Declassified UK (RSS/Atom feed)

https://www.declassifieduk.org/

RSS/Atom feed of Declassified UK
More feeds can be found in my following list

Public Key

npub18a58aldhx9v04tv5z4avs2mtq9xsuhgpz6mr3dmrjnul9rraaasqlkrcqw

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsr76r7lkmnzk864k2p27kg9d4szngwt5q3dd3cka3ef70j33777cqpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduqs6amnwvaz7tmwdaejumr0dsxqurw2

Publishing to

relay.damus.io

nos.lol

Author Public Key

npub18a58aldhx9v04tv5z4avs2mtq9xsuhgpz6mr3dmrjnul9rraaasqlkrcqw

Show more details

Last Notes

2026-09-22 07:55:44 GMT

Israel killed three UK citizens. Now their families want answers
[The coffin of aid worker James Henderson at Truro Cathedral in May 2024]
A pre-inquest review opened today into the killing of three British citizens working as security consultants for World Central Kitchen (WCK) in Gaza.
James ‘Jim’ Henderson, 33, James Kirby, 47, and John Chapman, 57, were among seven aid workers killed in a series of Israeli drone strikes on 1 April 2024.
Then UK prime minister Rishi Sunak [told][1] Benjamin Netanyahu he was “appalled” by the incident while current foreign secretary Ed Miliband described the killings as “cold-blooded”.
Nochi Mendel, the colonel who ordered the strike, [said][2] he is “not sorry” and the Israeli military recently announced it would not pursue any criminal investigations.
At Avon Coroner’s Court in Bristol, lawyers for the aid workers’ families demanded a full investigation into the incident including the actions and policies of the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) as well as the munitions used.
They want the inquest to establish whether the aid workers were unlawfully killed and whether the strikes were conducted in accordance with Israel’s targeting and deconfliction policies, with the coroner already indicating she will include the IDF and Mendel as interested persons.
The families have also requested that enquiries be made to Britain’s Ministry of Defence (MoD) amid questions about intelligence sharing with Israel, with a view to also including that department as an interested person.
This comes after *Declassified* [revealed][3] a British surveillance aircraft overflew Gaza shortly before the attack, with the UK government refusing to release the footage or even disclose the aircraft’s flight path.
In a statement outside the court, the Kirby family said: “The coroner told us today that Colonel Mendel, the Israeli military and the Israeli government are going to be made interested persons in this inquest.
“We also have questions for the British government. An RAF surveillance plane was flying over Gaza on the day James died. The Ministry of Defence has the footage from that flight but will not tell us whether it shows the area where the convoy was hit. We think the coroner should be given it.
“We are now asking the Government to give the Coroner whatever it has, and to keep pressing Israel for the drone footage and the other evidence. If Israel says no, people should be told that.
“There is no other independent investigation into James’ death. This inquest is all we have, and we are going to see it through”.
### RELATED
[
## UK covers up Gaza spy footage from day of aid...
][4] [READ MORE **][5]
## **The massacre**
Over the past two years, an Australian government investigation alongside various media and firsthand accounts have shed light on what happened the night of the attack.
Shortly after 11pm local time, the aid workers were targeted by three Israeli drone strikes launched roughly four minutes apart while travelling in a WCK convoy towards Rafah.
Earlier that evening, the convoy had escorted aid trucks from a makeshift pier to the WCK welcome centre in Deir el-Balah, where locally contracted security guards boarded the vehicles, according to the [Australian investigation][6].
Some of those local guards were armed, according to IDF officers who were monitoring the operation from above with surveillance drones, with one allegedly firing a gun into the air.
The IDF claimed the presence of the local guards indicated a hijacking by Hamas, despite the convoy continuing along its planned route and unloading the aid at a WCK warehouse some three miles south.
After unloading the aid, IDF drones continued to watch from the skies as the WCK convoy [departed][7] west towards the coastal road while a car carrying the local guards drove north.
The WCK convoy was supposed to return via the welcome centre, but a decision was made to travel directly to the accommodation in Rafah due to the operation being delayed, according to the Australian [investigation][8].
While this amounted to a modification in the route, it did not [impact][9] the decision to target the convoy because the IDF only became aware of this diversion later on.
The IDF [says][10] it then “mistakenly believed that the vehicles” travelling south “contained Hamas military operatives and therefore struck the vehicles”, with one [account][11] suggesting a bag put into one of the WCK vehicles was erroneously thought to be a weapon.
When the airstrikes were launched, the WCK convoy was nowhere near any Israeli troops and posed no reasonable threat to the IDF.
In written submissions to the coroner’s court, lawyers for the Henderson family argued the IDF’s narrative is “contradicted by all of the available evidence”.
“At its highest”, they wrote, “there was an alleged mistaken identification of a bag being placed into one of the cars being a gun or containing a gun”.
Pete Weatherby, representing the Henderson family, noted how the lawyers were “piecing together from open source material either from Mendel or the Israeli official position different and not entirely consistent narratives”.
He said it would therefore be useful for the Israeli government to finally outline “what they say actually happened factually as a starting point for the investigation”.
The strikes were “intentionally lethal”, lawyers added in written submissions, “and the postmortem finding shows that Jim’s injuries were so severe they resulted in his immediate death”.
When asked about WCK, Mendel previously [said][12]: “Unfortunately, they aren’t really a neutral organisation. Not really an organisation you can say is innocent and completely clean… It has ties to Hamas”.
## **Scope of the inquest**
Given Israel’s failure to provide a full account of the incident or pursue a criminal investigation, lawyers for the families have requested that the coroner launch a thorough and independent investigation into how the deaths came about.
The investigation, they contend, should go beyond the immediate circumstances of the incident to the IDF’s policies on targeting and deconfliction with the goal of determining whether the aid workers were killed unlawfully.
This is particularly important within the context of the IDF carrying out a pattern of strikes on aid convoys and premises during the six months prior to the WCK massacre.
“It appears *prima facie* that this is a case where three British citizens (and others) were unlawfully killed by the military of an allied nation”, the Hendersons’ lawyers argued in written submissions.
They pointed to a recent investigation in the *Guardian* which found the WCK strikes were “in line with a general policy employed by the Israeli military of… ‘incrimination’, which gives commanders in the field wide discretion on designating someone as a ‘terrorist’.”
The coroner’s court also heard that the strikes were launched with a Hermes 450 drone, [alleged][13] by Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT) to be powered by UK-made engines.
“There has been a great deal of public concern around the possibility that UK manufactured components or UK based research and development contributed to the killing of Jim and his colleagues”, the lawyers submitted.
Establishing the source of weaponry used in the attack is therefore “central” to understanding how the aid workers came to their death and “should be investigated”.
The lawyers also pointed to how an inquest jury previously found Tom Hurndall, another British national who died in Gaza in 2006, had been “unlawfully and intentionally killed” by the IDF.
### RELATED
[
## Minister misled parliament over arms exports to Israel
][14] [READ MORE **][15]
## **Surveillance footage **
The lawyers also requested that Britain’s MoD disclose whether it holds relevant surveillance or intelligence data relating to the incident.
The MoD previously informed *Declassified* that it holds video surveillance footage of Gaza from the day of the aid worker massacre but is refusing to publish the tape.
The footage was taken by a RAF surveillance plane which spent approximately five hours above the strip that day, returning to base shortly before the airstrikes took place.
The MoD may therefore have collected footage of events leading up to the tragedy, which could provide clarity over Israeli claims regarding Hamas “gunmen” near the convoy.
To this end, lawyers submitted that “the British Ministry of Defence… should be given the opportunity to be interested persons in these inquest proceedings”.
The lawyers specifically noted how any footage taken over Gaza that day “is obviously potentially relevant, and may show the progress and actions of the convoy”.
The coroner suggested that initial questions will be put to the MoD before deciding whether to include the department as an interested person.
Further information was requested from the Foreign Office with regard to what measures were in place to keep British aid workers in Gaza safe prior to April 2024, and what additional actions have been taken since the incident.
Elbit Systems has also been recommended as an interested person given the company could provide a witness statement confirming “whether any part of the [drone] originated in the UK”.
“As you know Elbit operates 16 facilities in the UK, the centrepiece is very close to where we are now in Bristol,” the lawyers said today.
“In terms of allaying public concern we would say this is a key part of this particular inquisitorial process and therefore evidence should be obtained from Elbit and they should be invited to take part in the process”.
In addition, the coroner has been requested to seek disclosure of IDF drone footage and audio, the IDF’s investigation file, IDF policy and procedures documents, and internal material from WCK.
The Foreign Office recently [announced][16]: “The World Central Kitchen attack is one of countless incidents in Gaza where there has been no accountability. In Gaza, humanitarian workers continue to work tirelessly to support civilians in desperate need, risking their lives whilst working in the most perilous conditions.
“Yet despite the fragile ceasefire, Gaza remains the deadliest place to deliver aid, with 186 humanitarian workers killed in 2025. Israel must comply with its obligations under international humanitarian law, and must do more to ensure that humanitarian staff can carry out their work safely. Lessons must be learnt from this tragedy”.
The coroner is now expected to seek disclosure from interested persons as well as other relevant parties before a second pre-inquest review takes place on 5 March 2027.
The post [Israel killed three UK citizens. Now their families want answers][17] appeared first on [Declassified UK][18].
[1]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2024-04-17/22287/
[2]: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-08-27/idf-colonel-in-gaza-wcf-convoy-strike-defends-decision/107071348
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-covers-up-gaza-spy-footage-from-day-of-aid-worker-massacre/
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=56515
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=56515
[6]: https://www.dfat.gov.au/sites/default/files/special-advisers-public-report-israels-response-wck-strikes-august-2024.pdf
[7]: https://www.dfat.gov.au/sites/default/files/special-advisers-public-report-israels-response-wck-strikes-august-2024.pdf
[8]: https://www.dfat.gov.au/sites/default/files/special-advisers-public-report-israels-response-wck-strikes-august-2024.pdf
[9]: https://www.dfat.gov.au/sites/default/files/special-advisers-public-report-israels-response-wck-strikes-august-2024.pdf
[10]: https://www.idf.il/en/mini-sites/military-advocate-generals-corps/criminal-investigation-decisions-regarding-5-incidents-examined-by-the-general-staff-fact-finding-and-assessment-mechanism-ffam/
[11]: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-08-27/idf-colonel-in-gaza-wcf-convoy-strike-defends-decision/107071348
[12]: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-08-27/idf-colonel-in-gaza-wcf-convoy-strike-defends-decision/107071348
[13]: https://caat.org.uk/news/media-release-the-uk-is-complicit-in-israels-killing-of-uk-aid-workers-in-gaza/
[14]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62901
[15]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62901
[16]: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/joint-statement-israel-closing-the-investigation-into-strikes-on-world-central-kitchen-convoy
[17]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/israel-killed-three-uk-citizens-now-their-families-want-answers/
[18]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/israel-killed-three-uk-citizens-now-their-families-want-answers/

2026-08-20 04:09:53 GMT

Jury refuses to convict seven Palestine Action ‘organisers’ for Israeli arms factory raid
[Defendants stand outside the Old Bailey during the trial]
Jurors in an eight-week trial of Palestine Action activists who allegedly planned a raid on an Israeli-owned arms factory were discharged on Wednesday.
It came after they told the court they had been unable to reach verdicts for seven of the defendants.
An eighth defendant, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was found guilty of criminal damage by a majority of nine to one jurors.
Last month, the jury [acquitted][1] one of the defendants, Will Plastow, of violent disorder over a lack of evidence.
Plastow and his co-defendants – Madeleine Norman, 31, Hannah Davidson, 53, Ian Sanders, 47, Aleksandra Herbich, 41, Teuta Hoxha, 30, Sean Middlebrough, 33 and Yulia Brigadirova, 33 – may now face a retrial.
But several smiled broadly in the dock as the jury was discharged.
Friends and family members watching the trial from the public gallery clapped and cheered as the defendants filed out of the courtroom and later into the street to join around a hundred supporters. “I believe that we have won,” they chanted.
All eight were accused of planning a break-in at an Israel-owned arms factory in the Filton area of Bristol on 6 August 2024.
Six other members of a Palestine Action “red team” broke into the Elbit Systems factory and damaged more than a dozen drones.
The incident took place at the height of Israel’s genocide in Gaza and before Keir Starmer’s government had implemented any restrictions on arms exports to Tel Aviv.
The raid sparked an unprecedented crackdown called Operation Recomply, led by Metropolitan Police’s Counter Terrorism Command.
This saw police arrest individuals across the UK on suspicion of helping with the break-in, even if they did not step foot at the factory.
Defendants spent up to 18 months in pre-trial detention, with some going on hunger strike to protest at their conditions.
### RELATED
[
## Activist cleared of violent disorder in Palestine Action raid
][2] [READ MORE **][3]
## **Cooking Pasta, Giving Rides**
None of the eight defendants were on the factory premises when the raid happened.
But prosecutors used joint enterprise powers, normally reserved for gangland murders, to pursue them however tenuous their connections to the break-in.
One defendant, Aleksandra ‘Ola’ Herbich, was alleged to have cooked pasta for the activists the night before they broke in and paid £50 for the group to stay at a campsite.
Another, Hannah Davidson, was accused of giving someone from the red team, Jordan Devlin, a lift to a DIY store to buy equipment used in the break-in.
This was despite Devlin having already been found not guilty of any crime relating to the incident.
In a moment of farce during the trial, Devlin waved to the jury from the public gallery after a defendant gave evidence naming him as a friend.
Police had so little evidence against a third defendant, Yulia Brigadirova, that her barrister told the court “perhaps she should be called the invisible coordinator.”
## **Outcome for ‘red team’**
The six “red team” members – Leona Kamio, 30, Samuel Corner, 23, Fatema Rajwani, 21, and Charlotte Head, 29, Jordan Devlin, 31, and Zoe Rogers, 22 who now goes by the name Joey Hinchliffe – were tried twice earlier this year.
Their first trial ended in February with the jury acquitting all six of aggravated burglary and three of the defendants on violent disorder charges.
The jury, however, was unable to reach verdicts on criminal damage for all six, violent disorder charges for the remaining three and a grievous bodily harm with intent charge for one.
In May, following a retrial, Kamio, Corner, Rajwani and Head were found guilty of criminal damage. Corner was acquitted of causing grievous bodily harm with intent, but found guilty of inflicting grievous bodily harm without intent.
They were sentenced to a combined total of more than 25 years in prison.
A hearing about a retrial for the eight defendants tried this summer is expected in September.
The post [Jury refuses to convict seven Palestine Action ‘organisers’ for Israeli arms factory raid][4] appeared first on [Declassified UK][5].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/activist-cleared-of-violent-disorder-in-palestine-action-raid/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63825
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63825
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/jury-refuses-to-convict-seven-palestine-action-organisers-for-israel-arms-factory-raid/
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/jury-refuses-to-convict-seven-palestine-action-organisers-for-israel-arms-factory-raid/

2026-07-21 17:41:52 GMT

Israeli arms firms threaten journalists at UK airshow
Israel’s largest arms firms angrily refused to answer questions from independent media at an arms fair in England on Monday.
They had been invited to the Farnborough International Airshow despite being required by French authorities to cover their stands in black drapes at the Paris airshow last year.
One company at Farnborough, Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), even threatened to report journalists to police for asking questions about its role in the Gaza genocide.
IAI makes the Heron surveillance drone which its chief executive [Boaz Levy][1] said played a “pivotal role” in Israel’s latest assault on Gaza.
The Israeli-state owned firm had a two-storey chalet at Farnborough as well as a stand, which was located next to a UK government space exhibition.
Staff outside the IAI chalet refused entry to journalists and became intimidating when asked about the firm’s role in Gaza.
One IAI security guard followed *Declassified *and demanded to see our media passes so he could “report us to the police”.
Facial recognition software indicates that the security guard, who was not displaying his own pass, resembles a man who has worked for Israel’s version of MI5, the Shin Bet.
***Watch our report from Farnborough airshow***
## ‘Walk away’
Staff at the Elbit Systems UK stand also did not want to speak to independent media when asked about the work of its Israeli parent company in Gaza.
Elbit’s Hermes drone killed three British military veterans – John Chapman, James Kirby and James ‘Jim’ Henderson – who were delivering aid along a coastal road in Gaza in 2024.
Footage of what appeared to be a Hermes drone flying above a coastline was being played on a large screen at Elbit’s stand, as well as air-to-ground missiles.
When asked by *Declassified* if this was insensitive to the veteran’s families, they repeatedly denied an Elbit drone was responsible for the deaths, saying “You’re very misinformed” before telling us to “walk away”.
Elbit’s private security guards – some of whom appear to be British military veterans – then began to usher our team away
Canary journalist Cameron Baillie was also bundled away from Elbit’s stand when he asked about the company’s role in the Gaza genocide.
### RELATED
[
## ‘Stop arming Israel’, urge family of slain aid worker
][2] [READ MORE **][3]
## ‘Depraved’
Another Israeli state-owned company, Rafael, had a chalet at Farnborough. Rafael makes the Spike missile which is believed to have killed the British aid workers in Gaza.
Rafael security staff barred access to *Byline Times* journalist Iain Overton as well as *Declassified*.
Overton said of his encounter with Rafael at Farnborough, “They went into their building and then started filming us from inside…as if we were being surveyed.”
He added: “The real question has to be to British ministers as to why they allow Israeli firms to be peddling their goods on UK soil in the face of repeated embargos, [and] the UN representing what’s happening in Gaza as a genocide.
“The UK’s imports of arms from Israel have increased by 10,500% since 2023 to the current day. It’s as if the trauma and horror of Gaza has had no impact on business here. The cheque books are open. There’s lots of business and meetings being had.
“We’ve seen people go both into Rafael and into Elbit. It’s as if there’s no link between what these systems were trained to do in Gaza – the Palestine Laboratory – and what we’re buying as the UK.”
The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) said that the [arms revenues][4] of Elbit, Rafael and IAI “reached unprecedented levels in 2023 on the back of the demand for weapons fuelled by the war in Gaza.”
Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT) spokesperson Kirsten Bayes said: “So many of the companies exhibiting, from Elbit to Rafael, are mired in the Israeli military’s deliberate killing and maiming of the tens of thousands of Palestinian children, as a UN Commission of Inquiry recently found.
“The UK should never host such a depraved group of suffering-profiteers.”
Farnborough International Airshow was asked to comment.
The post [Israeli arms firms threaten journalists at UK airshow][5] appeared first on [Declassified UK][6].
[1]: https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/article-774574
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=56582
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=56582
[4]: https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/2024-11/fs_2412_top_100_2023_0.pdf
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/israeli-arms-firms-threaten-journalists-at-uk-airshow/
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/israeli-arms-firms-threaten-journalists-at-uk-airshow/

2026-07-17 13:27:36 GMT

African leader’s grandson reveals why he helped Palestine Action
The grandson of one of Africa’s most iconic post-colonial leaders has told a court in London why he helped the protest group Palestine Action.
William Nyerere Plastow, 35, is charged with criminal damage in connection with a Palestine Action raid at an Israeli-owned arms factory in Bristol in August 2024.
A further joint enterprise charge of violent disorder was [dismissed][1] last week due to lack of evidence.
Plastow was arrested days after the raid and kept in prison without trial until February 2026, apart from a brief spell out on bail four days before his mother died of cancer.
The court heard on Thursday that his mother, Dr Jane Plastow, was a professor of African theatre and his father, Charles Makongoro Nyerere, is a politician in Tanzania.
Plastow’s grandfather, Julius Nyerere, was Tanzania’s first president having led the country out of British rule.
Plastow is among eight people on trial at the Old Bailey for allegedly organising the raid on an Elbit Systems factory in the Filton area of Bristol that took place in the early hours of 6 August 2024.
He is the only one whom the prosecution does not allege travelled to Bristol before the raid, and police accept he was at home in Manchester throughout the incident.
Plastow admits buying equipment for Palestine Action but denies knowing it would be used for the specific raid, which saw activists use a former prison van to ram their way into the factory and smash drones.
He said: “I first heard about the incident at Filton – and the existence of the site at Filton – when I was walking home from the gym looking at my phone at 8am”, on 6 August 2024, several hours after the raid.
“I’d done an early morning session and, as I walked home, I was scrolling through my Twitter feed,” when he saw a tweet from Palestine Action with a photo of the prison van crashing into the Filton factory.
The tweet read: “By dismantling machinery and weapons, they directly intervened in Elbit’s genocidal supply chain.”
Palestine Action drives a former prison van into Elbit’s factory on 6 August 2024. (Photo: Palestine Action)
## How Plastow became involved in Palestine Action
Plastow, who has a double first in social anthropology from Cambridge University, said Palestine “didn’t become a massive focus for me until the start of the genocide and seeing those images everyday of those kids blown to pieces…buildings knocked down with whole families inside them”.
Having worked for the BBC as a scriptwriter on medical dramas such as Doctors and Casualty, he rankled at suggestions that the images coming out of Gaza were fake, saying they were “100% not”.
He began going on pro-Palestine marches in Manchester, initially in a wheelchair since he had recently undergone major surgery on his leg.
He also wrote to his local MP, Jeff Smith, who allegedly responded by saying a “ceasefire would be a very bad idea and was premature”.
Addressing the jury, Plastow said: “How’s anyone supposed to feel about seeing dismembered children and then being told nothing should be done about it?”
Speaking of the marches, he said: “It felt very obvious that all of that was pretty futile”.
Instead, he became drawn to Palestine Action, due to their success in Manchester at getting a local landlord to drop Elbit as a client.
He said the group had “actually managed to close several factories that were sending genocidal machinery to slaughter children in Gaza.
“This was stuff around Manchester. This was all very local. It was within 10 miles.”
Plastow started saying: “I found it very shocking. Elbit supplied 85% of…” but was cut off by lawyers.
Rephrasing, he said: “It felt like finding out this was the Holocaust and the zyklon gas being used in Auschwitz was being made ten minutes up the road.”
He filled out a form on the internet expressing interest in attending a Palestine Action training day.
Trying to explain his motivation again, he began to say: “This was the height of things [in Gaza] and the International Court of Justice had just found…” but was cut off by the judge Patrick Field for legal reasons.
### RELATED
[
## ‘A stray dog with a toddler’s arm’: How Israeli atrocities...
][2] [READ MORE **][3]
## ‘Very busy’
Plastow told the court he had previously participated in a Palestine Action “lock-on” at a factory in Leicester run by Elbit subsidiary UAV Tactical Systems earlier in 2024.
That action, which was allegedly coordinated by co-defendant Sean Middlebrough, saw Plastow drive a van at low speed into a bollard before locking himself inside the van.
He was arrested at the scene and granted bail. Afterwards he told Palestine Action he only had time to assist with “a couple of runs to the shops”, as his mother had cancer and he was increasingly busy with work.
Although he was added to Signal groups whose membership included other co-defendants in this trial, Plastow said he “didn’t pay a huge amount of attention to them” and his lawyer said he “consistently rejected incoming calls.”
“I just wasn’t interested…I was very busy…I was thinking about my mum…I didn’t have time to have some long talking shop with a bunch of people I didn’t know.”
He denied knowing five of the six “red team” activists before they broke into Elbit’s Bristol factory and knew none of the alleged “black team” members who caused a diversion outside.
Of his seven co-defendants – the alleged “organisers” – he only interacted with Middlebrough and briefly with Ian Sanders, who was described in character references read in court on Thursday as a “kind, gentle and considerate person” raised by his Quaker mother “with the important values of peace and social justice.”
Middlebrough, who is being tried in absentia, was described by Plastow as “a guy with a strong Liverpool accent.”
Sean Middlebrough
## ‘El Granma’
In early August 2024, Middlebrough asked Plastow to purchase equipment for Palestine Action without telling him exactly how it would be used, the court heard.
Middlebrough, who used the alias El Granma, reimbursed Plastow and said someone would collect the purchases soon from his house in Manchester. The items, costing hundreds of pounds, included hand tools, protective equipment, head torches and rucksacks.
Plastow believed they would be taken in a car or small van and placed in a general stockpile for Palestine Action – rather than used immediately for a high profile raid – as the group had told him it was in the process of establishing lock-ups in different locations.
However, on 3 August 2024, Charlotte Head, who was a member of the red team, parked a prison van near Plastow’s house in order to collect the items.
“I was deeply surprised and not especially happy to have such a weird vehicle turn up,” Plastow told the court.
“From this point on, all I wanted was for this to go, to get on with my weekend and for this problem to go away.”
He had not met Head before and said: “She seemed very frazzled so I offered her a cup of tea. I thought ‘have a cuppa and then go’…Towards the end, she told me she doesn’t know where she’s going to go next.”
Plastow urged Middlebrough to give Head directions so she could leave, but as it became late, he let her stay the night in his spare room.
The next day, co-defendant Ian Sanders arrived at the house to help Head depart but Middlebrough told them to wait for him to join as well.
“It was going to be midday and then time kept slipping…They still didn’t leave…I was pretty annoyed,” Plastow recalled, feeling Middlebrough had “messed me around pretty badly”.
When Middlebrough did eventually arrive, he did not “say thanks or apologise, just gives me a little wave.”
### RELATED
[
## Activist cleared of violent disorder in Palestine Action raid
][4] [READ MORE **][5]
## ‘Duped’
Two days later, when walking home from the gym, Plastow saw the Palestine Action tweet announcing it had smashed into the Filton site using a prison van.
“I wasn’t happy about it,” Plastow said, adding that he “felt kind of duped” by Middlebrough.
In a subsequent Signal call, a Palestine Action figure admitted to him that some of the items he purchased had been used at Filton.
“He told me people had been arrested under terrorism powers and that people that weren’t the actionists had been arrested, which hadn’t happened before”.
“I was really frightened,” he told the court, saying the Filton raid had “happened when I was asleep” and he “couldn’t imagine” being arrested for it.
On 9 August, he said “about 20 guys came into my house and arrested me under the Terrorism Act. They kept me in for six days in a little white room with no windows and lights that didn’t go off.
“I told them everything I was doing on the sixth [of August]. That was the last day I got to spend with my mum before she was on her death bed.”
He denied intending to encourage or assist anyone to commit criminal damage at Filton.
## ‘Save lives’
During cross-examination, prosecutor Harry Warner repeatedly contended that Plastow knew the items he purchased would be used by Palestine Action to damage property belonging to Elbit.
Plastow insisted they would be “used by Palestine Action to save lives”, adding that the “purpose of the organisation was to save lives from being killed”.
He denied knowing of a plan to target the Filton site and said during his evidence: “I think nothing about Palestine Action could be described as highly organised.
“It was chaotic and a bunch of loosely connected people scrabbling around.”
When Plastow was granted bail for the second time in February 2026, he said: “I went back to my childhood home, my mum’s house – obviously she wasn’t there any more.”
The trial continues
The post [African leader’s grandson reveals why he helped Palestine Action][6] appeared first on [Declassified UK][7].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/activist-cleared-of-violent-disorder-in-palestine-action-raid/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63922
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63922
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63825
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63825
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/african-leaders-grandson-reveals-why-he-helped-palestine-action/
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/african-leaders-grandson-reveals-why-he-helped-palestine-action/

2026-07-10 20:46:17 GMT

‘A stray dog with a toddler’s arm’: How Israeli atrocities fueled Palestine Action
Two women have told a court how they felt compelled to join the Palestine Action protest group after watching “a live-streamed genocide” of Israeli attacks in Gaza.
“I would see mothers scrape up tiny pieces of their children,” 53-year-old Hannah Davidson told jurors at the Old Bailey this week. “I saw a stray dog with a toddler’s arm.”
Co-defendant Teuta Hoxha, a 30-year-old care worker, said she watched a video of a Palestinian father carrying two bags. “He was wailing. It was the type of wail that comes from the soul.
“What he was saying was, ‘I have my son in these plastic bags’, and that devastated me.”
“It was the realisation that if a state wants to exterminate people and it’s in the interests…of another state to collude, they will.”
Both women were motivated to join Palestine Action after watching graphic videos from Gaza, but deny organising a raid on an Israeli-owned arms factory in Filton, Bristol, in August 2024.
Hoxha and Davidson are among eight defendants accused of helping plan the raid. Both women are charged with violent disorder and criminal damage, which they deny.
“The majority of the British public were calling for a ceasefire,” Hoxha said. “An end to genocide was paramount.”
Asked by her lawyer Raj Chada whether that would involve using “any means necessary”, she replied “No. By ‘any means necessary’- I’d take that to mean Elbit, whose sniper drones target doctors going to treat families.”
She said Palestine Action “had done hundreds of actions and my understanding was there had never been any violence”.
The group’s aim was to “destruct the arms trade flowing from here in the UK to Gaza”. Hoxha knew there was a “risk of ending up in prison and people were willing to sacrifice their freedoms to make sure children ended up staying alive.”
Davidson, an artist, said prior to the incident she had handed in her notice at her job and struggled to sell her art while “in tears for hours and hours a day”.
“It felt very disingenuous to be advertising my art on Instagram and have 10 percent off my art and then the next thing you scroll to is bits of children.”
She had been a “deeply committed volunteer” with Gaza Genocide Emergency Committee, a Scottish organisation which lobbied local councils to divest from Israeli weapons firms, according to a character reference given to the court.
By January 2024, feeling “completely helpless” and done with letter writing, she became aware of Palestine Action on social media.
“They were a bit cheeky and they’d already managed to shut down two Israeli arms factories sending weapons from this country to be used in war crimes,” Davidson said.
### RELATED
[
## Activist cleared of violent disorder in Palestine Action raid
][1] [READ MORE **][2]
## Who is Hannah Davidson?
On Thursday, questioned by her lawyer Hamish McCallum, Davidson talked about growing up with her four siblings on a council estate in west London.
“I struggled a lot,” she said. “I struggled with the school environment. I struggled with socialising with other children.”
At 12, Davidson, who has since been diagnosed with autism, dropped out of school.
She babysat and washed cars until she was 15 when a neighbour who owned a horse offered Davidson a chance to learn to ride.
A job at a stable yard turned into a career with horses, working for the Metropolitan Police and two charities helping disabled and under-privileged children. She also worked as an artist.
But during lockdown, when her work with horses stopped, she headed to Edinburgh to live with a friend. She got a part time job and worked on building her art business back up until she was left distraught by the scenes in Gaza from October 2023, which led her to join Palestine Action.
## ‘Behind the scenes’
After a training day in April 2024 and a follow up phone call from someone in the organisation who wanted to know her motivation for getting involved, she started taking part in actions.
In June, she received another call from someone in the organisation asking if Davidson would “like to help out in some way behind the scenes,” she said.
She started to explore what would be involved, joining calls and reading documents she was sent about how the group worked.
On 29 July, a little over a week before the raid on Filton, she attended a gathering in Manchester of around 10 people involved with Palestine Action.
“It was a general meeting and it was also a bit of a social event because people were chatting online and, like myself, wanted to meet people in person,” she said.
“So if I was going to do more behind the scenes, people would want to meet me, check me out.”
Filton, she said, was discussed among other topics, but at that point, she thought it was “being prepared for something in the future” and her intention was “to be involved behind the scenes and not be involved in actual actions”.
## Driver
But in the following days, Davidson said her mental health “was deteriorating again”.
“I was feeling quite desperate about the situation,” she said.
And when someone said they were short of a driver for the action in Bristol, Davidson agreed to step in, driving a rental car to take her and Madeleine Norman, another defendant, to go help out.
“I thought I’d be running errands for the weekend, helping people with whatever they needed help with,” she said.
In Bristol, Davidson drove people around to pick up last minute items and delivered food to a local campsite where those involved were staying.
In the early morning hours of 6 August, she drove the personal belongings of people involved in the raid – alleged to be members of the black team – to a country road where they grabbed them quickly before they were driven away by three other cars.
Madeleine Norman. (Photo: Phil Miller / Declassified UK)
She then returned to the Airbnb to pick up three people – Sean Middlebrough, Julia Brigadirova, and Norman – and drop them at their homes on the way back to Edinburgh.
Around 4:30pm the next day, Davidson was returning from having lunch with a friend and found two detectives waiting at her flat who arrested her. She was transported from Scotland to counter-terrorism police cells in Newbury.
It would take 31 and a half hours before she was allowed to speak to a lawyer. “We were going out of our minds, we didn’t know what was going to happen to us,” she said, crying. “We were asking and asking and didn’t get a lawyer.”
“I was in absolute shock and autistic meltdown. I could barely breathe in and out while I was in the counter terror unit.
“They gave me a piece of paper and pencil and I sat and drew…We weren’t given T-shirts, only jumpers, and it was as hot as this,” she said, referring to the summer heatwave.
After police custody, Davidson said she “spent 46 days in [a prison] without any contact. I wasn’t allowed to phone anybody,” she said.
“I think we all just have really chronic PTSD about that period. We just disappeared. We didn’t know what had happened. We couldn’t have known that would be the response . . . it was just horrifying.”
## ‘Shocked’
Both her lawyer and the prosecutor Deanna Herr, who cross examined Davidson, asked repeatedly about her knowledge of the raid given planning documents she had access to.
Davidson maintained that she skimmed through much of the detail because she didn’t think it was relevant to her role.
She also said she thought that much of what was in evidence was unfamiliar to her and may have had details added about which she was unaware.
This included a document which listed items including axes, kebab skewers and whips. The items were to be used by the “black team” who were meant to distract security outside the factory as the “red team” gained access to the inside and destroyed weapons.
Davidson said she didn’t think any items had been listed when she looked at it and that she had only seen the completed document once it was in police evidence.
“If they’d been completed I’d certainly have flagged that up and wouldn’t have been involved in that action. Whips, BBQ skewers, absolutely not.”
Davidson further denied planning the break-in, saying: “I did not coordinate this action. I did not instruct anyone…I simply did not have an organisational role.”
Heer put it to Davidson that she was “intimately involved in this action. You knew full well it would involve the black team taking steps to stop the security guards intervening.”
Davidson replied: “I did not. I wish things had been different”.
Heer alleged she knew the action involved the threat of violence. Davidson responded: “Absolutely not what I agreed to at any time.”
Her testimony echoed that of Norman’s from earlier this week who also said not to have seen the weapons listed in the document, and believed Davidson had not seen it either because was certain they would have discussed it.
Norman had also suggested that others involved in the raid were “pretty pissed off” that the attack “didn’t go down” the way they had believed it would.
Of the weapon list, Davidson said on Thursday: “There is a lot I’ve seen in evidence that is the first time I’ve seen it. That is one of the things I was quite shocked about.
“If I had seen it, I wouldn’t have gone. I wish I had seen it. I wish I had seen some of the other documents as well because then maybe things would be different today.”
Co-defendants (from left to right) Aleksandra Herbich, Ian Sanders, Teuta Hoxha and Julia Brigadirova. (Photos: Phil Miller / Declassified UK)
## ‘Important responsibility’
Giving evidence on Friday, Hoxha also denied knowing that the raid would result in violent clashes with security guards and police.
Hoxha had previously taken part in a Palestine Action blockade of a different Elbit factory in Bristol, where she had “locked on” to a van. She had been arrested but released with no further action taken against her.
Despite being based in London, this prior experience in the Bristol area meant she volunteered to undertake a “reccie” of the main Elbit site in Filton but did not know at that stage what was being planned.
A meeting she attended on Formby beach near Liverpool, which prosecution allege was to plan the raid, was to celebrate a birthday of co-defendant Sean Middlebrough, she said.
CCTV footage from Liverpool Lime Street station shows Middlebrough carrying what looked like a cake box through the station.
Hoxha said she was involved in discussions about using Go Pro cameras in the raid. “The purpose of the Go Pro is to document the war crimes going on inside Elbit Systems,” she said, adding that thousands of Palestinians are “without arms and legs” due to Israel’s actions in Gaza.
“Documenting war crimes is an important responsibility,” she told the jury. Hoxha said she provided Go Pros to two members of the red team, Fatema Zainab Rajwani and Samuel Corner, as well as a member of the black team.
The lengthy process of configuring the Go Pros for live streaming via pre-paid phones left Hoxha “extremely stressed out” the night before the raid and meant she was not privy to final discussions about other details of the operation, she told the court.
Once the Go Pro stream was working, Hoxha told members of the red team that: “You guys are amazing we are here with you online.”
Asked by her lawyer what she meant by this, Hoxha said they were “Brave spectacular young people with the moral clarity to damage weapons that have left children without parents.
“I would rather live in that kind of society than one run by the Epstein class…They are amazing and they are brave.”
Hoxha denied watching the live feed but sent messages saying: “Start smashing guys!!! Smash!!!”
She told the court that “Elbit advertised that their weapons are battle tested on Palestinians”, but said there was “cloudy language” around what they make inside their UK factories.
Hoxha wanted the red team to record evidence of “Quadcopter drones, the Magni X drones, the servers and the other technology that means those drones in Gaza swarm…and drop bombs on people.”
During the raid, another user in a Signal group who was watching the live feed, said “Those are Israeli drones…The quadcopter that they are not supposed to have here.”
Hoxha told the court: “I think 40 drones were disarmed in 20 minutes.”
## ‘Sentenced as terrorists’
Chada described there being a “flurry” of Signal calls in the days after the action, which Hoxha said was because the Red Team was “being held longer than 48 hours”.
“Everyone was worried…One of the Red Team’s mother was dragged all the way from Wales to London by counter terrorism. I was arrested by counter terrorism. We were all arrested by counter terrorism.
“We were all terrified. We didn’t know how an action could turn into a terrorism case.”
She said they were held as “terrorist prisoners” and told the jury: “The red team have been sentenced as terrorists and I would never wish that on anyone else.”
When asked by her lawyer, she said she “didn’t assist or encourage” criminal damage or violence, but said that the red team was composed of “brave individuals and I think it’s disgraceful what has happened to them”.
Asked why she did not think the raid would involve violence, Hoxha said, “Given that behind the scenes lobbying groups [were] lobbying the government, it wouldn’t be in the interests of Palestine Action to be violent.”
During cross examination, prosecutor Emma Gargitter asked whether Hoxha’s use of aliases in Signal groups was to guard against infiltrators.
Hoxha confirmed this was the reason, adding that “We knew that officials from the Israeli embassy were having meetings with the government regarding members of Palestine Action.”
Another prosecution barrister, Heer, then got to her feet and told the judge: “I think there is a matter of law that needs to be addressed.”
The jury was then sent out.
## Who is Teuta Hoxha?
Hoxha’s family came to the UK when she was four-years-old and settled in Croydon, with her father working as a cleaner and caretaker at a school.
Her mother passed away in 2016, leaving her to help care for her younger siblings.
She graduated in English Literature at King’s College, London and aspired to be an investigative journalist.
Despite being short-listed for an award by the BBC for a piece on the Grenfell Tower disaster, she told the court she lacked the financial background to get into journalism.
Instead she became a carer for disabled people in hospitals and worked in residential schools for children with autism.
She had long been aware of the situation in Palestine due to her Muslim faith and went on marches, wrote to politicians and held fundraising stalls, but felt she was just “raising money for people that were going to be killed anyway”.
After seeing the video of the man in Gaza carrying his son’s remains in plastic bags, she googled “action for Palestine, and Palestine Action came up”, before attending an online training day.
She researched the group’s co-founder Huda Ammori “to understand what her principles were”, and noted that Ammori was half-Palestinian and had “turned to direct action” after “every avenue”, including the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, “wasn’t working”.
Hoxha was inspired by a quote from David Graeber, who said: “Protest is asking the powers that be to dig the well. Direction action is digging the well yourself and daring the powers that be to stop you.”
The trial continues
The post [‘A stray dog with a toddler’s arm’: How Israeli atrocities fueled Palestine Action][3] appeared first on [Declassified UK][4].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63825
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63825
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/a-stray-dog-with-a-toddlers-arm-how-israeli-atrocities-fueled-palestine-action/
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/a-stray-dog-with-a-toddlers-arm-how-israeli-atrocities-fueled-palestine-action/

