WHEN THE barbarity of Hamas is duplicated by an important economic partner and strategic ally of the West, be unsurprised that Rishi Sunak has had nothing much to say about the deaths of Gaza civilians beyond that Israel has a right to defend itself.
Yet there is something unconvincing, an incompleteness, in mainstream explanations for his refusal to back a ceasefire, for his unquestioning loyalty to Israel.
Of course, there will be his fear of losing the UK votes of supporters of Israel and of its current hard-right government, particularly in a general election. And there is the Tory party’s historically lukewarm interest in human rights and justice issues.
However, a more persuasive explanation for his unwavering support for Israel seems likely to be something on which news outlets have been jarringly silent since last month’s terrible Hamas attack. Notably the BBC, because of their theoretically special relationship with the British public.
It’s almost inconceivable that any serious analysis of the Tory leadership’s rock-solid ‘we’re backing Israel’ position would not have found itself confronting a new, and major, UK-Israel defence, security and technology agreement signed earlier this year, and designed to build on an existing trading relationship with Israel worth £5 billion. It’s a deal hardly anyone is aware of.
International trade agreements may not make for the sexiest news stories. But in the post-7 October political context this particular pact becomes of irresistible relevance. The fact that news organisations, and in particular the BBC, have diligently ignored the slightest reference to it since the Hamas attack raises a range of questions, not least rather serious ones about the orientation of news-management.
Before the latest Hamas-Israel conflict, the UK’s Department for International Trade raved about the merits of this new agreement, and pointedly referred to a British bounce-back following Brexit.
It would “build on the current UK-Israel Trade and Partnership Agreement, which replicates the scope of existing trade agreements between the EU and Israel”, it said.
“Israel’s economy” it added, “is growing rapidly, with its service sector growing by 45 per cent over the last 10 years. A new (agreement) will allow us to take advantage of this growth, generating ever more opportunities for UK firms to export their goods and services…”
And: “The UK is proud of its deep and historic relationship with Israel. As open, innovative and thriving economies, the UK and Israel are close allies and strategic partners.”
Since then, not a word. After all, Rishi Sunak would hardly want to upset the apple-cart. But neither did he, nor his media allies, want to say anything much to complicate the government’s simple narrative about Israel having the right to defend itself.
And the public’s right to the full picture? As Sir Humphrey, of Yes Minister fame, might have said: “It’s not our job to clutter up people’s minds with things they really don’t need to know.”
Then Blunkett lets the cat out of the bag…
DO NOT squint in disbelief when Keir Starmer says a humanitarian pause in Gaza is “the only credible approach that has any chance of achieving what we all want to see in Gaza – the urgent alleviation of Palestinian suffering.” Do not make the mistake, he would have us believe, of thinking that a ceasefire would better alleviate the agonies of civilians tormented, killed, horribly wounded, their lives torn apart, by bombing and artillery shelling.
Instead believe these non-combatant victims would prefer just a lull in death and destruction, that they are so used to mass bloodshed they would positively welcome a return to mayhem after a few hours, a couple of days, of relative peace. Don’t we all hanker after continuity in our lives?
In choosing his words with precision, Starmer ties himself in knots unknown to even the most logically-minded of boy scouts. A ceasefire, he argues, would leave Hamas’s infrastructure intact, enabling them to carry out future attacks. This is speculation. It is not speculative to state that an end to bombing would save the lives of civilians who, under the laws of armed conflict, should have been left unscathed.
Then, careless of Keir’s plausible guesswork, along comes David Blunkett and lets the cat out of the bag. The former Labour home secretary tells us Starmer is right to align himself with the prime minister and with British allies in calling for “humanitarian pauses” to allow aid into Gaza, rather than a ceasefire, because it showed the party was a “government in waiting”.
So there we have it. Align yourself with all the right people and you’ll win the election. On the way, Labour averts vitriolic attack by the Daily Mail, thereby hopefully retaining the invaluable votes of the Israeli camp.
Absurdity comes with a sea view
FOR A stunning example of legalistic absurdity look no further than the case of Erw Goch.
For decades, this stretch of open land above Aberystwyth has been of great importance as a recreational green lung for people living in the intensively developed suburb of Waunfawr.
With its sea views and rich bird-life, it’s a place to unwind, to recharge, to take stock. Generations living nearby have used it for exactly that. The function of this stretch of publicly-owned semi-wildness is therefore well and truly established.
The fact that more than half a century ago it was vaguely earmarked by the then Cardiganshire County Council as a site for a school has long been irrelevant. It was never used for the school in question – Ysgol Penweddig – which ended up way off down the hill.
Perversely, however, Ceredigion council’s cabinet is trying to cling on to the notion that this hilltop remains available only for “educational use”.
Both sides in the protracted dispute over whether the land should be declared a village green, and thereby saved from being concreted over, know this tag has for many years been a meaningless label which ignores the reality that the disintegration of this entirely non-formalised designation began when Penweddig was built elsewhere, and continued in the 1990s when part of the Erw Goch land was snipped off to allow construction of Hafan y Waun care-home.
The facts speak for themselves. But, almost neurotically, Ceredigion council has now squandered £40,000 of badly needed public money on seeking outside legal advice that would confirm its quite unreasonable contention that the “educational use” condition survives.
Lawyers, apparently manipulating legalistic argument to the point of strangulation, have now claimed just that. It’s a verdict that of course works both ways, that leaves neither side victors.
If “educational use” is ever confirmed, it may end up blocking residents’ wish to have the land designated a village green.
Equally, it may stymie the cabinet’s stubborn attempts to usher in the 70 houses they, with a housing association, are pushing for.
Which raises the question of what possible purpose did those on the council backing development – in defiance of a clear community wish for a village green designation – think would be served by seeking external legal advice? Always, the outcome was perhaps predictable: they would be deposited up a blind alley helpful neither to them nor to backers of a village green.
A full meeting of Ceredigion council has now unanimously rejected the rather odd findings of the authority’s outside lawyers.
The councillors’ rebuff should signal the end of the affair. Logically and democratically, the only proper way forward is for the application for village green status to succeed, and for the entirely phoney “educational use” plea to be slung into history’s shredder.
Consequently, it’s unacceptable that the council’s cabinet is apparently refusing to accept the full council ruling. Worse, they now risk provoking a constitutional crisis by announcing their intention to “go away and seek further advice”. Which, apart from turning democracy on its head, would entail a further spending splurge at a time when council budgets are as stretched to breaking point.
In a refreshing and unusual assertion of their overriding authority, the full council has defied those who, mistakenly, regard themselves as being in the driving-seat.
Faced with this solid opposition, the cabinet is now devoid of any possible mandate to carry on trying to push through their housing plan. Ploughing on regardless, which is their intention, will be to stray into a land democratically unauthorised and uncharted.
11 November 2023
Bronterre News 