the protection of civilians in military doctrine. But will the Minister agree with me, in supporting the Government, that the real challenge is the political leadership, not only of the IDF but of Israel? The Israeli Defence Minister said yesterday—he was almost crowing—that Gaza is burning. Will the Minister please outline to the House what action we are taking at a political level, to Netanyahu’s Cabinet, regarding those who are perpetrating war crimes?
We are taking all the measures that we have discussed on many occasions in this place, including sanctions on members of the Israeli Cabinet. Noble Lords will know that the United Nations General Assembly meets next week, and it has been the announced intention of the United Kingdom Government to consider recognising the state of Palestine at that event.
My Lords, a UN report has found clear evidence of Israeli genocide in Gaza. There is also a campaign of terror by Israelis in the West Bank against Palestinians. Would the Minister agree that the Government of a country that carries out such atrocities should be unequivocally condemned rather than supported in their mission?
I fundamentally disagree with politicians unilaterally declaring genocide anywhere. For genocide to mean anything, it must be protected as designated by a competent court. However much political pressure there is, or whatever our views might be, it really matters that we maintain that. As soon as you start ascribing genocide as a political act, then it becomes meaningless. We have to be very clear that that is a decision to be made by a court.
To be clear, though, this decision about the RCDS is not a reaction around international humanitarian law. It is because we are so deeply concerned; in a sense it is a diplomatic act. We hope that it is one that is noticed, and that it has some effect on the Government of Israel. We want this to result in a change of course by the Government of Israel. This is all about making sure that people in Gaza can be fed, get the medical interventions that they need and have the safety that they need. We want the hostages released immediately and we need ceasefire negotiations to resume.
My Lords, I support this temporary action by the Government, but would my noble friend the Minister agree that supporting such actions is absolutely not to support Hamas or to be antisemitic in any way? It is a means of putting pressure on the Israeli Government to cease their appalling actions in Gaza.
Hamas is a terrorist organisation. It does not believe in a two-state solution. We believe that Israel and the state of Palestine should live safely, in prosperity and security, alongside one another.
My Lords, I declare my interest as a director of the British Friends of Israel. Can the Minister assure the House that the Defence Secretary had due regard for the equalities impact of his decision to exclude Israelis from taking up places at the Royal College of Defence Studies? I am sure she knows that is one of his legal duties under Section 149 of the Equality Act. Will she confirm that he will take specific advice from the Attorney General on this point?
That is a very important point, and it has been considered, of course. To explain how the Equalities Act as it applies here, we award places at RCDS on the basis of its relationship with the Government and the country; it is not to do with the identity of the individuals who are taking part.