2026-07-07 13:14:00 GMT

Israeli arms firm returns after Westminster scandal
A British weapons firm owned by the Israeli government has been brought back to life, after its lobbying activities were exposed by *Declassified* last year.
RUK Advanced System Ltd is registered in London, but records show it is a subsidiary of Israel’s state owned arms giant, Rafael.
In October, documents were filed with Companies House to shut the business down, following our investigation. But it’s now been revived – and claims to be supplying British armed forces.
Last year, we [revealed][1] how RUK pumped money into the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Defence Technology, which promised “opportunities to network with MPs”.
Our investigation triggered an inquiry by Westminster authorities, which [confirmed][2] that parliamentary rules had been breached.
The inquiry found that the donation had been part of a “PR and marketing campaign” by RUK, which “resulted in a foreign government temporarily part-funding” the group of MPs.
The APPG quickly disbanded, while RUK deleted its website. Documents were later filed for the company to [shut down][3].
But the application has since been withdrawn and RUK’s website has now re-appeared.
Labour MP John Trickett told *Declassified*: “It is extremely concerning that a company owned by a foreign government was able to fund a British parliamentary group. The Standards Commissioner was right to take action.”
He added: “Now this company has returned, there should be full transparency about its operations in this country.”
A Rafael display at the DSEI London arms fair in 2021. (Photo: Declassified UK)
## Tried and tested
Products advertised include missiles with “unprecedented” lethality and a defence system for tanks which has been tried and tested in combat “along Israel’s borders”.
The company’s website says: “We deliver the most technologically sophisticated, operationally powerful, precisely-adapted, and cost-effective solutions to fill the unique combat requirements of the British MOD and Armed Forces.”
However, questions remain over the nature of the business and where it is based.
RUK says its products are “made in the UK” and submitted evidence to Parliament last year describing itself as “a UK manufacturer”.
But our investigation last year found no evidence that the company had any manufacturing facilities in the UK.
The address given in official company documents is a service address, with no RUK staff present. And when we eventually tracked the company to a tiny building on a technology park in Farnborough, it appeared to simply be a small office.
The latest financial accounts, from 2024, show that it only employed five people at that stage – and at least some of these individuals have since left the company.
Searches of LinkedIn have failed to identify any current employees at all, except for the director, Yoram Aldo Aron.
Neither Aron, nor Rafael, responded to *Declassified*’s request for comment.
The post [Israeli arms firm returns after Westminster scandal][4] appeared first on [Declassified UK][5].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/westminster-group-took-cash-from-israeli-state-owned-arms-firm/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/westminster-group-was-funded-by-israeli-government-inquiry-confirms/
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/israeli-weapons-firm-set-to-close-uk-wing/
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/israeli-arms-firm-returns-after-westminster-scandal/
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/israeli-arms-firm-returns-after-westminster-scandal/

2026-07-06 19:11:27 GMT

Boris Johnson’s ex-adviser loses Somaliland libel case
When a remote east African city was being shelled by [Somaliland][1] soldiers three years ago, a German academic became an unlikely messenger for the beleaguered inhabitants of Las Anod.
Dr Markus Hoehne, an anthropologist then at Leipzig University, spoke Somali and had previously spent time in Las Anod researching for his doctorate in the early 2000s.
As the city’s hospital came under attack, his local sources provided a daily stream of information, which he posted on Twitter.
Hoehne’s war diary helped foreign media outlets, like *Declassified*, cover [the assault on Las Anod][2], which started when a police unit – possibly [British trained][3] – massacred protesters.
Soon he was briefing diplomats on the situation who in turn informed the United Nations.
But not all the attention Hoehne received was positive.
For supporters of Somaliland’s government, his description of life on the eastern edge of what they regarded as their territory posed a significant political problem.
Somaliland, a break away region of [Somalia][4], was at that point unrecognised by any foreign state.
To make its case for international legitimacy, it sold itself as a peaceful democracy, in sharp contrast to the rest of Somalia which was often engulfed in conflict.
Hoehne was undermining this positive narrative by highlighting the suppression of protesters in Somaliland.
Worse still, the inhabitants of Las Anod were unionists who actually wanted to rejoin Somalia – a tendency Hoehne had been documenting in his academic writings over many years.
As Hoehne’s tweets gained traction, so did a devastating riposte.
Social media accounts supporting Somaliland’s government began to say he was a paedophile who had been deported from Hargeisa, Somaliland’s capital, for raping a girl.
### RELATED
[
## Gavin Williamson kept lobbying for Somaliland amid civil war
][5] [READ MORE **][6]
## Friends in high places
Among those to amplify this claim was none other than the godmother of Boris Johnson’s son.
Nimco Ali OBE had been born in Somaliland and became a leading women’s rights campaigner in the UK, where she counted Johnson and his wife, Carrie, among her friends.
Under Johnson’s premiership, she was [appointed][7] as an independent government adviser on tackling violence against women and girls.
For her to claim Hoehne was a paedophile carried a particular weight, and threatened not just his academic credibility but entire career and liberty.
“It felt like she was trying to shut me up”, Hoehne later told *Declassified*, fearing his academic work on Somaliland’s atrocities in Las Anod had been tainted at a vital moment.
Desperate to defend his reputation, he sued Ali in London in 2024, but she refused to apologise.
English libel courts are notoriously expensive, and both sides faced vast legal bills.
Yet Ali seemed confident she could prove Hoehne had raped an underage girl in 2004 and been deported for it.
The matter was complicated because Hoehne was expelled from Somaliland that year, but not for child abuse.
He was asked to leave in 2004 for political reasons, after his research exposed the tensions between places like Las Anod and Hargeisa.
Hoehne had already written about this episode in a book and since been allowed back into the country.
He had witnesses to prove why he was deported and crucially, field notes from 2004 showing he was not where the rape was alleged to have taken place.
### RELATED
[
## Gavin Williamson and the Somaliland massacre
][8] [READ MORE **][9]
## ‘I wish to apologise’
The libel case was due to go to trial later this year but last week Ali suddenly [posted a statement][10] on X saying: “I wish to apologise”.
Then today in London, a brief hearing was held at the Royal Courts of Justice, which *Declassified* was the only media outlet to attend.
Hoehne’s barrister told Mr Justice Coppel: “Ms Ali published gravely defamatory allegations about Dr Hoehne. Ms Ali alleged that Dr Hoehne was a paedophile who was kicked out of Somaliland for abusing girls.”
Ali’s barrister in turn said: “My Lord, at the time of the tweets, Ms Ali had been misinformed by third parties about the allegations, which she now accepts are entirely false.
“Ms Ali accepts that Dr Hoehne is not guilty of the conduct which she alleged against him, and was not expelled from Somaliland for such conduct.
“Ms Ali wishes to apologise unreservedly to Dr Hoehne for the serious reputational damage and distress which her Tweets have caused him. She has agreed to pay him substantial compensation.”
Hoehne’s lawyer responded that his client was “content to let the matter rest” in light of the “apology, retraction, and payment of compensation”.
Hoehne and Ali did not attend the hearing in person, which lasted less than five minutes.
Whether other supporters of Somaliland who smeared Hoehne will apologise remains to be seen.
It was not just academics but also media outlets like *Declassified* who were viciously criticised for covering the situation in Las Anod.
Somaliland’s government still has plenty of supporters, having recently been recognised by Israel and visited by former Conservative defence secretary Gavin Williamson.
He has been given honorary Somaliland citizenship and repeatedly accepted expenses-paid trips to the country.
The post [Boris Johnson’s ex-adviser loses Somaliland libel case][11] appeared first on [Declassified UK][12].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/somaliland/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/another-colonial-border-is-causing-conflict-in-africa/
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-covers-up-somaliland-massacre-report/
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/somalia/
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=52913
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=52913
[7]: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/fgm-campaigner-nimco-ali-appointed-as-tackling-violence-against-women-and-girls-adviser
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=11584
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=11584
[10]: https://x.com/NimkoAli/status/2071620214874157169
[11]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/boris-johnsons-ex-adviser-loses-somaliland-libel-case/
[12]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/boris-johnsons-ex-adviser-loses-somaliland-libel-case/

2026-07-06 19:11:22 GMT

Activist cleared of violent disorder in Palestine Action raid
A jury has acquitted an activist of violent disorder at an Israeli-owned arms factory targeted by Palestine Action in August 2024.
William Plaistow, 35, was acquitted on Monday at the Old Bailey due to what presiding Judge Patrick Field said was a lack of evidence over the incident in the Filton area of Bristol.
“The prosecution has not produced enough evidence against him to show that he intended that there would be a violent disorder at Filton or that he assisted anyone to commit that offence,” Field said.
Plaistow, who is from Manchester, still faces a criminal damage charge alongside seven other defendants in their ongoing trial over the break-in at Elbit Systems.
The other defendants are Ian Sanders, 47; Aleksandra Herbich, 41; Teuta Hoxha, 30; Sean Middlerough, 33; Julija Brigadirova, 33; Hannah Davidson, 53; and Madeleine Norman, 31.
They face criminal damage and violent disorder charges which they deny.
The prosecution contends that while they were not at the factory’s premises during the raid, their assistance, which allegedly included reconnaissance trips and purchasing tools, makes them “equally responsible” as those who carried it out.
## **‘Felt compelled’**
Following Plaistow’s acquittal, Monday’s six-hour hearing focused entirely on testimony from Norman.
After graduating from Oxford University with a degree in classics in 2018, Norman has worked for several organisations helping people with learning-disabilities and neurodivergences.
Norman told the jury they had become interested in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict during anti-racism protests in 2020 and learned more while volunteering with the Refugee Council.
“I was hearing more about Palestine in that context as well. There is obviously a massive diaspora of refugees who have been displaced from their homeland by Israeli settlers,” Norman said.
In 2021, Norman signed up with the Palestine Solidarity Campaign and began to learn “more about Palestinians, the apartheid system in Israel and the long history of Palestinian resistance to their repression”.
Norman learned more about Elbit Systems, Israel’s largest weapons manufacturer, and began protesting at one of the company’s factories in Manchester each Tuesday.
“We would go and march around the perimeter carrying placards and chanting. It felt pretty futile to be honest but we kept going,” Norman said.
The following year, after an initial email to Palestine Action was ignored, Norman attended one of the group’s online training sessions and then began participating in actions.
The jury was told about four separate direct actions Norman was involved in as part of Palestine Action before the raid at Filton.
They included spray painting and smashing windows at UAV Engines, an Elbit subsidiary, in Shenstone and blocking an Elbit factory in Leicester.
Norman reported feeling “weird” before such actions. “I would normally feel sick beforehand. I get crippling migraines for days afterwards.”
“It’s not like people do this for the thrill. You do it because you are compelled to.”
## **‘Jumpy’**
Ahead of the action in Bristol in the summer of 2024, Norman said that the group was “witnessing unspeakable events out of Gaza on a daily basis . . . that was the context”.
During early discussions about Filton about a month beforehand, an idea popped up about how a van might enter the factory compound.
Norman didn’t think the route was a good idea so wrote some notes on Cryptpad, an encrypted document-sharing platform, next to screenshots of the factory site.
But their suggestion was not discussed further. “No one was particularly convinced by it,” Norman said.
Norman was feeling “pretty burnt out” and had not planned to go to Bristol, but decided to go upon learning that another Palestine Action friend had hired a car and there was space in it.
Of the more than 20 people involved in the raid, Norman only knew a handful and was not introduced to new people once at the Airbnb in Bristol where activists gathered before the raid.
“Everyone was a bit jumpy. People already knew their friends. They weren’t really in a headspace for making new pals. Everyone was a bit stressed out,” Norman said.
The “red team” – the group of activists who would break into the factory – and the “black team” – another group meant to distract security guards from the red team – were “having meetings, but I wasn’t privy to them”.
## **‘Peripherally present’**
During a cross examination, prosecutor Deanna Heer KC repeatedly asked Norman, who identifies as they/them, if they accepted that their involvement in planning the action would involve damage to property at the Elbit site.
Norman said their personal contribution to the plan was the suggestion for the entry route for the van which was not taken up by the group.
“I’m going to suggest you were involved a bit more than that,” Heer said, again asking whether Norman accepted that their individual involvement in planning was carried out with the intention of helping others cause damage to property.
“I was and am incredibly supportive that weapons were damaged,” Norman said. “But as for my involvement, it was pretty minimal. I didn’t really have a role.”
Heer pushed on, asking Norman about a purchase they made for glue, gloves and tape. “Was that to help people carry out damage to property?” she asked.
“I didn’t ask what it was for. Somebody would say can you get these items and I did,” Norman said.
Heer asked once again whether Norman accepted that they were involved in planning an action that would involve causing damage to property at Elbit Systems.
“I knew that was the idea and I knew that was the plan. I was peripherally present…but I didn’t feel like it was my action. I wanted to go down to be an extra pair of hands on deck,” Norman said.
“I wish I had been helpful. I don’t think I was materially helpful.”
The trial continues.
The post [Activist cleared of violent disorder in Palestine Action raid][1] appeared first on [Declassified UK][2].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/activist-cleared-of-violent-disorder-in-palestine-action-raid/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/activist-cleared-of-violent-disorder-in-palestine-action-raid/

2026-07-03 14:48:39 GMT

Foreign minister swerves questions about Britons fighting for Israel
Foreign minister Hamish Falconer refused to answer questions on Wednesday about the UK government’s failure to stop British nationals fighting for the Israeli army in Gaza.
It comes after more than 25,000 people signed a [letter][1] to the Foreign Office demanding they investigate UK citizens who fought in Gaza and may have committed war crimes.
Thousands of British nationals have served in the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) since the Gaza conflict began in 2023, according to a Freedom of Information response from the IDF first published by [*Declassified*][2].
Britain’s Foreign Office does no monitoring of its own and was initially only aware of just [80][3] UK-Israeli soldiers. Falconer has specific responsibility for British policy towards the Middle East.
With the UK government yet to respond to the open letter, *Declassified* doorstepped Falconer while he walked from the Foreign Office to Parliament, asking him: “Are you worried that war criminals might be walking the streets of Britain?”
## ***Watch Hamish Falconer avoid our questions***
“I’m just on my way to answer an urgent question in the House of Commons so you’ll hear from me first there,” Falconer responded, with half an hour to spare before he was due in Parliament.
*Declassified* probed further: “Are you going to talk about what you are doing to stop British nationals fighting in the Israeli army in Gaza?”
“I’ll be answering questions from my colleagues shortly so you’ll be able to catch me there rather than here,” Falconer replied, as he began to cross Whitehall instead of stopping to talk.
“There’s more than 2,000 British nationals who’ve fought in the Israeli army since 2023,” *Declassified* continued as Falconer darted in front of a bus.
“Are you not worried that some of them might have come back to the UK? Are you doing enough to try and screen British nationals who’ve fought for Israel?”
“I’ll be answering I’m sure a whole range of questions in parliament in a second so I suggest you tune in to BBC Parliament,” Falconer asserted, walking briskly along Derby Gate.
“I’ve seen the order list. I don’t think this is on the list though is it? I mean it’s a fairly straightforward question,” *Declassified* continued.
“Why aren’t you stopping British nationals fighting for Israel while the UN says there’s a genocide going on? Isn’t that a fairly reasonable thing for the Foreign Office to do?”
“I suggest your viewers tune into BBC Parliament and they’ll be able to see lots of questions,” Falconer said, as he rushed through a security gate to enter the Palace of Westminster.
Falconer flanked by Miller and Alex Morris. (Photo: Hanna-Johara Dokal / Declassified UK)
## Operation Tango
Although Falconer was due to speak in Parliament about Israel, the debate focused on illegal settlements in the West Bank.
There was [no mention][4] of British nationals fighting in the IDF.
This is despite a UN commission warning last month that countries like Britain, which are members of the International Criminal Court, should do more to prosecute dual nationals in the IDF.
UN commissioner [Chris Sidoti][5] said: “Anyone who has served in the Israeli Defence Forces in Gaza since October 2023 must be considered a suspect for the commission of war crimes, crimes against humanity and the crime of genocide.”
*Declassified* has previously identified [15 British nationals fighting for the IDF][6], including men who filmed themselves rummaging through women’s underwear drawers in Gaza and posting footage of entire neighbourhoods being destroyed.
Ten Britons who served in the IDF were reported to the [Met Police war crimes unit][7] last year, but detectives have subsequently refused to open an investigation.
This is in sharp contrast with earlier efforts Britain has sometimes made to punish war crimes.
Tony Blair’s Labour government sent the SAS to hunt down Bosnian-Serb [war criminals][8] in the former Yugoslavia and bring them to justice under Operation Tango.
Hamish Falconer’s father, Charlie, sits in the House of Lords and was Tony Blair’s flatmate. (Photo: Jeff Gilbert / Alamy)
## ‘Loophole’
However, Britain has [no effective anti-mercenary legislation][9] to stop UK nationals fighting for foreign powers.
When the most relevant law, the Foreign Enlistment Act of 1870, was reviewed in [parliament][10] in 1976, it emerged no one had been convicted under it.
Labour’s then prime minister Harold Wilson noted that a number of Margaret Thatcher’s constituents in Finchley “went to fight for Israel, either because they were Israeli students in Britain—perhaps on the reserve list—or because they wanted to go to the land which is the foundation of their faith. That, I am sure, is understood by everyone.”
Baroness Sayeeda Warsi, a former Conservative cabinet minister, has said: “The only reason we allow the loophole to exist is because of the IDF.”
One UK diplomat said in the 1970s that the lack of anti-mercenary legislation meant the government could “shrug our shoulders and say we have no power to stop it”.
Britain has never signed the United Nations convention against mercenaries. It [lobbied][11] to weaken the treaty so recruitment of Nepalese citizens into the British army’s Gurkha brigade would not be jeopardised.
Royal Air Force personnel seconded to BAE Systems worked within Saudi Arabia’s air force during its bombardment of Yemen from 2015-2022. That conflict led to the world’s worst humanitarian crisis.
The post [Foreign minister swerves questions about Britons fighting for Israel][12] appeared first on [Declassified UK][13].
[1]: https://secure.declassifieduk.org/page/189081/petition/1?ea.tracking.id=tcrtq6ba
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/over-2000-britons-served-for-israel-amid-gaza-genocide/
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/revealed-over-100-britons-among-israeli-soldiers-and-settlers/
[4]: https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-07-01/debates/CCBC216B-8049-4E5C-BE35-97D0C5A85E64/IsraelE1ZoneExpansion
[5]: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/v0V2c7C35OY
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/the-british-israeli-soldiers-at-risk-of-gaza-war-crimes-probe/
[7]: https://youtu.be/BpSMLTx-pjs
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/good-and-bad-war-criminals/
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/british-fighters-in-israels-military-is-it-legal/
[10]: https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/1976-02-10/debates/9bccb9f4-97fd-461c-bc73-ef22ed0c7028/BritishMercenaries
[11]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/exclusive-why-britain-wanted-to-kill-a-united-nations-ban-on-mercenaries/
[12]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/foreign-minister-hamish-falconer-swerves-questions-about-britons-fighting-for-israel/
[13]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/foreign-minister-hamish-falconer-swerves-questions-about-britons-fighting-for-israel/

2026-06-30 13:07:08 GMT

Israel spent £50,000 lobbying Reform
Reform UK’s deputy leader said last week that a parliamentary [debate into Israeli influence][1] on British politics was “antisemitic in its very motivation and at its core”.
“As such, we should utterly reject it,” argued [Richard Tice][2] to a room full of MPs.
What he did not tell them, however, was that he had been on a trip to “the Gaza front line” last September funded by the newly-created [Reform Friends of Israel][3], where he concluded that the Gaza famine was a “[blatant lie][4]”.
And that trip is not the only example of pro-Israel pressure groups working with Reform. Just a few short weeks after Tice’s visit, his chief of staff and a motley crew of Reform figures visited Israel in a trip which has received scant [media][5] [attention][6].
Their** **six-day jaunt in November 2025 included a visit to the [illegally occupied][7] Golan Heights, which the UK recognises as part of Syria.
They also visited Israel’s police headquarters, which is overseen by far-right national security minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, who is [sanctioned][8] by the UK for “repeated incitement of violence against Palestinian civilians”.
This trip was funded by the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, according to newly released [Israeli government data][9] seen by *Declassified* and found by Berlin-based journalist Yossi Bartel.
The records show that the ministry paid Conexión Israel – a company based in Jerusalem that organises high-level country visits – more than £50,000 to facilitate the delegation.
The delegates returned singing Israel’s praises and denouncing British protesters marching against the war in Gaza as antisemitic and [“naively propping up a terrorist ideology”][10].
Dr David Bull, then Reform UK party chairman, [said][11] the trip had been “life changing”.
“I now understand the situation that Israel finds itself in and Reform UK will always stand with the Israeli people,” he said.
Andy Kalil, the member of the public who organised the petition that sparked last week’s debate in parliament, said the trip “goes the heart of why we petitioned for an independent inquiry into pro-Israel influence in UK politics.”
“A trip funded by the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs that exposed participants to the Israeli government’s perspective is clearly a matter of public interest,” he told *Declassified*.
### RELATED
[
## No war crimes in Gaza, says Nigel Farage’s Israel tsar
][12] [READ MORE **][13]
## ‘Their fight, our fight’
In addition to Bull, delegates included Lancashire county council leader [Stephen Atkinson][14], London assembly member [Alex Wilson][15], and Reform UK board member [Gawain Towler][16].
Both Atkinson and Wilson declared that their place on the trip cost Israel’s foreign ministry £4,861 each.
Ryan Powell, Tice’s parliamentary [chief of staff][17] who recently [ran unsuccessfully][18] as a Reform UK candidate in south London, was [also on the trip][19].
As was [Rafaella Stefani][20], another member of Tice’s parliamentary staff. She helped host an event at [Reform’s party conference][21] where Israel’s deputy ambassador spoke.
The reason for the visit, according to the parliamentary staff register, was to study Israel’s policing, border security, health service and immigration control.
The group visited several locations targeted during the Hamas-led attacks on 7 October 2023, including the Nir Oz kibbutz in southern Israel and the site of the Nova music festival massacre.
“It sickens me that something like this could ever happen,” said Wilson, who [posted a video][22] from where the mass killing took place.
“It also sickens me that back in the UK, week after week, we’ve seen thousands of people marching to give succour to the monsters who did this.”
Bull [wrote][23] that the group also met with Tel Aviv’s deputy mayor to discuss “visa overstayers and asylum seekers” and the Israeli National Police operation headquarters “where the very advanced use of technology enables them to act on ALL CRIME”.
Towler [questioned][24] how the UK “once a steadfast ally, let relations with Israel collapse into this sorry mess”.
“After all, their fight is, in many ways, our fight. A fight for enlightenment ideals, international norms, democracy and the rest,” he wrote.
Reform UK figures outside Israel’s Knesset in November 2025. (Photo: X)
## Rising power
The cost of the trip represents only a small fraction of an enormous influx of money flowing into Reform UK, particularly from a small group of overseas expats.
The party [raised][25] more than £9 million in donations in the first three months of 2026, far more than any other political party and nearly half of total donations raised by all the parties put together.
Most of the funding came from two crypto billionaires: Christopher Harborne, a British-Thai dual national, and Ben Delo, who is [relocating to the UK][26] from Hong Kong so he can keep donating to the party after new legislation capped overseas donations from British citizens to £100,000.
The party has also held international fundraisers in wealthy British expatriate communities including in the [United Arab Emirates][27], and [has said][28] it will hold ones in Monaco and the US.
Chris Doyle, director of the Council for Arab-British Understanding (Caabu), said the trip was “very typical” of the Israeli government’s approach over decades.
With Reform leading in opinion polls, Israel has clearly assessed that the party “will have a high chance of either forming the next government, being part of that government in a coalition perhaps or being the lead opposition,” Doyle said.
It’s also very much in keeping with the Israeli strategy of reaching out to far-right groups across Europe, in the US and India which “have adopted highly anti-Muslim, Islamophobic positions”, he said.
“This is perfectly standard operating practice to reach out to such groups, build long-term links to try to get them to see the world as one between Israel as a representative of Western civilisation against barbaric Muslim extremists,” he said.
### RELATED
[
## ‘Friends of Israel’ groups have funded 56 trips for British...
][29] [READ MORE **][30]
## ‘Greater scrutiny is needed’
Kalil said he found the strongly pro-Israel public statements from the delegation “very concerning”.
“Delegates were shown sites highlighting Israel’s security concerns, but not the devastation in Gaza. That’s not a balanced fact-finding visit,” he said.
On Monday, Kalil submitted a formal complaint about last week’s debate.
Among his primary concerns, he said in his complaint, was “the repeated characterisation of the petition, its signatories and several MPs who spoke in support of it as antisemitic.”
“The debate did little to address fundamental questions relating to lobbying, political donations, parliamentary visits, transparency or influence,” his complaint said.
“Instead, it demonstrated why many people believe greater scrutiny is necessary.”
He has asked that the government review whether it met the standards expected of such debates and for it to be rerun.
In addition to trips paid for directly by the Israeli government, British politicians including Tice have been taken to Israel by Reform Friends of Israel.
The group is led by [Jason Pearlman][31], who until December was a media adviser to Israel’s president, Isaac Herzog.
Herzog has been found by a UN commission to have[ incited genocide in Gaza][32].
Speaking from Israel, he told *Declassified* that he started a conversation with Reform about turning the party’s ‘Friends of Israel’ group into a “full-time” organisation while he was still working for Herzog.
“We did have a dinner with Nigel [Farage] and some key backers,” he said. “We were able to put seed funding together.” Pearlman refused to say who Reform Friends of Israel’s (RFOI) donors were.
The Israeli embassy in London and Richard Tice have been approached.
The post [Israel spent £50,000 lobbying Reform][33] appeared first on [Declassified UK][34].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/critics-of-israeli-influence-are-like-nazis-politicians-claim/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/richard-tice/
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/reform-friends-of-israel/
[4]: https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/on-the-gaza-front-line-i-find-the-famine-is-a-blatant-lie/
[5]: https://lancashire.thelead.uk/p/reform-uks-lancashire-leader-takes-israel-trip-cancelled-meetings
[6]: https://x.com/reformexposed/status/1995234933942481017
[7]: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-statement-on-the-golan-heights
[8]: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-and-partners-unite-to-sanction-ministers-inciting-west-bank-violence
[9]: https://www.gov.il/BlobFolder/dynamiccollectorresultitem/forein_1_26/he/repository-of-answers_ministry-of-foreign-affairs_forein_1_26.xlsx
[10]: https://www.facebook.com/reformukbarnet/posts/dr-david-bull-chairman-of-reform-uk-wrote-on-sunday-16th-november-2025-in-his-su/122158928348666004/
[11]: https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2571803066516031
[12]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62952
[13]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62952
[14]: https://council.lancashire.gov.uk/mgListGifts.aspx?UID=33642&RPID=0
[15]: https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-assembly-does/london-assembly-members/alex-wilson/gifts-hospitality?year=2025
[16]: https://gawaintowler.substack.com/p/fraying-ties
[17]: https://richardtice.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/RFM-RP-Digital.pdf
[18]: https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/uk-news/merton-local-election-results-2026-33852365
[19]: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmsecret/251229/register.pdf
[20]: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmsecret/251229/register.pdf
[21]: https://www.thejc.com/news/politics/we-have-friends-here-israels-deputy-ambassador-tells-reform-uk-conference-kzjly88n
[22]: https://www.facebook.com/reel/712542641354169
[23]: https://www.facebook.com/reformukbarnet/posts/dr-david-bull-chairman-of-reform-uk-wrote-on-sunday-16th-november-2025-in-his-su/122158928348666004/
[24]: https://gawaintowler.substack.com/p/fraying-ties
[25]: https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/media-centre/political-parties-accept-ps247m-donations-q1-2026
[26]: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/04/08/billionaire-expat-ben-delo-moves-to-uk-to-donate-reform/
[27]: https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/exclusive-inside-private-dubai-party-where-nigel-farage-praised-uae-minister
[28]: https://bylinetimes.com/2025/03/20/nigel-farages-reform-uk-funded-by-tax-haven-linked-firms-as-party-seeks-tax-exile-donors/
[29]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61270
[30]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61270
[31]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/no-war-crimes-in-gaza-says-nigel-farages-israel-tsar/
[32]: https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/09/israel-has-committed-genocide-gaza-strip-un-commission-finds
[33]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/israel-spent-50000-lobbying-reform/
[34]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/israel-spent-50000-lobbying-reform/

2026-06-26 17:49:57 GMT

Palestine activist jailed as ‘terrorist’ speaks out
“Other than hexing the man, I really wasn’t surprised”.
This is how Leona Kamio, known as Ellie, describes what was going through her mind when a judge announced she would be sentenced as a terrorist alongside three co-defendants earlier this month.
Kamio, a 30-year-old nursery teacher, had been convicted of criminal damage in connection with a Palestine Action raid on an Israeli arms firm in Filton, Bristol, in August 2024.
The jury that tried her had not been informed that any convictions could later carry a “terrorism connection”, she tells *Declassified* from Bronzefield prison in her first interview since being convicted.
During that trial, the defendants were also not allowed to explain why they targeted Elbit Systems or even say the word “genocide”, stripping the action of all context.
Kamio and her three co-defendants, Charlotte Head, Fatema Zainab Rajwani, and Samuel Corner, have now been sentenced to a combined total of more than 25 years in prison. Two others, Zoe Rogers and Jordan Devlin, were found not guilty.
In the morning before the sentencing hearing, Kamio felt that the judge, Mr Justice Johnson, already “had pre-written a crazy sentence”.
The “terrorism connection”, says Kamio, means the activists will serve at least two-thirds of their prison sentences, though it is “likely we’ll have to sit out the whole five-year term”.
In prison, she adds, “they’ve introduced a vetting process for us, which means we are only allowed to have contact with 20 people on the outside. That includes phone calls, visits, email and post”.
The goal of this, Kamio says, “is to make us feel isolated and cut off from the world”.
The four activists will also be “heavily surveilled in both prison and on release where we will have to be on notification to the police for 15 years and remain on a terrorist register”.
Does she feel let down by the British criminal justice system?
“On a surface level, yes”, Kamio says. “As a person who had never had any interaction with the law or known anyone who had, and thinking it would be fair, I felt let down”.
But, she added, “having been incarcerated now for almost two years across different prisons in the country and having met so many people inside those prisons, I would actually say that the criminal system is working exactly as it was intended to: to protect people in power”.
### RELATED
[
## Palestine Action activists sentenced as terrorists
][1] [READ MORE **][2]
## ‘The drones must be silent’
The sentencing hearing at Woolwich Crown Court saw the prosecution [submit][3] evidence at the “59th minute of the 11th hour” regarding damage costs associated with the raid.
That evidence, based on an insurance report, said the raid had caused more than £1.2m of damage, including to 40 military assets such as military drones and unnamed “drone systems”.
Defence lawyers said they were given no time to review the new evidence and admitting it so late would amount to “a gross affront to the integrity of the criminal justice system”.
Justice Johnson admitted it anyway.
Why did the prosecution not serve this evidence during the trial?
“If these weapons were put in front of a jury, it would have given us the opportunity to talk about the disgusting weapons that Elbit actually makes and what they do to Palestinians”, Kamio says.
[An Elbit drone damaged at the factory in Filton. (Photo: Handout)]An Elbit drone damaged at the factory in Filton. (Photo: Police handout)
“And the prosecution didn’t want that, because who in their right mind would choose the side of Elbit when they hear about a drone that lures civilians out into the open with the sounds of crying children so they can be shot”, she adds.
After the sentencing was handed down, Kamio recited part of a poem by Palestinian author Marwan Makhoul while being led out of the courtroom, saying: “In order to hear the birds, the drones must be silent”.
Family members in the public gallery looked on crying, while some of them banged on the windows.
“The line I quoted is a reminder of why we did what we did”, Kamio says. “It’s also a reminder that Palestinians and the land of Palestine itself will always be there, will always persevere, that one day the drones will stop. We have to act with that in mind, as if liberation is possible”.
## ‘Political pawns’
Three days after Kamio and her co-defendants were sentenced, the Court of Appeal upheld the government’s proscription of Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation.
In that ruling, Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr tried to set Palestine Action outside of Britain’s “long and honourable history of civil disobedience”, suggesting the group was little like the Suffragettes, who she falsely claimed operated “in the open”.
An alleged threat to “national security” was also emphasised in the ruling, despite the Home Office barely [mentioning][4] that issue in its open evidence for justifying proscription.
Palestine Action’s co-founder Huda Ammori has said she will challenge the ruling at the Supreme Court and, if necessary, at the European Court of Human Rights.
Even before the Filton incident, the UK government was [considering][5] banning Palestine Action, recent disclosure of official documents show.
The Filton raid, some suspect, was consequently categorised as “terrorism” in order to build the case for the proscription of Palestine Action as a whole.
Defence counsel argued that the initial charges against the first Filton activists under the Terrorism Act were changed to a “terrorism connection” under the Sentencing Act in order to prevent the jury from having to contend with the “terrorism” issue altogether.
If the jurors had been instructed to try the defendants on terror charges, the lawyers argued, they may not have arrived at the verdict that they did.
“They needed to secure some [terrorism] arrests and convictions for people taking direct action… before they could proscribe Palestine Action”, says Kamio.
“We have been used as political pawns in this stitch-up against Palestine Action. If anybody doubts this, then just listen to the two judgments passed down by Judge Johnson and Judge Carr… The language is so similar that they mimic one another. They’re not even trying to hide it”, she adds.
### RELATED
[
## ‘They’re political prisoners’: Parents of Palestine activists slam pre-trial detention
][6] [READ MORE **][7]
## ‘Good riddance’
A lot has happened in British politics since Kamio and her co-defendants were sentenced as terrorists earlier this month.
UK prime minister Keir Starmer announced his resignation following the by-election victory of Andy Burnham in Makerfield. Burnham now looks poised to become Britain’s seventh prime minister in just ten years.
Does Kamio have any parting words for Starmer, whose government has overseen a brutal crackdown on the pro-Palestine movement in Britain?
“Good riddance, you cosplaying Tory”, she says. But Kamio is also “not hopeful” about the prospects for a Burnham premiership.
“That’s why it’s fucking hilarious that the terrorism connection in our case was based on the accusation that we were trying to influence the government; we made it very clear that we knew that we could never influence a British government because the establishment just doesn’t care”, she declares. “So, no, I don’t have faith in the government, but I do have faith in people”.
What is Kamio’s message for people on the outside?
“Whatever you feel reading this – outrage, disbelief – rather than sitting in despair with it, channel it into doing something meaningful”, she declares.
Kamio continues: “They can’t carry on doing something that the majority of Britain doesn’t agree with, and the majority of people are pro-Palestine. My barrister said there are often times when the criminal justice system and the law are a bit behind the people, and I think this is true this time, and unfortunately, I’m in the middle of it”.
But, she adds, “that’s ok – because I do have faith that something good has to come out of all this”.
The post [Palestine activist jailed as ‘terrorist’ speaks out][8] appeared first on [Declassified UK][9].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63552
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63552
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/palestine-action-activists-will-be-sentenced-as-terrorists/
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/revealed-how-palestine-action-was-banned/
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/revealed-how-britain-weaponised-terrorism-laws-against-activists/
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=57881
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=57881
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/palestine-activist-jailed-as-terrorist-speaks-out/
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/palestine-activist-jailed-as-terrorist-speaks-out/

2026-06-24 12:41:19 GMT

Inside Labour Together’s secret battle against Jeremy Corbyn
Newly released documents reveal the inner workings of Labour Together and its role in covertly undermining Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership of the Labour party.
The documents were disclosed to Corbyn in response to a subject access request. They contain emails from Labour Together’s two key figures Morgan McSweeney and Josh Simons.
McSweeney went on to be Keir Starmer’s chief of staff while Simons became a cabinet minister until he resigned following revelations that he had hired a reputation management firm to “proactively undermine” journalistic investigations into Labour Together, McSweeney and Sir Keir Starmer.
Simons subsequently vacated his Makerfield constituency seat for Andy Burnham.
Internal documents detail how Labour Together under McSweeney’s watch (2017-20) conducted polling of the Labour membership to monitor its views on the incidence of antisemitism in the party.
This polling allowed McSweeney and his allies to track responses to the antisemitism narrative that they were simultaneously helping to sustain by placing arguably alarmist stories in the media.
The documents further detail how The Canary media outlet was highly trusted among Labour members and identified as a political challenge because it defended Corbyn amid antisemitism accusations.
The Canary was subsequently targeted by the McSweeney-linked Stop Funding Fake News campaign with an advertiser boycott, which helped to diminish its revenue.
Morgan McSweeney waits to board a flight at Zurich Airport in Switzerland on 1 June 2026. (Photo: Declassified UK)
## **Weaponising antisemitism**
McSweeney quietly inflamed the “antisemitism crisis” that would dog Corbyn’s leadership from at least 2018.
He did so by seeding and placing stories into the press that helped to build the narrative that Corbyn’s Labour had become riddled with antisemitism and that this flowed inexorably from a resurgent left-wing anti-imperialism.
At the same time, the new documents show, Labour Together was paying YouGov to repeatedly poll Labour members on whether they agreed with the framing of the party as a hotbed of antisemitism.
The goal was apparently to gain a detailed guide to the opinions of the party’s membership as McSweeney sought to detach it from Corbyn’s leadership.
Although the precise cost is unknown, polling of this kind was likely to be expensive.
It was also at this time that Labour Together unlawfully failed to declare most of its donations, amounting to over £700,000, with key funders of the organisation including hedge fund manager Martin Taylor and pro-Israel lobbyist [Trevor Chinn][1].
### RELATED
[
## Labour think tank paid PR firm to investigate Declassified journalist
][2] [READ MORE **][3]
## **‘Deliberately exaggerated’**
One email from October 2018 shows McSweeney sharing a range of polling questions about what members thought of Corbyn’s leadership, who they thought the next leader of the Labour Party should be, the traditional media that they consumed, and what social media platforms they used.
Emails show that McSweeney was directing what questions to be put to members by YouGov.
Included in the survey was a question about antisemitism, which asked:
*There has been quite a lot of news coverage recently about antisemitism in the Labour Party. Which of the following statements comes closest to your view?*
* *It is a serious and genuine problem that the party leadership needs to take urgent action to address*
* *It is a genuine problem, but its extent is being deliberately exaggerated to damage Labour and Jeremy Corbyn, or to stifle criticism of Israel*
* *It is not a serious problem at all, and is being hyped to undermine Labour and Jeremy Corbyn, or to stifle legitimate criticism of Israel*
* *None of these*
* *Don’t Know*
The results of two polls conducted in November 2018 and July 2019 suggest the Labour membership was sceptical of the “antisemitism crisis” narrative.
For instance, 76% of respondents believed in November 2018 that the crisis was either “deliberately exaggerated” or effectively non-existent and being “hyped” to damage Corbyn and protect Israel.
This dropped marginally to 71% seven months later despite a firestorm of media coverage.
## **‘Dreadful performance’**
McSweeney appeared to be displeased with the poll results, writing in one 2018 email that “there is nothing at the moment to suggest that Corbyn is challengeable before 2022 but equally there is every reason to be optimistic about what happens next”.
He added that Corbyn’s “absolute numbers are still very high (68%) particularly given his dreadful performance on Brexit and antisemitism”.
The poll results are additionally striking given Starmer’s decision to withdraw the whip from Corbyn in November 2020 after he said “the problem [of antisemitism] was dramatically overstated for political reasons by our opponents inside and outside of the Party”, reflecting the majority views of membership.
In the July 2019 poll, Labour members were asked to rank their support for other MPs in head-to-head battles with Corbyn. While Corbyn beat every contender, the closest contender was Starmer, who received 45% to Corbyn’s 55%.
According to insider [accounts][4], it was around July 2019 that McSweeney became a member of a loose working group supporting a potential Starmer leadership bid and providing polling data towards that end.
## **The Canary**
The documents also indicate how Labour Together and McSweeney were concerned about The Canary’s ability to rally support for Corbyn.
Included in the new disclosure is a two-page briefing note about The Canary which appears to have been written in 2018 and contain Labour Together polling data.
The note complained that The Canary “is one of the most trusted news sources amongst Jeremy Corbyn supporters”, and was well ahead of “The Times, The Mirror or the BBC”.
The data also showed The Canary had a “net positive 23%” trust score among Labour members, equalled only by The Guardian. The New Statesman, by contrast, received a score of minus six.
To that end, the briefing aired serious concerns about The Canary’s political influence in Britain.
“The Canary’s dominance of left wing online media will make [sic] a key influencer in deciding the next Mayor of London, the next leader of the Labour Party and the future direction of the country”, the note observed.
It further claimed The Canary was “sympathetic to anti-Semitic viewpoints and publishes articles in defence of politicians who have got into trouble for anti-Semitism”, an allegation which was [debunked][5] by the independent media regulator Impress in 2021.
### RELATED
[
## How Labour megadonor won Israeli medal of honour
][6] [READ MORE **][7]
## **Stop Funding Fake News**
When read against other emails and Labour Together’s polling, the briefing note points to concerns about how The Canary was undermining the antisemitism narrative that McSweeney and his allies were covertly helping to inflame in this period.
In March 2019, McSweeney and his ally Imran Ahmed would launch the Stop Funding Fake News (SFFN) campaign, which sought to demonetise The Canary by pressuring companies to withdraw advertising from its website.
While being led by factional Labour insiders, the SFFN campaign presented itself as a project run by committed grassroots activists who were concerned with the proliferation of “fake news”.
Interestingly, the internal briefing note, which appears to have been a precursor to the SFFN campaign, made no mention of the accuracy of The Canary’s reporting.
The emphasis was on its political influence, strongly suggesting the subsequent campaign was initiated in response to The Canary’s challenge to the political ambitions of Labour Together, onto which claims of “disinformation” were grafted.
Indeed, McSweeney reportedly [told][8] Labour Together colleagues: “Destroy the Canary or the Canary destroys us”.
That campaign, alongside changes to social media algorithms, played a powerful role in circumscribing the impact and reach of The Canary by late 2019.
By then, Labour Together’s plan to install Sir Keir Starmer as the leader of the Labour Party was well-advanced.
McSweeney and Labour Together’s fixation on polling would carry over the organisation while led by Josh Simons (2022 – 2024).
These intense polling efforts apparently also helped the organisation to create caricatures of target voters for the Labour party which were at once crude, bizarre, and insulting.
A version of the “Workington Man” curated by Labour Together was 62 years old, white, “absolutely despised Jeremy Corbyn”, “hates Europe and European culture”, drives an “Audi A4”, and “thinks South Asians who live nearby are terrible drivers”.
Meanwhile, “Stevenage Woman” was 42, non-white, “hates Boris for breaking the rules on Lockdown”, “thinks we should have fewer migrants”, “doesn’t think migrants improve British culture,” and “has a Ford Focus and is a very cautious driver”.
In April 2023, Labour Together under Simons published a report called [Red Shift][9], which argued that the Labour Party should target ‘Workington Man’ in order to win an anticipated General Election.
It contended that the party could do so by holding its line on “social and cultural issues” by being “tough on crime”, “exerting a firm grip over migration” while embracing the Union Jack and singing the national anthem at conference.
Red Shift described Workington Man as representative of a “patriotic left”, but did not repeat the crude caricatures reflected in internal documents.
Together, the documents add to a growing body of evidence about serious misconduct at Labour Together under McSweeney’s leadership.
“What is revealed makes the call for an independent inquiry into Labour Together overwhelming,” John McDonnell, the Labour MP and former Shadow Chancellor, told *Declassified.*
Corbyn also reacted to the revelations, saying: “Here it is in black and white: a grand anti-democratic heist against a political party, from the many to the few. They don’t need to answer to me. They should answer to the hundreds of thousands of ordinary members who wanted to build a real alternative to poverty, homelessness and war”.
Labour Together is now called ThinkLabour. Think Labour, Josh Simons, Imran Ahmed and Morgan McSweeney were asked to comment.
The post [Inside Labour Together’s secret battle against Jeremy Corbyn][10] appeared first on [Declassified UK][11].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-labour-megadonor-won-israeli-medal-of-honour/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62019
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62019
[4]: https://harpercollins.co.uk/products/keir-starmer-the-biography-tom-baldwin
[5]: https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2021/11/25/the-canary-cleared-of-antisemitic-discrimination-by-independent-press-regulator/
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62347
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62347
[8]: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/sep/14/corbyn-had-flown-too-close-to-the-sun-how-labour-insiders-battled-the-left-and-plotted-the-partys-path-back-to-power
[9]: https://cms.thinklabour.co.uk/assets/831c30f3-cbc9-4c8b-a847-aabefaca5e35.pdf
[10]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/inside-labour-togethers-secret-battle-against-jeremy-corbyn/
[11]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/inside-labour-togethers-secret-battle-against-jeremy-corbyn/

