In denying Gaza genocide, UK's Starmer incurs a severe political liability

This week, United Kingdom Prime Minister Keir Starmer told the Houses of Commons that what is happening in Gaza does not fit the definition of genocide.

This came in response to Independent MP Ayoub Khan's question asking Starmer to share his definition of genocide.

Rather than reply with a definition, something Starmer should have been able to do easily given his background as a former human rights lawyer, he answered defensively, suggesting that the Hamas-led attacks justified Israel's genocidal war on Gaza.

He stated, "It would be wise to start a question like that by reference to what happened in October of last year. I'm well aware of the definition of genocide, and that is why I've never described this as and referred to it as genocide."

This answer confirms suspicions that Starmer believes Israel's indiscriminate and inhumane response against Gaza is justified. No one has forgotten Starmer's infamous LBC interview in October 2023, when he said that Israel had the right to withhold electricity and water from Palestinian civilians in order to defend itself.

Now, more than a year later, Starmer's new answer to Khan reiterates that he believes in the collective punishment of Palestinians and will never call their treatment a genocide.

Horrific scenes

The PM's remarks came just one day after health workers, including retired UK surgeon Nizam Mamode, testified at the Houses of Parliament about the horrific scenes they witnessed while working on the ground in Gaza.

Mamode told the International Development Committee (IDC) on Tuesday about the catastrophic state of healthcare in Gaza, after working at Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis, in south Gaza.

In his testimony, Mamode said day after day, seriously injured children would recall lying on the ground following an air strike, only for Israeli quadcopters to hover over them and directly shoot them.

He also told the IDC what he witnessed in Gaza was on a scale he has not seen elsewhere, including his work in Rwanda during that country's genocide. The Chair of the Committee, Labour MP Sarah Champion, said the IDC will do all it can to make sure everyone hears Mamode's testimony. She added, "If leaders are not yet listening, they should be by now." By ‘leaders,' she could have only meant Starmer.

Mamode's testimony was broadcasted on numerous news channels that same day. But Starmer's refusal to call it a genocide the following day just shows yet again that no matter how much evidence of genocide is presented to the UK Government, he will not budge on his stance on Palestine's Gaza.

At the heart of it is his fear of rocking the boat with Israel, after relations recently became strained when Starmer banned 10 percent of arms export licenses to the country.

Legal accountability

The IDC sets its own agenda and can make enquiries into the policies and spending of the UK's Foreign Office and call for policy change, but it has no legislative power.

In 2016, it said the government should stop selling arms to Saudi Arabia, meaning the UK was arming one side of the conflict.

The IDC has yet to call for a similar cessation in the UK government's arming of Israel; perhaps it considers it a dangerous move as it would effectively confirm that the UK is complicit in arming a genocide.

Perhaps this too is Starmer's fear and why he is reluctant to use the word "genocide," despite numerous world politicians, the International Court of Justice and UN Special Rapporteur for the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Francesca Albanese, saying it is.

The UK is very much still arming Israel and thus very much still complicit.

The government suspended 30 arms export licenses to Israel in September, but 320 licenses remain, and Elbit Systems, Israel's largest arms manufacturer, operates 16 facilities in the UK.

There are also UK financial interests in it for Starmer not using the term ‘genocide.’ Israel says it is still interested in pursuing a free trade deal with the UK, and recently, a UK government spokesman said the UK was committed to delivering its trade negotiations with Israel, including building upon £6.1billion of trade and 38,000 British jobs.

What is striking is that while Starmer refuses to call this particular genocide what it is, as pointed out by author Ed Sykes in his recent op-ed in The Canary, he has no issue calling Daesh's killing of Yazidis, China's treatment of the Uighur community and the 8,000 Muslim men and boys murdered in Srebrenica, genocides.

In this instance, Starmer's reluctance stems from his desire to maintain his relationships with Israel and the US.

Former Trump advisor Robert O'Brien warned the UK at the end of August that there could be "serious rift" in US-UK relations if it implemented an arms embargo on Israel.

Starmer clearly values those two relationships more than the UK's standing in the United Nations and its relationships with countries such as Norway, Spain and South Africa, whose leaders have all called the Israeli war on Gaza a genocide.

Political fallout

The gulf between Starmer's stance on Gaza versus what other British politicians and the British public think could not be wider, and the two events at the Houses of Parliament this week demonstrate this.

While Starmer denies genocide, IDC committee Chair Sarah Champion says "the UK needs to take seriously the prospect of international humanitarian law having been egregiously broken in Gaza."

Meanwhile, a new Ipsos poll highlights how out of touch Starmer is with the British public. The poll found that three in five people in the UK (60 percent) think Israel's actions in Palestine's Gaza have gone too far, and only 12 percent believe that Starmer has done a good job in response to the conflict.

After substantial Labour losses during the UK local elections in May 2024, Starmer promised to regain the trust of voters who have sidelined the party over his stance on Gaza.

But his refusal to call the war a genocide and decision to continue arming Israel are only deepening public distrust, making winning back former Labour voters at the next local and general elections unlikely.

As head of the Council for Arab-British Understanding Joseph Willits wrote last month, Starmer's actions – or lack thereof – are damaging the credibility of the Labour Party, which frames itself as the "Party for International Justice."

Just take a look at the Labour Campaign for Human Rights website, which includes a call for the party to identify, prevent and respond to mass atrocities, including genocide. The website defines this as "Efforts to destroy a group through various measures, including killing its members, preventing births within the group, and separating children from the group."

This all sounds familiar because it is exactly what Israel is doing to Palestinians in Gaza. Perhaps this is the definition Starmer could have used during Prime Ministers' Questions on Wednesday.

Starmer's refusal to acknowledge reality won't just hurt him at home.

On an international level, if Starmer continues to turn a blind eye to the evidence presented to the UK government of ethnic cleansing in Gaza and the ICC eventually succeeds in issuing arrest warrants for Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu and former Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant over war crimes and crimes against humanity, Starmer could land the UK government in hot water.

This holds true especially if its complicity in arming the Israeli government came to light at an international law court.

The UK would lose its credibility as an upholder of international humanitarian law - not great for its world reputation, and as the UK's serving Prime Minister, Starmer would likely be held to account by the British public, given he has had many opportunities to bring an end to the mass atrocities in Gaza, but hasn't.