JEREMY CORBYN has been entirely correct to condemn the British government’s involvement in the current conflict in the Middle East.
Britain, along with the US and the EU, has indeed called for a ceasefire — but at the very same time British bases in Cyprus are being used as the main supply line to transfer US weaponry to Israel and thereby to prepare for today’s active intervention by the US in the conflict.
The US national security adviser Jake Sullivan confirmed this collaboration when he praised the prior “skilled work of the US military and meticulous joint planning in anticipation of the attack.”
At the same time, the Israeli government gave its own response to calls for a ceasefire by banning the UN general secretary Antonio Guterres from entering Israel.
In the past, as with Libya in 2011, governments have recalled Parliament at moments when there was danger that, directly or indirectly, British forces or British military facilities would be used in such interventions.
On September 26, days before any Iranian response to Israel’s murderous attacks on Lebanon, Reuters reported that the US had voted an additional package of $8.7 billion (£6.5bn) to enable it “to maintain a qualitative military edge in the region.”
By that stage Israeli forces had killed several hundred in Lebanon on top of the 41,000 in Gaza. Now there is full-scale war on Lebanese territory — as Israel pursues its previously declared aim to advance 40 miles from the border.
It is in these circumstances that the trade union and labour movement needs to scrutinise very carefully the Prime Minister’s repeated expressions of “support” for Israel.
Just a month ago, most press commentators in Britain, and some in Israel also, were expressing a total cynicism about Netanyahu’s turn against Lebanon and Hezbollah.
It was, they said, because Netanyahu needed another war to escape criminal prosecution. Gaza had been razed. The new war in Lebanon was to save his own career and was one which began with no provocation and was indeed proceeded by murderous acts of terrorism by Israel itself.
Labour’s call for an immediate ceasefire is correct — but it cannot be combined with “support” for Israel without discrediting that call itself. The stakes are now too high.
Iran’s engagement, though currently limited, has opened a new salient — one almost welcomed by Netanyahu — and which would, if intensified, soon broaden to involve Iraq and Syria at minimum.
The Progressive Peoples Party of Cyprus, until 2014 the ruling party in that country, has now issued an urgent call for international pressure to enforce a ceasefire — not just to call for a ceasefire at the same time as pouring new weapons for Israel via British military bases on that Island.
The statement warns of a much more serious regional war. China has equally expressed its deep concern, opposing the violation of Lebanese sovereignty and all moves that fuel antagonism.
Israel is a nuclear power. The consequences of regional war could quickly move beyond control. This is why, over and above immediate solidarity with those on the firing line in Lebanon and Palestine, Britain’s trade union and labour movement has a duty to intervene with our government.
Britain’s Cyprus bases cannot continue to be used as the main supply line for weapons of war to Israel. Nor is the use of British war planes in active service in the area. Our government has the power to end this overnight.
This weekend’s peace demonstrations are therefore very important in pushing home these demands, but they will not be effective without active pressure from trade unions and MPs. Calls for ceasefire are not compatible with actively providing the main base for supplying weapons of war.