2026-06-23 21:09:58 GMT

Critics of Israeli influence are like Nazis, politicians claim
British MPs compared their colleagues to Nazis during a debate about Israel’s influence on UK politics on Monday.
The event in Parliament was triggered by a petition signed by more than 118,000 people, calling for a “public inquiry into pro-Israel influence on politics & democracy”.
But the [debate][1] was steamrolled by MPs who claimed the title of the [petition][2] was anti-Semitic.
Labour MP [Peter Prinsley][3] said the petition was “familiar”, comparing it to conspiracy theories spread by Nazis.
DUP politician Sammy Wilson also likened it to Jews being accused of causing the Black Death.
However, pro-Israel lobby groups have flown British MPs out to the country at least 67 times since the Gaza genocide started in October 2023 – at a cost of almost £170,000.
Of this, three quarters came from ‘Friends of Israel’ groups, which are funded by anonymous donors. The former director of Labour Friends of Israel (LFI) has described it as a “lobbying organisation”.
The remaining funding either came directly from the Israeli Embassy, or from an organisation called ELNET which [describes itself][4] as “the most influential pro-Israel advocacy organisation in Europe”. Around 4% of the money came from a mix of different groups.
***Watch the debate***
## Undeclared interests
At least six of the MPs who criticised the petition on Israeli influence have been personally taken on all-expenses-paid trips to Israel.
They include Sammy Wilson, who went on a week-long visit to Israel worth £3,810, which was [funded][5] entirely by the Israeli Embassy.
However, Wilson failed to declare this during yesterday’s debate.
Meanwhile, Tory MP Andrew Mitchell failed to declare that Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI) had paid for a £5,878 trip, for him and his adviser.
The group has [previously][6] stated that it “lobbies Conservative MPs” to foster greater “sympathy for Israel”.
During yesterday’s debate, he claimed that focussing on Israel’s influence on UK politics “smacks of an antisemitic conspiracy theory”.
As a foreign minister in Rishi Sunak’s government, Mitchell repeatedly defended arms exports to Israel.
Meanwhile, the deputy leader of Reform UK, Richard Tice, told MPs that the petition was “is antisemitic in its very motivation and at its core”.
He said he wanted more of Israel’s “success and brilliance” in the UK, not less.
Tice failed to declare his trip to Israel last year, funded by the newly-formed Reform Friends of Israel (RFOI). The group is [headed][7] by a media adviser to Israel’s president, Isaac Herzog, who a UN commission found to have incited genocide.
## Accountability
Only a few MPs spoke in favour of holding a public inquiry into pro-Israel influence on politics and democracy – most of whom were independent.
They included the MP for Dewsbury and Batley, Iqbal Mohamed, who said: “We rightly sanction Russia for undermining democratic institutions, and warn about the threats from China and Iran to our political system, yet when substantial evidence of foreign influence concerns Israel, our principles of transparency, scrutiny and accountability appear to vanish.”
He pointed out that the recent landmark review into countering foreign financial influence and interference in UK politics, which was commissioned by the government, had focussed on Russia and China, without a single mention of Israel.
Shockat Adam, the independent MP for Leicester South, said: “Conflating a people’s religion with a Government’s actions is totally unacceptable.
“Criticising the state of Israel and its actions, especially with its present Government, is not antisemitic, otherwise the bombing of Iraq or Afghanistan would be Islamophobic.”
James Frith, a minister who represented the UK government at the debate, denied that Israel had conducted genocide in Gaza, when challenged by independent MP Adnan Hussain.
However a [UN commission of inquiry][8] said on Tuesday that “Israeli authorities and security forces have deliberately targeted Palestinian children resulting in genocide”.
It added: “Israel’s targeting of neonatal and maternity care centers in Gaza have directly harmed the survival of newborns and Palestinians’ reproductive future, including rises in miscarriages, birth defects and lasting vulnerabilities among newborns, resulting in the destruction of Palestinian newborn life and the population’s continuity.”
The post [Critics of Israeli influence are like Nazis, politicians claim][9] appeared first on [Declassified UK][10].
[1]: https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-06-22/debates/4A98124D-73A6-4CD6-B5AD-DF1DE6C2C114/UKPoliticsPro-IsraelInfluence
[2]: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/752646
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/peter-prinsley/
[4]: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/elnet-mps-trips-israel-gaza-uk-politicians-trump-donors/
[5]: https://members.parliament.uk/member/1593/registeredinterests
[6]: https://web.archive.org/web/20060321004157/http://www.cfoi.co.uk/about.html
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/no-war-crimes-in-gaza-says-nigel-farages-israel-tsar/
[8]: https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2026/06/israel-continues-commit-genocide-and-other-atrocity-crimes-deliberately?sub-site=HRC
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/critics-of-israeli-influence-are-like-nazis-politicians-claim/
[10]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/critics-of-israeli-influence-are-like-nazis-politicians-claim/

2026-06-23 09:05:57 GMT

Palestine Action lawyer faces renewed contempt proceedings
[Police officers arrest protesters at Filton sentencing in Woolwich in June]
A leading British civil rights barrister faces contempt proceedings once again after a judge decided to refer allegations against him for a second time.
The original proceedings brought against Rajiv Menon KC were thrown out last month for procedural reasons.
But on 22 June, Mr Justice Johnson ruled that Menon’s case met the necessary “threshold conditions” to proceed and that it was in the public interest to do so.
He said the case should be referred to a judge who can “deal with the matter expeditiously”.
“I stress that nothing in this judgement decides that Mr Menon has acted in contempt of court,” Johnson wrote.
“My findings do not bind the presiding judge. The presiding judge will only institute contempt proceedings if they consider that it is the appropriate and justified step.”
Garden Court Chambers, where Menon has practised for three decades, said on Monday that the proceedings brought against Rajiv were unprecedented and have “sent shock waves through the legal profession.”
“The impact of these proceedings is already being felt by the criminal defence community, especially juniors, with concerns that public confidence in the independence of the Bar and the integrity of our system of justice will be damaged.”
Menon has more than 30 years experience spanning high-profile cases such as Stephen Lawrence, Hillsborough and Grenfell.
Prior to becoming a judge, Johnson represented a range of clients including [MI6 and the Ministry of Defence][1].
[
## **How we got here**
Menon is accused of violating Johnson’s orders in his closing statement in the trial of six Palestinian Action activists who broke into an Israeli-owned arms factory near Bristol in 2024.
The judge had warned defence barristers not to tell the jury that they could reach a verdict according to their conscience, a principle known as jury equity.
In his closing speech, Menon, who represented one of the activists, told the jury about the Bushell case, a landmark ruling from 1670 which established the independence of juries.
He read from a plaque at the Old Bailey commemorating the jury in that case, saying “it established the right of juries to give their verdict according to their convictions”.
In February, the jury [acquitted][2] all of the activists of aggravated burglary, but failed to reach a verdict on several other charges.
The Crown Prosecution Service sought a retrial while Johnson filed the original contempt of court complaint against Menon.
In May, four of the defendants – Charlotte Head, Samuel Corner, Leona Kamio and Fatema Rajwani – were found guilty of criminal damage. Corner was also convicted of grievous bodily harm without intent.
Two others, Zoe Rogers and Jordan Devlin, were found not guilty of criminal damage.
It then emerged, as reporting restrictions were lifted, that the four activists faced being sentenced as terrorists even though the jury had not been informed of that possibility.
In a marathon court hearing on 12 June, Johnson [ruled][3] first that the four would indeed be sentenced as terrorists and then handed down a combined total of more than 25 years in prison.
Meanwhile, three court of appeal judges [had ruled][4] that the contempt proceedings levelled against Menon were unlawful.
They said that Johnson could decide whether to refer the complaint to another High Court judge, the Attorney General, to the Bar Standards Board or take no further step.
Now Johnson has made his ruling, it will be up to the new judge to decide whether contempt proceedings continue.
Garden Chambers said it was awaiting the outcome of “this already protracted process” and would continue to support Menon “through this difficult time”.
Kirsty Brimelow KC, Chair of the Bar Council which represents barristers in England and Wales, has previously said the contempt proceedings against Menon “risk a chilling effect on the profession” and called it a “[troubling episode][5]”.
The post [Palestine Action lawyer faces renewed contempt proceedings][6] appeared first on [Declassified UK][7].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/julian-assange-judge-previously-acted-for-mi6/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/palestine-action-protesters-found-not-guilty-of-elbit-burglary/
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/palestine-action-activists-will-be-sentenced-as-terrorists/
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/palestine-action-barrister-wins-appeal-in-contempt-case/
[5]: https://www.barcouncil.org.uk/resource/bar-council-statement-on-contempt-of-court.html
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/palestine-action-lawyer-faces-renewed-contempt-proceedings/
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/palestine-action-lawyer-faces-renewed-contempt-proceedings/

2026-06-16 15:31:49 GMT

Israeli property event referred to authorities over illegal settlement ads
[Protesters at the Great Israeli Real Estate event in London on Sunday]
The UK government has referred the Great Israeli Real Estate event to the Advertising Standards Authorities (ASA) as it has emerged that properties for sale in illegal Israeli settlements were promoted at the show.
Organisers had said last week that all exhibitors at the event would provide information only about properties for sale within the Green Line – the internationally recognised border between Israel and Palestine.
But on Monday, *Declassified* [revealed][1] that brochures circulated at the event advertised developments in at least seven illegal settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
*Declassified *now understands that on Sunday, the day the event was held at the Edgware United Synagogue in London, Middle East minister Hamish Falconer and culture minister Ian Murray contacted the ASA about the exhibition.
It was not immediately clear what triggered their concern, including whether they were made aware of the advertising circulating at the event as it happened.
A government spokesperson said: *“*We completely oppose the advertisement of properties for sale in settlements, which are illegal under international law.
“We have written to the Advertising Standards Authority to ensure any evidence of such advertising is scrutinised under UK law, and we have updated advice to UK businesses of the legal and reputational risks of activity in illegal settlements.”
## ‘Entirely inadequate’
On Tuesday, Foreign minister Yvette Cooper offered further information, telling MPs that the ministers had asked the ASA for reassurances that if there was “any evidence of the advertising or promotion of property in illegal settlements at this or any other events, they will uphold the law, regulations and guidance that applies”.
Last week, over 100 MPs and campaigners called for the ban of the event which had advertised Gush Etzion, an illegal Israeli settlement in the occupied West Bank, on its website. The mention of the settlement was [later removed][2].
Green MP Ellie Chowns, one of the MPs who wanted the event stopped, noted on Tuesday that Cooper told MPs that she would be pursuing the event, but said that her actions had been “piecemeal and entirely inadequate”.
“How is it that this government fails even to prevent the marketing of illegal property in this country and still fails to take action?” Chowns said, calling for a ban on trade with illegal settlements.
Ryvka Barnard, deputy director of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, welcomed the referral, but said it was “quite frankly too little too late”.
“There was substantial evidence ahead of the event that organisers were advertising properties in illegal settlements, and clear calls from MPs and peers, human rights groups, lawyers and ordinary citizens, for the event to be investigated.
“Instead it was allowed to go forward and now the government is scrambling to respond afterwards,” she told *Declassified*.
### RELATED
[
## Revealed: Illegal West Bank settlements advertised at Israeli event in...
][3] [READ MORE **][4]
## Potential violations
Human rights lawyer Daniel Machover said the regulators would need to ensure that their guidance and practice incorporated the legal obligations set down in the International Court of Justice’s July 2024 advisory opinion.
“That includes ensuring nothing that occurs in our jurisdiction renders ‘aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by Israel’s illegal presence in the occupied Palestinian territory’,” Machover told *Declassified* on Tuesday.
“Stepping back, there are potential crimes being committed here by those involved in the attempted sale of settlement properties that police should be investigating.”
Those involved may have been aiding and abetting war crimes, including assisting in the transfer of non-protected people in the occupied Palestinian territories and the forcible transfer of protected people, he said.
They may also have violated the Proceeds of Crime Act which makes it illegal for promoters and estate agents operating in the UK to facilitate the sale of land acquired through illegal conduct.
The Metropolitan Police declined to comment specifically on the event, but *Declassified *understands that it has also been referred to the force.
It is among around 240 referrals related to the Israel-Hamas conflict made to the Met Police since 7 October 2023.
A Counter Terrorism Policing spokesperson told *Declassified *on Monday*:* “Each and every referral made to the War Crimes Team is reviewed in line with War Crimes/Crimes Against Humanity Referral Guidelines, jointly agreed by police and the Crown Prosecution Service.
“At this time, there is no UK-based investigation into any matters relating to this particular conflict.”
The post [Israeli property event referred to authorities over illegal settlement ads][5] appeared first on [Declassified UK][6].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/revealed-illegal-west-bank-settlements-advertised-at-israeli-event-in-london/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/pressure-mounts-on-uk-to-ban-israeli-real-estate-event/
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63566
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63566
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/israeli-property-event-referred-to-authorities-over-illegal-settlement-ads/
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/israeli-property-event-referred-to-authorities-over-illegal-settlement-ads/

2026-06-16 15:31:29 GMT

Investigation urged over illegal UK arms shipments to Israel
Over 60 MPs and Lords have demanded answers over illegal shipments of weaponry from Britain to Israel via Belgium.
MPs who have signed the letter include Diane Abbott, Richard Burgon, John McDonnell, and Hannah Spencer, while the Lords include Baroness Sayeeda Warsi and John Hendy KC.
It has also been signed by Abtisam Mohamed MP, who sits on the foreign affairs select committee.
The move comes after [*Declassified*][1], Belgian NGO [Vredesactie][2], Irish news outlet *[The Ditch][3]*, and [Palestinian Youth Movement][4] discovered a suspicious package of military goods bound for Israel in March.
[Belgium][5] has strict laws on the transhipment of military items to [Israel][6] through its ports and airports, including a ban on overflights carrying weaponry through its airspace.
The shipment was seized by the Belgian authorities, which confirmed that it contained items covered by UK export codes for military aircraft and fire control components.
They did not refute that some of the items may have belonged to [Moog][7], a US aerospace firm in Wolverhampton which manufactures trainer aircraft components for the Israeli air force.
A Belgian government spokesperson told *Declassified*: “No transit licence request was issued; if it had been, it would have been refused”.
### RELATED
[
## How a UK arms shipment to Israel was seized in...
][8] [READ MORE **][9]
## **Arms to Israel**
Published this morning and authored by Steve Witherden MP, the letter is now asking the UK authorities to explain how an illegal arms shipment to Israel was exported from Britain.
Addressed to trade secretary Peter Kyle, it asks for clarification on when the authorities first became aware that UK-origin arms were being illegally shipped to Israel.
*Declassified* understands that the March shipment was not the first instance of UK arms bound for Israel being intercepted in Belgium.
The letter further asks whether the Belgian authorities, arms manufacturers, and cargo carriers responsible for the shipment have been consulted over the issue.
In addition, it asks whether the trade department will subject the responsible arms firms to compliance visits to ensure they are conforming with their legal obligations.
The final question centres on whether the government will commit to examining whether logistics companies operating in the UK, including UPS and Challenge Airlines, are fully compliant with arms export regulations.
If not, the letter asks whether those logistics companies will be excluded from public procurement processes.
The full letter can be seen below:
The post [Investigation urged over illegal UK arms shipments to Israel][10] appeared first on [Declassified UK][11].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-a-uk-arms-shipment-to-israel-was-seized-in-belgium/
[2]: https://www.vredesactie.be/
[3]: https://www.ontheditch.com/
[4]: https://www.palestinianyouthmovement.com/
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/belgium/
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/israel/
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/israeli-fighter-pilots-training-with-uk-equipment/
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62854
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62854
[10]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/investigation-urged-over-illegal-uk-arms-shipments-to-israel/
[11]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/investigation-urged-over-illegal-uk-arms-shipments-to-israel/

2026-06-15 18:05:06 GMT

Revealed: Illegal West Bank settlements advertised at Israeli event in London
[Pamphlets collected from the Great Israeli Real Estate Event in London (Source: JAZA)]
Properties from seven illegal settlements were advertised at the [Great Israeli Real Estate Event][1] on Sunday in London, days after more than 100 MPs and groups urged the UK government to ban it.
Organisers had [told journalists][2] last week that all exhibitors at the event “without exception” would only provide information about properties for sale within the Green Line – the internationally recognised border between Israel and Palestine.
But brochures circulated at the event which Jewish Anti-Zionist Action (JAZA) shared with *Declassified *and others [posted online][3] show companies touting properties for sale in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
In one pamphlet, Harry Zahev Developers advertises apartments and private homes in Kfar Eldad and Teneh Omarim, illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank near Palestinian towns and communities.
“Bringing gardens and spaces where nature is your closest neighbour,” the pamphlet reads.
In another brochure, the Jerusalem Real Estate company offers the city’s “most sought-after Anglo neighborhoods” including French Hill and Ramat Eshkol, two settlement neighbourhoods in occupied east Jerusalem.
Neither company responded immediately to requests for comment on Monday. *Declassified* attempted to reach the event organisers, but could not find any contact details.
Other illegal Israel settlements featured in the promotional materials which JAZA collected include the West Bank settlements of Ma’ale Adumim and Givat Ze’ev, and Givat Hamatos, a settlement currently under construction in East Jerusalem.
“Through these pamphlets and information we collected on the inside, we can prove that this event was selling properties in the occupied West Bank,” said Guy Zilberman, a JAZA activist who gained entry to the exhibition.
## **‘Crazy times’**
Zilberman described his experience at the real estate show. “After passing through security, I was given a free tote bag and a booklet advertising the different real estate companies present at the fair that day,” he said.
At the stall for one developer, he said he was told the company had “properties they were selling in ‘Judea and Samaria’ that he thought would be perfect for me”.
The company representative “had all the booklets and papers for it but couldn’t get them out because the police had said in order for the event to go ahead they couldn’t advertise properties illegal under international law,” Zilberman said.
The man then told him these were “crazy times we live in” and asked for Zilberman’s contact details so he could follow up after the event.
He visited another stall and said he was given a leaflet advertising properties in Ma’ale Adumim, which is an illegal West Bank settlement.
After about an hour inside, Zilberman [disrupted the event][4], calling for “sanctions now” and saying “don’t steal” in Hebrew.
“After disrupting the event, I was pulled out by my neck by security,” Zilberman said.
He noted that the Board of Deputies [had said ][5]that the event was “an excuse to harass and intimidate members of the Jewish community”.
“I would invite the Board of Deputies to look at the documents here that clearly depict in writing that these properties in illegally occupied territories…have been advertised at this event,” he said.
The Board of Deputies did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Monday.
## **‘Empty words’**
The revelation that properties from illegal settlements were advertised at the event will bring pressure on the foreign secretary who [promised last week][6] to pursue “any cases where there are breaches of UK law” when pressed about the event.
Several civil society groups had also called on the Metropolitan Police to investigate the show.
London Mayor Sadiq Khan said on Friday that he had discussed the event directly with the force and had been “informed that any allegations of criminality related to the unlawful sale of property at the event would be assessed by the Met with a view to investigation”.
*Declassified* has shared the promotional materials with the Foreign Office, which did not respond when asked to comment, and the Met Police which declined to comment specifically on the matter.
Instead, a Counter Terrorism Policing spokesperson told *Declassified* that it has received around 240 referrals related to the Israel-Hamas conflict since 7 October 2023.
*Declassified* understands one of the referrals relates to the real estate event.
“We will not be commenting on the specific nature of each and every referral. As is the case with all referrals, they are assessed by specialist officers to determine whether any UK-based investigation may be required,” the spokesperson said.
“Each and every referral made to the War Crimes Team is reviewed in line with War Crimes/Crimes Against Humanity Referral Guidelines, jointly agreed by police and the Crown Prosecution Service.
They added: “At this time, there is no UK-based investigation into any matters relating to this particular conflict.”
Jeanine Hourani, an organiser with the Palestinian Youth Movement, which protested outside the event, said: “In the last week, Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper claimed to be acting against settler violence by preventing British businesses from conducting economic or financial activities with Israeli settlements in the West Bank.
“In response to the ‘Great Israeli Real Estate Event’, she claimed to be ‘pursuing that particular event’. But these are empty words given her failure to take action.”
The post [Revealed: Illegal West Bank settlements advertised at Israeli event in London][7] appeared first on [Declassified UK][8].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/pressure-mounts-on-uk-to-ban-israeli-real-estate-event/
[2]: https://www.jewishnews.co.uk/foreign-secretary-warns-businesses-and-charities-ahead-of-israeli-real-estate-event-advertising-settlement-land/
[3]: https://www.instagram.com/p/DZk9grHjC8m/?img_index=8
[4]: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/_VdRQCw8NYo
[5]: https://x.com/BoardofDeputies/status/2066105937023184903/photo/1
[6]: https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-06-09/debates/17B7E328-FC55-496D-839C-1AD698698BE6/MiddleEast
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/revealed-illegal-west-bank-settlements-advertised-at-israeli-event-in-london/
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/revealed-illegal-west-bank-settlements-advertised-at-israeli-event-in-london/

2026-06-12 21:32:44 GMT

Palestine Action activists sentenced as terrorists
[Palestine Action dismantle Elbit equipment, 6 August 2024. (Photo: Handout)]
Four Palestine Action activists have been sentenced to a combined total of more than 25 years in prison, after a judge ruled that they could be treated as terrorists.
Charlotte Head, Samuel Corner, Leona Kamio, and Fatema Zainab Rajwani were convicted of criminal damage last month in relation to a raid against an Israeli arms factory in Bristol in 2024.
At their sentencing hearing at Woolwich Crown Court today, Judge Johnson agreed to apply a “terrorism connection” to the case under the Sentencing Act.
Head and Kamio were given six years, Rajwani received five years and eight months, and Corner was sentenced to eight years and eight months.
Gasps could be heard from the public gallery as the sentences were delivered, as some family members cried. They pounded the windows of the gallery as the defendants were led out.
Hundreds of protesters were also gathered outside, and could be heard chanting throughout the day from inside the courthouse.
During the hearing, defence lawyers accused the prosecution of submitting key evidence “at the 59th minute of the 11th hour”.
That evidence related to how the defendants allegedly smashed 40 military assets including over a dozen drones, causing over £1.2m worth of damage.
Defence counsel said the submission allowed no time to review the report and admitting it as evidence would amount to “a gross affront to the integrity of the criminal justice system”.
## **What the court heard**
That evidence – a witness statement from a consultant who assessed what Elbit’s insurance company was required to pay after the raid – was submitted to the court just eight days before the hearing.
It marked the first time that an assessment of the damage at the factory was submitted from a witness that was not anonymous and was, therefore, potentially admissible.
Defence counsel Tom Wainwright explained that the report had been submitted so late that he had not even had the opportunity to discuss it with his client, Samuel Corner.
“It would be wholly wrong and unfair for my Lord to allow the prosecution to rely on this highly contentious evidence for sentencing purposes and admit it for the purposes of determining the value of the damage caused”, said Menon.
Judge Johnson nonetheless accepted the evidence as admissible but said he would only use it to form a narrow view of the damage incurred at the factory.
The latter half of the hearing focussed on how the word “serious” is properly defined with reference to the “serious damage to property” clause of the Terrorism Act.
Defence lawyers argued that the term “serious” was intended by parliament to imply something “sinister” such as causing “excessive fear” or “harm” towards persons.
Menon also raised concerns that there is a pattern of courts finding “terrorism connection” in cases involving minorities or those supporting them, but not white supremacists.
Neither Thomas Mair, the neo-Nazi murderer of British MP Jo Cox, nor Thomas McKenna, who was procuring firearms to provoke a “race war” were given criminal convictions with a “terrorism connection”, he noted.
“So apparently, stockpiling weapons in preparation for a race war against Muslims and immigrants does not amount to an act of terrorism”, Menon declared to the court.
### RELATED
[
## Revealed: How Britain weaponised terrorism laws against activists
][1] [READ MORE **][2]
## **Verdict**
Judge Johnson’s ruling was made with reference to the statutory definitions of terrorism in the Terrorism Act.
They include causing “serious damage to property” for political reasons with the aim of influencing a government, international organisation, or sector of the public.
He found that “serious damage to property” was caused to Elbit’s factory in Bristol.
This damage extended to “very many individual items of advanced technological equipment as well as to the fabric of the building”, Johnson said, adding that the evidence provided late to the court shows “more than £1m paid out by insurers”.
It was unnecessary to determine “precise economic value of damage” as he was “sure it amounted to serious damage”, he continued.
Johnson further ruled that the protest action was not designed to influence the Israeli government.
However, he said it was intended to influence the UK government as well as a sector of the public defined as employees of and companies linked to Elbit Systems.
There was a “strategy of carrying out actions against Elbit and businesses linked to it in order to intimidate it into ceasing operations or cause the government to prevent it from operating”, Johnson said.
He was also “sure” that the action was for the purpose of “advancing a political or ideological cause” in line with the defendants’ beliefs surrounding Israel and Palestine.
In concluding his verdict, Johnson said: “I am sure each of the defendants’ offences involved serious damage to property, was designed to influence the UK government and to intimidate a section of the public, and was for the purpose of advancing a political cause”.
## **Major concerns**
The ruling comes amid major concerns surrounding the weaponisation of terrorism laws against pro-Palestine activists.
One of the UK’s leading human rights lawyers, Michael Mansfield KC, [said][3] before the hearing that sentencing protesters as terrorists would be a “constitutional threat”.
Mansfield was among a group of 50 lawyers and legal experts to write an open letter which stated: “It’s particularly insidious for the obvious reason that they weren’t allowed to explain their motivation to a jury – that was denied them.
“And yet the state says ‘we’re actually going to elevate what the offences are’ when a jury might well not have convicted had they known they were going to be treated as terrorists”.
The letter continued: “The fundamental principle is you should not be convicted on any statutory offence for which you have not been charged”.
Former Labour shadow chancellor John McDonnell also signed a letter condemning this “unjust” and “cruel” use of terrorism laws in advance of the hearing.
Defence lawyers are expected to appeal this decision.
The post [Palestine Action activists sentenced as terrorists][4] appeared first on [Declassified UK][5].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63357
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63357
[3]: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/jun/10/four-palestine-action-protesters-terrorists-constitutional-threat
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/palestine-action-activists-will-be-sentenced-as-terrorists/
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/palestine-action-activists-will-be-sentenced-as-terrorists/

2026-06-11 16:27:09 GMT

‘We wanted to save lives’, Palestine activists tell court
[Frank Sherman and Hana Yun-Stevens outside Birmingham crown court. (Photos: John McEvoy / Declassified UK)]
A jury at Birmingham crown court is deliberating whether four pro-Palestine activists committed criminal damage at an arms factory in Wolverhampton.
Defendants Iain Evans, Hisham Alkhamesi, Frank Sherman, and Hana Yun-Stevens believed the factory, used by arms firm Moog, supplied weaponry to Israel.
They climbed onto the roof in August 2025, smashed equipment and unveiled a banner saying “Free Palestine” while wearing T-shirts with the names of Palestinians killed in Israeli airstrikes.
Social media posts relating to the action and shown to the jury described Moog as a manufacturer of fighter jet components which are supplied to Israel.
During the five-day trial, the defendants told the court that they had been on protests but felt unable to effect change, leading to the decision to engage in direct action.
Jurors were unable to reach a verdict this week and have been discharged until Tuesday.
One of the defendants, Sherman, who identifies as they/them, chose to give their own closing statement today rather than let a barrister advocate on their behalf.
Sherman, 23, told the jury they would always believe disrupting the factory was “not criminal” and that any repercussions they may face could not “compare to how I would feel if I had not taken action”.
Lawyers for the other defendants reminded the jury of its powers – referencing the Magna Carta and the Bushell case, a landmark ruling from 1670 which established the independence of juries.
They also mentioned how the suffragettes “did a bit of smashing themselves”.
The prosecution’s lawyer noted how “there is no dispute that these defendants… believed that the business they targeted was involved in the supply chain to Israel”.
But the trial, he said, “is not about Israel, it’s not about Palestine… It’s simply about whether they unlawfully damaged property”.
The four defendants have all pleaded not guilty to criminal damage.
## ‘The lives we would save’
During cross-examination on Tuesday, Yun-Stevens, 24, explained the concept of direct action as “going to the source of production and disrupting it, having an immediate impact”.
Yun-Stevens said the primary intention in scaling Moog’s roof was not to cause criminal damage but to “disrupt the factory’s operation which we deemed to be criminal”.
Solar panels and windows were smashed during the incident with the stated goal of slowing down the factory’s production line and exposing machinery to rain damage.
Alkhamesi, 23, told the court on Tuesday that the “main intention” of the action was “to occupy the roof” because the “factory can’t operate while we’re on the roof”.
He explained how his life had been shaped by his grandfather, Abdullah Alkhamesi, who founded the Yemeni Red Crescent in 1973.
Alkhamesi’s grandfather died in 2017 because he was unable to receive healthcare in Yemen amid a military blockade imposed by Saudi Arabia.
The court also heard how Alkhamesi contributed money left to him by his grandmother to fund the direct action campaign against Moog.
Evans, who previously worked in the aerospace sector, told the court: “We believed the longer we stayed up there, the more lives we would save. The idea was that the longer we stay on the roof, the longer the factory would be shut down”.
He intimated at the importance of direct action with reference to the concept of “just in time” supply chains, wherein items are delivered right before they are needed in order to reduce stockpiling costs.
“Any delay in that process, if [a company] is late in delivery, that has knock on impacts because obviously they’re not keeping a stockpile of parts in a warehouse”, Evans said. That means “immediate impacts on the supply chain”.
All of the defendants emphasised that they had been involved in Palestine marches over recent years and felt they were not making a significant enough impact on events.
Yun-Stevens noted in court how a full arms embargo has still not been imposed on Israel.
The defendants further explained how the action was taken in the early hours of a bank holiday Monday in order to prevent interaction and potential confrontation with Moog staff.
## Closing statements
During closing statements today, Sherman explained that “the care that we as a group put into the direct action that we took can only be spoken of by one of us”.
Sherman, who previously volunteered in support of refugees in Athens and Calais, told the court that: “The reason we are here standing trial is because we took direct action”.
Direct action, said Sherman, is akin to seeing “a room is flooding because the tap is turned on and you spend time ringing people to try and get them to turn off the tap, but they are refusing to come even though you can see the damage it’s causing. Direct action is turning off the tap yourself”.
With reference to their co-defendants, Sherman continued: “As Iain told you, the longer we stayed up there, the more lives we could save; as Hisham told you, we intended to disrupt shipments, disrupt production; and as Hana told you, we disrupted only what we deemed to be criminal”.
Sherman declared: “I will always in my heart know that using care and intention to disarm the factory is not criminal”.
They closed their statement by reading the poem “If I Must Die”, by Palestinian author Refaat Alareer.
The other three defendants retained their legal representation for closing statements.
Representing Alkhamesi, defence counsel Mira Hammad told the court that her client was in some ways “the least likely person you could imagine to get on that roof”.
As a “shy straight-A student” who “sits in the corner of the room and likes to talk about books”, Alkhamesi was not the type of person who would be expected to “climb onto the roof of an arms company”.
Yet there was “no mystery about why the [four defendants] were there either”, said Hammad. “It wasn’t for personal gain, to get anything for themselves”.
The explanation, she said, “was on their T-Shirts. It’s right there in the prosecution case” and “the tweet” discussing “military aircraft parts to Israel”.
Defence counsel Tom Wainwright, representing Evans, emphasised the importance of jury trials and noted how they were coming under attack in the UK.
“The history of trial by jury we are not taught about in school compared with other rights and liberties”, he said. “But it is marked by control being wrested away from those in power and back to the local community”.
The post [‘We wanted to save lives’, Palestine activists tell court][1] appeared first on [Declassified UK][2].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/we-wanted-to-save-lives-palestine-activists-tell-court/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/we-wanted-to-save-lives-palestine-activists-tell-court/

2026-06-10 16:23:54 GMT

Pressure mounts on UK to ban Israeli real estate event
The UK government is under mounting pressure to ban an event that has advertised the sale of illegally occupied Palestinian land in the West Bank.
The private, invitation-only Great Israeli Real Estate Event is scheduled to be held in London on Sunday, following tour stops in the US and Canada.
Its event in New York last month drew criticism from the city’s mayor [Zohran Mamdani][1] over promoting illegal settlements.
Earlier this week, prospective attendees could tick a box next to Gush Etzion, an illegal Israeli settlement in the occupied West Bank, to register their interest.
However, as of Wednesday afternoon, Gush Etzion had been removed from the [event website][2].
Photos from previous editions of a similar event in London reveal that homes in [Gush Etzion][3] and [Ma’ale Adumim][4] – another illegal Israeli settlement – were being advertised.
A spokesperson for the event [has denied][5] that they are featuring West Bank land, telling *Jewish News* on Tuesday that all exhibitors “without exception” will provide information about properties and projects within the Green Line.
The Green Line is the internationally recognised boundary separating Israel from Palestinian territories in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip.
The spokesperson added: “We believe that these ridiculous allegations are motivated by anti-Israeli and terrorist supporters, seeking only excuses to attack Jews in general and the State of Israel in particular.”
## ‘Bartered and sold’
In parliament earlier on Tuesday, MPs called on British foreign secretary Yvette Cooper to ban the event, after she had just announced [sanctions][6] on firms and individuals enabling Israeli settler violence.
Liberal Democrat MP Calum Miller noted the Gush Etzion properties were being marketed.
“This is Palestinian land being advertised, bartered and sold on the streets of our capital,” he said.
“Will the government intervene to ban the event unless assurances can be given that no properties in illegal settlements will be advertised?”
Labour MP Richard Burgon said: “Given that the government rightly recognised the state of Palestine, surely we should now move to ban this event which is selling off land illegally in Palestine.”
Cooper said: “We are pursuing that particular event. If we find any cases where there are breaches of UK law, we will also pursue them.”
“The wider issue is that nobody in the UK should be advertising illegal settlements. Nobody should be pursuing illegal settlements. No businesses or organisations should be getting involved in them.”
But organisations are also calling on Cooper and home secretary Shabana Mahmood to go further and ban the event.
In a [letter to Mahmood][7], the Palestine Solidarity Campaign said it was “unthinkable” that the event could go ahead and called on the government to ensure that the Metropolitan police investigate.
“We urge you to take all necessary steps to ensure that criminal charges are brought against those who are enabling the sale of stolen Palestinian land and to prevent the event from going ahead,” the group said.
The post [Pressure mounts on UK to ban Israeli real estate event][8] appeared first on [Declassified UK][9].
[1]: https://novaramedia.com/2026/05/09/mamdani-blasts-property-fair-selling-occupied-palestinian-land/
[2]: https://israelevent2026.com/
[3]: https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=4772334746210433&set=pcb.4772339209543320&locale=en_GB
[4]: https://www.facebook.com/israel.london.show/posts/pfbid02ryfuvrt6MzA2XFqGHrDzN8w2E4fHaRaRdg1y2QtCusAf1hBq9hJ4FBDtptvnyc9nl
[5]: https://www.jewishnews.co.uk/foreign-secretary-warns-businesses-and-charities-ahead-of-israeli-real-estate-event-advertising-settlement-land/
[6]: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-and-allies-sanction-networks-enabling-settler-violence-in-the-west-bank
[7]: https://palestinecampaign.eaction.org.uk/israelirealestateevent/?fbclid=IwY2xjawSWRmFleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETE1QnlmdzA5cDFBZnNrbjRac3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg5MgABHsdmEJTGDdfmbUDiSz8NKwbFO6YdD8fX7KsL0hw5XX8r2zZsHGDwB-M50NGv_aem_eUJuCe2X90HNZd1kvxMFKg
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/pressure-mounts-on-uk-to-ban-israeli-real-estate-event/
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/pressure-mounts-on-uk-to-ban-israeli-real-estate-event/

