Showing posts with label arms. Show all posts
Showing posts with label arms. Show all posts

Saturday 7 July 2018

Brent Council to discuss motion on Gaza inquiry & arms control


Brent Council is to discuss a motion on Gaza at Monday's meeting put forward by the Labour Group:


Full Council – 9 July 2018 Motion selected by the Labour Group 

This council joins international condemnation of the recent killings of 130 Palestinian protestors by Israeli forces – firing live ammunition into crowds of unarmed civilians is illegal and must not be tolerated; any escalation in this long-running dispute is deeply regrettable. 

This council is appalled that more than two thirds of Palestinians are reliant on humanitarian assistance, with limited access to essential amenities such as water and electricity. 

This council supports the right to protest against such awful conditions, against the continuing blockade of Gaza, and occupation of Palestinian land, and in support of a viable two state solution. 

This council calls upon the UK government to encourage the UN Secretary General to renew his call for an independent international inquiry into these killings, and review the sale of arms that could be used in violation of international law. 

Councillor Kieron Gill Brondesbury Park Ward

Thursday 25 February 2016

Greens call for arms embargo against Saudi Arabia

Greens in the European Parliament  today call for an arms embargo against Saudi Arabia in the wake of serious allegations of breaches of international humanitarian law by the country in Yemen.

Ahead of the vote in the Parliament today, Greens have put forward a motion condemning the Saudi Arabian-led coalition airstrikes against Yemen; calling for a halt to military confrontation and expressing deep concern that some Member States are still supplying arms to Saudi Arabia in breach of EU arms exports rules. Greens also say that ongoing licensing and direct military training by EU Member States should be considered complicity in war crimes.

Molly Scott Cato, Green MEP for the South West, slated the UK government for initiating a secret deal with Saudi Arabia to ensure both states were elected to the UN human rights council and for being the largest arms supplier to the region since 2010; export licences to the kingdom under the coalition government of 2010-2015 totalled nearly £4bn. She said:

It is barbaric and totally immoral that we supply military equipment to a regime engaged in war crimes. Clearly Cameron sees the vested interests of the UK arms industry as more important than the lives of innocent children in Yemen. As for Saudi Arabia chairing the UN human rights council, this is an outrage that insults the many thousands of women, minorities and dissidents who have had their rights abused at the hands of this oppressive regime.
See also a full response to constituents who have contacted Molly regarding the Saudi Arabian-led intervention in Yemen.

Tuesday 24 November 2015

Don't bomb Syria - weaken ISIS by cutting off its funds and arms supplies

I am publishing this letter to Dawn Butler from local activist Sarah Cox as a Guest Blog in the light of Dawn Butler's call for constituents to give her their views on the bombing of Syria. Butler's poll is HERE

 I have just sent this email to Dawn Butler. Please email her too. You can do it through the Stop the War Coalition website Home or write your own email LINK
 
Dear Dawn Butler,

Thank you for your very thoughtful reply to my previous email to you about the possibility of Britain joining in the bombing of Syria. I would like to ask you to consider again how dangerous and indeed counterproductive such a course of action would be.

I am sure you agree that policy decisions should be evidence based, not the result of knee jerk reactions or simply about this country's position in the world, so I am asking you to consider the following facts:

The US has been bombing ISIS positions for a year now and far from reducing the number of ISIS fighters or the area of land they control, both have increased. In fact it has been argued by some Middle East experts that US bombs act as recruiting agents for ISIS.

The bombing and invasion of Iraq did not bring peace and stability to that country, in fact ISIS was born out of the divisions in Iraqi society introduced by the US sponsored Iraqi government.
The bombing and occupation of Afghanistan have not brought peace or stability to that country, nor did NATO forces succeed in their stated aim of eliminating the Taliban, which still controls large parts of the country.

Allied bombing of Libya has not brought peace or stability to that country, in fact it has resulted in the creation of a chaotic failed state in which ISIS is able to recruit and organise.

Only today we learn that Turkish forces have shot down a Russian plane, claiming it was over Turkish airspace, while Russia insists it had not left Syrian airspace. How sensible is it to send more planes into the already crowded airspace over ISIS positions in Syria?

There are up to six million civilians living in the areas under ISIS control. Do you seriously believe that US, French, Australian, Jordanian, Russian and, if this country joins in, British bombs can distinguish between innocent civilians and ISIS supporters any more than the bombs dropped on Dresden (arguably a war crime by today's standards) did between Nazis and ordinary people suffering under Nazi rule?

Can there be any justification for dropping bombs on ISIS because they behead and inflict other barbarous punishments on the people in the areas they control, while continuing to supply arms to Saudi Arabia and other states which also behead and inflict barbarous punishments on people living in their countries? Saudi Arabia does behead people publicly, contrary to what David Cameron says, earlier this year they advertised for eight more executioners and recently sentenced a Sri Lankan woman domestic worker to be stoned to death, yet Britain regards Saudi Arabia, which arms and supports ISIS as a friend and ally.

Surely Jeremy Corbyn is right to say that the priority must be to cut off funding, support and arms supplies to ISIS and to seek a political solution to the immensely complex situation in Syria?

As for the threat of terrorist attacks in this country, I believe that indiscriminate bombing and increasing Western intervention in the Middle East make these more likely and that cuts to police funding will make us less safe. At the same time, a climate of rising Islamophobia, cuts to youth services and policies like the Prevent strategy that seek to silence debate about foreign policy or issues like Palestine could increase disaffection among young Muslims.

Thank you for taking the time  to read this. Please vote against further bombing of Syria and support policies that weaken ISIS by decreasing or stopping its funding and its arms supplies.

Yours sincerely,
Sarah Cox