|
UK
Parliament: Inquiry into the use of British arms in Yemen, ending March 25,
2016 This inquiry has been welcomed by
many, but I cannot help it, but I really have a much more critical approach
to that inquiry. Where is it really for? There already had been a parliament
inquiry in December 2015 on the Yemen war, with quite a lot of evidence given,
evidence. This was a bulk of evidence showing the dimension of the
destructions, losses and victims by the Saudi coalition air raids, and by
that proving that the Saudi side had committed a lot of war crimes in this
war. And after this inquiry, there had
been a resolution by the European parliament requiring a ban on arms exports
to Saudi Arabia. It should be evident that British weapons bought by the
Saudis have been used in this war in the same way as weapons imported from
other countries. If Britain had exported a plenty of weapons to Saudi Arabia,
they will have been more often used than weapons exported by another country,
let us say Belgium. So what about this inquiry? By this new inquiry, the critics
of British arms exports to Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States now are required
to proof – attack by attack – that especially British arms have been used.
That will be difficult up to impossible in the most cases. To identify the
air plans raging over your head while you are running for a shelter? Seeing
whether they are (British) Typhoon Eurofighters or American F-15 bombers? The
greater part of attacks happening at night –still a greater job to identify
the planes, really. The bombs dropped – were they
really British? There are a lot of images and films showing the victims and
the destruction of the raids. Well, now parliament asks whether the bombs
dropped on some mountain village really were British or not. The village is
in ruins and many people are killed, anyway. The whole intention of this
inquiry sounds odd to me. I only now two cases for certain, when British
bombs have been used. But what is the evidence of that? That there are just 2
out of 16.000 air raids in which British bombs had been dropped? The Saudis have bought a plenty of
British bombs, BAE Typhoon Eurofighters form a major part of the Saudi air
fleet. British arms export to Saudi Arabia really had exploded since the
beginning of the Yemen war. Thus, if x % of the bombs bought by the Saudis
und y % of their air fleet being BAE Typhoons, statistics and reality just
tell us that x % of the bombs dropped on Yemen are British and y % of the air
planes used for that are British, only unless you clearly have different
evidence. Or who really will believe that
the bombs they bought from the British just will be stapled in the Saudi
arsenals, while only American, Italian etc. made bombs are dropped? Who
really will believe that the BAE Typhoons mostly stay on the ground, that just
US bombers flying all the raids? That would be nonsense just unless otherwise
PROVED. Thus, I think the result of this
inquiry will be that only in very few cases it can really be proved that
British arms and equipment is involved. The result of this inquiry will serve
the Tory government – which always has proofed to be almost “horny” for
selling arms to Saudi Arabia – to claim that they now have got the proof that
British arms exports almost are not involved in the Yemen war, and they so
have the right to continue their arms exports. Well, anybody would know that
this claim would be a folly – but it will be no greater folly than for
instance the permanent claim of Mr. Ellwood that there is no evidence for
Saudi air strikes hitting civilians, telling this again and again like a
broken disk against all evidence. Thus, in any case, probability calculation, logics and common sense
tell us that British weapons are very often used in the Yemen war, killing,
injuring and destroying. In
“The Independent”, Andrew Smith wrote on March, 14: “Despite this enthusiasm for arms sales, UK arms export law is very
clear. It says that licences for military equipment
should not be granted if there is a “clear risk” that it “might”
be used in violation of international humanitarian law. By any reasonable
interpretation these criteria should surely prohibit all arms sales to Saudi
Arabia that could be used in Yemen.” There nothing has to be added. |