2026-06-08 13:58:57 GMT

Policeman who called journalist a ‘dog’ was already under investigation
[A close up image of David Soffer in Golder's Green in March 2026]
A Metropolitan policeman who was filmed calling a Palestinian journalist a “dog” had already been accused of harassing an Iranian woman in a previous incident, *Declassified* can reveal.
Special constable [David Soffer][1] was at the front of a mob that surrounded Al Jazeera journalists in Golders Green earlier this year.
He [was filmed][2] calling one of them a “dog” in Arabic, adding: “Go back to Qatar… Get out of here, you donkey.”
Soffer was subsequently arrested on suspicion of a racially aggravated public order offence.
But *Declassified* can reveal that he was already facing an unrelated internal investigation, over allegations that he followed, intimidated and harassed an Iranian woman in a nearby area of London last year.
Documents show that a local resident, Layla Ashoor, filed a complaint accusing Soffer of calling her a “fat loser,” and saying: “Shut up, bitch”.
She alleged that Soffer refused to stop following her, despite her requests.
But rather than take action against the special constable, a criminal case was brought against Ashoor for racially or religiously aggravated harassment against Soffer.
She pled not guilty and the charges were eventually dropped before the full trial began.
“This has left me feeling unprotected and that there is a wider sense of impunity around racialised abuse,” Ashoor told *Declassified*.
“When I was contacted by police and told I could be arrested if I did not attend an interview, I suffered severe panic attacks and lived for months in fear that I was going to be criminalised.
“I went through police interviews and court processes before the case was ultimately dropped and no charges were brought.”
## **‘Too slow’**
Meanwhile, more than two months after the unrelated incident with [Al Jazeera journalists][3], the Met’s investigation into Soffer is still ongoing.
One of the Palestinian journalists who was at the scene told *Declassified* he was scared for his life.
“I was worried someone would come from behind and punch me or stab me,” he said. “I was really worried.”
The journalist asked not to be named due to safety concerns.
“The abuse started an hour earlier, before the filming,” he said. “They called us terrorists and Hamas supporters. And they just harassed us more and more.
“The police were there and they saw it all. They were too slow to respond. And the investigation has been frustrating – it’s been two months and we’ve not really heard anything.”
A Metropolitan Police spokesperson said: “Enquiries remain ongoing following the arrest of a Met special constable on suspicion of a racially aggravated public order offence in the early hours of Saturday, 28 March 2026.”
*Declassified* understands that Soffer was subsequently de-arrested the same day, after it was determined that arranging a voluntary interview would be more appropriate.
He was released and has since attended an interview and the investigation continues. He also remains suspended from police duties.
When questioned about the previous incident involving Layla Ashoor, the Met confirmed that Soffer had been subject to a public complaint relating to “alleged off-duty conduct” in June last year.
The spokesperson said that the case against Ashoor was closed because it “did not meet the evidential threshold for any charges”.
But they added: “An internal investigation in relation to the officer’s conduct remains ongoing.”
The post [Policeman who called journalist a ‘dog’ was already under investigation][4] appeared first on [Declassified UK][5].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/revealed-man-filmed-in-al-jazeera-intimidation-mob-is-met-police-officer/
[2]: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/USiBpB8qJuE
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/met-police-officer-exposed-by-declassified-has-been-suspended/
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/policeman-who-called-journalist-a-dog-was-already-under-investigation/
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/policeman-who-called-journalist-a-dog-was-already-under-investigation/

2026-06-05 10:02:50 GMT

No convictions in Kurdish terror trial at Old Bailey
[Kurds protest outside the Kurdish Community Centre in London after police arrest suspected PKK members in November 2024]
Three Kurdish activists accused of being members of banned Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) will be retried after a jury was unable to reach a verdict in their case.
Turkan Ozcan, Ali Boyraz and Ercan Akbal are accused of belonging to the banned terrorist group.
The Crown Prosecution Service’s decision to retry the case, announced on Friday, came after three other defendants were cleared of membership charges.
Berfin Kerban, Agit Karatas and Mazlum Sayak were found not guilty of PKK membership in a four-month long terror trial at the Old Bailey.
The trial was the culmination of a major police investigation involving over 800 officers—yet not a single guilty verdict was returned.
Prosecutors had brought twelve charges against the Kurdish activists, accusing all six of PKK membership.
They also charged the group with a range of lesser offenses around organising and speaking at events and protests run through the Kurdish Community Centre in north London.
That included a terrorism charge for one man speaking at an event to commemorate his relative who was killed in combat with Turkey—and another for organising an evening of traditional Kurdish dancing.
On 13 May, the jury reached a unanimous not-guilty verdict on four of the charges, including three of the membership charges, each carrying a potential 14-year jail sentence.
But the jury was unable to reach a verdict on the remaining eight counts despite deliberating for over a week.
With a retrial now ordered, the remaining defendants could wait years before a final verdict is reached.
Karatas, a master’s student at the London School of Economics, spoke to *Declassified* after being cleared of PKK membership.
“The breadth of the [UK]’s law on proscribed organisations creates ‘suspect communities’ who are subjected to increased surveillance and possible prosecution,” he said.
“This case has demonstrated how Kurdish social, cultural and political activities are [targeted] by the law.”
### RELATED
[
## ‘Incirlik is yours’: How Turkey’s Erdoğan handed major military base...
][1] [READ MORE **][2]
## **What is the PKK?**
The Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) has fought the Turkish military and state since 1980.
Though originally fighting for a socialist Kurdish state, the PKK has since evolved to advocate for a unique model of direct democracy, women’s autonomy and multi-ethnic political federation known as “democratic confederalism”.
Tony Blair’s Labour government outlawed the PKK in 2001, under [pressure][3] from its key NATO ally Turkey. The PKK has been a proscribed ‘terrorist’ group in the UK ever since.
For decades, the Kurdish community has faced terrorism stops at airports, harassment and criminalisation, but this is the first time such an extensive range of charges has been deployed in court.
Turkey is a key British ally in the region, and has long actively sought the criminalisation of the Kurdish diaspora by its Western allies.
British nationals have been prosecuted in recent years for allegedly travelling to join the PKK or associated Syrian Kurdish armed forces in their fight against the Islamic State militant group – even though the Kurds’ war against ISIS was fought with backing from the UK and US.
Defendants had previously worked with UK government ministers to raise awareness of Kurdish rights and abuses, including regular interactions with deputy prime minister David Lammy.
Karatas had been scheduled to attend an event commemorating victims of ISIS’ brutality and hosted by Middle East minister Hamish Falconer on the morning of his arrest.
“I [previously] felt comfortable in engaging in Kurdish politics in the country I was born and bred in,” says Karatas. “To this day, and throughout the trial, I have championed parliamentary engagements to promote discussions on Kurdish culture and politics.”
The PKK [officially disbanded][4] altogether in 2025, beginning a disarmament process and peace talks with Turkey.
## **Operation Hydrascope**
Despite these developments, the British police launched simultaneous dawn raids in November 2024, targeting the Kurdish Community Centre in Haringey and the home of the six defendants.
In an application to have the defendants held for further questioning, police stated that “over 800 police officers and staff” were engaged in the investigation, “all working extended hours”, according to a lawyer involved in the case.
The case, dubbed “Operation Hydrascope”, is thus believed to be the UK’s largest terrorism investigation since the height of ISIS attacks on UK soil in 2017, and one of the largest ever against a left-wing organisation.
The scale of the trial and investigation is remarkable given that even the prosecution’s own expert witness, Ghadi Sary, testified in court that the PKK poses “no threat” to people in the UK. There was no suggestion of any violent activity during the nearly five-month trial.
Instead, the prosecution evidence focused on the defendants organising and speaking at events at the Kurdish Community Centre, forwarding WhatsApp messages concerning these events, collecting donations for Kurdish refugees, flying the PKK flag, wearing traditional Kurdish clothes, and singing a well-known Kurdish revolutionary song.
Notably, prosecutors argued that even if defendants did not know or believe themselves to be part of the PKK, and were not seen as PKK members by the organisation itself, these actions in support of the PKK showed “shared aims” with the Kurdish political movement and thus constituted *de facto *membership of the banned organisation.
### RELATED
[
## Met chief should resign over Palestine comments, ex-senior officer says
][5] [READ MORE **][6]
## **‘Unjust’ and ‘stupid’ **
The defence team, led by Hossein Zahir KC and Henry Blaxland KC, robustly challenged the idea that shared aims constituted proof of membership.
In his closing speech, Blaxland told the jury there was literally “nothing to see” on the membership charge, calling the prosecution both “unjust” and “stupid.”
Kurdish woman Berfin Kerban was subsequently cleared of membership of the PKK, as were Agit Karatas and Mazlum Sayak whose lesser charges were also dropped on Friday.
Turkan Ozcan, Ali Boyraz and Ercan Akbal, all parents and grandparents aged in their late 50s and early 60s, remain under investigation for both membership and several lesser charges.
“The criminalisation of Kurdish political activity undermines trust and mutual friendships built over decades between the state and its citizens, many of whom have escaped persecution and found safe haven in Britain,” Karatas said following the verdict.
The investigation and prosecution of individuals accused of “sharing aims” with proscribed organisations continues to be an issue of acute relevance in the UK.
“Counter-terrorism legislation is being tested to see how much the state can get away with,” said Iida Käyhkö, a researcher in security studies at Royal Holloway University London who has followed the case from its outset.
Käyhkö said the trial against the activist is part of an “effort by the British government to broaden and intensify the use of counterterrorism legislation against political movements in recent years, particularly evident in the proscription of Palestine Action.”
“By accident or by design, the use of proscription has the effect of criminalising wider political and social movements.”
The retrial, expected to last around 10 weeks, is scheduled to begin 10 January 2028.
The post [No convictions in Kurdish terror trial at Old Bailey][7] appeared first on [Declassified UK][8].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=54285
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=54285
[3]: https://www.kurdishpeace.org/research/european-politics/banned-flags-how-turkey-influences-european-security-policy/
[4]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czel3ry9x1do
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63229
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63229
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/no-convictions-in-kurdish-terror-trial-at-old-bailey/
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/no-convictions-in-kurdish-terror-trial-at-old-bailey/

2026-06-04 22:04:37 GMT

Parliament could hold vote to ban Israeli soldiers from UK
MPs could vote to ban soldiers in the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) from entering the UK, *Declassified* can reveal.
Former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has tabled an amendment to the Armed Forces Bill to ban the entry of foreign soldiers from countries that are subject to war crimes investigations.
But the vote will only go ahead if the [amendment][1] is selected by the House of Commons Speaker, Lindsay Hoyle.
The move follows *Declassified*’s [investigation][2] earlier this year which found more than 2,000 British citizens have served in the IDF since October 2023.
Yet the British government has failed to keep track of the numbers, which can only be obtained directly from the IDF.
Returning soldiers are also not questioned about their activities in the region.
This is despite an array of scholars, lawyers and politicians warning that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.
Last year a [UN commission of inquiry][3] found that “Israeli authorities at the highest echelons…have orchestrated a genocidal campaign for almost two years now with the specific intent to destroy the Palestinian group in Gaza”.
In November 2024, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants for Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defence minister Yoav Gallant.
And even the UK government has [said][4] it has “serious concerns” about Israel’s compliance with International Humanitarian Law – while former Labour minister Wes Streeting privately [admitted][5]: “Israel is committing war crimes before our eyes.”
The decision over whether to select Corbyn’s amendment to the Armed Forces Bill – and ask MPs to vote on it – is now down to Sir Lindsay Hoyle.
Last year, *Declassified* revealed how Hoyle [personally intervened][6] to block the release of emails he sent to Israeli politicians.
It followed his “solidarity visit” to Israel in November 2023, and a photo opportunity with the country’s former ambassador to the UK, Tzipi Hotovely.
A [campaign][7] launched last week by *Declassified* and the [International Centre of Justice for Palestinians][8] (ICJP) is calling for the UK government to track the movements of Britons who have served in the IDF and subject them to secondary screening where necessary at ports of entry.
Corbyn told *Declassified*: “Israel has been committing genocide against the Palestinian people. The Visiting Forces Act cannot be used as a legal shield for its soldiers.
“The United Kingdom signed up to the Rome Statute. It is time our domestic law reflected that commitment.
“If a foreign military’s leaders stand accused of war crimes, they should not be receiving immunities and privileges on British soil. It’s that simple.”
He added: “Britain’s diplomatic support to Israel has served to normalise one of the greatest crimes of our time. It must end now.”
The post [Parliament could hold vote to ban Israeli soldiers from UK][9] appeared first on [Declassified UK][10].
[1]: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/59-02/0003/amend/armedforces_rm_rep_0604.pdf
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/over-2000-britons-served-for-israel-amid-gaza-genocide/
[3]: https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/09/israel-has-committed-genocide-gaza-strip-un-commission-finds
[4]: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-suspends-around-30-arms-export-licences-to-israel-for-use-in-gaza-over-international-humanitarian-law-concerns
[5]: https://news.sky.com/story/read-wes-streetings-messages-with-mandelson-in-full-13505439
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/speaker-doubles-down-over-refusal-to-disclose-israel-emails/
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/nobody-wants-to-live-next-to-a-war-criminal/
[8]: https://www.icjpalestine.com/
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/parliament-could-hold-vote-to-ban-israeli-soldiers-from-uk/
[10]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/parliament-could-hold-vote-to-ban-israeli-soldiers-from-uk/

2026-06-03 16:51:36 GMT

UK media fails to disclose defence industry ties of most military commentators
[General Sir Nick Carter outside Ministry of Defence headquarters in London]
Nearly 60 percent of retired senior British [military][1] officers now working in the defence industry have appeared as expert commentators in UK [media][2] without any disclosure of their commercial ties, a conflict research charity [has found][3].
The London-based group Action on Armed Violence (AOAV) [examined][4] a decade of UK media appearances by former British senior military figures.
It found 33 retired officers currently or recently working in defence, security, [intelligence][5] or military technology who had also been cited in the British press.
Nineteen of these – or 58 percent – were quoted on matters of defence based on their military experience alone, without their paid-for military-industrial roles being disclosed to audiences.
The findings raise questions about transparency in reporting on defence and national security, particularly at a time when UK military spending is rapidly rising under the justification Britain is on a “[war footing][6]”.
## **Sought-after commentators**
Retired military officers are a regular feature of British news coverage. Their experience in the armed forces often makes them sought-after commentators on issues ranging from the war in Ukraine and conflicts in the Middle East to defence procurement and military readiness.
Some of them include the most senior figures in modern British military leadership, including former Chiefs of the Defence Staff, Chiefs of the General Staff, First Sea Lords, Air Chief Marshals and NATO commanders.
Among those highlighted is General Sir Nick Carter, the former Chief of the Defence Staff. Carter has held advisory roles with the German defence technology company [Helsing][7] and worked as a strategic adviser to [Exigent Capital][8], which helps defence firms develop growth strategies.
Yet media reports often identified him simply as a former military chief. In a [*Telegraph* article][9] from February 2025, for instance, Carter argued that “defence spending had to increase now”, while being described only as a former head of the British armed forces.
General Sir Chris Deverell receives similar treatment, with his consultancy work with defence and military technology firms including [Helsing][10] and [Babcock][11] going unreported.
In a November 2025 *Telegraph* article where he [advocated][12] for higher British defence spending, readers were told only that he had been “the four-star head of Joint Forces Command and a senior officer in the British Army”, with no mention of his commercial work.
Lord Houghton, another former Chief of the Defence Staff, currently advises defence contractor [Thales UK][13] and chairs [Defence Holdings PLC][14].
But this would not be clear to readers of his [*Daily Mail* article][15] in April 2024 in which he backed increased defence spending while his industry positions went unmentioned.
### RELATED
[
## Lobby group taking journalists on propaganda tours of Israel
][16] [READ MORE **][17]
## **Journalism captured by industry **
Perhaps the most striking example is Colonel Richard Kemp, a frequent commentator on Israel and Gaza.
Kemp is a trustee of [UK Friends of the Association for the Wellbeing of Israel’s Soldiers][18], an organisation linked to the Israeli military.
Yet in a [Telegraph article][19] from August 2025 in which he argued that “Israel has little choice but to occupy Gaza”, such clear connections to Israel went undisclosed.
Dr Paul Lashmar, former head of the journalism department at City University said of the findings: “It is not good enough for the journalist just to give the former rank and name of a military commentator if they are now working for a defence contractor.”
“Current employment, if relevant, must be stated otherwise the public can be oblivious of any conflict of interest. For example, it is one thing to have led a tank regiment but another if the ‘expert’ is now working for a company manufacturing tanks,” Lashmar said.
Professor Justin Schlosberg, an expert on hidden media power, ownership and disinformation at the University of Westminster, told *Declassified UK* “that nearly 60% of these senior military commentators were presented without disclosing their corporate paymasters undermines the principles of transparent, public interest journalism”.
“It’s a reflection of how captured British journalism is by the military industrial complex. An open and honest debate about unprecedented militarisation has never been more needed. Instead it’s been turned into a managed consensus,” he said.
The *Telegraph* stood out for its repeatedly having published commentary and opinion from former senior military figures advocating increased defence spending or military escalation without adequately disclosing their commercial defence interests.
The *Telegraph* did not respond to a request for comment.
However, similar failures also appeared across the *Daily Mail, Express, The Independent, iPaper, The Sun*, LBC, Sky News, Times Radio, and Channel 4 News.
The post [UK media fails to disclose defence industry ties of most military commentators][20] appeared first on [Declassified UK][21].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/category/military/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/category/media/
[3]: https://aoav.org.uk/2026/military-experts-or-arms-industry-insiders-uk-media-fails-to-disclose-defence-sector-links-in-nearly-60-of-cases/
[4]: https://aoav.org.uk/2026/military-experts-or-arms-industry-insiders-uk-media-fails-to-disclose-defence-sector-links-in-nearly-60-of-cases/
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/category/intelligence/
[6]: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/apr/14/uk-war-footing-defence-review-fiona-hill
[7]: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/carter-nick-chief-of-the-defence-staff-at-the-ministry-of-defence-ministry-of-defence-acoba-advice/advice-letter-nick-carter-member-of-the-advisory-council-helsing-gmbh
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/deeply-concerning-british-generals-israeli-weapons-job-criticised/
[9]: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/02/21/uk-massively-vulnerable-to-russian-aggression-nick-carter/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
[10]: https://www.linkedin.com/in/sir-chris-deverell/details/experience/
[11]: https://www.linkedin.com/in/sir-chris-deverell/details/experience/
[12]: http://google.com/url?q=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/11/05/british-defence-spending-inadequate-german-drones-estonia/&sa=D&source=docs&ust=1780409700739718&usg=AOvVaw1WapSlBcCf3OSRZiaZNl7a
[13]: https://members.parliament.uk/member/4694/experience
[14]: https://www.thetimes.com/business/companies-markets/article/defence-holdings-appoints-ex-army-chief-as-chairman-pnzgnrjft?gaa_at=eafs&gaa_n=AWEtsqekkPkzV29lVUc-kQKmrXfFyAH8EycHkxHNIpBgZWHqTTWryi592BFr3sfXMIw%3D&gaa_ts=6968c783&gaa_sig=6oHe1pGEG23frzlD_OLRBYhh49ssrUPyc6MsphrLnCANxhjMI7O4EhwF6vg_oLkAF5vcRagV7q9mN4Yft9AVrw%3D%3D
[15]: https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-13265279/Britains-boutique-military-no-depth-former-head-Armed-Forces-claims-amid-calls-increased-defence-spending.html
[16]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63008
[17]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63008
[18]: https://register-of-charities.charitycommission.gov.uk/en/charity-search/-/charity-details/3976196/trustees?_uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet_organisationNumber=3976196
[19]: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/08/08/israel-has-little-choice-but-to-occupy-gaza/
[20]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-media-fails-to-disclose-defence-industry-ties-of-most-military-commentators/
[21]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-media-fails-to-disclose-defence-industry-ties-of-most-military-commentators/

2026-06-02 14:54:35 GMT

British government is failing us, say Palestinians in Gaza
[A Palestinian woman visits a relative’s grave in Gaza City]
Palestinians in Gaza, squeezed into ever-shrinking territory, served by less than half the aid trucks promised in a ceasefire agreement, are calling on the British government to do more to protect them.
Their calls come after Benjamin Netanyahu [announced][1] last week that he had ordered the Israeli army to seize control of 70 percent of the Gaza Strip.
Meanwhile, his defense minister, Israel Katz, [said][2] there were plans for the large-scale migration of Palestinians from Gaza “at the right time and in the right manner”.
Both moves – the army’s push westwards and the ethnic cleansing of the enclave – are clear violations of the US-brokered ceasefire agreed in October 2025.
But Palestinians who spoke with *Declassified* said the ceasefire has only ever been one in name.
The Israeli army, they said, has already expanded its control well beyond the so-called “yellow line”, the agreed truce line dividing Gaza.
Eight months since the ceasefire was announced, more than 900 people have been killed and nearly 2,800 injured, including many who were in close proximity to the line.
## **‘Turning a blind eye’**
Amena Abu Saif, 30, was carrying her 10-month-old baby when an Israeli sniper fired at her from inside the yellow line and shot straight through her abdomen.
She and her family were displaced from their home by the war. They were living in a school run by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency in Jabalia refugee camp, about 250 metres away from the line, when she was hit.
She has watched as diplomatic efforts to bring fighting to an end have stalled. One major sticking point has been the call for Hamas to disarm.
Abu Saif said conditioning the progress of the talks on the disarmament of Hamas, a position which the UK and other countries have supported, is out of touch with reality on the ground.
Amena Abu Saif lays on a stretcher after she was shot near the yellow line (Photo: Shaimaa Marwan)
“They demand that we abide by the agreement, while the bullet that struck me as I carried my baby in my arms is not counted among Israel’s violations or its evasion of commitment to the agreement,” she said.
“If Hamas and the resistance factions hand over their weapons, will Israel stop killing and displacing us? Certainly not. My child and I were not carrying weapons. We were civilians and completely defenseless.”
She added: “We want a clear position that stops these violations, not just political statements that blame one side while turning a blind eye to Israel. People here are dying while the world limits itself to statements,” she said.
## **Lack of urgency **
Her calls are similar to those made by MPs in recent weeks who have demanded that the British government pull more levers as the situation in Gaza deteriorates even further.
Speaking in parliament late last month, Middle East minister Hamish Falconer [said][3] the government supported Donald Trump’s 20-point peace plan, the first phase of which was the ceasefire.
But the full promise of it, he said, “has yet to be fully realised”. Conditions in Gaza are “dire”, he acknowledged, with children “living amid sewage, parasites and disease”.
He called for Hamas to agree to disarm and decommission their weapons and for the IDF to withdraw from Gaza.
MPs questioned how this could happen absent further action, like the [UK sanctions][4] put on Israeli ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich a year ago this month.
“It is nearly one year since the sanctions . . . and what have we seen in that year?” said Ellie Chowns, Green MP for North Herefordshire. “Ongoing horror in Gaza, in the West Bank and in Lebanon.”
“When will the government stop repeatedly hesitating and take action?”
Stella Creasy, Labour MP for Walthamstow, said: “How will we make the current Israeli Government understand . . . that we mean business if the minister keeps coming to the house to tell us that he will not hesitate, but hesitates to set out what he is actually going to do in response to these incidents?”
On Monday, Emily Thornberry, the Labour chair of the foreign affairs select committee, [told][5] a gathering in parliament that the UK government had let Palestinians down.
Trump called his peace plan for Gaza “a great victory” and then walked away, she said.
“Out of the news means out of the mind. But The Gazans are not going anywhere and yet where is the progress? It is completely intolerable yet we tolerate it,” Thornberry said.
“Where are the international summits? Where is the urgency? Where is the sustained diplomatic effort?”
### RELATED
[
## Nobody wants to live next to a war criminal
][6] [READ MORE **][7]
## **Detached from reality **
Inside the Red Crescent Hospital in Khan Younis where her daughter, Hala, lays in the intensive care unit, Mona Darwish, 60, said the ceasefire was “a fragile truce that people do not feel in their daily lives”.
On 19 April, a few days before Hala’s wedding, an Israeli sniper shot a bullet through the window of their family’s home in Al-Maghazi refugee camp in central Gaza. It lodged in the 17-year-old’s head.
Darwish said she and her family are afraid to return home after the incident, and questions how effective mediators have been in restraining Israel and ensuring its commitment to the ceasefire terms.
Discussions about peace processes and disarmament seem completely detached from what she has witnessed, especially given the ongoing violations Palestinians civilians continue to endure.
“This approach, supported by Britain and the Western community, does not reflect what we are living through,” she said.
“We are still living days that resemble nightmares under bombardment and fear, while one side is being asked to make concessions at a time when the violations have not stopped.”
## **Building on ruins**
Ahmad Elyan, who lost his home in Jabalia refugee camp, is waiting for Israel to follow through on the terms of the agreement so he can return and build a tent on the ruins of his house.
Until now, he has not been able to return because it falls within the yellow zone.
“Anyone who tries to approach the area where our homes are located is immediately shot and killed,” he said.
Elyan said he feels that Israel takes whatever it wants from the agreement while refusing to fulfill its obligations, amid silence from the mediators and the countries sponsoring the agreement, including the UK.
Their focus to end the conflict, he said, seems to be only the disarmament of Hamas.
“We have not heard any statement from Britain regarding Israel’s ongoing violations,” he said.
“Where are the allied countries, and Britain in particular, regarding these violations, especially since it is among the countries currently seeking disarmament?”
He added: “My children ask me every day: when will we return to Jabalia refugee camp? When will we at least be able to pitch a tent in the place where our destroyed home once stood?”
The post [British government is failing us, say Palestinians in Gaza][8] appeared first on [Declassified UK][9].
[1]: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/5/28/israels-netanyahu-directs-army-to-seize-70-percent-of-https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/5/28/israels-netanyahu-directs-army-to-seize-70-percent-of-gaza-stripgaza-strip
[2]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/may/28/israels-defence-minister-says-large-scale-palestinian-migration-from-gaza-will-go-ahead
[3]: https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-05-21/debates/9A5F0C8A-FA18-4401-8206-992ADC68B499/MiddleEast?highlight=gaza#contribution-50497F5C-2C77-41E1-89FF-783A22495C95
[4]: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-and-partners-unite-to-sanction-ministers-inciting-west-bank-violence
[5]: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/jun/02/uk-government-failed-palestinian-people-emily-thornberry
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63315
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63315
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/british-government-is-failing-us-say-palestinians-in-gaza/
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/british-government-is-failing-us-say-palestinians-in-gaza/

2026-05-28 23:26:45 GMT

SAS war crimes claims dismissed in one day, Afghanistan inquiry told
[British soldiers patrol in Helmand Province in 2010]
An initial internal review into reports of war crimes committed by SAS soldiers in Afghanistan was dismissed in just one day, newly declassified documents have revealed.
The file provides further evidence that senior special forces officers willfully ignored persistent reports that elite British troops were executing unarmed Afghans.
It is among a batch of heavily redacted witness statements and transcripts released on Friday, the latest from an ongoing judge-led [inquiry][1] into the killing of 80 people during SAS counter-terrorism raids in Afghanistan between 2010 and 2013.
The inquiry, which began in 2023, was forced on a reluctant Ministry of Defence after sustained legal battles and media investigations brought credible claims that special forces had committed cold-blooded murder, planted weapons on innocent civilians, and deleted incriminating documents from computers.
Many of the files, evidence and testimony from the inquiry which is heard in both closed and open are regularly released to the public. However, closed-session files which are published are redacted or provided in summary.
The files released on Friday were heavily redacted and included evidence from the chief of staff to the director of Britain’s special forces in 2010 and 2011, identified only by a cipher, N2252.
He said he worked closely with the then-director of special forces, General Jacko Page, who also has not been named by the inquiry. The identity of all special forces named in private hearings of the inquiry has been suppressed.
N2252 was told about allegations that more bodies than weapons were found after SAS operations and raised them with his colleagues.
The inquiry has already heard how, after an operation in February 2011 in which eight people were killed, including a 15-year old boy Mohammad Taher, N2252 wrote to the special forces senior legal adviser, N2108, alerting him to yet “another one of ‘more bodies than weapons’ “.
Soon afterwards, in an operation called Objective Tyburn, N2252 emailed the legal adviser: “4 EKIA (enemy killed in action) – 2 weapons recovered”.
The evidence released on Friday also shows how senior Special Forces officers were extremely reluctant to pass the growing reports of unlawful actions by the SAS to the military police.
For years, they dismissed the growing evidence of the execution of unarmed Afghan civilians as “rumours”.
### RELATED
[
## SAS ‘shot toddlers in their beds’, Afghanistan inquiry told
][2] [READ MORE **][3]
## **Fight over evidence **
The inquiry was established under Lord Justice Haddon-Cave, after mounting evidence in [press][4] reports and evidence by a high-ranking special forces officer who decided to blow the whistle of serious criminal activities by SAS troops.
The whistleblower said SAS soldiers he commanded had committed war crimes by murdering prisoners in Afghanistan, telling the Royal Military Police that a “cancer had infected” an SAS squadron.
The whistle-blower’s devastating statement was placed in a safe at the headquarters of the Special Boat Service (SBS) – the naval equivalent of the SAS – by then head of the SBS Colonel Gwyn Jenkins.
Last year, General Jenkins, a Royal Marine, [was appointed][5] the First Sea Lord, the head of the navy.
It is unsurprising that the Ministry of Defence has persistently objected to the inquiry’s attempts to reveal more evidence it has been hearing. The inquiry has insisted the personal security of individual special forces soldiers who took part in operations in Afghanistan – and whistleblowers – must be protected.
But there is growing evidence – manifested by the delays in releasing even Friday’s redacted evidence – that the ministry is attempting to block proposals to release information solely on the grounds that secrecy is needed to protect the reputation of the SAS and its operations from further scrutiny and embarrassment.
The post [SAS war crimes claims dismissed in one day, Afghanistan inquiry told][6] appeared first on [Declassified UK][7].
[1]: https://www.iia.independent-inquiry.uk/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61321
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61321
[4]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/2bbBKcDgvXtbGhK5mH7Q39C/the-sas-murders-and-the-conspiracy-to-cover-them-up
[5]: https://www.gov.uk/government/people/gwyn-jenkins
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/special-forces-war-crimes-claims-in-afghanistan-dismissed-in-one-day-inquiry-told/
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/special-forces-war-crimes-claims-in-afghanistan-dismissed-in-one-day-inquiry-told/

2026-05-27 20:33:19 GMT

Revealed: How Britain weaponised terrorism laws against activists
[Five of the six Palestine Action activists tried in the first Filton case outside Woolwich Crown Court]
Four activists could be sentenced as terrorists next month despite not being convicted of terrorism offences.
Charlotte Head, Samuel Corner, Leona Kamio, and Fatema Rajwani are among several Palestine Action activists accused of raiding an Israeli weapons factory in Bristol in 2024.
They were found guilty of criminal damage earlier this month at Woolwich Crown Court, with Corner also convicted of grievous bodily harm without intent.
Two others, Zoe Rogers and Jordan Devlin, were found not guilty despite telling the court that they were proud of their actions.
During the trial, a jury was asked to decide whether the defendants were guilty of criminal charges but not allowed to know there was also a “terrorism connection”.
The 12-panel jury was also not permitted to hear why the defendants chose to target the Israeli arms firm, stripping the action of all context – namely the genocide in Gaza.
It is now up to the presiding judge to decide whether to sentence the activists with a “terrorism connection” – and, if he does, the ramifications will be enormous.
Unlike most prisoners in the UK who serve around 40 percent of their sentences, they would have to serve their full terms unless they can convince a parole board that they have “reformed” after serving at least two-thirds of it.
Once released, they could be treated as terrorists for decades.
And this could all happen without a jury ever finding them guilty of any terrorist offence, marking the first case where activists risk prosecution under terrorism provisions.
How did we get here?
## **‘Terrorism connection’**
The [Terrorism Act (2000)][1] defined an action as “terrorism” if it:
a. Involves serious violence against a person
b. Involves serious damage to property
c. Endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action
d. Creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
e. Is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system
And it:
a. Is designed to influence the government or an international governmental organisation or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
b. Is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial, or ideological cause
When debating the act, home secretary Jack Straw [reassured][2] parliament that those definitions “will not catch the vast majority of so-called domestic activist groups which exist in the country today”.
That included groups like Greenpeace which were engaged in direct action campaigns on issues ranging from militarism to the environment.
Home Office minister Charles Clake [added][3] that the new proscription powers would only be used “when absolutely necessary”.
To this end, it was broadly understood that the act was not intended to allow for the designation of activism as terrorism on the basis of property damage that did not pose a threat to life or safety.
In 2021, the Counter-Terrorism and Sentencing Act allowed prosecutors to attach a “terrorism connection” to a criminal case at a much lower bar than before.
It [allowed][4] non-terrorist offences which carried over two years of imprisonment to be sentenced with a “terrorism connection” without those charges being heard by a jury.
One of the few dissenting voices to this amendment was Lord Marks, who [noted][5] how sentencing individuals on the “basis of a decision taken by a judge alone, without hearing any evidence… would cut across the principle of our criminal law”.
He added: “No one should be convicted of an offence except upon admissible evidence, open to challenge in a trial and, if in the Crown Court, heard by a jury”.
### RELATED
[
## Palestine Action defendants dismiss lawyers to address jury directly
][6] [READ MORE **][7]
## **The Filton incident**
On 6 August 2024, activists from Palestine Action raided an Elbit Systems facility in Filton, Bristol.
Inside the factory, they clashed with security guards – one of whom allegedly hit an activist with a sledgehammer – and destroyed property including military drones.
Some of the activists were rounded up at the scene and detained under ordinary criminal provisions, but after 36 hours they were re-arrested under section 5 of the Terrorism Act.
Section 5 “establishes the offence of the preparation of an act of terrorism or assistance to another to commit an act of terrorism”. Anyone found guilty is liable to life imprisonment.
So extreme was this police response that a group of UN special rapporteurs [sounded the alarm][8].
In a letter sent to the UK government, they observed how “UK police have exercised significant powers under counter-terrorism legislation despite the absence of credible connection between the activists’ conduct to terrorism as properly defined”.
The Filton activists were not ultimately charged under the Terrorism Act. But the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) later announced it would submit to the court that the first case being tried against the Filton activists had a “terrorism connection” under the Counter-Terrorism and Sentencing Act.
This marked the first time that such provisions had been used against activists – and seemed to prepare the groundwork for the proscription of Palestine Action as a whole.
## **Proscribing Palestine Action **
Documents seen by *Declassified* reveal how the UK government was considering the proscription of Palestine Action before the action in Filton.
A Counter Terrorism Policing (CTP) report dated 27 June 2024, some five weeks before the incident, discusses a meeting with the CPS about “the resource implications for CTP” if Palestine Action were “declared as a terrorist group”.
The report contained a CTP threat matrix which identified four categories of “activism”. They ranged from “lawful activism” to “terrorism” as defined under the Terrorism Act.
In the view of the activists’ lawyers, this timeline suggested the “terrorist connection” was added to the Filton action to build a legal justification for proscribing the group as a whole.
“The material decision making agencies appreciated that in order for Palestine Action to be proscribed as a terrorist entity, rather than high level aggravated activism, there would need to be ‘terrorist’ organisation”, the lawyers argued during an abuse of process hearing last year.
They added that those agencies required concrete instances of “terrorism” in order to proscribe, with the first Filton hearing being “charged in a way that enabled Palestine Action to meet the definition of a terrorist organisation”.
Indeed, former home secretary Yvette Cooper used the “terrorism connection” issue when justifying her decision to proscribe Palestine Action in parliament last June.
Two months later, she also [wrote in the *Observer*][9] that charges against Palestine Action activists included a “terrorism connection” when seeking to explain her decision to proscribe.
That article was published despite internal advice that it [risked][10] prejudicing the criminal proceedings against the Filton activists, suggesting proscription was the key priority.
### RELATED
[
## Palestine Action ban risked activists’ right to fair trial, documents...
][11] [READ MORE **][12]
## **Serious property damage**
While the “terrorism connection” to the Filton case was used to justify proscription, it remains unclear how the authorities have determined when protest-related criminal damage crosses the line into terrorism.
Palestine Action has engaged in hundreds of direct action campaigns since it was founded in 2020. But at the time of proscription, the authorities only referred to three incidents which allegedly met the threshold for “terrorism”.
What made them different?
Last year, the Attorney General’s Office (AGO) was asked under the Freedom of Information (FOI) act to provide “policy documents, guidance notes, circulars, or legal guidance issued to prosecutors” regarding when to apply a “terrorism connection” to criminal offences.
Internal guidance was also requested in relation to “the treatment of protest-related cases in which a terrorism connection may be considered”.
The AGO responded by refusing to confirm or deny whether the information was held.
“Any documents that may or may not be held in relation to the application or proposed application of a ‘terrorism connection’ under the Sentencing Code to protest-related or criminal damage-related prosecutions would relate to the Attorney General’s function as a Law Officer and chief legal adviser to the Government”, it said.
When asked for the same information, the CPS said it “does not hold any internal CPS policy documents, guidance notes, circulars, or legal guidance within the specific scope of your request”.
Taken together, it would seem that the British authorities have drawn an invisible line whereupon protest-related criminal damage crosses a legal threshold into “terrorism” – but the public is not allowed to know where it is.
## **£1 million**
Despite the absence of public information on how a “terrorism connection” is applied, internal documents and ministerial [statements][13] suggest that high-profile protest actions causing £1m in damage or more could leave activists liable to being sentenced as terrorists.
And this line appears to have been drawn with pro-Palestine activists in mind.
In March 2025, when the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre (JTAC), housed within MI5, recommended that Palestine Action be proscribed, its report focussed exclusively on three incidents which allegedly caused damage “in excess of £1m” as evidence of “terrorism”.
One of those three incidents was Filton, described in the JTAC report as “6 August 2024 Terrorist Attack” with “estimated damage… to be in excess of GBP 1 million”.
Another related to an action against French arms firm Thales in Glasgow in 2022 which was seemingly not assessed as terrorism until after Filton.
In 2023, a year after the Thales action, a private briefing for a British minister[ noted][14]: “Palestine Action does not meet the threshold for proscription as they do not commit, participate in, prepare for, promote, encourage, or otherwise be concerned with acts of terrorism”.
In 2025, a Scottish counter-terrorism board [observed][15] that Palestine Action “has been focused on protest activity which has not been close to meeting the statutory definition of terrorism”.
What emerges from this timeline is that the authorities may have developed a new way of interpreting the threshold for “terrorism” – based on the “serious damage to property” limb of the Terrorism Act – and retroactively applied it to the Thales case.
That the authorities may have modified their interpretation of what constitutes “terrorism” raises serious concerns in and of itself, particularly given there has been no parliamentary or public consultation on the matter.
If any reinterpretation of the threshold for “terrorism” occurred after the Filton incident, this would raise concerns about* ex post facto* modifications of how the law is administered.
In other words, in light of the absence of any legal precedent, it would not have been possible for the defendants to know that the incident could be treated as terrorism at the time that it took place.
Moreover, it raises the prospect that private arms companies targeted by Palestine Action could be incentivised to inflate damage costs in order to aggravate punishment for activists, potentially offering a deterrent effect against future protest activity at their sites.
In the Thales case, which was later used to justify proscription, damage costs were estimated at around £190,000, with the company claiming “revenue lost due to the site closure” was £941,000.
In another instance, damage costs relating to a Palestine Action campaign at a factory in Runcorn, Chester, were [revised][16] down from £4m to £225,000-£345,000 – amounting to a reduction of over 90 percent.
Moreover, there appears to be no framework for ensuring the arms companies provide accurate damage reports *before *a “terrorism connection” is applied.
### RELATED
[
## Palestine Action barrister wins appeal in contempt case
][17] [READ MORE **][18]
## **Violence **
In addition to emphasising actions which caused “in excess of £1m damage”, the JTAC report made allegations about Palestine Action’s use of “violence”.
While conceding that Palestine Action was “highly unlikely” to advocate for violence, it claimed with regard to Filton that “some of the attackers attended the incident with the intent or willingness to conduct serious violence against persons in support of their political cause”.
Cooper repeated these claims in parliament when she [said][19] members of Palestine Action had demonstrated “a willingness to use violence”.
Security minister Dan Jarvis also [said][20] Palestine Action members “have used violence against people” and been “charged with a series of serious offences, including violent disorder, grievous bodily harm with intent and aggravated burglary”.
The same claims were emphasised by senior Conservative party officials, with shadow foreign secretary Priti Patel [declaring][21] Palestine Action had “a long history of violence”.
While used to strengthen the public justification for proscription, it remains unclear what if any bearing the issue of violence had on the decision to apply a “terrorism connection” to the first Filton defendants or to proscribe Palestine Action as a whole.
Furthermore, since the CPS applied for a “terrorism connection” to be added to the first Filton case, all of the defendants have been cleared by two juries of any violent intent.
While the Filton incident was used to publicly justify proscription, the verdict in that case, with the defendants cleared of violent intent, has undermined the public rationale for proscription.
And now, four Filton defendants could be sentenced as terrorists despite Palestine Action not being proscribed at the time of the incident and the High Court subsequently finding the ban unlawful, pending an appeal.
The sentencing hearing will take place on 12 June at Woolwich Crown Court. Three days later, the Court of Appeal will hand down its judgment on the legality of the Palestine Action ban.
The Crown Prosecution Service, Attorney General’s Office, and Counter Terrorism Policing were approached for comment.
The post [Revealed: How Britain weaponised terrorism laws against activists][22] appeared first on [Declassified UK][23].
[1]: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/contents
[2]: https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/1999-12-14/debates/b8b65fd0-3cdc-4cc0-9d23-dfce015aa510/TerrorismBill
[3]: https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/1999-12-14/debates/b8b65fd0-3cdc-4cc0-9d23-dfce015aa510/TerrorismBill
[4]: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2020/17/section/69
[5]: https://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/?id=2021-03-03b.1156.5
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63071
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63071
[8]: https://spcommreports.ohchr.org/TMResultsBase/DownLoadPublicCommunicationFile?gId=29507
[9]: https://observer.co.uk/news/opinion-and-ideas/article/palestine-actions-violent-criminality-is-not-lawful-protest
[10]: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/may/17/yvette-cooper-palestine-action-article-despite-cps-warning-trial
[11]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63276
[12]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63276
[13]: https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-07-02/debates/6C9338E8-E516-494A-81A2-B3FEF549DD48/PreventionAndSuppressionOfTerrorism
[14]: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/home_office_ministerial_meetings
[15]: https://www.thenational.scot/news/25543064.scottish-contest-board-said-palestine-action-not-terrorist-group/
[16]: https://freedomnews.org.uk/2023/05/25/two-imprisoned-for-dismantling-runcorn-weapons-factory/
[17]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63181
[18]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63181
[19]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-statements/detail/2025-06-23/hcws729
[20]: https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-07-02/debates/6C9338E8-E516-494A-81A2-B3FEF549DD48/PreventionAndSuppressionOfTerrorism
[21]: https://x.com/pritipatel/status/2023026278450798951
[22]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/revealed-how-britain-weaponised-terrorism-laws-against-activists/
[23]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/revealed-how-britain-weaponised-terrorism-laws-against-activists/

