What has ‘eliminating’ civilians digging family & friends buried alive under rubble following an Israeli attack on residential buildings in Gaza, have to do with the security of Israel?

If you Google – ‘Daniel Davis Deep Dive + Israel Strikes Iran – Precise but FEEBLE + YouTube’ and fast forward to 11:32, you will see film footage in which following an Israeli attack on residential houses in which 38 people were killed, a boy digging his Mother out of the rubble says:

‘I looked at my Mother and did not know what to do.
While I was trying to dig her out, I looked up and saw a Tank aiming at me.
Everybody else was doing the same and digging in fear.
Then a quadcopter came and started shooting at us.’

Some members of the IDF have refused to commit war crimes.

‘We … have been on reserve duty in the occupied territories, and were issued commands and directives that had nothing to do with the security of our country, and that had the sole purpose of perpetuating our control over the Palestinian people. … The missions of occupation and oppression do not serve (the) purpose (of Israel’s defence) – and we shall take no part in them.’ (Combatant’s Letter, ‘Courage to Refuse.’ Cited in Footnote 15 of Chapter 7 on p.140 of ‘The Cambridge Handbook Of The Just War’, edited by Larry May (2018). The letter is no longer accessible on the internet).

Google – ‘Anadolu Ajanasi + Israeli minister’s Greater Israel remarks spark controversy.’

Look at the 2nd map.

It shows Zionist ‘Greater Israel’ including what is today: Gaza; the West Bank; Lebanon; Syria; Iraq; Jordan & Egypt.

So, Israel is not defending itself.

It is committing the war crimes of : (i) ethic cleaning; & (ii) genocide, in order to clear all Arabs off the land it has designated as being part of Zionist ‘Greater Israel.’

To achieve that paramount strategic & stated government policy aim, Israel must first defeat all of its ‘enemies’ including Iran.

So, I do not think that a regional war has been avoided. I think that it is just beginning.

What I am wondering is:

(i) since using UK taxpayer monies to help Israel bring about its vision of a Zionist ‘Greater Israel’ was not mentioned in Labour’s election manifesto; &
(ii) there has been no referendum on the issue;

then what political mandate do Keir Starmer & David Lammy have to support the bringing about of a Zionist ‘Greater Israel?’

If they are not doing this, i.e. in our name & using British taxpayer’s money, then why have they taken sides with an extreme Zionist regime whose stated aim is to establish a Zionist ‘Greater Israel’?

I.E. why has the UK sided with Israel, who commit acts of ethnic cleansing & genocide before our eyes every day?

On 1 October (when they attacked Lebanon) & on 26 October (when they attacked Iran), Israel also acted in breach of Article 51 of the UN Convention. See my comment.

‘The use of force is prohibited as a choice of conduct toward another state, just as domestically the criminal law forbids individuals from violence toward one another. A monopoly on legal use of force rests with the supranational organisation, the UN, not individual states. Accordingly, Article 51 to the UN Charter copies the domestic systems rule of self-defence in cases in which the government cannot bring its power to bear to prevent illegal violence’ (John Yoo, ‘Using force’ University of Chicago Law Review 71 (2004) page 738.)

So, why do Keir Starmer & David Lammy appear to be saying that by attacking Lebanon & Iran, i.e. in breach of Art 51 of the UN Charter, that the Zionist regime in Israel was acting in ‘self-defence?’

Israel has also attacked UN peace-keeping forces in Lebanon.

Are Starmer & Lammy also saying that Israel was also acting in ‘self-defence’ when it did this?

If they are, then where does that leave the western liberal International Rules based order in the eyes of the Global South & BRICS?

In other words, by taking sides with the Zionist regime in Israel, what permanent diplomatic damage have these two politicians done to the reputation of Britain globally and to our economic/trading interests?

I think that the UK under the leadership of Starmer & Lammy could end up between a ‘rock’ (i.e. Donald Trump) & a ‘hard place’ (i.e. BRICS + the rest of the Global South). I am not convinced that Starmer & Lammy (neither of whom have ever worked in international trade – which I have), understand that when a procurement specification is designed, it can specify standards and requirements that make exporting from the UK uneconomic/impossible. In other words, that if BRICS (+ states in the Global South) choose to do so, that they can exclude UK businesses from participating in international trade in markets spread across 2/3 of the surface of the globe. I hope that Rachel Reeves, her Treasury advisors & the civil servants in the FO understand this. Let’s see what unfolds. My fear is that under Labour, Britain will become increasingly excluded from participation in global markets. That is potentially a disaster for UK businesses & ultimately for UK taxpayers, & may be the price the UK is made to pay for siding with ‘Zionism.’ I am wondering just how educated, geopolitically informed, worldly, experienced and bright, these Labour politicians actually are?