From Balfour to Israeli Bombs: How Britain Engineered a Century of Palestine's Occupation
In the decades following the formation of the Israeli regime, Britain not only helped shape the geopolitical contours of the Middle East but also maintained its unwavering support for Israel. One of the most salient aspects of this support is the consistent political and military alignment exhibited in international forums, particularly within the United Nations Security Council. The British government has repeatedly voiced support for Israel in various debates and has, at times, facilitated the adoption of resolutions that legitimized military operations or broadened backing for this strategic ally.
From Balfour to Israeli Bombs: How Britain Engineered a Century of Palestine's Occupation
In the decades following the formation of the Israeli regime, Britain not only helped shape the geopolitical contours of the Middle East but also maintained its unwavering support for Israel. One of the most salient aspects of this support is the consistent political and military alignment exhibited in international forums, particularly within the United Nations Security Council. The British government has repeatedly voiced support for Israel in various debates and has, at times, facilitated the adoption of resolutions that legitimized military operations or broadened backing for this strategic ally.
Arming the Israeli Occupation
Moreover, Britain’s military support for Israel has continued unabated in recent decades, manifesting in large-scale arms sales, the transfer of advanced technologies, and diplomatic backing in international circles. Between 2020 and 2024, British arms exports to Israel exceeded £442 million, encompassing components for fighter aircraft, missile systems, and electronic warfare equipment. Defense cooperation agreements signed in 2023 expanded military collaboration through joint training exercises and intelligence sharing. Critics argue that this sustained and systematic support constitutes a form of indirect military assistance that enables the Israeli regime to carry out operations resulting in the loss of Palestinian lives and escalating tensions in the occupied territories. Furthermore, London’s backing is viewed as part of a broader and intricate web of alliances that perpetuate aggressive policies against Palestinians—a pattern that persists even amid rising humanitarian concerns.
Double Standards and Zero Credibility
Human rights activists have repeatedly pointed to the indirect role played by the British government in intensifying violence in the region. Many contend that by continuing to support Israel—both politically and economically—Britain contributes to conditions in which the rights of Palestinian civilians are routinely violated. They argue that this support creates a structural framework that normalizes aggressive policies, excessive use of force, and the ongoing military occupation. This perspective highlights the dissonance between Britain’s public condemnations of civilian casualties and its behind-the-scenes decisions that empower one party in the conflict. The tension between these contradictory stances reveals the duplicity of Western policy—a policy that publicly denounces violence, yet covertly enables mechanisms that foster oppression and bloodshed.
Indeed, such duplicity serves not to Britain’s advantage, but rather undermines its credibility in the international system and among human rights institutions. Over time, this has also eroded the legitimacy of Western governments more broadly. Since October 7, this reality has become increasingly apparent to Western societies—that their governments consistently prioritize strategic interests and power over humanitarian and moral considerations.
Britain’s Long Game in the Middle East: A Moral Bankruptcy?
Ultimately, critics contend that Britain’s comprehensive and enduring support for Israel cannot be divorced from the broader strategic objectives it seeks to pursue—objectives aimed at consolidating power within the international order. From this vantage point, the alliance with Israel is not merely a partnership rooted in shared values or security interests; it is a calculated endeavor to maintain Britain’s influence and authority on the global stage. Within this framework, support for Israel is perceived not only as foreign policy but as an integral part of Britain’s overarching strategy to safeguard its strategic position in the international hierarchy. In this context, the Israeli regime serves as a vital instrument through which Britain seeks to assert its regional ambitions in Southwest Asia. Nevertheless, these actions and approaches have incurred—and continue to incur—significant costs for the British government. It remains to be seen how far this cost-benefit calculation will continue to prove advantageous, and whether Britain will persist in pursuing this dual-track policy.