2026-05-27 01:04:18 GMT

Nobody wants to live next to a war criminal
[Nobody wants to live next to a war criminal campaign image]
Earlier this year, *Declassified* [revealed][1] that over 2,000 Britons served for the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) since October 2023.
This information would never have come to light using sources in Britain.
The UK government does not collect data on British nationals serving in the IDF, and soldiers returning from Israel have not been questioned about their activities in the region.
Instead, the information came from a Freedom of Information request issued to the IDF by a lawyer in Israel.
The UK government’s failure to collect data on the movements of potential war criminals or properly investigate their activities raises serious concerns.
Individuals who have returned from committing war crimes in Gaza may now be living alongside us and working in public institutions such as hospitals, the police, and schools.
Nobody wants to live next to a war criminal – not least members of the Palestinian community in the UK who have family or friends who have been subjected to war crimes.
## **Major campaign**
In the interests of transparency, public safety, and justice, *Declassified* and the ICJP are launching a major [campaign][2] to demand that the UK government:
* Track the movements of Brits who have served in the IDF
* Subject them to secondary screening where necessary at ports of entry
* Support robust war crimes investigations in line with domestic and international law
These demands come on the back of a meeting earlier this year of the [Hague Group][3], in which forty states convened to demand accountability and the enforcement of international law in Palestine.
They are also simple requests, and firmly in the public interest.
Our campaign [letter ][4]has already been signed by over 60 prominent figures – from lawyers and genocide scholars to military veterans and politicians.
They include human rights lawyer Michael Mansfield, genocide scholar Martin Shaw, former British army general Charlie Herbert, anti-apartheid campaigner Andrew Feinstein, Green party leader Zack Polanski, and the Mother of the House of Commons, Diane Abbott MP.
We are now opening the letter up to the public, *and need as many signatures as possible. *You can sign the letter [here][5].
## **Not one prosecution**
This could not come at a more important moment.
The Metropolitan Police’s War Crimes Unit [announced last month][6] the closure of its scoping exercise into ten British nationals accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity while fighting in Gaza.
In its decision letter, the Met said an effective investigation could not be conducted, nor was there a realistic prospect for a conviction.
That means there still hasn’t been one prosecution of – or apparently even a thorough investigation into – Brits fighting for Israel amid the genocide.
This apparent indifference does not apply to Britons who have travelled to fight in Ukraine.
Foreign Office travel advice specifically notes that travelling to Ukraine “to fight, or to assist others engaged in the war… may amount to offences under UK legislation”, adding: “You could be prosecuted on your return to the UK”.
There is no such warning explicitly cautioning Britons against fighting for the IDF in [advice for travelling to Israel][7].
And while nobody in Britain has been prosecuted for serving in a genocidal army, the authorities have dedicated much-needed resources towards arresting over 2,000 people for displaying placards saying they oppose genocide and support Palestine Action.
Jonathan Purcell, ICJP’s Head of Public Affairs and Communications said:
“It’s possible that British people are taking part in a genocide and returning home to live, work and socialise alongside us. It is a truly chilling thought and it poses a serious threat to our national security.
“The UK government must take this seriously and ensure it thoroughly investigates individuals who have gone to fight for the IDF, a genocidal army that has perpetrated countless war crimes and crimes against humanity”.
Laura Pidcock, Declassified UK co-director said:
“To think, after everything we have witnessed over the last two years in Gaza – the way in which the population has been systematically killed, tortured, starved and displaced, with infrastructure destroyed and life made untenable by genocide – that there could potentially be people in Britain who participated in war crimes and yet not being investigated by authorities is staggering.
“We urge as many people as possible to sign this letter asking for these entirely reasonable steps to be taken”.
If you have any information which might relate to this campaign, please contact the ICJP in confidence at: [email protected]
The post [Nobody wants to live next to a war criminal][8] appeared first on [Declassified UK][9].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/over-2000-britons-served-for-israel-amid-gaza-genocide/
[2]: https://secure.declassifieduk.org/page/189081/petition/1
[3]: https://thehaguegroup.org/meetings-hague-2026-en/
[4]: https://secure.declassifieduk.org/page/189081/petition/1
[5]: #nobody-wants-to-live-next-to-a-war-criminal-petition
[6]: https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/london-police-refuse-investigate-british-nationals-accused-war-crimes-gaza
[7]: https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/israel
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/nobody-wants-to-live-next-to-a-war-criminal/
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/nobody-wants-to-live-next-to-a-war-criminal/

2026-05-21 20:38:49 GMT

UK citizens subjected to ‘show trial’ in Germany, lawyers say
[The ‘Ulm 5’, including Britons Zo Hailu and Crow Tricks second and third from left]
Two British nationals are among five activists who were forcibly brought into a Stuttgart courtroom by police on Wednesday after statements they wished to read were seized from them.
This was the latest escalation in a case that their lawyers have described as a “show trial” and is part of a broader crackdown on those who take direct action for Palestine.
Zo Hailu and Crow Tricks, both British citizens based in Berlin, were arrested last September alongside three others from Spain, Ireland, and Germany following an action at an Elbit Systems facility in Ulm, near Stuttgart.
They are charged with trespass, destruction of property and membership of a criminal organisation, Palestine Action Germany, under section 129 of the German criminal code.
Elbit Systems, which has a growing number of factories across Europe, supplies 85 percent of the drones and land-based military equipment used by the Israeli military.
The company’s site in Ulm was recently revealed to have been exporting targeting equipment to Israel by Irish investigative news site [*The Ditch*][1].
## **Ulm 5**
Known as the Ulm 5, the activists have been held in pre-trial detention across five separate prisons in south-west Germany for eight months, exceeding Germany’s standard six-month limit.
Last week, without prior warning, the court issued a further 28 hearing dates beyond the 16 originally announced, extending the trial – which began on Monday – to January 2027.
By the time any verdict is reached, they will have spent 16 months in prison.
The defence lawyers have argued that the full force of the state is being brought to bear on the defendants because of the nature of their action.
Mimi Tatlow-Golden, mother of co-defendant Daniel Tatlow-Devally, said: “In March, we expressed our fears that the Ulm 5 would face a show trial. During the hearing on 11 May, a defence lawyer also described proceedings as such – a *Schauprozess *[show trial].”
She said it was time the governments of the defendants “woke up to these egregious violations against their citizens in an EU country”.
“Once again we call for international trial monitoring to ensure the Ulm 5’s constitutional and human rights are upheld.”
### RELATED
[
## Palestine Action ban risked activists’ right to fair trial, documents...
][2] [READ MORE **][3]
## **UK government silence**
So far, the UK government has not responded publicly to the case of two of its citizens held in pre-trial detention in a European Union country under harsh conditions.
The mother of Zo Hailu, Nicky Robertson, [said][4] treatment had been “extreme”, with Zo “stripped naked on arrest and given an adult nappy to wear for six hours”.
In the UK, scores of [Palestine Action][5] activists associated with a raid on Elbit Systems in Bristol in August 2024 were held in pre-trial detention for over a year, with several of them also engaging in a hunger strike in prison.
The Brize Norton 5, [accused][6] of breaking into an RAF base in Gloucestershire and spraying paint into the engines of two Voyager aircraft, are now facing pre-trial detention of around 18 months with their hearing not scheduled until January 2027.
Germany is Israel’s second-largest arms supplier after the United States, and has provided key diplomatic support to Benjamin Netanyahu’s government.
Chancellor Friedrich Merz publicly [assured][7] Netanyahu that Germany would find ways for him to visit without facing arrest under the International Criminal Court (ICC) warrant.
Documents obtained under freedom of information laws also revealed Germany [coordinated][8] its International Court of Justice (ICJ) testimony with Israel.
Meanwhile, a survey from August 2025 [found][9] 65 percent of Germans believed Israel is committing war crimes in Gaza, and 59 percent considered its military action genocide.
## **Dragged into court**
On Wednesday, the Ulm defendants refused to enter the courtroom after statements they wished to read were seized from them.
The statements outlined their reasoning for taking the action, in wanting to disrupt the supply chain of weaponry being sent Israel as it commits genocide in Gaza.
Vi Kovarbasic gripped their chair and refused to stand, and was wheeled in. Daniel Tatlow-Devally, Zo Hailu, Crow Tricks, and Leandra Rollo were carried in by officers holding their arms and legs, still handcuffed.
Nuala Tricks, Crow’s mother, and Nicky Robertson, Zo’s mother, said what had happened was “another shocking and disappointing show trial for the Ulm 5”.
“In peaceful protest at the unfair trial conditions, the five refused to walk into the glass cage – they were wheeled, carried and dragged in, still handcuffed. The morning was dominated by the judge continuing to reject all motions put forward by the defence,” they said.
“These included the inability to communicate confidentially with their lawyers, defendants not being allowed to sit with their lawyers, and the request for the judge to recuse herself due to her very obvious bias”, they added.
The scenes were witnessed by family members in the public gallery, who have attended all hearings throughout proceedings.
### RELATED
[
## UK leaders have betrayed those who fought in WW2
][10] [READ MORE **][11]
## **Behind glass and handcuffed**
The proceedings are being held at Stuttgart-Stammheim, the maximum-security facility associated with West Germany’s terrorism trials of the 1970s.
A freedom of information request [revealed ][12]that the presiding judge never sought to use a standard courtroom belonging to her own regional court.
Instead, she placed proceedings in a high-security room belonging to the higher regional court without releasing any security assessment.
At every hearing, the five have been brought in while handcuffed and placed in a bulletproof glass cage. The defence has repeatedly argued the set up violates their presumption of innocence and prevents confidential communication with their lawyers.
The defence has also identified what they say are a cascade of constitutional violations: no defence note-taker has been permitted despite German courts producing no verbatim transcript, defendants unable to take their own notes; inadequate simultaneous translation.
On the first day, the presiding judge also refused to grant defence counsel the right to even speak at all. On the second, she granted them the floor – then summarily rejected every single application.
The five have been repeatedly denied bail, despite posing no credible flight risk, and the press has been barred from photographing them until the end of the trial.
The defence has filed motions for recusal of all five judges as a result of the conditions of the trial.
Defence counsel Benjamin Düsberg said the State Security Chamber “continues to reject basic constitutional standards” and that defence lawyers “will not stoop to being party to the sham legitimation of a show trial”.
The trial continues on Friday.
The post [UK citizens subjected to ‘show trial’ in Germany, lawyers say][13] appeared first on [Declassified UK][14].
[1]: https://www.ontheditch.com/elbit-germany-sending/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63276
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63276
[4]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/apr/27/pro-palestine-activists-face-trial-attack-israel-arms-factory-germany
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-palestine-action-put-the-justice-system-on-trial/
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-much-damage-did-palestine-action-really-do-at-brize-norton/
[7]: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/2/24/merz-says-netanyahu-will-be-able-to-visit-germany-despite-icc-warrant
[8]: https://www.eupac.org/leaked-documents-show-germany-coordinated-icj-testimony-on-arms-exports-with-israel/
[9]: https://www.giga-hamburg.de/en/publications/giga-focus/gaza-israel-and-german-foreign-policy-view-on-public-opinion
[10]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=59078
[11]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=59078
[12]: https://ulm5.info/en/news/2026/05/19/press-release-family-19-may-2026
[13]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-citizens-subjected-to-show-trial-in-germany-lawyers-say/
[14]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-citizens-subjected-to-show-trial-in-germany-lawyers-say/

2026-05-19 13:15:06 GMT

Palestine Action ban risked activists’ right to fair trial, documents reveal
[Yvette Cooper and Keir Starmer stand facing with two police officers]
Britain’s former home secretary Yvette Cooper was warned that proscribing Palestine Action could prejudice the trial of six activists but went ahead anyway, it can be revealed.
Internal documents seen by *Declassified *show the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) advised Cooper not to proscribe Palestine Action within six months of any Filton hearings.
The Filton 24 are pro-Palestine activists accused of breaking into a factory owned by Elbit Systems, [Israel’s][1] largest arms firm, in Bristol in August 2024.
The CPS was concerned that proscribing Palestine Action within six months of the hearings would prejudice their right to a fair trial.
Yet Cooper went against this advice and announced the proscription of Palestine Action less than five months before the first of those trials began in November last year.
Last week, the *Guardian *also [revealed][2] that Cooper risked being in contempt of court by justifying the proscription of Palestine Action in a column published in the *Observer*.
In that article, Cooper said the charges against the defendants involved a “terrorism connection” and accused the group of “intimidation, violence, weapons, and serious injuries to individuals”.
Defence lawyers sought to argue in court that Cooper had committed an “abuse of process” by discussing details of the case that were under reporting restrictions.
Mr Justice Johnson dismissed that application despite acknowledging that Cooper was “specifically advised that going ahead with the article might prejudice these proceedings”.
Taken together, the revelations suggest Cooper prioritised securing and justifying the proscription of Palestine Action over respecting due process.
The Home Office was approached for comment.
### RELATED
[
## Terrorism ban on Palestine Action ruled unlawful by High Court
][3] [READ MORE **][4]
## **‘6 months gap’**
The revelation comes in a cache of Home Office emails seen by *Declassified*.
It has not been possible to report on this information until now due to reporting restrictions, even though it relates directly to the defendants’ right to a fair trial.
On 3 April 2025, around one week after the Proscription Review Group had recommended proscribing Palestine Action, Cooper’s private secretary sent an urgent email to Britain’s head of proscription asking for a list of dates which could impact the timing of proscription.
“The HS [home secretary] has just asked for an update on upcoming dates relating to the proscription of PAG [Palestine Action] – she’s asked for it asap this lunchtime”, the private secretary wrote.
One of the key issues that Cooper wanted information about was “when court cases are expected”.
The head of proscription responded later the same day.
“Key dates as follows”, they wrote. “Main point to highlight is those relating to the Bristol/Elbit systems trials”.
They continued: “CPS have advised 6 months gap between any announcement and start of the trial to minimise risk of prejudice”.
The email highlighted in bold how the first trials of the Filton activists were due to take place in November 2025.
Yet Cooper announced the proscription of Palestine Action on 23 June, less than five months before the first Filton trial began.
## **Terrorism connection**
The jury failed to convict any of the activists in that case but four of them were found guilty of criminal damage in a retrial earlier this month, with one also found guilty of grievous bodily harm without intent.
Those defendants could now be [sentenced ][5]as terrorists, despite only being tried for criminal offences.
And while Johnson threw out the “abuse of process” application, he would go on to refer defence counsel Rajiv Menon KC for contempt proceedings regarding his closing speech.
In that speech, Menon [reminded][6] jurors of their absolute right to acquit, citing the landmark Bushell case of 1670.
The case against Menon was [thrown out][7] last week on the basis of lack of jurisdiction.
Campaign group Defend Our Juries said: “The fact that contempt of court proceedings were even brought against a barrister for his closing speech – for the first time in British legal history – should deeply concern everyone who cares about the rule of law”.
The post [Palestine Action ban risked activists’ right to fair trial, documents reveal][8] appeared first on [Declassified UK][9].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/israel/
[2]: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/may/17/yvette-cooper-palestine-action-article-despite-cps-warning-trial
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62165
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62165
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/palestine-action-barrister-wins-appeal-in-contempt-case/
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/palestine-action-barrister-wins-appeal-in-contempt-case/
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/palestine-action-barrister-wins-appeal-in-contempt-case/
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/palestine-action-ban-risked-activists-right-to-fair-trial-documents-reveal/
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/palestine-action-ban-risked-activists-right-to-fair-trial-documents-reveal/

2026-05-18 08:34:34 GMT

Sexual abuse of Palestinians should force a reckoning for the British government
[A Palestinian woman gestures to an Israeli army tank during a house demolition near Bethlehem]
A [new report][1] documenting gendered and sexualised violence against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank has intensified pressure on Britain and its allies to confront the brutal realities of Israel’s occupation and military campaign against Palestinians.
The West Bank Protection Consortium investigated a catalogue of incidents, each representing a “grave violation of bodily integrity and personal dignity”, including forced nudity, invasive body searches, indecent exposure – including to children.
Researchers also documented cases of groping, stalking, threats of rape, and the use of drones to film inside women’s bedrooms and record strip searches.
In many of the cases documented, Israeli forces were present and either failed to intervene or actively participated.
The report comes shortly after a [statement][2] from UN Women highlighting the gendered consequences of Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza, where women and children are disproportionally affected by bombardment, injury, displacement, starvation and the collapse of healthcare services.
Taken together, these accounts reveal how gender-based violence operates as an integral feature of Israel’s system of oppression, occupation and genocide.
Britain can – and should – be doing more.
## **Our international obligations**
Where there is credible evidence of serious violations linked to gender-based violence, third countries are obliged under international law not only to refrain from supporting the unlawful acts, but to take steps to prevent and respond to them.
In relation to Israel, these obligations have been reaffirmed through the International Court of Justice’s [January 2024][3] finding of a plausible risk of genocide in Gaza and its [July 2024 ruling][4] on the unlawfulness of the occupation.
Yet despite mounting evidence of abuses, the UK has continued to offer diplomatic and military support to Israel while failing to take adequate steps to support accountability or pressure its government to change course.
As Chair of Liberal Democrat Friends of Palestine, I have spent years reading, speaking and campaigning about the harms inflicted on Palestinians as a result of Israeli military action and occupation.
Yet it was only after attending a recent webinar organised by Gender Action for Peace and Security that I began to understand the scale and systematic nature of Israel’s gendered crimes against Palestinians – from the targeting of women and girls through harassment, indecent exposure, and threats of rape, to the degrading treatment and sexual torture inflicted on men and boys in detention.
### RELATED
[
## Exposed: Israeli operation to help Brits move to West Bank
][5] [READ MORE **][6]
## **Making life unbearable**
Speakers stressed how these abuses function as part of a broader coercive environment designed to make everyday life unbearable and drive Palestinians from their homes and communities.
More than two-thirds of displaced households interviewed in the report identified threats to women and children, particularly sexualised violence, as their decisive reason for leaving.
Some families reported arranging early marriages for girls aged 15 to 17 simply so they could move to households believed to be safer.
Speakers also highlighted how underreported many of these violations remain, due to stigma, fear of reprisals, and the [culture of impunity][7] surrounding violence against Palestinians in general.
Evidence from Gaza points to a parallel pattern of gendered harms emerging in the context of Israel’s genocidal assault on the civilian population.
According to [Oxfam][8], more women and children were killed by Israeli bombardment in Gaza between October 2023 – September 2024 than during the equivalent period of any other conflict over the past two decades. Many more have been displaced, widowed or orphaned.
Near Gaza City, Palestinian children play on the rubble of homes destroyed by Israeli airstrikes (Photo: Alamy)
Israel’s systematic blockade of medical supplies and destruction of hospitals and IVF clinics has had severe consequences for women’s reproductive health. By October 2024, women were three times more likely to die from childbirth and three times more likely to miscarry, according to [UN analysis][9].
Newborn deaths have also increased, while the birth rate has fallen dramatically, dropping by [more than 40][10]% in the first half of 2025 compared with the same period in 2022. Mothers and newborn children are also more vulnerable to starvation and malnutrition as a result of the blockade.
In this context, a UN Commission of Inquiry [found][11] that Israel has systematically imposed measures to prevent births in Gaza, one of the categories of genocidal acts established under the Genocide Convention.
The forced displacement of [over 90%][12] of Gaza’s population has created additional gendered harms. Many families now live in overcrowded tents or temporary shelters with limited access to food, sanitation or privacy.
In these conditions, women and girls face increased exposure to violence and exploitation, while also taking on greater responsibility for household survival following the loss, injury or displacement of male family members.
For women experiencing menstruation, the lack of privacy and sanitary products creates a stressful, humiliating and potentially unsafe environment.
## **Credibility at stake **
The growing body of evidence emerging from Gaza and the West Bank should force a reckoning for governments that continue to support Israel while presenting themselves as defenders of human rights and women’s equality internationally.
Expressions of concern are no longer enough when credible reports from humanitarian organisations, UN bodies and Palestinian communities themselves continue to document patterns of abuse that demand accountability.
The UK government should be using every lever available to press for an end to these violations, support international accountability mechanisms, and ensure Britain is not contributing – directly or indirectly – to further abuses.
In addition to upholding our international obligations, the UK should suspend all arms sales with Israel until it complies with international law and ensure gender concerns are integrated into risk assessments and foreign policy decisions such as sanctions and arms transfers.
Failure to take action risks undermining not only international law, but also the credibility of Britain’s stated commitment to protecting women and girls in conflict around the world.
The post [Sexual abuse of Palestinians should force a reckoning for the British government][13] appeared first on [Declassified UK][14].
[1]: https://www.nrc.no/globalassets/pdf/reports/sexual-violence-and-forcible-transfer-in-the-west-bank/sexual-violence-and-forcible-transfer-in-the-west-bank---final.pdf
[2]: https://www.un.org/unispal/document/advocacy-brief-the-cost-of-war-in-gaza-on-women-and-girls-un-women-17apr26/
[3]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68108260
[4]: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/07/icj-opinion-declaring-israels-occupation-of-palestinian-territories-unlawful-is-historic-vindication-of-palestinians-rights/
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62819
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62819
[7]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/25/no-israel-prosecutions-for-killing-palestinian-civilians-in-occupied-west-bank-since-start-of-decade
[8]: https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/more-women-and-children-killed-gaza-israeli-military-any-other-recent-conflict
[9]: https://www.unocha.org/news/we-cannot-afford-look-away-ocha-urges-security-council-end-violence-gaza
[10]: https://www.un.org/unispal/document/ohchr-press-release-11dec25/
[11]: https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/hrbodies/hrcouncil/sessions-regular/session58/a-hrc-58-crp-6.pdf
[12]: https://www.un.org/unispal/document/domicide-report-26feb26/
[13]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/sexual-abuse-of-palestinians-should-force-a-reckoning-for-the-british-government/
[14]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/sexual-abuse-of-palestinians-should-force-a-reckoning-for-the-british-government/

2026-05-15 11:31:45 GMT

Met chief should resign over Palestine comments, ex-senior officer says
[Met police commissioner Mark Rowley speaks to journalists at the scene of the stabbing attack in Golders Green (Photo: Alamy)]
A former Scotland Yard superintendent has backed calls for the Metropolitan Police chief to resign over his criticism of pro-Palestine protests.
Nusrit Mehtab – who was one of the UK’s top female, ethnic minority police officers – [told][1] *Declassified* that Sir Mark Rowley is “blurring the lines of operational policing and political positioning”.
Her comments follow a series of controversial interventions from Rowley, including his recent claim that organisers of the Palestine demonstrations tried to deliberately direct protesters past synagogues.
“Their initial suggestion for their route, their march, has involved walking by a synagogue,” he [told][2] *The Times*.
“The fact that features as the organisers’ intent, I think that sends a message… that feels like antisemitism.”
The Palestine Coalition, a UK-based alliance which includes Palestine Solidarity Campaign and Stop The War Coalition, has [condemned][3] the comments as “incomprehensible and defamatory,” and demanded that Rowley retract them.
Speaking to *Declassified *this week, Mehtab said that Rowley was “repeatedly signalling out one protest” while saying nothing about others, like the far-right ‘Unite the Kingdom’ rally led by Tommy Robinson.
This weekend will see both the annual pro-Palestine Nakba Day march and one of Robinson’s rallies in central London with more than 4,000 Met police expected to be deployed.
She said: “The perception can be – based on that rhetoric – that is he aligning himself to the right-wing? Or is it possible that he’s carving himself a political career?”
Mehtab added: “This is all about moving away from blurring the lines of operational policing and political positioning, because then the perception is that safety and security is only there for one community, when actually safety and security should be the domain of all communities.”
## Accusations of racism
After joining the Metropolitan Police in the late 1980s, Mehtab rose through the ranks to become a superintendent. Her career included a stint in the force’s counter-terrorism unit while it was led by Rowley.
But she quit in 2020, accusing the Met Police of racism and sexism.
Rowley has repeatedly refused to accept that the force is “institutionally racist”, [claiming][4] the word institutional was “ambiguous”.
But Mehtab said she had personally experienced racism and sexism within the counter-terror unit when he was in charge of it.
“If he can’t even admit institutional racism and can’t address the very issues that are blatantly in front of him, how can he then – in terms of being fair and impartial – take that and police communities impartially?”
Mehtab also criticised Rowley’s political intervention following the Golders Green stabbings last month.
Essa Suleiman, 45, has since been charged over the stabbing of two Jewish men and one Muslim man.
Following the incident, Rowley publicly condemned the Green Party leader, Zack Polanski, for retweeting criticism of police officers who arrested the suspect.
The tweeted message accused the officers of “repeatedly and violently kicking a mentally ill man in the head when he was already incapacitated by Taser”.
With just a week before local elections, Rowley [responded][5] with an unprecedented attack on Polanski, accusing him of amplifying “inaccurate and misinformed commentary” and of being an “armchair critic”.
But Mehtab told *Declassified*: “Officer safety doesn’t teach you to kick somebody in the head.”
She added: “Zack Polanski was absolutely right to question that.”
Asked whether Rowley should resign, she said: “It’s for him to think about whether his position is still tenable… But I think that the people that have asked for him to resign were right to do so.”
The post [Met chief should resign over Palestine comments, ex-senior officer says][6] appeared first on [Declassified UK][7].
[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_poRGZjzuo
[2]: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/crime/article/sir-mark-rowley-metropolitan-police-british-jews-threat-tc2gcx7w0?eafs_enabled=false
[3]: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/palestine-coalition-met-police-mark-rowley-synagogues-b2970176.html
[4]: https://news.sky.com/story/met-police-chief-sir-mark-rowley-again-rejects-use-of-term-institutional-to-describe-forces-problems-after-damning-report-12840225
[5]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c74r9rlw9ngo
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/met-chief-should-resign-over-palestine-comments-ex-senior-officer-says/
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/met-chief-should-resign-over-palestine-comments-ex-senior-officer-says/

2026-05-14 10:32:18 GMT

Britain’s secret ‘black propaganda’ operations
[Prince Phillip and Ghanaian President Kwame Nkrumah in 1960 as the Special Editorial Unit activities to undermine Nkrumah’s leadership were well underway]
The UK government used fake organisations and forged documents to disrupt its enemies and protect its interests amid the Cold War, declassified files show.
The information comes in a series of highly sensitive [files][1] which were released to the National Archives in London.
The files belonged to the Information Research Department (IRD), a clandestine anti-communist propaganda unit which operated in the Foreign Office between 1948 and 1977.
Within the IRD there was a highly secretive subdivision named the Special Editorial Unit (SEU), which specialised in the “dark arts” of covert statecraft with assistance from MI6.
That involved planning and executing “black” propaganda operations such as the creation of fictitious organisations and the dissemination of forged documents.
These “black” operations were designed “to encourage a reaction, incite violence, or foment racial tensions”, according to historian [Rory Cormac][2], whose new book looks into the key figures behind the SEU.
The SEU also secretly controlled a series of global news agencies which posed as legitimate media groups and functioned as conduits for British propaganda content.
In addition to this, it supplied “independent” journalists with special briefings and pre-written articles which were then published under their own names.
The focus of much of this material was on the Soviet Union and its external activities, but other campaigns targeted left-wing and national liberation movements across the developing world.
Anti-colonial leaders such as Egypt’s Gamal Abdel Nasser, Indonesia’s Sukarno, and Ghana’s Kwame Nkrumah were a frequent focus of British propaganda operations.
Elsewhere, the SEU orchestrated propaganda campaigns on such diverse topics as fishing rights in the North Atlantic, apartheid in South Africa, and European communist parties.
The files offer new insights into the role of propaganda operations in British covert statecraft, exposing how duplicity and disinformation were used on a far greater scale than previously known.
## **Controlled outlets**
One of the SEU’s core activities was covertly running news agencies – described in the files as “controlled outlets” – and ensuring they were stocked with a constant stream of propaganda material.
Agencies controlled from Whitehall included Near and Far East News (NAFEN), the National Guardsman, the Guardian of Liberty, Lion Features, and World Feature Services.
The SEU produced around ten articles for NAFEN each week during the 1960s which were then disseminated across Asia, particularly in India, Pakistan, Ceylon, Japan and Malaysia.
The Guardian of Liberty was a bi-monthly journal mailed out to politicians, government departments, trade unions, universities, public libraries, journalists, and businessmen in the developing world.
“With the Hungarian Uprising as its ostensible origin”, one SEU file noted, the Guardian of Liberty was able to build up “a reputation as an authoritative source of information on Communist affairs” which was often “embarrassing to the Soviet authorities”.
The SEU was particularly pleased with how it functioned as a “hard-hitting disavowable outlet available for the dissemination of particularly ‘difficult’ subjects” such as “the naming of KGB agents operating in foreign countries”.
Another significant SEU-controlled outlet was Lion Features, which typically published three issues each month containing five articles.
A copy of one of the tri-monthly issues that the SEU-run outlet distributed to sway opinions and coverage (Source: National Archive)
It was sent out to “newspapers and radio stations through Africa, and also to the Middle East and in some cases Asia too”, according to an SEU report, with as many as 80 African newspapers using the service in 1972.
In order to look like *bona fide* news agencies, the SEU’s “controlled outlets” fused political with “anodyne” content in order to “sweeten the pill” of the propaganda material.
These “anodyne” articles covered such issues as women’s affairs, health, sociology, geography, history, and sport.
“In order to attract editors and readers, and to maintain the appearance of a genuine features agency, an average issue is usually made up of two polemical articles, combined with three others of a positive or anodyne nature”, wrote one SEU official about Lion Features.
## **Independent outlets**
In addition to controlling news agencies, the SEU supplied “independent” outlets and journalists with secret briefings and pre-written content for publication under their own names.
Some of those stories emanated from British intelligence material, helping journalists to build their own prestige and disseminate stories internationally.
One of the SEU’s most important contacts in this regard was someone cryptically referred to in internal memos as “Journalist in Vienna”, but never named.
A “well-established correspondent on Soviet and East European affairs”, the SEU sent him a weekly average of two to three pre-written articles for publication in leading journals across Europe. Most surfaced in the German-language Swiss press.
Between October 1972 and September 1973, he published 211 articles from the SEU in Swiss outlets ranging from well-known publications with international reputations like the German-language *Neue Zurcher Zeitung* daily to smaller, provincial newspapers.
Many of these articles were then picked up in major journals across Europe and beyond.
One of the journalist’s pieces in *Neue Zurcher Zeitung*, for instance, was drawn upon “in a series of articles in the French left-wing daily Combat”, from which it was “noticed by the Chinese” and broadcast in China.
The “Journalist in Vienna” also supplied influential contacts “with special material” prepared by the SEU and acted as “an important link to Swiss political and military circles and to the governments of certain other countries through their ambassadors in Vienna”.
While this journalist was perhaps the most prolific SEU contact in Austria, he wasn’t the only one.
Others in Vienna included a “well-known Austrian journalist… who has a weekly television programme on current affairs”, a Reuters correspondent who was given topical “tip offs” on East European affairs, and a reporter who offered “a backchannel into the Dutch press”.
Further material was supplied to “the heads of the UPI and Reuters offices in Vienna” in the hope that this would have a “built-in multiplier effect and produce wider coverage”.
Elsewhere in Europe, the SEU’s key contacts included a “Swiss journalist” in Geneva and a representative of the Springer Group, the German publisher, with the latter providing “a channel into the West German press… and into the Springer Foreign Press Service”.
One the SEU’s annual reports, detailing its wide-ranging top secret activities (Source: National Archives)
Additional content was sent to the Swiss Press Review, a weekly feature service in German, English, French and Spanish, with the SEU even paying for its editor to visit Hong Kong during the early 1970s “in order to stimulate more intense coverage of Chinese events”.
Across the channel, the SEU also had inroads into the British press through the *Sunday Telegraph*, the *Scotsman* and the Economist’s Foreign Report newsletter.
In 1973, for instance, an SEU memo noted that the *Sunday Telegraph’s* assistant editor – presumably Gordon Brook-Shepherd, a key IRD contact – was provided with “six sets of written material or oral briefing”.
Armed with this information, this editor contributed a “series on Arab guerrilla movements and their international links”, with articles appearing “on four successive Sundays”.
## **‘Black**‘ **operations**
The unit also forged documents from real and fake groups in “black” operations which further reinforced Britain’s propaganda offensive.
These operations, however, were employed “selectively” and “only on those occasions when an important message cannot be conveyed credibly by other means”.
For instance, the unit forged articles that appeared to emanate from real outlets such as the Soviet news agency *Novosti*, while propaganda content was also laundered through groups by the SEU such as the “*Comitato Milanese per la Pace”* (Milan Committee for Peace).
The forgeries would then be mailed to suitable targets worldwide, such as government officials, trade union groups, peace organisations, and journalists..
Amid the planning for “black” propaganda operations, it was not uncommon for British ministers to intervene and offer recommendations.
In 1964, foreign secretary Patrick Gordon Walker enquired whether “in our output to Africa, we could not make something of the fact that the Chinese were hardly closer to black in colour than were the whites”.
He suggested that the SEU do “some research into the race feelings of Africans towards the Chinese”, with a broader view to disrupting any perception of “togetherness”.
An anonymous letter written to a “Persian Gulf leader” in 1972, following “a suggestion” from the foreign secretary, was seen to have “contributed to his decision not to establish diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union”.
## **Operations against the Soviet Union**
A significant portion of the SEU’s propaganda operations were aimed at the Soviet Union and designed to disrupt its activities and isolate it geopolitically.
As laid out in annual SEU reports, frequent themes included “expansionist Soviet tactics in the developing world” as well as the “Soviet bloc’s less [than] savoury activities worldwide in the espionage and subversion field”.
The SEU, for instance, helped to expose a Soviet-inspired intelligence operation in Tunisia as well as the visit of a Soviet special agent to Portugal’s colonies in Africa.
Other campaigns were geared towards souring the Soviet Union’s relations with its neighbors and sullying its reputation amongst developing nations.
Four “black” operations were launched in 1965 with the goal of exploiting “Sino-Soviet friction” and exposing Soviet “front organisations”.
One of those involved adding a fake covering note “deploring Chinese nuclear explosions” to a genuine Soviet booklet, while a forged poster criticising China’s nuclear programme was also mailed to youth committees.
The SEU also produced a forged *Novosti* booklet in 1972 about the Lumumba Friendship University, a research facility in Moscow that welcomed foreign students.
The booklet “drew attention to difficulties… suffered by the [foreign] students” and “suggested that their poor results were caused by their low intelligence rather than by Soviet methods of teaching”.
The goal was “to counter a drive by the Soviet Union to recruit Arab students”, with 1,060 copies posted to developing countries and “special attention” paid to the Middle East.
Even now, parts of the SEU’s work remains secret (Source: National Archives)
Another forged *Novosti* bulletin entitled “Islam’s Role in Modern Society” was sent out to Muslim countries to show “how Islam and other religions are repressed by the Soviet Union”.
Elsewhere, “black” operations were launched primarily to cause embarrassment to the Soviets.
In 1974, a “fictitious” statement from the Soviet-aligned World Peace Council (WPC) was produced about the “harassment and expulsion” of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.
The Russian dissident and novelist was arrested and expelled that year following the publication of The Gulag Archipelago about the Soviet Union’s sprawling prison system.
The WPC, founded in 1950, was ostensibly campaigning for disarmament, anti-imperialism, and global peace, but was also a front organisation promoting Soviet foreign policy.
The SEU’s statement was dispatched to some 504 recipients, “most in Western Europe, some in the Middle East and others in Asia and Africa”, with the goal of “offend[ing] moderate left-wingers”.
With this, the WPC was forced into issuing a denial, thus drawing “attention to the fact that” it had “failed to pronounce on Solzhenitsyn’s case – a significant and revealing admission”.
## **Operations against anti-colonial leaders**
Other major SEU operations were aimed at prominent leaders of national liberation and de-colonial movements in the global south.
One of those figures was Gamal Abdel Nasser, whose tenure as Egyptian president between 1954 and 1970 saw the nationalisation of the Suez Canal.
The SEU worked diligently to drive a wedge between Egypt and surrounding countries, with a focus on Nasser’s “land hunger” across North Africa and the Middle East.
“Black” operations during the 1960s focussed on “the population explosion in Egypt in relation to Libya” and Egypt’s “designs on Libya’s oil”, while others aimed to expose “Nasser’s expansionist ambitions” in Yemen and Syria.
Another “black” propaganda theme centred on how Nasser’s “attitude to the Soviet Union was incompatible with communism’s precepts on Islam”.
Sukarno, the president of Indonesia between 1945 and 1967, was another key focus of British propaganda activities.
The SEU aimed to create tension between Indonesia and international Islam, with “black” operations reviewing “Indonesian designs for taking over the leadership of the Muslim world”.
The goal, one official wrote, was “antagonis[ing] Muslim leaders in the Middle East”.
Some 500 copies of a pictorial leaflet “depicting Sukarno between Hitler and Mussolini” were also sent out to attack the Indonesian president in 1964.
A 1964 SEU report relays an operation targeting Sukarno (Source: National Archives)
The following year, British propagandists produced “black” leaflets [demanding][3] the “communist cancer be cut out” of Indonesia, helping to incite massacres against leftists which the CIA would later describe as “one of the worst mass murders of the 20^{th} century”.
And once the massacres had broken out, according to research by journalists Paul Lashmar, Nicholas Gilby, and James Oliver, the IRD [praised][4] “the fighting services and the police” for “doing an excellent job”.
One IRD leaflet declared: “Communism must be abolished in all its forms. The work started by the army must be carried on and intensified”.
A third prominent target for the SEU was Kwame Nkrumah, who was president of Ghana between 1957 and 1966 after helping the country win independence from Britain.
The IRD’s overarching [goal][5] in attacking Nkrumah was to create “an atmosphere” in which he “could be overthrown and replaced by a more Western-oriented government”.
Direction for the anti-Nkrumah offensive came from then UK prime minister Alec Douglas-Home, who asked in 1964: “Can we not leak some detailed facts about Nkrumah’s actions, through channels which could not be brought home to us?”
Four hundred and fifty copies of an SEU leaflet emanating from a group of “Ghanian exiles” were sent in 1965, and used to attack Kowo Addison, the director of the Kwame Nkrumah Ideological Institute.
“The purpose of the operation was to draw attention to the sinister foreign advisers who are encouraging Nkrumah to pursue policies against Ghana’s real interests”, one SEU official wrote.
Five hundred copies of a second leaflet “attacking the evil men around Nkrumah”, particularly the secretary-general of the Pan-African Journalists Union, Kofi Batsa, were also distributed.
Nkrumah launched back in a 1965 speech with a scathing attack on “those with wicked intentions who… are writing and circulating anonymous letters and documents with threats and calumny to other people”.
After Nkrumah was overthrown in a coup in 1966 and replaced by high-ranking elements of Ghana’s military and police, a diplomat said the IRD’s efforts should be “[directed][6] at ensuring that the lesson of Nkrumah’s flirtation with Communism is not lost on other Africans”.
Elsewhere in Africa, SEU-directed campaigns accused Kenya’s Jaramogi Oginga Odinga of being a “tool of the Chinese” and sought to “encourage a peaceful resolution of the South African [apartheid] situation”.
Others still sought to expose “the folly of Southern Rhodesia’s unilateral declaration of independence” in 1965 and bring attention to “atrocities in Uganda” under Idi Amin during the 1970s.
## **Operations in Europe**
While most operations focussed on the Soviet Union and the developing world, the SEU also kept a keen eye on European affairs.
The “Cod Wars”, a series of conflicts between Britain and Iceland over fishing rights in the Northern Atlantic, became a theme of SEU activities during the 1970s.
Several articles were written by the SEU “on Chinese and Soviet interest in Iceland”, with one of them subsequently appearing “in at least five Swiss newspapers”.
The articles denounced “Soviet interest in the island, and Communist hopes of a windfall from the dispute”, hoping to display Iceland’s actions as influenced by external interests.
In one instance, the SEU even asked the editor of the Swiss Press Review “to attract subscriptions” from Icelandic newspaper editors in order to effectively smuggle Britain’s perspectives into the country.
Elsewhere, SEU material targeted the influence of communists in Portugal, the “independence” of Western communist parties, the “sincerity” of Italian communists, and “claims about adopting democratic principles” from Euro-Communist elements.
The IRD was eventually shut down in 1977 under Harold Wilson’s Labour government amid funding cuts, détente, and confusion about its division of labour with MI6.
Britain’s covert propaganda machinery, however, did not altogether disappear with it. The Foreign Office continued to conduct some IRD-type activities through a successor body named the Special Production Unit (SPU).
The post [Britain’s secret ‘black propaganda’ operations][7] appeared first on [Declassified UK][8].
[1]: https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/results/r?_q=%22special+editorial+unit%22
[2]: https://direct.mit.edu/jcws/article-abstract/24/3/4/112897/British-Black-ProductionsForgeries-Front-Groups?redirectedFrom=fulltext
[3]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/17/slaughter-in-indonesia-britains-secret-propaganda-war
[4]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/17/slaughter-in-indonesia-britains-secret-propaganda-war
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/top-secret-document-exposes-uk-role-in-ghana-coup/
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/top-secret-document-exposes-uk-role-in-ghana-coup/
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/britains-secret-black-propaganda-operations/
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/britains-secret-black-propaganda-operations/

