Made in Britain – Bombs in the Yemen.
Cover Image Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/felton-nyc/40455885145
The UK has been arming and supporting the Saudi-led coalition responsible for the deaths and injuries of an estimated 18,332 civilians in Yemen since 2015.
The UK is the world’s second largest arms exporter. According to official figures, exports reached a record £14 billion in 2018, with sales to Middle Eastern countries comprising almost 80% of that sum.
Whilst this was a statistic looked proudly upon by the British government, Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT), summed up the essence of such international trade, saying that the figures ‘exposed the rank hypocrisy at the heart of UK foreign policy.’
Of enduring concern for campaigners such as CAAT, has been the sale of arms to Saudi Arabia, who have been accused of gross violations of international laws of war and human rights in Yemen.
Saudi Arabian involvement in Yemen began in 2015, after the start of the civil war. A Saudi-led coalition of Arab states is fighting primarily against Houthi rebels, who are backed by Iran, seeking to restore the legitimate government of Yemen. However, a UN report found evidence of potential war crimes, accusing the Saudi-led coalition of indiscriminate air-raids that have killed civilians, and the deliberate denial of food to Yemeni civilians who already faced starvation.
Tens of thousands of people have been indiscriminately killed and injured, according to research by the Yemen Data Project. Infrastructure has been destroyed, and as well as being brought to the brink of famine, the Yemeni people have experienced a cholera epidemic. The UN has described the situation in Yemen as the world’s biggest humanitarian disaster, and pointed to potential war crimes by complicit Western countries such as the UK who have provided material and diplomatic support to Saudi Arabia. The UK has licensed over £5.3 billion worth of arms to Saudi Arabia since the start of the bombing, and provided logistical and intelligence support. UK weapons used include BAE Systems aircrafts: Typhoon and Tornado, UK-made cluster bombs and UK-supplied precision guided weapons.
How has the government justified this? A 2016 parliamentary report that discussed UK-manufactured arms in Saudi Arabia described the UK-Saudi relationship as being one of ‘friendship and cooperation’ and highlighted the supposed value of such a relationship. Saudi Arabia is said to be key to UK security as a counter-terrorism partner and an ‘influential voice in the region [with] an essential role to play in resolving conflicts, particularly in Syria and Yemen.’ The report acknowledges some human rights disagreement between the two countries, however it only references domestic issues. It continues to defend the relationship, declaring that the benefits to UK trade are not its main drivers, saying that: ‘A significant number of British jobs depend on contracts won in the Kingdom, but this does not in any way come at the expense of human rights.’ However, the UK has continually chosen to ignore or attempt to refute claims of breaches of international law by the Saudis, and thus any possibility of British wrong-doing. The government has been blinkered by its self-interest and continued to act immorally, supporting the coalition in its human rights abuses.
At the beginning of the conflict in Yemen, in March 2015, the UK’s Foreign Secretary at the time, Philip Hammond, said: ‘We’ll support the Saudis in every practical way short of engaging in combat.’ This statement seems to be falsely premised on the idea that avoiding direct engagement in combat is less immoral than supplying the weapons to enable Saudi Arabia to do so.
The murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in October 2018, was a high-profile event which gathered international media attention. This resulted in Germany deciding to reject any further export licences to Saudi Arabia in 2018. However, the US, UK and France did not, even going so far as to criticise Germany in fear of their commercial interests being put at risk.
In an attempt to justify the UK government’s support of Saudi Arabia, Jeremy Hunt recently claimed in an article for Politico that the consequences of the UK halting arms sales to Saudi Arabia to use in Yemen would be ‘morally bankrupt,’ as the benefits we receive from the relationship in terms of influence over the Middle East are too valuable to risk. He said: ‘Britain’s history and our values require us to play our part in making a constructive difference in the Middle East.’ This sort of self-aggrandisement has arguably driven much of British foreign policy through history and fails as a moral justification. Hunt attempts to further his argument by focussing on the ‘path to peace’ in the form of the Stockholm agreement that the UK has apparently led. The agreement seeks cease-fire and mutual redeployment of forces, and is actually led by the UN, with the involvement of the UK. In fact, without the support from the UK and US for the Saudis, the war in Yemen would arguably be unsustainable. Hunt goes on to state with similar undertones of UK importance, fears that halting arms exports to Saudi Arabia would ‘make ourselves [the UK] irrelevant to the course of events in Yemen.’ Again, this does not make our involvement in Yemen morally justifiable.
Ironically, the UK government has boasted about the increasing amounts of humanitarian aid being sent to Yemen to help the millions at risk of starvation, and its leadership in making sure that supplies get through Yemen’s Red Sea Ports. This, however, serves to divert attention from the UK’s arms export policy which indeed supports the source of the humanitarian crisis that needs increasing amounts of aid in the first place. No amount of aid can compensate for the complicity of the UK government in the crisis.
Just as the UK government has ignored international norms, it has laughed in the face of domestic jurisdiction. Even after the London Court of Appeal ruled arms sales to Saudi Arabia to have been illegal, in April 2019, it has been admitted by current foreign secretary, Liz Truss, that the UK government has breached this several times, unlawfully granting further export licences.
In stark contrast, European countries including the UK have very recently said they would stop exporting arms to Turkey which could be used in its military operation in Syria, amidst worries that such military action could destabilise the Middle East. The double standard between the swift condemnation of Turkey, and the persistent support of Saudi Arabia is plain to see. Why, one may ask? It seems clear when you compare the value of the Turkish market with that of Saudi Arabia which is much larger and more valuable to the UK and other European arms exporters. The governments seem to be far less concerned about consistent principles like human rights and democracy, which they advocate, than they are with their own interests.
The apparently ‘robust regime’ that controls UK arms exports is not so. The UK is playing a reckless role in the Middle East and explaining it away with self-interested rationale. Thanks to campaigns by groups such as CAAT, the government is finally being held more accountable for its actions, however even the court order has not put an end to the export licences to Saudi Arabia.
The controversy has not been a secret, however it has not gained much traction in the media and we should be asking ourselves why. Is it because we are not the ones personally dropping the bombs? Does the conflict seem too far away - out of sight out of mind? If so, we must question our morals and our lack of action. In the UK, the majority of us are in fact against overseas military intervention, according to a YouGov poll, and against economic benefits being prioritised over human rights in international trade, according to Ipsos MORI. These beliefs should be reflected in our foreign policy. Can our lack of protest be explained by our preoccupation with domestic affairs such as Brexit? Or is it because there is so much going on internationally that we have become desensitised and apathetic? Is it the media who are responsible for the lack of attention? Many refer to the Yemen war as the ‘forgotten war’, as Western media tends to focus on Syria. Either way, we must remain diligent, keep ourselves educated and hold the government accountable.
