When Iran launched almost 200 ballistic missiles at targets across Israel on Tuesday, there were fears that it would ignite a wider regional conflict. That a wider war has not (yet) erupted is partly due to the fact that most of the missiles were intercepted by Israel and what the Israeli Defense Forces’ (IDF) spokesman called ‘a defensive coalition led by the United States’. The United Kingdom was part of that coalition. But what role did the UK really play on Tuesday night? And how does that support square with the Labour government’s hostility towards Israel?
Defence Secretary, John Healey, reiterated that ‘the UK stands fully behind Israel’s right to defend its country and its people against threats’ when he confirmed that British forces ‘played their part’ in defending Israel this week. This isn’t the first time Britain has backed Israel in this way. When Iran last attacked Israel in April, the Royal Air Force deployed Typhoon FGR4 fighters from RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus, alongside tanker aircraft, to help intercept their drones and missiles. A great deal has changed since April, however.
The general election saw the arrival of a new triumvirate to determine British foreign and security policy: the cautious and legalistic Sir Keir Starmer as prime minister, a new foreign secretary in the headstrong, moralising David Lammy, and John Healey, a meticulous, pragmatic Yorkshireman at the head of the Ministry of Defence. While the UK may pledge its support for Israel’s right to self-defence, two significant decisions have been taken which have changed the bilateral relationship.
The first step was to overturn the previous government’s objection to the International Criminal Court (ICC) issuing an arrest warrant for Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and defence minister Yoav Gallant for war crimes and crimes against humanity. A Downing Street spokesman stepped smartly away from the controversy by saying that ‘our position on this process matter is that it is for the courts and prosecutor to decide’.
Then, in September, the Foreign Secretary told parliament that the government was suspending around 30 licences for the export of military equipment to Israel because ‘there exists a clear risk that they might be used to commit or facilitate a serious violation of international humanitarian law’. These licences included components for F-16 fighter aircraft, unmanned aerial vehicles, naval systems and targeting equipment.
These decisions have damaged the UK’s relationship with Israel, with Netanyahu describing the suspension of arms export licences as ‘shameful’. It is against this backdrop that we have to view the government’s pledges of support this week. Suspending exports and stepping back from the ICC warrant procedure sit uneasily with committing British armed forces to the physical defence of Israel: the UK’s policy on Israel suddenly looks contradictory and confused.
Britain’s support for Israel this week was largely cosmetic
Britain’s military contribution will have reassured many decision-makers in Jerusalem. Healey revealed after the event that, while UK assets had been ready to take action, they ‘didn’t need to do so’.
But the Defence Secretary is putting a positive gloss even on that: unlike in April, when Iran launched a combination of drones, rockets and missiles, Tuesday’s attack relied predominantly on ballistic missiles and may have included the hypersonic, highly manoeuvrable Fattah system. The Typhoon FGR4 jets used by the RAF are air superiority fighters which can also be used for air-to-ground precision strikes. They can intercept slower unmanned aerial vehicles, as happened in April’s operation, but they are not equipped to track or engage ballistic missiles.
The Royal Navy also contributed to this week’s deployment in the shape of HMS Duncan, a Type 45 air defence destroyer which has been in the region since May. She is equipped with the Sea Viper anti-air missile system which can engage and intercept a large number of airborne threats and has been used to shoot down Houthi drones and missiles in the Red Sea. However, it is reported that HMS Duncan did not fire any Sea Viper missiles on Tuesday.
There is debate over the full capability of HMS Duncan. The Ministry of Defence has asserted that she can intercept ballistic missiles, but the former defence secretary Sir Ben Wallace suggested this would be difficult pending a £300 million upgrade to the Sea Viper system which he authorised in 2022. He said yesterday that the UK ‘should with immediate effect seek to accelerate the already planned upgrade of their missile systems in light of what we are seeing in the Middle East’.
Britain’s support for Israel this week was largely cosmetic. Sending military assets which cannot directly engage the immediate threat from Iran is symbolic of the government’s muddled attitude towards Israel. It is supportive of our ally, but not unconditionally, and will wring its hands when the conflicts in Gaza and Lebanon become controversial. This agonised semi-solidarity may be an attempt to split the difference between bitterly polarised arguments, but it is not what serious grown-up statecraft looks like.