2026-05-12 18:31:44 GMT

Palestine Action barrister wins appeal in contempt case
[A protest outside Woolwich Crown Court where the Palestine Action activists were tried (Photo: Alamy)]
A leading human rights barrister has won his appeal against contempt of court proceedings, which were levelled at him for a closing speech in the trial of Palestine Action activists.
The court of appeal’s ruling on Tuesday in the case of Rajiv Menon KC comes as it has also emerged that four of the defendants found guilty in a retrial can be sentenced as terrorists.
Three court of appeal judges found that the trial judge, Mr Justice Johnson, “had no jurisdiction” to refer the case against Menon to the High Court.
The decision leaves open the possibility that Johnson could potentially still refer the contempt allegations to the Attorney General or another High Court judge sitting in the Crown Court.
It was, however, met as a victory by Menon’s lawyers and supporters who [warned][1] that the proceedings were [unprecedented][2] and have had a chilling effect on the entire bar.
Campaign group Defend Our Juries (DoJ) said: “Rajiv Menon KC did what every defence barrister should be free to do – in discharging his duty to his client: he told a jury the truth about their own rights.”
“The fact that contempt of court proceedings were even brought against a barrister for his closing speech – for the first time in British legal history – should deeply concern everyone who cares about the rule of law,” the group added.
Menon had been accused of violating Johnson’s orders in the first trial of six activists who broke into an Israeli-owned arms factory near Bristol in 2024 at the height of the Gaza genocide.
He barred the lawyers from inviting the jury to disregard the court’s ruling of law or to acquit the defendants on the basis of conscience, known as the principle of jury equity.
In his closing speech, Menon told the jury about the Bushell case, a landmark ruling from 1670 which established the independence of juries.
The barrister read from a plaque at the Old Bailey which commemorates the jury in that case saying it “established the right of juries to give their verdict according to their convictions”.
### RELATED
[
## Palestine Action defendants dismiss lawyers to address jury directly
][3] [READ MORE **][4]
## ‘Kept in the dark’
In February, a jury acquitted all of the activists of aggravated burglary, but failed to reach a verdict on several other charges.
The Crown Prosecution Service sought a retrial on those charges.
Before the closing arguments in the retrial, five of the [defendants dismissed their lawyers][5], including Menon and represented themselves, saying they no longer felt their lawyers could represent them as a result of restrictions imposed by the court.
Last week, four of the defendants were convicted of criminal damage in the retrial, with one also found guilty of grievous bodily harm without intent.
Reporting restrictions were lifted today allowing the media to report that a “terrorism connection” was added to their case, which the jury was not told about.
This factor means they can be sentenced as terrorists, which could increase the time they spend in custody or conditions upon release.
A DoJ spokesperson said: “This grave miscarriage of justice should be a matter of public outrage. Had the jury not been deliberately kept in the dark about this secret terrorist sentencing, the jury may not have chosen to convict.
“The judge also forbade the defendants and their barristers from informing the jury of their right to acquit on the basis of conscience.”
The post [Palestine Action barrister wins appeal in contempt case][6] appeared first on [Declassified UK][7].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/contempt-case-against-palestine-action-barrister-creating-chilling-effect/
[2]: https://gardencourtchambers.co.uk/garden-court-statement-rajiv-menon-kc/
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63071
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=63071
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/palestine-action-defendants-dismiss-lawyers-to-address-jury-directly/
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/palestine-action-barrister-wins-appeal-in-contempt-case/
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/palestine-action-barrister-wins-appeal-in-contempt-case/

2026-05-11 16:36:33 GMT

Israeli settler group returns to London despite calls for sanctions
[Shivat Zion’s Jonathan Vigné at a World Zionist Organisation event in London on 10 May 2026.]
An Israeli charity that offered to help Brits move to the West Bank has been photographed at an event in London, despite calls for it to be sanctioned.
[Shivat Zion][1] had a stall at an ‘Aliyah Fair’, held in Saracen’s Rugby Stadium in London yesterday.
Organised by the World Zionist Organisation, the regular event is designed to help British Jews emigrate to [Israel][2].
But last month, an [undercover investigation][3] by *Declassified* revealed how Shivat Zion bragged about “awesome” illegal settlements – and told supporters it could benefit from UK tax subsidies.
We filmed the group’s “encouragement” officer, Jonathan Vigné, discussing the support it would give settlers moving to Efrat, in the [West Bank][4].
Our investigation sparked [calls][5] from MPs for the government to impose sanctions on Shivat Zion, along with Vigné and the charity’s CEO, Shraga Evers, who lives in Efrat.
One Labour politician [told us][6]: “Strong government action is required to put an immediate end to this matter.”
But the government has repeatedly dodged the question. The Foreign Office [claimed][7]: “It is the UK’s longstanding policy not to speculate on potential sanctions designations.”
And the Home Office declined to condemn Shivat Zion, saying: “We do not comment on individual groups”.
When asked about it in Parliament last month, foreign secretary [Yvette Cooper][8] said: “No one should be building illegal settlements on the West Bank. It is essential that everyone abides by international law.
“We would expect any organisation in the UK and people living in the UK to abide by international law.”
## **‘Horrifying’**
The Aliyah Day event promised “information, guidance and community” for British Jews considering moving to Israel. It featured lectures on everything from entering the Israeli jobs market, to the tax advantages given to immigrants.
But the venue was kept secret until the day before, when people attending were emailed the location.
An anti-Zionist activist who attended the event for research purposes told *Declassified *it was well-attended.
“It was horrifying to see Shivat Zion being given this platform, given what it has said about illegal settlements,” they said.
“That this is happening supposedly ‘in our name’ as Jews, is sickening to those of us who mean it when we say: never again. And that this is potentially being supported with British charity tax benefits is deeply concerning.”
Alongside Shivat Zion’s appearance in London, Israel’s Minister of Aliya and Integration, Ofir Sofer, was also [pictured][9] at the event yesterday. Sofer has previously [introduced][10] financial rewards to new immigrants who settle in the West Bank.
He belongs to Israel’s far-right Religious Zionist party, whose leader Bezalel Smotrich has been sanctioned by the UK for “repeated incitements of violence against Palestinian communities”.
Sofer’s ministry had a stall at yesterday’s Aliyah Fair, along with the Israeli Ministry of Education.
A floor plan from the event in London. (Photo: Supplied)
The British government has repeatedly condemned Israel’s illegal settlements in the West Bank. Just last week, the UK Chargé d’Affaires to the UN described them as a “flagrant violation of international law” which “must cease”.
And, in February, the government promised to take “concrete steps” to counter settlement expansion.
Yet almost a month after *Declassified*’s investigation into Shivat Zion, the government appears to have taken no action whatsoever – and has even refused to explicitly condemn the organisation.
Meanwhile, Shivat Zion responded to our findings by posting a video online, claiming that the undercover investigation was a “trap” to make it “look as if we tried to convince people to make Aliyah, specifically to Judea and Samaria, which is simply not true”.
The video says: “We are an apolitical organisation and work in accordance with Israeli law. But if someone has decided on a specific city in Israel, we help them. It’s their individual decision.”
### RELATED
[
## Exposed: Israeli operation to help Brits move to West Bank
][11] [READ MORE **][12]
## **Charity Commission**
The Charity Commission has also remained silent about the potential involvement of a British charity.
Despite being registered in Israel, Shivat Zion’s website invited supporters to direct their donations via UK Toremet Ltd – based near London – and claim UK Gift Aid in the process.
In an email seen by *Declassified*, a representative from Shivat Zion claimed that donations “go through” the UK Toremet charity, explaining that this “ensures the donations properly reach Shivat Zion”.
If money were to be received this way, it could mean that support for illegal settlers could potentially benefit from British tax subsidies.
But when questioned by *Declassified*, UK Toremet claimed it has no “active” relationship with Shivat Zion and hadn’t given any grants to the organisation in the last 12 months.
We were unable to verify this claim, but donors to Shivat Zion would have been under the impression that their money would go via UK Toremet in order to benefit from Gift Aid.
Responding to our findings last month, a spokesperson for the Charity Commission said: “We are assessing if any information published gives rise to new concerns about UK Toremet Limited.”
But four weeks on, the commission has still not announced any updates.
The post [Israeli settler group returns to London despite calls for sanctions][13] appeared first on [Declassified UK][14].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/shivat-zion/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/israel/
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/exposed-israeli-operation-to-help-brits-move-to-west-bank/
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/west-bank/
[5]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-04-22/129200
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-politicians-call-for-sanctions-on-israeli-charity/
[7]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-04-22/129200
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/yvette-cooper/
[9]: https://x.com/DanielaGrudsky/status/2053576395406586347
[10]: https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-02-15/ty-article/.premium/israeli-govt-to-reward-new-immigrants-who-settle-in-countrys-periphery-and-west-bank/0000018d-ac36-da6e-af9f-ac3fffb70000
[11]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62819
[12]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62819
[13]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/israeli-settler-group-returns-to-london-despite-calls-for-sanctions/
[14]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/israeli-settler-group-returns-to-london-despite-calls-for-sanctions/

2026-04-15 10:34:46 GMT

Nato expansion ‘would provoke Russians’, UK understood
[A man in a red tie smiles next to a man in a blue tie]
UK officials believed Nato expansion “would provoke [the] Russians” if a large group of European states joined the military organisation, [declassified files][1] from 1997 show.
A March 1997 briefing for prime minister [John Major][2] outlined UK support for a “small first group” of countries to join the [Nato][3] alliance.
“Too many at once would strain Nato structures, antagonise [Russia][4]”, read the briefing, which was intended for Major’s upcoming meeting with Nato secretary general Javier Solana. Further decisions on which states would join and when “would provoke Russians”, it added.
The meeting took place as Nato, in the face of strong Russian opposition, was considering enlarging to include the Czech Republic, Hungary and [Poland][5] and perhaps Slovenia and Romania.
The first three countries were invited by Nato to join in July 1997, and they did so in 1999. A further 11 European states went on to join the military alliance by 2020.
The same briefing for Major stated that then Russian president [Boris Yeltsin][6] was “likely to press key allies for assurances that Nato will not admit Baltics, [Ukraine][7]”. “Will get no change from us”, the briefing added.
Even in 1997, many officials in the [US][8] administration under [Bill Clinton][9] were already in favour of the Baltics states joining. This was especially controversial as the three states share land borders with Russian territory.
John Kerr, Britain’s ambassador in Washington wrote “the Americans have promised to help them [Baltic states] prepare for membership” and “Many in the Administration (including the Pentagon) think the Balts will indeed join Nato one day”.
He added: “They see this as only a matter of time and careful management of Russia.”
### RELATED
[
## UK knew Nato expansion could lead to war with Russia
][10] [READ MORE **][11]
## ‘Blatant provocation’
The British files for 1995-99, available at the National Archives in London, show that Russia repeatedly warned the West about eastern European countries, including Ukraine, joining Nato.
By contrast, the UK Ministry of Defence has posted [hundreds][12] of times, especially on social media platform X, that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 was “unprovoked”.
“Blatant provocation” is how Nikolai Afanasievsky, Russia’s deputy foreign minister, described talk of Nato admitting former Soviet republics, in a meeting in February 1997 with UK ambassador in Moscow, Jeremy Greenstock.
Greenstock tried to reassure Afanasievsky that “Nato had no intention to admit FSU [former Soviet Union] members at this stage”. His “at this stage” comment was technically true, but seven years later, in 2004, the Baltic states had all joined.
Nato enlargement to territories of the former Soviet Union including the Baltic states was “a neuralgic point” for the Russians, UK officials at Nato informed the Foreign Office in March 1997.
“The most difficult issue was Yeltsin’s anxiety about possible [sic] accession of Ukraine, the Baltic states and other states of the Former Soviet Union”.
The following month, Yeltsin wrote to Major saying: “Our negative attitude to Nato expansion plans remains unchanged. Implementation of those plans would be the biggest mistake of the West in all the post-war period”.
One particular priority for Moscow was “exclusion of deployment on a permanent basis near Russia of Nato battle formations”.
## ‘Russian fears were real’
“Russian fears were real”, Major told Dutch prime minister Wim Kok in a discussion in The Hague on Nato enlargement in January 1997. “This had been clear from his own contacts with Yeltsin and others in the past”, Major added, according to the write-up of the meeting.
When Major met Solana in March 1997 the latter referred to “Russians fears about Nato troops and equipment moving eastwards”. Russian foreign minister Primakov “had more or less begged him [Solana] for help in giving the Russians reassurance about Nato forces not moving eastwards”.
Earlier, in December 1996, Russian prime minister Viktor Chernomyrdin had told Major in private: “Russia could not stop Nato enlarging, but this would create a fragile situation which could explode”.
Similarly, a Foreign Office paper drawn up in December 1995 noted “the depth of hostility to the principle of enlargement” by Russia. It said the UK “should address Russian sensitivities” about this, including “to explain Nato’s role and activities to a wider Russian public through an enhanced information effort”.
This was at a time when UK officials believed the first phase of enlargement should be “small” and only consider Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary.
Earlier that year, in March 1995, the UK’s ambassador to the US, Robin Renwick, informed the Foreign Office of the understanding in Washington that “there was a widespread psychological and intellectual perception in Moscow that Nato was a real threat”.
This was well-known to the British prime minister. In May 1995, Major said in a meeting with his Irish counterpart, John Bruton, that he “thought that their fundamental fear was of encirclement”, referring to the Russians.
He added that, compared to EU membership for the central European states “for the Russians, Nato had a much more threatening symbolism and political resonance… The Baltics were particularly difficult, with extreme sensitivity for Russia. It would be very hard to have a Nato border directly against Russia”.
Thus Major argued to take enlargement “slowly” and “develop a unique relationship with Russia, which took account of its special size and strategic weight”.
### RELATED
[
## Blair and Major reassured Russia about Nato expansion
][13] [READ MORE **][14]
## ‘Law until themselves’
After [Tony Blair][15] became prime minister in May 1997, Britain sought to develop close relations with Russia, especially after [Vladimir Putin][16] became prime minister in August 1999.
Blair’s officials believed they could form a “new partnership” with Russia, and that Moscow would gradually acquiesce in the enlargement of Nato. However, Russians fears of enlargement barely ceased.
“Enlargement is still very neuralgic” to Russia, wrote John Goulden, the UK’s top official at Nato, in February 2000. “Public opinion believed this would lead to Russia’s political isolation in Europe” with one Russian official saying it “amounted to Nato closing Peter the Great’s window to the West”.
One reason for Moscow’s opposition to enlargement at this time was Blair’s war in [Kosovo][17] in 1999, which involved bombing [Serbia][18], Moscow’s ally, and expanding Western influence in eastern Europe after failing to secure UN security council authorisation.
A Foreign Office brief for Blair’s meeting with Nato secretary general George Robertson in February 2000 noted: “Russian opposition to Nato expansion has become even more hard-line as a result of Kosovo”.
However, it wasn’t just Kosovo, but US/UK policies towards Iraq, and their [bombing][19] of the country in 1998, also without UN authorisation, that angered Russia.
This was explicitly outlined by Tim Barrow, private secretary to foreign secretary Robin Cook, who wrote to No.10 in September 1999 saying: “Russia’s relationship with the West has recently taken a pounding. The Russians found US/UK policies in relation to Iraq and Kosovo particularly hard to swallow.”
“The underlying reason for this disquiet (which is genuine) is a feeling that the United States and Nato are a law unto themselves. The idea that the West takes little account of Russian interests and that the process of Nato enlargement is intended to constrain Russia still further.”
The post [Nato expansion ‘would provoke Russians’, UK understood][20] appeared first on [Declassified UK][21].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/declassified-files/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/john-major/
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/nato/
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/russia/
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/poland/
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/boris-yeltsin/
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/ukraine/
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/united-states/
[9]: http://declassifieduk.org/tag/bill-clinton/
[10]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62808
[11]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62808
[12]: https://x.com/search?q=from%3ADefenceHQ%20unprovoked&src=typeahead_click
[13]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=59368
[14]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=59368
[15]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/tony-blair/
[16]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/vladimir-putin/
[17]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/kosovo/
[18]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/serbia/
[19]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/blair-misled-parliament-over-1998-iraq-bombing-files-show/
[20]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/nato-expansion-would-provoke-russians-uk-understood/
[21]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/nato-expansion-would-provoke-russians-uk-understood/

2026-04-14 13:38:57 GMT

How a UK arms shipment to Israel was seized in Belgium
[A young man smiles]
Two shipments of military components bound for Israel from the UK have been seized in Belgium, it can be revealed.
This follows an alert issued to authorities in Brussels by *Declassified*, Belgian NGO [Vredesactie][1], Irish news outlet [The Ditch][2], and the Palestinian Youth Movement.
[Belgium][3] has strict laws on the transhipment of military items to [Israel][4] through its ports and airports, including a ban on overflights carrying weaponry through its airspace.
Customs officials were notified last month of a suspicious military shipment travelling from Britain to Israel through Liege airport.
The cargo was subsequently searched by a specialised engineer who [found][5] “the presence of fire control systems and spare parts for military aircraft”.
Walloon minister-president Adrien Dolimont said: “We have to see if the legislation has been respected. Here, in this case, it’s clear that it hasn’t”.
Another Belgian government spokesperson told *Declassified*: “No transit licence request was issued; if it had been, it would have been refused”.
### RELATED
[
## Arms for Israel secretly shipped through UK airspace
][6] [READ MORE **][7]
## **The shipment**
The two consignments arrived in Liege on 24 March and were scheduled for onward air transport to Tel Aviv on a Challenge Airlines service two days later, according to shipping documents seen by *Declassified*.
The UK arms export codes associated with the goods were ML10 and ML5, which relate to military aircraft and fire control components.
Hans Lammerant, a spokesperson for [Vredesactie][8], said: “We also have information on 17 transits in the past. So it was clearly a regular transit from Bierset [Liege] to Israel”.
The Belgian authorities have refused to name the arms firms who exported the goods amid the opening of a criminal investigation into the matter.
However, a spokesperson for the Walloon government confirmed that the initial complaint focussed on [Moog][9], a US aerospace firm with factories across Britain, and did not refute that some of the seized items may have belonged to that company.
Customs brokerage documents seen by *Declassified* indicate that some of the earlier shipments from Britain to Israel via Liege airport were sent by Moog.
A postcode associated with the company’s factory in Wolverhampton, for instance, sent items to Israel through Belgium last December with goods description “servo actuator”.
Moog manufactures actuators for the [M-346][10], an aircraft which is used to [train Israeli pilots][11] to fly advanced fighter aircraft including the F-35 and F-16.
Actuators are machines that control the movement of other components, and can be used to help steer an aircraft.
It is unclear whether the arms producers would have been aware of the cargo carriers’ shipping routes.
A Walloon government spokesperson told *Declassified*: “In our view, the goods do indeed require a transit licence, which must be applied for either by UPS or by Challenge Airlines…
“We have already contacted our lawyers. We wish to… take all necessary steps to ensure that the law is upheld”.
Moog and UPS were approached for comment.
### RELATED
[
## UK arms trade: A trifecta of everything that’s wrong
][12] [READ MORE **][13]
## **Legal concerns**
After finding the shipment, Walloon minister-president Adrien Dolimont said: “It’s not always easy to identify whether or not it’s military equipment”.
For instance, cargo carriers appear to be consolidating military items with civilian goods into shared airway bills, meaning arms components can be shipped alongside games consoles and medical items, potentially making enforcement controls more challenging.
In addition to this, arms shipments seem to have been given customs codes commonly associated with civilian goods (such as “valves and similar components”) instead of ones more closely linked to military goods (like “aircraft parts”).
*Declassified* asked Britain’s trade department whether it has made an assessment of UK-origin military items being illegally transhipped via Belgium, and if it has discussed this with the Belgian authorities.
A spokesperson said: “We have suspended all licences for equipment for Israel that might be used in military operations in Gaza, with the exception of the special measures relating to the global F-35 programme.
“Exports of controlled equipment are subject to strict licensing requirements. It would be a criminal offence for an exporter not to have the required licences in place before exporting such items”.
The post [How a UK arms shipment to Israel was seized in Belgium][14] appeared first on [Declassified UK][15].
[1]: https://www.vredesactie.be/
[2]: https://www.ontheditch.com/
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/belgium/
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/israel/
[5]: https://www.rtbf.be/article/du-materiel-militaire-destine-a-israel-bloque-a-l-aeroport-de-bierset-11708029
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=56797
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=56797
[8]: https://www.rtbf.be/article/du-materiel-militaire-destine-a-israel-bloque-a-l-aeroport-de-bierset-11708029
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/moog/
[10]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/m-346/
[11]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/israeli-fighter-pilots-training-with-uk-equipment/
[12]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62684
[13]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62684
[14]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-a-uk-arms-shipment-to-israel-was-seized-in-belgium/
[15]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-a-uk-arms-shipment-to-israel-was-seized-in-belgium/

2026-04-13 11:04:41 GMT

Exposed: Israeli operation to help Brits move to West Bank
[Rows on houses on a hill with a road leading down]
An Israeli organisation has been caught on camera offering to help British citizens move to an illegal settlement in the West Bank.
*Declassified* can reveal how the group, Shivat Zion, told supporters it could benefit from UK tax subsidies – despite staff bragging about “awesome” settlements.
An undercover investigation saw the group’s “encouragement” officer discussing the support it would give settlers moving to Efrat, in the West Bank.
“You’re next to the Arabs; you’ll hear their mosques,” he was recorded saying. “But apart from this, it’s a great living standard.”
The comments were made during a Zoom call with a Jewish anti-Zionist activist, who asked *Declassified* to secretly film the conversation.
In February, the UK government [promised][1] to take “concrete steps in accordance with international law to counter settlement expansion”.
Foreign minister Hamish Falconer said: “Israel’s illegal settlements and decisions designed to further them are a flagrant violation of international law”.
But *Declassified* can reveal how Shivat Zion invited supporters to claim UK Gift Aid when making donations.
Despite being registered in [Israel][2], it directed donations to a separate charity called UK Toremet Ltd, based near London.
In an email seen by *Declassified*, a representative from Shivat Zion claimed that donations “go through” the UK Toremet charity, explaining that this “ensures the donations properly reach Shivat Zion”.
If money were to be received this way, it could mean that support for illegal settlers could potentially benefit from British tax subsidies.
UK Toremet has now claimed it has no “active” relationship with Shivat Zion and hasn’t given any grants to the organisation in the last 12 months.
*Declassified* can’t verify this claim, but donors to Shivat Zion would have been under the impression that their money would go via UK Toremet in order to benefit from Gift Aid.
Leading human rights lawyer, Daniel Machover, told *Declassified* he was “deeply disturbed” by the investigation’s findings and said it was “inexcusable” to claim that these donations were eligible for UK Gift Aid.
A landmark advisory opinion by the [International Court of Justice][3] (ICJ) in 2024 placed countries “under an obligation not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by Israel’s illegal presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory”.
The court’s advisory opinion is not legally binding, but still carries significant political weight.
But despite its previous rhetoric about illegal settlements, the UK government ignored questions from *Declassified* and refused to comment on our findings.
## Aliyah
In November, the World Zionist Organisation organised an event at a secret location in London. With “inspiring talks” and “practical information”, it was designed to help British Jews emigrate to Israel – a process known as aliyah.
But the event was also attended by several Jewish anti-Zionist activists. They included Emily, a dual US/UK citizen who grew up in a multi-faith family and now considers herself a religious Jew.
Emily told *Declassified* that the aliyah event made a compelling case for moving to Israel, with a series of financial and emotional incentives.
“It was quite terrifying how appealing it was,” she said. “If I wasn’t so steadfast in my anti-Zionism, how easily one could be persuaded to do this.”
Among the people Emily met at the event was Jonathan Vigné, who works in “Digital Aliyah Encouragement” for the Israeli group Shivat Zion (literally “return to Zion”).
It describes itself as a non-profit that helps people move to Israel, enabling “smooth integration”.
But on its website, the organisation mentions several illegal settlements, including Efrat, half an hour’s drive south of Jerusalem.
With a [population][4] now approaching nearly 16,000, Efrat’s [residents][5] include the founder and CEO of Shivat Zion himself, Shraga Evers, who emigrated from the Netherlands.
So, Emily arranged a follow-up Zoom call with Vigné – and invited *Declassified* to secretly film it.
On the call, she expressed interest in moving to Efrat and asked whether Shivat Zion could help her.
“Right, sure,” Vigné responded immediately. “We do support and we inform and we advise … That’s the service we can provide.”
He added: “Efrat is awesome. Efrat is a very high living standard. It’s [a] very nice place … They’re developing big-time.”
### RELATED
[
## Revealed: Over 100 Britons among Israeli soldiers and settlers
][6] [READ MORE **][7]
## Efrat
For [Palestinians][8], the reality of life under occupation sits in stark contrast to the “awesome” living standards in places like Efrat.
In recent years, settlers have been filmed [attacking Palestinian workers][9] in the surrounding area, and detaining young children. Other residents have been killed.
Palestinian activist Issa Amro told *Declassified* that Efrat settlers “get quality life on the expense of the basic rights of the Palestinians”.
“Efrat is a settlement – and to live there, it’s a war crime,” he said. “It’s not ‘awesome’.”
Efrat has grown rapidly, and last year the local council leader, Dovi Shefler, [announced ][10]construction was underway to expand the settlement further, in a push for Israeli sovereignty in the area.
Already, local reports say that a “huge percentage” of Efrat settlers are “English-speaking immigrants”.
And, in February, the US Embassy in Israel announced it would start providing passport services in Efrat.
But while it flourishes for illegal settlers, human rights groups [say][11] that Palestinians are blocked from travelling on the road leading to it – despite it also going to Palestinian-owned land.
Speaking on the Zoom call, Jonathan Vigné made no mention of “Palestinians”, instead referring briefly to “the Arabs”.
“Everyone [in Efrat] lives in fairly comfortable either houses or apartments,” he said. “They’re developing big-time …
“You’re next to the Arabs. You’ll hear their mosques … the call to prayer, and all of it. You’ll hear from all angles. So it’s very – I mean it’s West Bank. But apart from this it’s a great living standard.”
He continued: “Everyone’s nice; everyone tries to help each other. You have restaurants, you have clinics, you have – like I said – banks, supermarkets, everything. And it’s only like a 20 minute drive from central Yerushalayim [Jerusalem], which is pretty great.”
## Gift Aid
In January, Shivat Zion launched a fundraising campaign to raise £65,000 by the end of the year to support its aliyah services.
Commenting at the time, CEO Shraga Evers explained: “Over the past two years we have witnessed a remarkable wave of commitment from British Jews who feel that this is their moment to come home. Every day we speak with families who are looking for a better future and a partner to guide them.”
But despite Shivat Zion not being registered in the UK, a [report][12] promoting the fundraising campaign said: “Donations from the UK are eligible for Gift Aid.”
The group’s website confirmed: “Donations in pounds (£) qualify for Gift Aid” and British donors were given the option to “make this a Gift Aid donation”.
In order to benefit from the subsidy, money was directed to UK Toremet Ltd, a registered British charity called UK Toremet Ltd, which has a track record of funding projects linked to illegal settlements.
After we contacted UK Toremet and Shivat Zion, the latter’s website was updated to remove all mention of the British charity.
But an email from Shivat Zion, seen by *Declassified*, said: “All UK donations (in GBP) go through the UK Toremet Limited Charity, as we are an Israeli charity. This ensures the donations properly reach Shivat Zion.”
However, when questioned about it last month, UK Toremet claimed it “does not currently have an active relationship” with Shivat Zion, adding that no grants had been paid to the Israeli group within the last 12 months.
“UK Toremet Ltd has no knowledge of our name being used without license or permission by this org,” the charity said, “but since receiving your email we have reached out to the organisation and asked them not to do so unless any future application for inclusion on our approved grantee list is approved.”
*Declassified* cannot verify the claims made by UK Toremet, as only the Charity Commission has the power to find out what has been going on behind the scenes between the two organisations.
But there is no doubt that donors to Shivat Zion would have been under the impression that their money would be channeled via UK Toremet in order to benefit from Gift Aid.
Last year, the Guardian [reported][13] that UK Toremet Ltd had previously acted as a conduit for another charity, transferring millions of pounds to an Israeli settlement in the West Bank.
The donations were said to have been approved by the Charity Commission, who claimed it was “legitimate” as it was intended to fund an Israeli school.
But after renewed scrutiny, the regulator was [reported][14] to have referred the situation to the police and requested advice from the Attorney General.
### RELATED
[
## Will the UK press Israel over illegal settlers’ reign of...
][15] [READ MORE **][16]
## **‘Unacceptable’**
Human rights lawyer Daniel Machover told *Declassified*: “Fundamental breaches of international law cannot constitute charitable purposes.”
He added: “It’s just unacceptable, really, for these things to go unhindered when it’s clear that they shouldn’t be taking place. I am really deeply disturbed that this is going on.”
Referring to the ICJ’s 2024 advisory opinion, Machover said: “It’s bad enough that things were going on right up until then.
“It’s inexcusable for this to be carrying on since July 2024, when we have positive obligations to stop rendering aid and assistance; to stop things that go on in our jurisdiction that assist the embedding of an illegal occupation and illegal settlements.
“This has just got to be addressed. It’s fairly straightforward, in my view, and it needs to stop.”
A Charity Commission spokeswoman told *Declassified* that it had undertaken three separate regulatory compliance cases involving UK Toremet Ltd about its work in Palestine since 2016.
“We issued the charity’s trustees with statutory guidance and an action plan, which warned it must comply with the Geneva Conventions Act 1957,” the spokeswoman said.
“The Commission also communicated to the trustees the government’s position that construction of settlements in Palestine is illegal under international law.”
She added: “We will assess any information published to determine whether it gives rise to new concerns about UK Toremet Limited.
In a [lengthy statement][17], UK Toremet said: “There are no current engagements with any regulatory body, on any issue.
“Any assertion or accusation, explicit or implicit, made by you that UK Toremet Ltd is engaged in any activity that is contrary to English charity law, Charity Commission guidelines, or any other activity that is not charitable is untrue and void of any factual or legal base.”
The charity added: “All grants made by UK Toremet are made with the full discretion of UK Toremet’s Trustees, taking into account any wishes expressed by those who originally donated the funds to UK Toremet for the funds to be used for a particular charitable purpose.
“All grants are made in strict adherence to English charity law and regulations, Charity Commission guidance, and UK Toremet’s grantmaking policies and procedures. Any funding granted is strictly limited to those activities of the grantee that fall well within the boundaries of charitable purposes and charitable expenses, especially when working internationally.”
## Insults
Responding to our questions, Shivat Zion’s CEO Shraga Evers resorted to a string of highly offensive insults – including calling Emily a “modern-day Kapo”.
‘Kapo’ refers to a Nazi concentration camp prisoners who were given privileges in return for enforcing rules and overseeing fellow prisoners doing forced labour.
Evers said: “We assist new Olim [migrants] regardless of where they choose to settle and provide support that falls under social affairs activities of which new immigrants are part.
“Furthermore, while I do not feel any need to apologize for living as a Jew in Judea — neither to you nor to the aforementioned individual — it further underlines the deceptive manner in which elements of the anti-Semitic lobby, together with a handful of helpful modern-day Kapos, are operating.”
The post [Exposed: Israeli operation to help Brits move to West Bank][18] appeared first on [Declassified UK][19].
[1]: https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-02-24/debates/7CDE665D-72ED-46E6-B690-781FE687932D/GazaHealthcareSystem?highlight=settlements#contribution-242B74BB-15A4-4672-9A9F-A7FFB6657327
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/israel/
[3]: https://www.un.org/unispal/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/186-20240719-adv-01-00-en.pdf
[4]: https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/politics-and-diplomacy/article-868901
[5]: https://www.jpost.com/aliyah/article-745651
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=55338
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=55338
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/palestine/
[9]: https://www.btselem.org/map
[10]: https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/politics-and-diplomacy/article-868901
[11]: https://www.btselem.org/map
[12]: https://www.jewishnews.co.uk/uk-aliyah-surges-over-70-since-2023-as-shivat-zion-launches-65000-appeal/
[13]: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/jul/18/two-uk-charities-donate-millions-israeli-settlement-occupied-west-bank
[14]: https://www.thirdsector.co.uk/regulator-alerts-police-seeks-advice-funds-sent-occupied-palestine/governance/article/1926249
[15]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=53630
[16]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=53630
[17]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Response-from-UK-Toremet-Ltd.pdf
[18]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/exposed-israeli-operation-to-help-brits-move-to-west-bank/
[19]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/exposed-israeli-operation-to-help-brits-move-to-west-bank/

2026-04-03 14:21:26 GMT

Majority of Cypriots want British bases to go, new poll finds
[Cypriots protest against a UK-US spy station on Mount Troodos, 25 January 2026. (Photo: Aleksandar Ljubojevic / Declassified UK)]
More than half of voters in the Republic of Cyprus want to shut down British military bases on the eastern Mediterranean island, a new poll has found.
Britain still militarily occupies three per cent of [Cyprus][1] having refused to completely decolonise when granting independence to the rest of the island in 1960.
56 per cent of respondents said they now want the bases gone compared to 38 per cent who are in favour of them.
The figures reveal growing resentment towards the bases, with opposition up 14 points from 42 percent in 2024 and support falling by 12 points.
Cyprus Broadcasting Corporation conducted the [poll][2] between 10-26 March asking 1,402 adults ahead of parliamentary elections in May.
It came in the wake of a drone strike on a US spy plane hangar within a British base on Cyprus near the start of the [Iran][3] war, which raised safety concerns.
However resentment to the bases has been growing since the Gaza genocide started in 2023.
Britain used its airbase at Akrotiri, the island’s southern peninsula, to stage hundreds of spy flights over Gaza, as well as sending military cargo planes to [Israel][4] and fighter jets to bomb Yemen.
The surveillance flights coincided with Israeli [massacres][5] of Palestinian civilians and the killing of three British [aid workers][6] in Gaza.
A series of protests took place at Akrotiri and outside the British High Commission in the capital Nicosia.
Meanwhile, annual demonstrations swelled at [RAF Troodos][7], Britain’s GCHQ spy station on the summit of Cyprus.
These marches were supported by AKEL, the main left-wing opposition party, who are hoping to challenge the incumbent centre-right DISY party.
The poll showed both parties tied on 18 percent.
ELAM, a far-right Greek nationalist party, is in third, with a majority of its voters opposed to the bases.
## Anger at Akrotiri
Melanie Steliou, a parliamentary candidate for AKEL in Limassol, the constituency next to Akrotiri, told *Declassified* the poll “is interesting and quite clear. The number of Cypriots who do not want the British bases in Cyprus is increasing.”
However she felt the growth in opposition should have happened sooner, explaining that when the 2024 poll was taken, “Israel was well into its offensive in Gaza.”
Steliou added: “A percentage of Cypriots only realised this puts us in danger when the drone fell on Akrotiri in March this year. That says a lot about the normalisation the British forces have managed to achieve on the island.
“The British government, through the mainstream media, is trying to push the narrative that the bases protect the Cypriots from Iranian drones.
“They are not protecting Cyprus or the Cypriots. They are protecting their colonial assets which they use to destroy other countries. And this is what we should bear in mind and never give up the fight for true independence and decolonisation.
“Not just for us but for all people across the globe who have been colonised and exploited by the Western imperial powers.”
Concern looks set to grow as the Ministry of Defence plans to expand its communications infrastructure at Akrotiri by building 32 new antennas.
Previous efforts to erect radio masts at the base sparked environmental and health concerns that led to a [riot][8] outside the base in 2001.
Cyprus’ president Nikos Christodoulides has said he wants to have “open and frank discussion with the British government” about the bases.
Opposition to British bases is growing globally, with [Mauritius][9] seeking to assert sovereignty over the [Chagos Islands][10] and politicians in [Kenya][11] accusing UK troops of a “[disturbing trend of sexual misconduct][12]”.
Pro-democracy campaigners in [Bahrain][13] continue to speak out against the UK naval base there despite risking torture from the country’s repressive monarchy.
The UK Foreign Office was asked to comment on the poll in Cyprus.
The post [Majority of Cypriots want British bases to go, new poll finds][14] appeared first on [Declassified UK][15].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/cyprus/
[2]: https://cyprus-mail.com/2026/04/02/survey-finds-low-trust-widespread-discontent-among-cypriots
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/iran/
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/israel/
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/exclusive-gaza-victim-demands-justice-over-british-spy-flights/
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/release-gaza-footage-british-victim-demands-in-new-spy-flight-documentary/
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/inside-the-cypriot-campaign-to-kick-out-british-bases/
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/revealed-baby-animals-knowingly-killed-by-british-military/
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/mauritius/
[10]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/the-chagos-islands-were-never-britains-to-give-away/
[11]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/kenya/
[12]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/kenyan-politicians-accuse-british-army-of-contempt-for-their-country/
[13]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/bahrain/
[14]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/majority-of-cypriots-want-british-bases-to-go-new-poll-finds/
[15]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/majority-of-cypriots-want-british-bases-to-go-new-poll-finds/

2026-04-01 12:58:10 GMT

Labour MP broke rules over undeclared Israel trip – again
[Peter Prinsley interviewed at the Labour Party Conference in September 2025 (Declassified)]
The vice chair of Labour Friends of Israel (LFI) has been found in breach of parliamentary rules, after failing to declare an all-expenses-paid trip to Israel.
Labour MP Peter Prinsley has now admitted he didn’t mention the trip because he was “attempting to avoid potential accusations of bias”.
Yet a [report][1] by the parliamentary standards commissioner, published last week, concluded that the omission was “inadvertent” and accepted Prinsley’s apology.
It marks the second time in the last 12 months that the MP has breached parliamentary rules over his failure to declare the trip to Israel.
Last year, he blamed the omission on an “administrative error” by one of his staff members.
The latest incident came when Prinsley was invited to declare his interests before the Home Affairs select committee last year, which was hearing evidence about the police ban on Maccabi Tel Aviv fans.
But instead of mentioning his involvement with LFI, he simply said: “I’m a Jewish Labour MP.”
He has now admitted: “I believed that stating I was a Jewish MP effectively encompassed and signalled the related matters that might reasonably be inferred from that fact – including my association with Labour Friends of Israel and my visits to Israel.”
He added: “Although perhaps not a fully formed thought, I was concerned that my links to Israel such as they are […] might prompt unfair suggestions that I could not be objective in my questioning. Such allegations have been made against me before, and I accept that this concern may have influenced my judgment.”
### RELATED
[
## Israel lobby funded a quarter of British MPs
][2] [READ MORE **][3]
## **‘I just do as I’m told’**
Prinsley joined a five-day trip “solidarity” trip to Israel in May that was organised and funded by LFI.
While there, the delegation posed for a picture with President Isaac Herzog, who a UN commission has concluded “incited the commission of genocide” in Gaza.
But when *Declassified* questioned Prinsley at the Labour Party Conference in September, he told us he had “no idea” if voters would care about his meeting with Herzog.
“I really don’t know that they’d be interested in it, to be quite honest,” he said.
And when asked why he went, the MP said: “I was asked to go. I just do as I’m told.”
He also declined to describe Israel’s assault on Gaza as a genocide, saying: “I’m not an expert on this stuff.”
## **Vice chair**
As a member of the Home Affairs select committee, Prinsley contributed to a controversial report that condemned West Midlands Police for banning Maccabi Tel Aviv fans.
Less than 24 hours after the committee hearing in December, it was [announced][4] that the MP had also been appointed as vice chair of Labour Friends of Israel.
Along with the trip to Israel, this role had not been disclosed to the hearing the previous day.
However, the parliamentary standards commissioner refused to investigate whether this omission also amounted to a breach of the rules, telling *Declassified * there was “insufficient evidence to support the complaint”.
It’s believed that this was due to the fact the formal announcement came after the committee hearing – even though it is likely Prinsley would have been aware of the appointment in advance.
LFI has previously described itself as “a Westminster based lobby group working within the British Labour Party to promote the State of Israel,” and has funded dozens of British politicians to travel to Israel.
But it has repeatedly refused to disclose where its money comes from, other than to deny that it is funded by the Israeli government.
Seven ministers – including Rachel Reeves and David Lammy – have each stated they are a “member” of the group in the List of Ministerial Interests.
Meanwhile, the trade secretary, Peter Kyle, also claimed to be an LFI “member” at an event earlier this year, but has not formally declared.
Last month, *Declassified* [repeatedly asked Kyle][5] whilst he walked between meetings in Whitehall why he had not declared his LFI membership, particularly given his responsibility for arms exports to Israel.
He did not respond.
The post [Labour MP broke rules over undeclared Israel trip – again][6] appeared first on [Declassified UK][7].
[1]: https://www.parliament.uk/globalassets/documents/pcfs/rectifications/mr-peter-prinsley-mp-rectification-2026.pdf
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=55966
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=55966
[4]: https://www.lfi.org.uk/labour-friends-of-israel-welcomes-four-new-honorary-vice-chairs/
[5]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCE45wiXMR4
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/labour-mp-broke-rules-over-undeclared-israel-trip-again/
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/labour-mp-broke-rules-over-undeclared-israel-trip-again/

2026-04-01 09:15:26 GMT

‘I had heard rumours about MOD waste. What I saw was jarring’
[UK defence secretary and chancellor of the exchequer at RAF Waddington last year (Photo: Alamy)]
*Declassified [recently exposed ][1]how the MoD splurged £1.5bn on the failed Watchkeeper drone project. The contract was awarded to Elbit Systems and Thales, who are now profiting from a multi-million dollar contract to export Watchkeeper X drones to Romania. *
*Dozens of drone parts have been sent from Britain to Israel since 2023, but they have seemingly not been re-exported to Romania, potentially violating UK export law. Worse still, open-source evidence suggests Elbit has been testing the drones in the illegally occupied Golan Heights.*
*In response to these revelations, arms trade professor Anna Stavrianakas *[*penned an article*][2]* in Declassified, Campaign Against Arms Trade wrote to business secretary Peter Kyle, and Steve Witherden MP demanded answers from trade committee chair Liam Byrne.*
*Now, a former defence contractor writes exclusively about their experience in the industry*:
Within the UK defence community, there is an open secret: everything is broken. The largest defence contractors take billions for projects they don’t intend to deliver, because delivery means the end of a revenue stream.
Civil servants are overworked, underpaid, and ignored – so once a new hire becomes knowledgeable, they leave the government to become a private contractor.
This leads to understaffing, forcing the government to spend more money on contracting to plug the gaps. That money comes from the defence budget, forcing those that remain in the Ministry of Defence (MoD) to work harder and do more with less.
Those that leave then use their connections with those still in government to circumvent the intended contractual bidding process, and the civil servants capitulate in the hope that there might be a job in it for them privately down the line.
The people remaining in civil service are largely those just starting their careers, those close to retirement, or those who would leave if they could. The new staff have little knowledge, the experts struggle to share it, and the bridge between them is crumbling.
All of these problems are terrible, but they are symptomatic of the largest issue of all: talking about these issues is career suicide.
## **Throw money at it**
I had been told informally that everything was broken during my training, but I was first introduced to the concept in a professional context about three months into my hiring.
The first project I was assigned to was an analysis project designed to figure out how to use a piece of equipment that billions had been spent on over many years, and was nowhere close to being deployable.
My induction to this project was the project lead telling me: “Yeah, buying it before figuring out what we need is completely asinine”.
As a young, naive grad, I was astounded by their candour. I had heard rumours about wastage, cronyism, and incompetence in various anecdotes – but to be confronted with it so directly was jarring. How could it get this bad? Why was no one doing anything? “But hey, at least we are here to figure it out now!” And there it was.
That was the mindset that allowed things to become so terrible. It doesn’t matter what the government does or doesn’t do, or how late a project is, or how usable or unusable equipment is – if it doesn’t work, throw money at a contractor to fix it.
Unironically, it is this exact mindset that has caused the MoD to become so neutered and reliant on private contractors. Underfund a project, let the project fail, pay a contractor to fix the project, the contractors hire people from government to man the project, the government has less people and funds for the next project, rinse and repeat.
### RELATED
[
## How a failed British drone project won millions for Israeli...
][3] [READ MORE **][4]
## **Fear of losing work**
Now, reader, you may be thinking at this point: “Well, that is an unfortunate systemic problem, but if the projects are still being delivered in the end, what’s the harm?”.
Putting aside the purely fiscal considerations (where the day rate charged for a *junior* analyst is £450 per day, with experts charging the taxpayer four figures for eight hours of work easily), and putting aside the degradation of the UK government’s ability to operate independently, and putting aside the crisis of morale of those in the civil service watching their projects fail only for contractors making triple their wage to swoop in and take credit, the separation of government from capability creates an *insurmountable* communication embargo.
In a sector where secrecy is paramount, it is already difficult enough to develop interoperability, diversity of thought, resource sharing, and reliable information channels.
When adding the complexities of non-state actors being given access to state secrets, companies collaborating on projects while refusing to share information in fear of giving their competitors an edge, and contractors who see these systemic issues unable to raise them to the MoD client for fear of losing work, it creates an environment where to speak openly about issues is impossible to do while maintaining self-preservation.
Any contractor who alienates the client or helps the competition will lose contracts, anyone who loses contracts is a fiscal liability, and fiscal liabilities cannot be tolerated in a privatised framework.
## **Keep calm, carry on **
So, if the contractors on which the modern MoD is built have neither the ability nor incentive to address these issues, why has the civil service not done so internally?
I want to reiterate that I have never worked for the government directly, but I know many people who have, and I have worked closely with those who still do.
When speaking with these people privately about my concerns, trying to find an answer as to why no one was fixing anything, the answer to that is exactly the same as in the case of the privateers: ostracisation.
The picture they painted looks something like this: if a group is working long hours, for bad pay, where everyone around them is miserable as a result of the conditions in which they subsist, a tacit agreement forms – We know it’s awful, but we can’t spend time and energy thinking about that, we have too much work to do.
This repression calcifies, and anyone who challenges that repression by drawing attention to the issues is seen to be ‘rocking the boat’. It’s a relic of blitz mentality, ‘keep calm and carry on’.
The collective belief that everything is fine means that everything is fine. For one to challenge that and dissent, they must express discontent. This, in turn, awakens the repressed negativity in those around them.
Suddenly, the issue stops being the conditions themselves, and becomes the dissenter making you think about them. The dissenter becomes socially isolated, their career stagnates, and they either leave or fall in line. The malcontent becomes the mechanism by which the conditions are maintained, the dissenter either capitulating or being forced out.
In the case of someone leaving who is working in defence, they have no choice but to then become a contractor or leave the sector. Yet again, the system continues to enfranchise privateers while degrading governmental capability and agency.
### RELATED
[
## UK ignores corruption scandals when awarding major military contracts
][5] [READ MORE **][6]
## **Waste as a policy**
There is much, much more to say on this topic: I have only been able to touch on culture of passivity, the difficulties of trying to use the system to change the system, the fallible logic behind the extortionate rates contractors charge, cronyism, or the slough of other issues plaguing not only MoD, but the UK government as a whole.
However, all of these issues are entirely secondary to the place from which all these issues stem – privatisation.
The privatising of Defence Science and Technology Laboratory, the agency within the MoD responsible for cutting-edge science and technology to aid military and national security, and British assets more broadly has been an unmitigated disaster within defence, and the only people who disagree are the contractors who profit from it.
In a system where those incentivised to make it better are disenfranchised, and the enfranchised have no vested interest in the system’s improvement, there is only one conclusion to draw: wastefulness is not an abnormality in defence, but is instead government policy.
The post [‘I had heard rumours about MOD waste. What I saw was jarring’][7] appeared first on [Declassified UK][8].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-a-failed-british-drone-project-won-millions-for-israeli-arms-firm/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-arms-trade-a-trifecta-of-everything-thats-wrong/
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62517
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62517
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61913
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61913
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/i-had-heard-rumours-about-mod-waste-what-i-saw-was-jarring/
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/i-had-heard-rumours-about-mod-waste-what-i-saw-was-jarring/

2026-03-31 12:03:41 GMT

UK ARMs TRADE: A trifecta of everything THat’s wrong
[British Army officers demonstrate a Watchkeeper drone at a UK arms trade show in 2018 (Photo: Richard Baker / Alamy)]
I am not easily shocked by the mendacity of UK arms export policy.
As a long-time observer of British involvement in the arms trade, I have seen sniper rifles described as ‘crowd control goods’, repeated instances of civilian harm reduced to ‘isolated incidents’, and risks of harm dismissed as ‘theoretical’ rather than ‘clear.’
Nonetheless, John McEvoy’s [recent story][1] about UK arms exports to Israel left me shaking my head and shouting at the screen. Here’s why.
Amidst the carnage of Israel’s genocidal assault on Gaza since October 2023, arms trade experts have been trying to track the global supply chains and international policy responses that have facilitated it, and to identify routes for legal and political accountability.
In September 2024 the government announced a partial ban on arms exports to Israel, the massive loophole of the exclusion of parts for the F-35 fighter jet notwithstanding.
A year later, observers were puzzled to learn that, after the partial ban, the UK government had issued to Israel “two licences [worth £120 million][2] supporting the onward export of equipment to a single programme in a NATO country.”
What were these licences for, who was the NATO country, and why were the parts going via Israel? Most of us batted around a few ideas and then put it on the ‘tricky but inconclusive’ pile. Not John McEvoy, and not *Declassified*.
## Waste, delay and failure
Every step of the story that has unfolded is astonishing, illuminating the trifecta of everything that’s wrong with the arms trade. First up: waste, delay and failure.
We are told that arms exports are important for keeping domestic production lines running so that the British armed forces can have the best weapons.
Yet time and again, procurement decisions waste taxpayers’ money, siphoning it into the pockets of arms industry shareholders, via programmes that fail to deliver the weapons and equipment the armed forces need for the wars the government insists on sending them into.
The Watchkeeper drone has cost British taxpayers more than £1.5 billion, failed to deliver its operational promises and will be retired early.
But not before the company, UAV Tactical Systems (U-TacS) – a joint venture between French arms firm Thales and Israel’s Elbit Systems – charged the Ministry of Defence £50,000 for amendments to contracts and £18,000 a month for accommodation for two technicians.
If you’re wondering, ‘profiteering’ is the correct term for this.
### RELATED
[
## How a failed British drone project won millions for Israeli...
][3] [READ MORE **][4]
## Flaunting controls
Second is the repeated failure of the UK government to enforce its own controls.
This happens with such regularity that it’s fair to say the government is more interested in [legitimising its actions][5] than actually restricting the circulation of weapons.
This problem is particularly pronounced in relation to Israel. Not only have UK arms exports to Israel continued despite its repeated presence on the Foreign Office list of “countries of concern” in relation to human rights, but the government has also [amended its own guidance][6] in the past, to allow weapons components to reach Israel via the United States – this was twenty-odd years before today’s infamous [F-35 “Carve-Out”][7].
And when faced with criticism, the government massages the truth.
More than 25 years ago, the government was forced to refuse Israeli ‘assurances’ after it emerged that the IDF [was using UK-supplied weaponry][8] in Occupied Palestinian Territory when it said it wouldn’t.
But even this wasn’t the high-minded response it sounds like: the government moved to prevent future embarrassment caused by Israel ignoring assurances by no longer asking for them.
The revelation in this month’s story that left me gasping with surprise was that Elbit filed a “force majeure” declaration in its contract with Romania for the export of Watchkeepers due to the demands of the war in Gaza, allowing it to keep the UK-supplied parts in Israel.
Force majeure refers to unexpected, unforeseen events beyond the control of the state. But Israel’s response to the Hamas-led attacks of October 2023 has been entirely in the state’s control and was neither unexpected nor unforeseen – it was ordered by Israeli politicians.
That the UK government would accept the violation of its own rules – which required Israel to re-export the parts to Romania as per the terms of the contract – means it either didn’t know or didn’t care. Either is a gross failure of controls at a particularly sensitive time for arms exports.
## Historical amnesia
The third element of this story is historical amnesia.
Declassified reported that Israel tested the Watchkeeper drones at Fiq airbase in the Golan Heights – a region of southwest Syria that has been illegally occupied by Israel since 1967.
The UK government itself acknowledges that the occupation of the Golan Heights is illegal. In 2008, the UK government even requested that Elbit relocate test flights for the Watchkeeper away from Fiq.
Whether by design or failure, this inability to remember basic historical facts is another key pattern of UK arms export policy.
Usually, the government treats each round of violence as [a blank slate][9], disconnected from the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land and system of apartheid of which each lethal assault is a part, which means arms exports can continue because there is no ‘clear risk’ of their misuse.
This time it hasn’t even bothered with this pretense.
### RELATED
[
## How Britain is wasting its defence budget
][10] [READ MORE **][11]
## Deep systemic problems
I’ve watched UK arms export policy long enough to have come to view that not every cock-up is a conspiracy. I wouldn’t be surprised if John McEvoy’s story was news to every licensing official in the Export Control Joint Unit.
There is a lack of capacity and knowledge in the civil service to properly enforce UK controls, some old-fashioned bureaucratic inertia and, crucially – in particular in relation to cases like Israel and also Saudi Arabia in relation to the war in Yemen – when exports become politically sensitive, they are subject to ministerial direction.
Civil servants give the answer expected of them, and an arms export licensing role isn’t one to blow the whistle from, it seems.
John McEvoy and the Declassified team showcase investigative journalism at its best. While news cycles move on, much to warmongers’ approval, Declassified chips away at the systems that support war.
And the lessons for us, dear reader? If you’re not already angry about the UK aiding and abetting a genocide, be angry at the waste of your tax pounds on ineffective weapons during a cost of living crisis.
The post [UK ARMs TRADE: A trifecta of everything THat’s wrong][12] appeared first on [Declassified UK][13].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-a-failed-british-drone-project-won-millions-for-israeli-arms-firm/
[2]: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/export-control-licensing-management-information-for-israel/israel-export-control-licensing-data-31-july-2025
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62517
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62517
[5]: https://blog.oup.com/2020/01/how-the-uk-is-facilitating-war-crimes-in-yemen/
[6]: https://worldpeacefoundation.org/publication/missing-in-action-uk-arms-export-controls-during-war-and-armed-conflict/
[7]: https://caat.org.uk/take-action/campaign-with-us/uk_out_f35_programme/
[8]: https://worldpeacefoundation.org/publication/missing-in-action-uk-arms-export-controls-during-war-and-armed-conflict/
[9]: https://www.redpepper.org.uk/global-politics/palestine-middle-east/how-the-uk-arms-the-occupation-and-genocidal-war-in-gaza/
[10]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=57968
[11]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=57968
[12]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-arms-trade-a-trifecta-of-everything-thats-wrong/
[13]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-arms-trade-a-trifecta-of-everything-thats-wrong/

2026-03-31 00:01:29 GMT

Met Police officer exposed by Declassified has been suspended
[A close up image of David Soffer at Golder's Green.]
A Metropolitan Police officer who was filmed “intimidating” Al Jazeera journalists in London has been suspended, after he was identified by *Declassified*.
Special Constable David Soffer was at the front of a mob that surrounded the film crew last week.
Soffer, 34, was seen directly approaching one of the Al Jazeera journalists, who is Palestinian, calling him a “dog” and a “donkey” in Arabic.
“Go back to Qatar,” he is heard saying. “Get out of here, you donkey.”
After [*Declassified* revealed][1] Soffer’s involvement, he immediately deleted the volunteer police role from his LinkedIn account.
Today, a Met Police spokesperson said: “An investigation by the Met’s Directorate of Professional Standards into the actions of an off duty Met Special Constable is ongoing.
“On Saturday evening, following an assessment carried out as part of that investigation, the officer was suspended.”
The police force also confirmed last week that it would “review” footage of the incident to identify whether any offences were committed by anyone involved. No updates have yet been given about this, however.
The incident happened in the Golders Green area of London, as Al Jazeera reported on the arson attack on Jewish charity ambulances.
### RELATED
[
## Revealed: Man filmed in Al Jazeera ‘intimidation’ mob is Met...
][2] [READ MORE **][3]
Police are treating the arson attack as an antisemitic hate crime, with CCTV showing people setting the vehicles on fire and running away.
In the aftermath, a group of men were filmed surrounding and intimidating an Al Jazeera film crew near the scene.
In its initial statement last week, the Met Police said: “We’re aware of the footage showing the verbal altercation between local residents and journalists.
“Freedom of the press is important and journalists must be able to do their job without being subject to intimidation or harassment.
“Officers did intervene but we recognise that there was an extended period where the journalists were put in a difficult situation which led them to leave the area. Officers on duty in the area have been asked to be alert to any similar altercations in the coming days.”
The post [Met Police officer exposed by Declassified has been suspended][4] appeared first on [Declassified UK][5].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/revealed-man-filmed-in-al-jazeera-intimidation-mob-is-met-police-officer/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62648
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62648
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/met-police-officer-exposed-by-declassified-has-been-suspended/
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/met-police-officer-exposed-by-declassified-has-been-suspended/

2026-03-26 14:37:12 GMT

Revealed: Man filmed in Al Jazeera ‘intimidation’ mob is Met police officer
[Special Constable David Soffer, wearing grey hoodie, in Golders Green on Monday (Photo: YouTube / Middle East Eye)]
A man who was filmed “intimidating” Al Jazeera journalists in London has been identified by *Declassified* as a serving Metropolitan Police officer.
Special Constable David Soffer was at the front of a mob that surrounded the film crew on Monday, shouting “go home”.
[Footage][1] shows Soffer directly approaching one of the Al Jazeera journalists, who is Palestinian, calling him a “dog” and a “donkey” in Arabic.
“Go back to Qatar,” he is heard saying. “Get out of here, you donkey.”
After *Declassified* revealed Soffer’s involvement, a spokesperson for the Metropolitan Police said: “We are aware that an off duty serving Met officer was involved in the altercation. The matter has been referred to the Department of Professional Standards for assessment.”
He now faces the possibility of disciplinary action – and has already deleted the police role from his LinkedIn account.
And police have said they will “review” the footage to identify whether any offences were committed by anyone involved in the incident.
Soffer seen in the crowd surrounding Al Jazeera journalists on Monday (Photo: YouTube / Middle East Eye)
The incident happened in the Golders Green area of London on Monday, as Al Jazeera tried to report on the arson attack on Jewish charity ambulances.
Police are treating the arson attack as an antisemitic hate crime, with CCTV showing people setting the vehicles on fire and running away.
Two British men were [arrested][2] on Wednesday and later released on bail while an investigation continues.
Later, footage of a group of men surrounding and intimidating an Al Jazeera film crew near the scene sparked outrage on social media.
The Met Police spokesperson said: “We’re aware of the footage showing the verbal altercation between local residents and journalists.
“Freedom of the press is important and journalists must be able to do their job without being subject to intimidation or harassment.
“Officers did intervene but we recognise that there was an extended period where the journalists were put in a difficult situation which led them to leave the area. Officers on duty in the area have been asked to be alert to any similar altercations in the coming days.”
David Soffer – who also runs a reputation management firm according to records filed at Companies House – is seen making his way to the centre of the mob and insulting the cameraman.
A prolific user of X/Twitter, Soffer has publicly expressed his support for Israel.
In 2024, the far-right activist Tommy Robinson posted an image on Twitter saying “Fuck Palestine”, adding: “The shithole is full of inbred Islamist parasites and terrorists.”
Soffer responded, saying that Robinson “is telling the truth” and that Israel will “justly finish” the war in Gaza.
The post [Revealed: Man filmed in Al Jazeera ‘intimidation’ mob is Met police officer][3] appeared first on [Declassified UK][4].
[1]: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/USiBpB8qJuE
[2]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3v6rx6dxz6o
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/revealed-man-filmed-in-al-jazeera-intimidation-mob-is-met-police-officer/
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/revealed-man-filmed-in-al-jazeera-intimidation-mob-is-met-police-officer/

2026-03-25 12:50:31 GMT

When Britain secretly met an Iranian coup plotter
British officials had at least five meetings with a former Iranian army Colonel who sought to overthrow the regime in Tehran and promote a “military government”, declassified files show.
The Colonel, Nasrullah Tavakoli, said in 1991 that he had been in contact with MI6 “since 1980”, the documents show.
Tavakoli, who was close to Ayatollah Khomeini during the 1979 Islamic revolution that overthrew the pro-Western Shah, had at least four meetings with Britain’s former ambassador to Iran, Sir Denis Wright, during 1987-1992.
In one meeting in January 1991, Wright told the Foreign Office in a letter about Tavakoli’s contacts with “our friends”, a euphemism for MI6.
He wrote: “T [Tavakoli] told me in confidence that since 1980 he had, on visits to London, contacted our friends on a phone no. [sic] they had been given and they would send someone round to his hotel or flat to discuss the situation in Iran”.
He added that “This time, however, there had been no answer to the phone number. Perhaps the friends should be told this”.
Tavakoli told Wright during their lunch together that “the situation, economic and political, was going from bad to worse” in Iran and that “sooner or later the regime must go and a new government formed in which the clergy would play no part.”
Wright informed the Foreign Office of Tavakoli’s view that “While eventually a democratic government was desirable the first step must be a military one. Tavakoli clearly sees himself as heading this military government”.
The Colonel claimed that “his past opposition to the Shah, having spent 26 months in prison in 1973/74, and good relations with Khomeini under whom he was chief of staff for a time, makes him acceptable to the armed forces”.
He said that “it was essential before he and his friends moved that they should have the blessing, guidance and support (implying arms) from the UK”, Wright wrote.
### RELATED
[
## Britain’s long history of spying on Iran
][1] [READ MORE **][2]
## ‘No longer a world power’
In this meeting, and in the others, Wright made clear that he believed Britain would not be able to support Tavakoli.
He wrote: “I listened sympathetically but pointed out that the Iranians must work out their own salvation; we were no longer a world power… any British involvement with opposition forces would only be to their detriment in the long run just as our alleged support for Reza Khan [ie, the Shah] had never been forgotten nor forgiven by many Iranians”.
Wright informed the Foreign Office he had first met Tavakoli in February 1987 after a suggestion from a “staunch anglophile living in Tehran”.
His write-up of the meeting was welcomed by Rob Young, the head of the Foreign Office’s Middle East Department, who replied to Wright saying “this kind of information is always of great value, given the difficulties of finding out what is actually going on within the Iranian regime.”
Young forwarded Wright’s letter to the British embassy in Tehran.
## ‘Get rid of the ruling mullahs’
Two years later in October 1989 – a period for which the Archives do not contain information – Tavakoli was invited to the Foreign Office to meet Wright and Young. The files make clear that “MED [Middle East Department] have no record of the meeting”.
Wright’s next meeting with Tavakoli in January 1991 was followed by one in January the following year. Wright then informed senior Foreign Office diplomat David Gore-Booth that Tavakoli “sung his old song of how unhappy everyone was in Iran, how important it was to get rid of the ruling mullahs, and the need for British help (but he didn’t say how).”
He added: “He asked me to arrange for him to see someone at the FCO [Foreign and Commonwealth Office]…. I made no promises as I am not at all sure that you will feel he is worth seeing again”.
However, Gore-Booth replied to Wright suggesting a meeting between Tavakoli and Simon Buckle, a desk officer in the Middle East Department.
Buckle subsequently agreed to meet Tavakoli, telling Gore-Booth: “I do not expect anything of great substance to emerge, but in view of the unsettled internal situation in Iran as [then President] Rafsanjani tries to push through reforms, I think it would be appropriate for me to see him.”
### RELATED
[
## How Britain helped Iran’s Islamic regime destroy the left-wing opposition
][3] [READ MORE **][4]
## Military leader
Wright had retired from the Foreign Office in 1971, after his posting in Tehran, but was still seen as capable of acting for the government. In 1979, for example, Wright was despatched by prime minister Margaret Thatcher to meet the Shah in exile after he was overthrown, to explain her decision not to grant the former dictator asylum in Britain.
During Wright’s time in Tehran, and subsequently, Britain had given substantial military and diplomatic [support][5] to the Shah’s repressive regime.
Nevertheless, the files do not indicate that Wright was acting covertly for the Foreign Office in meeting an Iranian coup plotter. His letters also suggest he wasn’t all that impressed with Tavakoli, in addition to telling him that Britain could not help him.
MI6 is opaque and it is not possible to find further information on the extent of its dealings with Tavakoli. The murky episode is interesting in light of the willingness of UK officials to be secretly in touch over several years with a would-be military leader boasting high-level connections in Tehran.
Tavakoli told Wright in their meetings that he was Ayatollah Khomeini’s “chief of staff” during the 1979 revolution. Other evidence [suggests][6] he was the chief aide to Iran’s first post-revolutionary military leader, General Muhammad Vali Qarani, in early 1979, before being forced to resign over pro-American remarks he made.
Tavkoli was [detained][7] for opposition to the regime in 1993, the year following his last known meeting with Sir Denis Wright. Tavkoli has since passed away.
The post [When Britain secretly met an Iranian coup plotter][8] appeared first on [Declassified UK][9].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=59629
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=59629
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=311
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=311
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/when-britain-backed-irans-dictator/
[6]: https://www.scribd.com/document/122968892/Paved-With-Good-Intentions-Barry-Rubin#content=query:tavakoli,pageNum:306,indexOnPage:0,bestMatch:false
[7]: https://www.hrw.org/reports/1994/WR94/Middle-03.htm
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/when-britain-secretly-met-an-iranian-coup-plotter/
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/when-britain-secretly-met-an-iranian-coup-plotter/

2026-03-24 13:24:43 GMT

UK saw Israel as ‘chief problem’ to curb Iran’s nuclear ambitions
[Israel’s Negev Nuclear Research Research Center near Dimona seen in August 2023 (Photo: Google Earth)]
Israel’s nuclear arms programme was seen as the major obstacle to achieving a nuclear weapons free zone in the Middle East, declassified files from 1993 show.
An agreement to introduce such a zone could have curbed Iran’s nuclear ambitions which were then described as being at an “early stage”.
While the UK government supported a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East at this time, officials in the Foreign Office saw the “chief problem” to its implementation being Israel’s failure to sign up the UN’s Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
That treaty, signed in 1970, committed non-nuclear states not to acquire them.
Iran is a signatory to the NPT and had jointly proposed with Egypt the introduction of a nuclear weapons-free zone in 1974. In 1991, Egypt wrote to the UN Secretary General calling on the permanent members of the UN Security Council and also Israel, Iran and the Arab states, to formally endorse such a zone.
A June 1993 memo from Foreign Office official Jane Govier to Simon Buckle in the Middle East Department referenced Egypt’s letter and stated that the “the UK is in favour” of a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East “and we lend support to the idea in the relevant fora”.
“However, we have never formally responded to the above letter and neither, to our knowledge, have the other permanent Security Council members. The chief problem in any case is one of the regional suspicions, including Israel’s failure to sign the NPT”.
## **‘Early stages’**
At the time, the Foreign Office believed Iran was exploring nuclear options.
Govier wrote that “Although we have no direct evidence, we believe that Iran is pursuing a secret nuclear weapons programme in contravention of their obligations as a non-nuclear weapon state party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty”.
She added: “At present Iran is in the early stages of creating a nuclear R&D infrastructure and lacks key facilities which would enable it to produce the fissile material necessary for a nuclear weapon”.
She wrote that the “best way” to achieve a nuclear weapons free zone in the Middle East “would be for all states in the region to accede to the Non-Proliferation Treaty and place all their nuclear facilities under a safeguards agreements [sic] with the International Atomic Energy Agency”.
“However”, she added, “the participation of all states in the region, including Israel, would be necessary, and more progress will probably need to be made in the Middle East Peace Process before this is possible.”
US concerns about Iran were similar to Britain’s. An American document contained in the British archives states: “Iran could become another Iraq – with weapons of mass destruction programs far advanced and extremely difficult to stop or even slow… We need to prevent this from happening”.
It added: “Fortunately, Iran’s programs are at a relatively early stage of development. We thus have a crucial window of opportunity to stem Iranian proliferation.”
The evidence suggests this window of opportunity was never capitalised on as neither the UK nor the US seriously pushed for a nuclear weapons free zone in the Middle East.
Sir Richard Dalton, who served as Britain’s ambassador to Iran during 2002-06, told us: “The Middle East nuclear weapons-free zone has long been a most promising proposal to underpin security for all in the region, but it has foundered, like so many other initiatives, on the rock of Israel’s US-backed insistence on standing against multilateral solutions”.
Questions are currently being asked about Israel’s nuclear arsenal following attacks over the weekend by Iran near Israel’s main nuclear facility at Dimona in the Negev desert. Iran’s missile attacks on the city of Dimona follow thousands of air strikes by Israel on Iran since late February.
### RELATED
[
## Revealed: Britain secretly believes Israel has nuclear weapons, but won’t...
][1] [READ MORE **][2]
## **‘Unsafeguarded nuclear programme’**
Files uncovered by *Declassified* previously show British officials were [aware][3] by the early 1980s that Israel was already a nuclear-armed power. But neither then, nor even still today, do they admit their knowledge of this open secret.
In January 1992, Margaret Thatcher’s foreign secretary Douglas Hurd issued instructions to British diplomats in Moscow to lobby the Russian government not to sell nuclear reactors to Israel or Iran.
He wrote: “Like the Americans we too are worried about the proliferation implications of these sales. There are considerable concerns about the nuclear programmes of both states [Iran and Israel].
“Israel has a substantial, sophisticated and largely unsafeguarded nuclear programme. Although a party to the NPT, Iran seems to have nuclear ambitions out of scale with any possible need for nuclear energy.”
“On Israel”, Hurd added, “you should refer to the recent speculation, point out the concerns about the Israeli nuclear programme, and ask them to reconsider the deal”.
## **UN discussions**
Discussions in the United Nations about a nuclear weapons free zone in the Middle East have continued over the decades. In recent UN General Assembly resolutions, Iran has voted in favour of the zone, along with over 100 countries, but Israel has abstained.
The UN secretary general’s [report][4] of July 2024 notes that “Many States expressed their concern at the negative impact on regional security and stability owing to the possession of nuclear weapons by Israel”.
It also refers to “many States calling on Israel to accede to the Non-Proliferation Treaty and submit all its nuclear facilities to IAEA comprehensive safeguards”.
Israel has long refused to sign the NPT and is known to be a significant nuclear-armed power that is currently [modernising][5] its nuclear arsenal.
The most recent substantive international discussion on the issue of a nuclear weapons free zone in the Middle East was a UN General Assembly conference in November last year which was attended by 22 member states and four observer states, including the UK.
The UN [report][6] from the meeting notes: “Members to the Conference identified as a key challenge the continued absence of Israel from the sessions. They noted with regret that the United States of America was the only invited observer State that had not yet attended.”
The post [UK saw Israel as ‘chief problem’ to curb Iran’s nuclear ambitions][7] appeared first on [Declassified UK][8].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=12547
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=12547
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/revealed-britain-secretly-believes-israel-has-nuclear-weapons-but-wont-admit-it/
[4]: https://docs.un.org/en/A/79/139%28PartI%29#:~:text=The%20State%20of%20Israel%20reiterates,been%20constructive%20and%20consensus%2Doriented.&text=weapons%20and%20other%20weapons%20of%20mass%20destruction%E2%80%9D%2C%20the%20Arab%20Group,from%20the%20resolution%20in%20question
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/the-bbc-isnt-telling-the-truth-about-israels-nuclear-arms/
[6]: https://docs.un.org/en/A/CONF.236/2025/3
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-saw-israel-as-chief-problem-to-curb-irans-nuclear-ambitions/
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-saw-israel-as-chief-problem-to-curb-irans-nuclear-ambitions/

2026-03-19 16:56:01 GMT

Met police failed to follow internal guidelines on policing Palestine protests
[A Defend Our Juries protest in Trafalgar Square in October 2025 (Photo: Ron Fassbender / Alamy)]
The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) arrested pro-Palestine activists against its own internal guidance, documents seen by *Declassified* suggest.
The files, obtained through Freedom of Information requests, also show that the force is cracking down on the use of Arabic words far beyond its controversial policing of the term *intifada*.
The information comes from two versions of MPS “guidance” advising officers on what constitutes grounds for arrest at Israel-Palestine protests.
One version is from July 2025, shortly after Palestine Action was proscribed, while [the second][1] is from December 2025 after the Bondi Beach and Manchester synagogue attacks.
The version from July specifically states that calling for de-proscription of a group does not “itself” suggest membership or support of a proscribed organisation.
Alongside a photo of a protester with a placard that says “Home Secretary, De-Proscribe Hezbollah”, the guidance says: “Holding the sign alone will not likely amount to an offence”.
But *Declassified* has identified a man who says the Met has arrested him three times since last January for holding a placard calling for the de-proscription of Hamas, Hezbollah, and Palestine Action.
The December version places a much heavier emphasis than the earlier guidance on investigating words in Arabic, with full pages dedicated to single words not covered at all in the earlier guidance.
Jonathan Purcell, spokesperson for the International Centre of Justice for Palestinians, said the “whack-a-mole” policing of languages “smacks of a racist association of the Arabic language with violence, when in fact these are calls for liberty and freedom”.
## **Preventing protest**
It’s a legal right in the UK to criticise the government’s decision to ban a group and to call for de-proscription.
The MPS acknowledged this in its internal guidance from last July, the same document which says that holding a sign calling for de-proscription alone does not suggest membership of a proscribed organisation and that individuals have to actively express support for a proscribed group for this to be an offence.
The force has nevertheless repeatedly prevented protesters from exercising these rights, although it’s unclear just how many have been arrested for this.
In October, a sign-holder at a protest in Trafalagar Square in London was [arrested][2] under the Terrorism Act for allegedly displaying a sign which said: “I do not support the proscription of Palestine Action.”
“This is a police state,” she said while being led away by police. “Anything is possible in this country apparently. I don’t recognise it anymore.”
The MPS told *Declassified* that she was “de-arrested” sometime after.
Asked about the arrest later that month, Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley [told][3] members of the London Assembly: “When people are playing games with the law and trying to step right up to the line, then it is not impossible to make mistakes.”
Rowley claimed protesters had held placards saying “I support Plasticine Action”, hoping that officers did not read them closely and would arrest them.
“There have been some silly games played and, of course, under pressure, sometimes officers might get that slightly wrong, but . . . we are always learning from the past ones and some of the games that some of these protesters are playing,” he said.
The government’s independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Jonathan Hall KC, told *Declassified* he believes that while people “are free to express their opposition to terrorism proscription,” this is not “always straightforward” for the police in live situations.
“Imagine a banner appearing to support an extremely violent terrorist organisation: using the word ‘deproscription’ is not necessarily a get-out-jail-free-card, and it might rightly attract the attention of police.
“But if people cannot conscientiously say that they disagree with government decisions, then that would be terrible, and the police just have to take care in these situations,” he continued.
Hall said issues surrounding calls for de-proscription will be discussed in his next annual report.
### RELATED
[
## Revealed: How Palestine Action was banned
][4] [READ MORE **][5]
## **‘Marked man’**
Michael*, a retiree from north London, says after three arrests by the MPS for holding placards calling for the de-proscription of Hamas, Hezbollah, and Palestine Action, he’s started advising police officers with his own crib-sheet to prove it’s not a crime.
“This hostile action to criticism of Israel or support for Palestinian rights is very confrontational. I think it’s politically directed. They obviously have a direction that they should not be soft on demonstrators,” he said.
After his first arrest last January, he says counter-terror police interrogated him about his “relationship with Hamas” and how he had managed to “keep in contact” with them.
He said he has no relationship with Hamas, nor any political groups in the UK, and that while he does “belong to the local library, that’s as racy as it gets”.
Michael said he was arrested again in July and a third time in October over his signs, but was never charged.
On another occasion, he was detained, but not arrested. He said he was told: “Put it this way, wherever you go, we will be there too.”
“I took that as intimidation and left pretty quickly after that,” Michael said.
The impact of his arrests has been “profoundly unsettling”, not just on his family and social life, but also on his everyday life: he was temporarily barred from volunteering, the “main feature” of his life these days.
“I’m a marked man,” he said.
The proscription of Hamas’ political wing was controversially applied [without][6] a parliamentary vote, while Hezbollah’s followed [heavy lobbying][7] from the Conservative Friends of Israel.
Palestine Action’s ban was also ruled unlawful by the High Court last month but the Home Office is challenging the decision.
Michael said he will continue to protest the “unconscionable” ban of these groups despite his encounters with the police.
In correspondence with *Declassified*, the MPS attributed these mistakes to the fact that officers are called in from all across policing, not just public order, and can’t all be expected to remember “every nuance” of the guidance given to them.
## **Cracking down on Arabic**
The guidance shared with the police in December 2025 shows how advice on use of the word ‘*intifada*’ abruptly shifted following the attacks on Jewish communities in the UK and Australia.
*Intifada *is an Arabic word literally meaning shaking off or, in a political context, uprising against injustice.
The July guidance suggests that “chants talking about an intifada could be an offence if the wording leads the officer to believe it is calling for a violent uprising”.
It then points out that the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) contends that use of the word “is an expression of political support for Palestine and does not have negative racial connotations”.
When asked by *Declassified* if this position has changed, the CPS said it couldn’t comment on individual words.
Yet days after the Bondi Beach attack killed 15 people, the MPS and Greater Manchester police forces announced that they would arrest people for chanting “globalise the *intifada*” or holding placards displaying the phrase.
Internally, MPS officers were told they would “be expected to take decisive action” if “globalise the *intifada*” was found on a placard or chanted at protests because it carries “a real risk of stirring up antisemitism”.
The force are advised to investigate “what the person means” when they use the term *intifada* alone, including questioning individuals to figure out why they’ve used it.
The December guidance also goes beyond concerns over the word *intifada*, suggesting that the terms *inqilaba* (revolution) and *muqawama* (resistance) should be investigated and could be an offence if the police perceive those using the words are calling for the destruction of Israel, or implying support for Hamas.
The MPS acknowledged that, when said in the context of supporting self-defence, they aren’t offences.
But it’s unclear how this can be enforced: the MPS is primarily staffed by English-speaking officers, and although Arabic-speaking officers are available for significant protests, it seems the messaging in the guidance documents could impose a chilling effect on protests.
Zena Agha, interim director of the British Palestinian Committee, said the documents empower the government and police to “dictate whether individuals expressing their right to protest are criminalised”.
“[They] lay bare the anxiety that the police, acting on behalf of the government, have with regards to curtailing not just the right to protest but what can be said or expressed in support of Palestinian freedom and self-determination,” she said.
While no arrests appear to have been made in relation to these words yet, there have been arrests over the alleged use of *intifada*.
On 17 December, three individuals — Haya Adam, Azza Zaki, and Abdallah Alanzi — were arrested for allegedly chanting for an *intifada* at a protest in London.
They were charged under the Public Order Act for “using threatening words and behaviour” where “racial hatred was likely to be stirred up”, according to the CPS. The three have pleaded not guilty.
### RELATED
[
## US arms firm secures ban on Palestine protests in Britain
][8] [READ MORE **][9]
## **‘Chilling effect’**
In the December guidance, police officers were further told, in the context of investigating chants perceived as anti-semitic, to seize people’s phones and search for content that could back this up.
Both pieces of guidance also advise that chants saying Yemen, Lebanon or Palestine “you make us proud, turn another tank around” could be interpreted as euphemisms for supporting the Houthis, Hezbollah and Hamas.
The chants referring to Lebanon or Palestine “must be assessed in the specific context” but might violate the Terrorism Act or public order laws.
Nick Glynn, a retired police officer and board member of Independent Scrutiny and Oversight which monitors police racism on behalf of the National Police Chiefs’ Council, said this equivocation is wrong, and a “dangerous but commonly used trope” to silence opposition to the “ongoing genocide”.
He also described, in reference to the documents as a whole, a potential “chilling effect” on protest as a result of their “biased” and “one-sided” framing.
The MPS has also allegedly begun seeking advice about Bobby Vylan’s “death to the IDF” chant at a recent protest, despite the more recent guidance saying it has to be “more” than simply chanting “death to the IDF” to be an offence.
The force would not confirm if it was indeed the rapper and activist who was under investigation.
**His name has been changed* *to protect his identity*
The post [Met police failed to follow internal guidelines on policing Palestine protests][10] appeared first on [Declassified UK][11].
[1]: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/mpsgmp_joint_statement
[2]: https://www.instagram.com/p/DPcHeOqjfoO/
[3]: https://meetings.london.gov.uk/documents/s118811/Minutes%20-%20Appendix%201%20-%20QA%20with%20MPS%20and%20MOPAC.pdf
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=59964
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=59964
[6]: https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/uk-hamas-ban-set-pass-issue-politically-sensitive
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-the-israel-lobby-got-hezbollah-banned-in-britain/
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=60856
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=60856
[10]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/met-police-failed-to-follow-internal-guidelines-on-policing-palestine-protests/
[11]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/met-police-failed-to-follow-internal-guidelines-on-policing-palestine-protests/

2026-03-19 04:52:17 GMT

MoD refuses to apologise after Declassified called ‘extreme’
[Paul Biya, second from right, is re-elected as Cameroon’s president last November (Photo: Angel Ngwe / Alamy)]
The Ministry of Defence is refusing to apologise for an official describing *Declassified* as “extreme” in a private briefing given to the Australian Attorney General’s office.
Brigadier Geoffrey Dodds was [found][1] to have described *Declassified* as an “extreme, non-msm [mainstream media]” organisation by The Grayzone, following a Freedom of Information request the media outlet made last year.
Dodds’ depiction of *Declassified* is contained in notes prepared by him for Australian officials in 2022.
As secretary of the Defence and Security Media Advisory (DSMA) Committee, Dodds was outlining instances in which some UK media organisations have refused to accept the advice of his committee.
Better known as the ‘D-Notice’ committee, the DSMA exists supposedly to prevent media disclosing information that could compromise national security. It operates a purely voluntary system and there are no obligations for journalists to censor material after receiving a request from it.
In February 2022, Declassified [refused][2] to comply with a request from the DSMA Committee to censor the name of a British military official, Lieutenant Colonel Sid Purser, who was supporting Cameroon’s dictator, Paul Biya.
Biya, 93, has ruled the police state for more than four decades with British support even while [our reporting][3] has revealed that the UK government is well aware of his regime’s human rights abuses.
After The Grayzone published the finding last year, *Declassified* wrote to the DSMA Committee to complain about Dodds’ description, and asked for a public retraction and apology.
Dodds replied claiming that “the informal speaking notes reproduced in this article do not categorize Declassified as extreme”.
He added: “I regard Declassified as non mainstream media and used the then timely example of the Cameroon article as an example of non mainstream media not accepting DSMA advice”.
However, we believe the term “extreme, non-msm” can only be read as suggesting that the secretary meant and used both those descriptions in briefing the Australian officials.
Excerpt from the FOI response published by the Grayzone.
## **‘Fairly and properly’**
Following Dodds’ response, we took our complaint to the MoD’s Directorate of Defence Communications, which handles its relations with the media, and it referred us back to the DSMA Committee.
The eventual reply from Paul Wyatt, the Director General of Security Policy at the MoD, who is also chair of the DSMA Committee, says that he is satisfied with Dodds’ initial response.
Wyatt told us in a letter that after reviewing the correspondence “Brigadier Dodds has provided you with a response that does fairly and properly address the issues you have raised”.
Wyatt said that Dodds was “helping the Australian government’s fact-finding on the merits of the DSMA system in the UK”.
“He was acting in a bona fide manner using abbreviated notes to talk about the independent, non-statutory, joint media/Government body intended to prevent loss of life and damage to national security.”
## **Definition of ‘extremism’**
As *Declassified* argued in our letters to the MoD and the DSMA Committee, this is not just an issue of semantics. The government has a formal [definition][4] of “extremism” which enables action to be taken against “extremist” individuals or organisations, including through penalties under the law.
The context is one where we are already seeing clampdowns on civil liberties and action taken against organisations deemed by the government as extreme. The fact that Brigadier Dodds was using the term “extreme” with foreign legal officers makes the case even more concerning.
We believe Brigadier Dodds has transgressed his duties as a civil servant by disparaging *Declassified*, and we can only wonder whether this *Declassified* “example” has been bandied around in meetings with other people.
The DSMA is a government body meaning its officers must comply with the civil service code. The code [states][5] that “You must not act in a way that unjustifiably favours or discriminates against particular individuals or interests”.
This quote is important since it relates to *Declassified*’s blacklisting by the MoD in 2020. The code was explicitly highlighted in the MoD’s review of that blacklisting to show that MoD media officers were wrong to discriminate against us.
### RELATED
[
## The UK-backed African regime run by five men
][6] [READ MORE **][7]
## **Blacklisting**
The issue then concerned the failure of an official in the MoD’s Defence Communications Directorate (DCD) to give us a quote for an article we were writing. He told us: “We no longer deal with your publication”.
The director of the DCD also wrote that his department “should not waste any time” on *Declassified* because, he said, it was a hostile website rather than a proper news organisation.
At our urging, this was investigated by the MoD, a review was conducted and an apology was issued. Then defence secretary Ben Wallace made a [statement][8] to this effect in the House of Commons in September 2020.
During this episode, the MoD’s chief operating officer, Mike Baker, wrote to law firm Leigh Day (which was acting for us at the time) apologising for not providing a comment to us and reiterating Ben Wallace’s statement.
He wrote: “On 21 September 2020 the Secretary of State for Defence made a statement to Parliament indicating that the Ministry of Defence will treat media outlets with fairness and impartiality and that he has written to defence communicators across the Department to emphasise that point”.
By traducing *Declassified* in a bilateral briefing of this kind, Brigadier Dodds appears to have transgressed these public commitments by the MoD to treat *Declassified* with fairness and impartiality. We continue to seek answers and accountability, including a call for the MoD to meaningfully investigate the incident.
The post [MoD refuses to apologise after Declassified called ‘extreme’][9] appeared first on [Declassified UK][10].
[1]: https://thegrayzone.com/2025/11/30/files-expose-britains-secret-d-notice-censorship-regime/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/why-we-refused-to-comply-with-the-d-notice-committee/
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/the-uk-backed-african-regime-run-by-five-men/
[4]: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/new-definition-of-extremism-2024/new-definition-of-extremism-2024
[5]: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/civil-service-code/the-civil-service-code
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=7246
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=7246
[8]: https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2020-09-21/debates/1096F62B-E304-457A-A501-D7D2CD6F997B/TopicalQuestions
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/mod-refuses-to-apologise-after-declassified-called-extreme/
[10]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/mod-refuses-to-apologise-after-declassified-called-extreme/

2026-03-16 12:55:22 GMT

How a failed British drone project won millions for Israeli arms firm
[A Watchkeeper drone on display in 2010 (Photo: Jack Sullivan / Alamy)]
On a summer’s day in 2018, a British army drone crashed near a school in Wales where students were taking part in a sports day.
It marked the third time that this type of drone – the Watchkeeper WK450 – had crashed, with two more having plunged into the Irish sea.
Following the incident in Wales, another three Watchkeepers [crashed][1], twice in the US and once in Cyprus, rendering around 10 percent of the fleet unusable.
Many of the drones that didn’t crash were left to gather dust in storage depots amid concerns about their reliability in poor weather conditions.
The Watchkeeper contract, valued at over £770m, had been awarded by the Ministry of Defence in 2005 to French arms firm Thales and Israel’s Elbit Systems.
Those companies created a joint venture in Leicester named UAV Tactical Systems (U-TacS) to develop and manufacture the drones.
By 2024, the Watchkeeper programme had [cost][2] the British public over £1.5bn without delivering on its core objectives. The fleet is due to be retired in 2027 – 15 years earlier than planned.
“The general feeling of most people involved [in the programme] was that we were all nursing the Watchkeeper to a slow death”, one British official [confessed][3] in 2023.
Despite this, the Watchkeeper programme has proven to be a boon for Israel’s arms industry.
## **Boon for Elbit**
While being paid to deliver defective drones for the UK, U-TacS developed an export variant of the Watchkeeper and won a major contract to supply them to Romania.
Shipping records obtained by *Declassified* reveal U-TacS has sent dozens of drone components including Watchkeeper engines to Elbit in Israel over the past 18 months.
Advanced radar systems used by the Watchkeeper have also been exported to Israel by Thales in Crawley.
This information might help to explain why the value of UK arms exports to Israel skyrocketed between October and December 2024, totalling more than the 2020-23 period combined.
Under UK arms export regulations, any Watchkeeper components sent to Israel should have been re-exported to Romania.
Yet they appear to have remained in Israel, with Elbit filing a “force majeure” declaration in its contract with Romania while testing the drones at a “secret airfield” in “northern Israel”.
Open-source information analysed by *Declassified* now indicates this airfield is located in the Golan Heights, a region of southwest Syria that has been illegally occupied by Israel since 1967.
The UK government acknowledges that Israel’s occupation of the Golan Heights is a violation of international law, suggesting the export of Watchkeepers from Britain could be unlawful.
Dania Abul Haj, a senior legal officer at the International Centre of Justice for Palestinians (ICJP), told *Declassified*: “Private companies have a responsibility to ensure that their products are not being used to further Israeli crimes or illegal activities, or to maintain unlawful occupations.
“Failing to adequately implement procedures to this effect may result in liability for the company’s directors both in the UK and abroad”.
A spokesperson for the Department for Business and Trade said: “We don’t comment on individual export licences.
“All licences have been assessed against our strict criteria. We keep these under review and can suspend or revoke any licences which are no longer consistent with UK standards”.
### RELATED
[
## Revealed: How British engines ended up in Israeli drones
][4] [READ MORE **][5]
## **Watchkeeper WK450**
The Watchkeeper WK450, modelled on the Hermes 450 drone which the Israelis have “battle-tested” on Palestinians, made its maiden UK flight in 2010.
It took off from Parc Aberporth, a privately-owned military testing range in Wales which [receives][6] funding from the Ministry of Defence.
Thales boasted at the time that the “success of this first flight” could be “attributed to the combined efforts of the integrated Thales UK and Ministry of Defence team”.
It wasn’t long, however, before major problems emerged.
Between 2005 and 2015, the Watchkeeper programme “resulted in merely 146 flight hours, of which only six days on active duty, in Afghanistan”, according to [*The Lead*][7].
At one point, training on the Watchkeeper was moved from Wales to RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus due to the drone’s inability to operate in poor weather conditions.
This meant that “equipment that needed maintenance was shipped back to the UK for repair just to be sent back out to Cyprus”, resulting in “hundreds of thousands in additional logistic and maintenance costs”, one British official managing the programme said in 2023.
During this time, the official said, U-TacS [charged][8] £18,000 per month “to self-organise accommodation in Cyprus for their two deployed technicians”.
They further estimated that the cost per flying hour of the Watchkeeper was around £88,400, meaning there was “no way that the Watchkeeper programme can be considered a return on investment, let alone value for money”.
Last year, the Ministry of Defence nonetheless opted to keep the Watchkeeper operational for another two years, through to 2027.
This extension is [expected][9] to cost an additional £95m, “nearly 75% of the budget allotted for [the Watchkeeper’s] planned replacement”, named Project Corvus.
## **Watchkeeper X**
Amidst all the problems with the Watchkeeper WK450, U-TacS developed an export variant of the drone named Watchkeeper X.
This drone was unveiled at the DSEI arms exhibition in London in 2015, with one Thales executive [saying][10] it was “based on a ground-breaking, world-leading unmanned aircraft system that was designed specifically for the requirements of the British army”.
That executive added: “We have now taken the knowledge and experience that we have gained over the history of the programme and looked at how we can make it more flexible, effective and readily available for our customers”.
Thales and Elbit thus benefitted from a major injection of British funding amid the development of Watchkeeper X, but they also received support from the UK government for exporting the drones.
In 2023, Elbit [announced][11] that it had been awarded an initial $180m purchase order to supply Watchkeeper X drones to the Romanian ministry of national defence, with the total value of the agreement potentially increasing to $410m.
Yoram Shmuely, the general manager of Elbit Systems Aerospace, declared: “We appreciate the continued support and collaboration with the Israeli and UK governments and our business partners on the Watchkeeper program”.
The next year, Britain’s Ministry of Defence [announced][12] the government would “continue to support the export of Watchkeeper X. This will support UK industry, growth and jobs whilst also strengthening strategic defence relationship[s] with partners and allies”.
### RELATED
[
## Exposed: The UK firms supplying Elbit Systems
][13] [READ MORE **][14]
## **Exports to Israel**
Shipping documents show how dozens of drone components have been sent from U-TacS to Elbit sites in Israel since the contract with Romania was signed.
The goods descriptions for those shipments include:
* Aircraft parts UAV
* 7 x unmanned air vehicle harnesses
* UAV Flight Trials Kit
* UAV Assembly
* UAV System Parts – Pre Production
* Military Aircraft Parts
* UAV Starter Ext Harness
Some of the shipments from U-TacS to Israel specifically mention the Watchkeeper programme.
In 2025, U-TacS exported a “WK engine” and an “Engine WK 62.5 Hours Kit” to Elbit’s Advanced Technology Centre in Haifa.
Additional military items associated with the Watchkeeper programme have been exported to Israel from Thales in Crawley, the shipping documents show.
Last year, that factory sent two shipments described as “Military Aircraft Parts – I-Master” and a third “I-Master Radars (2-off)” to Elbit in Haifa.
The I-Master radar system, which has been [linked][15] to the Watchkeeper programme since 2005, “delivers all-weather surveillance, pattern of life monitoring, change detection and wide area-coverage”.
## **The deal**
The proliferation of these drone-related shipments might explain why the value of UK arms exports to Israel skyrocketed in late 2024 even after the Labour government’s partial arms restrictions on Tel Aviv.
Between October and December 2024, the UK approved £127.5m worth of military equipment to Israel, totalling more than 2020-2023 combined, Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT) [found][16].
The figures caused an uproar when they emerged publicly. “I have to ask the foreign secretary: how do you sleep at night?” independent MP Zahra Sultana [said][17] in parliament last May while asking for an explanation.
Then-foreign secretary David Lammy said he didn’t “recognise” the figures Sultana had quoted and suggested she was “keen on clickbait”.
The government subsequently clarified that “the vast majority of that overall value was supporting the production of items for use outside of Israel”.
That included “£120m… for components to support exports of military items from Israel to a single programme for a NATO ally… for their ultimate use”.
Elbit’s contract to supply Watchkeepers to Romania, which is a member of NATO, would appear to match that description.
But in 2024, Elbit [filed][18] a declaration of “force majeure” with Romania, saying the situation in Gaza had affected its “ability to fulfill its contractual obligations”.
This suggests that drone parts sent from Britain to Israel have not been re-exported to Romania, despite this being mandated under UK export law.
It also raises questions about whether – and how – Israel might use the parts, according to Sam Perlo-Freeman, a research coordinator at CAAT.
“There is absolutely no guarantee that equipment exported to Israel will actually be used for the Romania contract, and not for Israel’s own killer drones. The government makes no attempt to follow up how exported arms are actually used,” Perlo-Freeman told *Declassified*.
“The UK’s collaboration with Israel in the export of Watchkeeper X drones, including the export of crucial radar equipment for them, only strengthens the Israeli arms industry, and Elbit in particular, a company that has been instrumental in the genocide in Gaza”, he said.
He added that the “excuse” of allowing arms sales to Israel for onward export “is wearing very thin. A full two-way arms embargo is needed to end UK complicity in genocide and illegal war”.
## **Golan Heights**
Last year, Romanian news organisation Digi24 was invited to film the Watchkeeper X drones taking off and landing at “a secret military base in northern Israel”.
The outlet [reported][19]: “This is where the drones that the Romanian Army purchased are being tested. The aircraft are worth hundreds of millions of dollars”.
*Declassified* has examined the videos published by Digi24 using open-source techniques including satellite imagery and geospatial analysis.
The footage strongly suggests that Elbit has been using Fiq, an airbase located in the illegally occupied Golan Heights, to test the Watchkeeper X drones.
A media report shows the drone landing at a runway (top), which appears to match with satellite images of Fiq airfield in occupied Golan.
Additional footage was taken by Digi24 inside Elbit’s control room, where screens showed the surveillance data hoovered up by the drone over a body of water.
That footage maps onto an anchorage at Ein Gev on the Sea of Galilee, which is only 10km west of the Fiq airstrip.
Promotional footage shows the drone flying over a harbour (top), which appears to match with satellite images of Ein Gev in the Sea of Galilee in occupied Golan.
This would not be the first time that Elbit has used Fiq airbase to test its drones.
In 2017, the Swiss government [admitted][20] that defence officials had visited that airfield in 2012, 2013 and 2015 “to see flight tests of the Hermes 900 unmanned aerial vehicle”.
It claimed the officials did not know the airfield was located in “occupied territory” and their visits were “contrary” to the policies of the country’s foreign ministry.
In 2008, the UK government even requested that Elbit relocate test flights for the Watchkeeper WK450 from Fiq.
Britain’s Ministry of Defence [said][21] it “would consider it inappropriate to use the facilities at the Golan Heights as part of the Watchkeeper program” because “it is the long held position of the UK government that the Golan Heights is occupied territory”.
## **Unlawful exports?**
That the Watchkeeper X drones may have been tested at Fiq airbase raises serious questions about the legality of UK drone exports to Israel.
Criterion four of the Strategic Export Licensing Criteria [states][22] that the UK government must take into account “whether the recipient has in the past tried or threatened to pursue, by means of force, a claim against the territory of another country”.
It further notes that the government must judge “the likelihood that items would be used in the territory of another country other than for legitimate purposes, including national or collective self-defence”.
The information raises further concerns that U-TacS, when applying for an arms export licence, may have misinformed the UK government about the goods being diverted to an unauthorised end-use location.
Dania Abul Haj from ICJP said: “States have the obligation not to render aid or support to Israel’s illegal policies that aim to alter the physical character, demographic composition, or institutional structure of the occupied Syrian Golan Heights.
“This position was affirmed by the International Court of Justice in its advisory opinion delivered in July 2024, despite the fact that the decision concerned Palestinian occupied territory, the same legal norms apply in this case”.
Haj added that under Article 7 of the Arms Trade Treaty states must take into account whether military exports “would contribute to or undermine peace and security” or be used to “commit or facilitate a serious violation of international humanitarian law”.
U-Tacs, Elbit and Thales did not reply to requests for comment.
The post [How a failed British drone project won millions for Israeli arms firm][23] appeared first on [Declassified UK][24].
[1]: https://dronewars.net/tag/crashes/
[2]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2024-10-04/5889/#:~:text=The%20through%20life%20costs%20of%20the%20Watchkeeper,current%20in%2Dservice%20contract%20will%20be%20%C2%A31.548%20billion
[3]: https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/119511/pdf/
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61456
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61456
[6]: https://web.archive.org/web/20100418022303/http:/www.thalesgroup.com/Pages/PressRelease.aspx?id=12584
[7]: https://thelead.uk/gazas-skies-cardigan-bay-drone-testing-facility-dividing-welsh-village
[8]: https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/119511/pdf/
[9]: https://www.army-technology.com/news/uk-throwing-good-money-after-bad-in-watchkeeper-drone-retention/
[10]: https://www.unmannedsystemstechnology.com/2015/09/thales-announces-watchkeeper-x-modular-uas/
[11]: https://www.elbitsystems.com/news/elbit-systems-awarded-180-million-purchase-order-under-framework-agreement-supply-first-three
[12]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2024-11-29/17022/
[13]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61250
[14]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61250
[15]: https://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2024/06/watchkeeper/
[16]: https://caat.org.uk/news/new-figures-reveal-massive-increase-in-uk-arms-exports-to-israel-as-government-defends-f-35-exemption-in-court/
[17]: https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-05-20/debates/CD60AEFA-5138-47B1-A8B6-DC108014F0ED/IsraelAndTheOccupiedPalestinianTerritories?highlight=%22how%20do%20you%20sleep%20at%20night%22#contribution-6B8AB74A-D3DD-4479-98C8-F15A0A99637C
[18]: https://militarnyi.com/en/news/war-in-gaza-disrupts-delivery-of-watchkeeper-x-drones-to-romania/
[19]: https://www.digi24.ro/stiri/actualitate/cum-arata-dronele-cumparate-de-romania-din-israel-aparatele-sunt-testate-intr-o-baza-militara-secreta-3516401?__grsc=cookieIsUndef0&__grts=59087522&__grua=7c73ef5b8d3235ae0606f2e84e457ff5&__grrn=1
[20]: https://www.timesofisrael.com/swiss-say-no-more-drone-tests-in-occupied-golan/
[21]: https://web.archive.org/web/20230613132214/https:/www.haaretz.com/2008-10-17/ty-article/elbit-acedes-to-u-k-request-to-cancel-uav-trials-in-occupied-golan/0000017f-e815-dea7-adff-f9ff082b0000
[22]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-statements/detail/2021-12-08/hcws449
[23]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-a-failed-british-drone-project-won-millions-for-israeli-arms-firm/
[24]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-a-failed-british-drone-project-won-millions-for-israeli-arms-firm/

2026-03-13 10:01:16 GMT

UK military refuses to give ‘running commentary’ on Iran civilian deaths
[US troops at RAF Fairford in England prepare bombs to be dropped on Iran. (Photo: Alastair Grant / Alamy)]
Britain’s Ministry of Defence (MoD) is refusing to tell the media or parliament how many Iranian [civilians][1] have been killed by US bombing missions from British air bases.
Officials are also not commenting on whether [target lists][2] for so-called “defensive” US strikes from British soil are approved by the UK before each mission, or if they are audited afterwards.
Further questions about whether the US uses artificial intelligence to compile these target lists, or whether it is allowed to load banned cluster bombs at UK bases, were rebuffed.
The silence casts serious doubt on Keir Starmer’s claim that Britain is not involved in the war and is only letting Donald Trump use British bases for a “specific, limited defensive purpose”.
The prime minister said US strikes from RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire and the British-occupied Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia were “to destroy [Iran’s] missiles at source, in their storage depots or at their launchers.”
When asked a series of simple questions about how Britain would monitor or enforce the target lists, the MoD and Attorney General’s Office refused to answer directly or make ministers available for an interview with *Declassified*.
An MoD spokesperson said: “We won’t be providing a running commentary on our allies’ operations, including their use of our bases.
“The United States has started using British bases for specific defensive operations to prevent Iran firing missiles into the region, which is putting British lives at risk.”
This new goal of preventing Iran “firing missiles into the region” seems much broader than what is permitted by the government’s own legal advice.
A [summary][3] of that position said the US should only use UK bases to “facilitate specific and limited defensive action against missile facilities in Iran which were involved in launching strikes at regional allies.”
It is unclear how the UK can distinguish between missile stockpiles which Iran may need to lawfully retaliate against the US and Israel’s illegal attack, and those weapons that might be fired at civilian sites in the Gulf.
Even in cases such as attacks on hotels in Bahrain, it has sometimes [emerged][4] that US troops were stationed inside.
Professor Marc Weller, a former UN legal advisor, has [said][5] “it may not be realistic or practical to determine in each instance which Iranian missile facilities have targeted regional allies or, more to the point, which will do so in the future. Presumably some have been used to attack both Israel and US forces, and regional states.
“Iran will certainly not be persuaded by this distinction. Its authorities will not be able to tell which US strikes launched from UK bases aim to protect UK regional allies, and which are part of the US’s overall aggressive campaign to subdue its government.”
### RELATED
[
## Did Trump bomb Iranian schoolgirls with UK-made weaponry?
][6] [READ MORE **][7]
## Artificial intelligence
More than [1,300][8] civilians in Iran have been killed in US-Israeli strikes compared to at least [17][9] killed by Iranian strikes on the Gulf states.
UK defence minister Al Cairns [refused][10] on Tuesday to “publish a list of any civilian deaths that result from US military strikes that have used UK military bases” when asked by Labour MP Richard Burgon.
It comes as American B-1 and B-52 bombers have begun bombing Iran from RAF Fairford, despite 168 people being killed – most of them children – in a strike on a girls school in Iran earlier in the war.
Starmer refused to say if the school bombing was a war crime when [asked][11] in parliament on Wednesday.
The massacre at the school in Minab, southern Iran, has raised concern about the accuracy of US target lists, as the outdoor play area was visible on Google Earth since 2017.
A preliminary investigation by the Pentagon found the US may have used outdated intelligence, while others are concerned about the use of AI.
Admiral Brad Cooper, the head of Centcom, [said][12] the US is “leveraging a variety of advanced AI tools” to bomb Iran, adding that “advanced AI tools can turn processes that used to take hours and sometimes even days into seconds.”
The MoD refused to answer questions about whether target lists for US missions from UK bases would also use AI.
## Cluster bombs
Government officials further refused to comment on whether US bombers based at RAF Fairford or Diego Garcia would be allowed to use cluster bombs.
Britain has signed an international treaty banning cluster munitions, whereas the US has not.
David Miliband, who was foreign secretary when the ban was passed, secretly allowed the US to keep cluster bombs at UK bases for [“temporary exceptions”][13] and on a “case-by-case” basis.
The exemption, revealed by WikiLeaks, came at a time when the US stockpiled cluster munitions in ships at Diego Garcia.
Current British officials have also refused to comment on whether the US can deploy graphite ‘blackout’ bombs, a type of cluster munition, from British bases.
The weapon, which was dropped on Yugoslavia and Iraq, is used to disable power stations and cripple a country’s electricity grid, which can lead to diseases like cholera.
Trump hinted at such an option on Thursday, [threatening][14] Iran: “We could take apart their electric capacity within one hour.”
Attorney General Lord Hermer, who made his career as a liberal human rights lawyer, declined to be interviewed on the potential use of these weapons, or about fighting in partnership with Israel, a country whose prime minister is wanted by the International Criminal Court.
### RELATED
[
## Rishi Sunak’s Mission Creep in Yemen
][15] [READ MORE **][16]
## Intelligence sharing
As well as allowing the US to use British air bases to bomb Iran, there are also American intelligence personnel at sites in the UK and Cyprus that could be crucial to the conflict.
Starmer said on 5 March that “the US and the British [are] working together to protect both the US and the British in joint bases where we’re jointly located and we’re sharing intelligence on [a] 24/7 basis in the usual way”.
Members of parliament’s cross-party defence committee received a “secret briefing on operations in Iran and the wider region” from the MoD on Tuesday.
They released a cryptic statement saying “Although we cannot comment on the substance of that discussion…we note, however, the considerable gap between some of the political rhetoric circulating internationally, and the reality of the UK’s support to the United States and regional partners.”
This could be hinting at considerable US-UK intelligence cooperation during Trump’s illegal war.
America’s National Security Agency operates sites such as RAF Menwith Hill in Yorkshire, which campaigners have previously linked to Trump’s assasination of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani.
The Menwith Hill Accountability Campaign [said][17] that last week “the base seems busier than usual with more vehicle movements through the gates”, suggesting this could be related to operations in Iran.
The post [UK military refuses to give ‘running commentary’ on Iran civilian deaths ][18] appeared first on [Declassified UK][19].
[1]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-03-05/118235
[2]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-03-05/118233
[3]: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/summary-of-the-uk-government-legal-position-the-legality-of-defensive-action-in-respect-of-iranian-regional-attacks#:~:text=In%20addition%2C%20the%20UK%20has,launching%20strikes%20at%20regional%20allies.
[4]: https://www.aa.com.tr/en/americas/iranian-strike-on-hotel-in-bahrain-injured-2-us-defense-department-employees-report/3847152
[5]: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2026/03/uk-arguments-us-operations-its-bases-blur-line-between-lawful-self-defence-and-unlawful-war
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62432
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62432
[8]: https://aje.news/v4zrce
[9]: https://www.amnesty.org.uk/latest/middle-east-millions-at-risk-as-israel-us-and-iran-unlawfully-target-energy-infrastructure/
[10]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-03-05/118235
[11]: https://www.thenational.scot/news/25927362.keir-starmer-fails-call-us-strike-iran-school-war-crime/
[12]: https://archive.is/KSG1v#selection-981.0-987.387
[13]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/208206
[14]: https://www.ibtimes.co.in/us-could-knock-out-iran-power-hour-trump-899261
[15]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=54712
[16]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=54712
[17]: https://themhac.uk/news/2026-03/concern-about-iran
[18]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-military-refuses-to-give-running-commentary-on-iran-civilian-deaths/
[19]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-military-refuses-to-give-running-commentary-on-iran-civilian-deaths/

2026-03-12 14:58:39 GMT

They attack, we defend: how the media toe the line on Iran
[Smoke rises above Tehran on 7 March following a strike on an oil storage facility (Photo: Alireza Sotakbar / Alamy)]
The UK media’s take on the use of ‘hard power’ depends entirely on who’s exercising it.
The labelling of Russia’s war in Ukraine in February 2022 was clear from the start. According to the Nexis database, 12,700 stories across the UK media in the first week of the war were focused on what was unequivocally referred to as Russia’s “invasion of Ukraine”.
Clive Myrie, presenting an extended BBC *News at Ten* on the first night of the war spoke of a “huge Russian military offensive” next to a strapline of “Russia invades Ukraine” that remained on screen throughout the headlines.
Tom Bradby, presenting ITV’s *News at Ten*, spoke of “a day of infamy for the Russian government and terror for millions of Ukranians”. Echoing the [statement][1] by then foreign secretary Liz Truss that this was “an unprovoked, premeditated attack against a sovereign democratic state”, he asserted that Putin had “invaded a democratic, sovereign neighbour in a war of imperial conquest.”
In the wall-to-wall coverage of the US-Israel pre-emptive attack on Iran on 28 February 2026, no broadcast journalists spoke of “imperial conquest” nor did they mention the issue of Iranian sovereignty.
And while coverage of the Russian invasion was consistently described as “unprovoked” – with 2336 stories in the first week – only 390 stories referred to claims that the US/Israel assault on Iran was “unprovoked” in the same period.
This is despite [evidence][2] that NATO expansion contributed to Putin’s decision to invade while ‘significant progress’ was [claimed][3] in talks between the US and Iran over the future of the latter’s nuclear programme before the bombing started.
### RELATED
[
## How Britain is involved in Trump’s Iran war
][4] [READ MORE **][5]
## Illegal wars?
As opposed to the single “invasion” strapline used to illustrate Russia’s aggression, the BBC’s main TV news bulletin used multiple straplines including “US-Israel attack Iran”, “Iran strikes back” and ‘Fears for Middle East war.”
In contrast to the outpouring of condemnation of Russia’s actions, there were only 1,785 stories in the first week that were specifically focused on the “attack on Iran”, just 14% of the number that spoke of a “Russian invasion” four years previously.
While 251 stories referred to Russia’s “illegal invasion” in its first week, there were just 82 stories in UK media that addressed Israel and America’s bombing of Iran as an “illegal attack” in the week after 28 February. Many of these simply reported comments made by Green and Liberal Democrat MPs in Parliament as opposed to asking their own questions about the legality of the attacks.
Laura Kuenssberg did [press][6] the Israeli president Isaac Herzog on this point in her Sunday morning BBC programme on 8 March (and was dismissed by Herzog as asking “unbelievable questions”).
The issue of legality was also addressed in a debate organised by [Channel 4 News][7] and in individual pieces by the [Guardian][8], [Reuters][9] and [Sky][10] (though that was in an interview with the Russian ambassador).
These interventions no doubt expressed genuine [tensions within Labour][11] – anxious not to reopen the debate about the legality of the 2003 invasion of Iraq – about whether the US/Israeli attacks could be justified under international law.
Yet, at the time of writing, only two out of the 152 stories on the BBC’s “Iran War” online pages (1.3%) and just one of the 257 stories (0.39%) on Sky News’ Iran pages – a [clip][12] of Keir Starmer insisting that he wouldn’t join a war without a “lawful basis” –come close to considering the crucial question of whether the attacks were legal or not. (For some reason, Sky’s interview with the Russian ambassador isn’t listed here).
## ‘Defensive’
Analyses of whether devastating pre-emptive strikes by Israel and the US comply with international law have been overshadowed by the [spectacle][13] of the attacks themselves and the notion that, as the *Sun* [posed][14] it on 2 March, Iran presents a ‘VERY real threat to normal Brits’.
As John Irvine, ITV’s senior political correspondent, put in on the *Weekend News* bulletin the evening before: “I think it’s pretty obvious by now that the greatest threat to this entire region comes from Iran’s missile arsenal”.
In particular, journalists have emphasised the “defensive” nature of the UK’s role with some 715 stories on “defensive strikes” in the first week of the coverage.
Mainstream journalists have, however, failed systematically to investigate the impact of Starmer’s agreement to [facilitate][15] ‘specific and limited defensive action against missile facilities in Iran’.
All too often, the tendency has been to take the claim that the UK is engaging in legitimate self-defence at face value.
On the first night of the bombing on 28 February, ITV News’ correspondent, Jasmine Cameron-Chileshe, simply repeated Keir Starmer’s claim that “British planes are in the sky today as part of coordinated regional defensive operations to protect our people, our interests and our allies.”
Over on the BBC’s main weekend bulletin, political correspondent Chris Mason parroted Starmer’s line word for word: “Yes, British planes have been in the sky in the region in a defensive capability and he emphasises within international law so protecting allies.”
No alternative explanation was offered in either case.
### RELATED
[
## Inside the Cypriot campaign to kick out British bases
][16] [READ MORE **][17]
## Diversion tactics
Instead, there has been extensive discussion of the [hollowed state of the military][18] and of the [delays][19] in sending HMS Dragon to the eastern Mediterranean to, as the BBC [put it][20], “join the UK’s defensive operations in the region”.
There have been [breathless][21] accounts of UK jets shooting down Iranian drones and late-night discussions on the BBC News Channel with security analyst Mikey Kay assessing the technical capacities of UK military hardware.
What there has *not* been is detailed investigation by defence correspondents of the implications of providing [‘safe passage’ for US planes][22] through UK bases and of the difficulties in assessing whether it’s possible to distinguish in reality between ‘offensive’ and ‘defensive’ bombing.
Meanwhile, Gaza – whose residents are still being [attacked][23] by Israeli forces – has slipped out of the headlines as journalists focus their attention elsewhere. This has allowed Israel to step up its settlement activity in the West Bank and to present its military activity in Lebanon, where its bombs have killed [570 people][24], as another example of defensive activity.
UK media have helped to normalise this by, more often than not, describing the movement of Israeli troops into southern Lebanon as an “incursion” rather than an actual ground invasion.
While there were 242 stories in the first week of the war to Israel’s “incursion” into Lebanon (including 21 on BBC World), only 41 stories referred to an “invasion of Lebanon”. This included six stories on BBC World of which only three were actually about the current situation.
The UK media’s compliant coverage and its failure to challenge the current foreign policy consensus is completely at odds with the UK public. 59% of those [polled by YouGov][25] oppose US military against Iran with only 25% in support.
50% are [opposed][26] to Starmer’s decision to allow the US to use UK airbases for military action against Iran with only 32% in support.
Rather than reflecting this constituency, mainstream news are acting as loyal lieutenants in an illegitimate and profoundly destabilising war.
The post [They attack, we defend: how the media toe the line on Iran][27] appeared first on [Declassified UK][28].
[1]: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/foreign-secretary-statement-on-ukraine-situation-24-february-2022
[2]: https://www.npr.org/2022/01/29/1076193616/ukraine-russia-nato-explainer
[3]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2026/feb/26/us-iran-nuclear-talks-middle-east-latest-news-updates
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62457
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62457
[6]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m002sgns/sunday-with-laura-kuenssberg-iran-israel-and-the-foreign-secretary
[7]: https://www.channel4.com/news/debate-is-the-iran-war-legal
[8]: https://www.theguardian.com/law/2026/mar/02/legality-us-israel-attacks-iran-uk
[9]: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/are-us-attacks-iran-legal-2026-03-04/
[10]: https://news.sky.com/video/iran-war-is-illegal-has-no-explanation-and-no-clear-goal-says-russian-ambassador-13516873
[11]: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/emily-thornberry-trump-hasnt-learned-36829838
[12]: https://news.sky.com/video/starmer-pushes-against-uk-intervention-in-iran-war-without-lawful-basis-or-viable-plan-13515122
[13]: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/mar/01/middle-east-in-flames-what-the-papers-say-about-the-war-on-iran
[14]: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/38377767/iran-threat-brits-pm-terrorists-death-england/
[15]: ../../../../Downloads/us%20attack%20on%20iran%20uk%20parliament
[16]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62402
[17]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62402
[18]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-KgjBUgnis
[19]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/10/mod-criticised-after-delay-in-sending-hms-dragon-to-cyprus
[20]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0k1yyg475ko
[21]: https://www.gbnews.com/news/iran-news-british-forces-shoot-down-iranian-drone-heading-towards-iraq
[22]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-britain-is-involved-in-trumps-iran-war/
[23]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21uFiEas2iU
[24]: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/3/1/us-israel-attacks-on-iran-death-toll-and-injuries-live-tracker
[25]: https://yougov.com/en-gb/articles/54243-uk-public-opinion-on-the-us-iran-conflict
[26]: https://yougov.com/en-gb/daily-results/20260302-14ed5-2
[27]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/they-attack-we-defend-how-the-media-toes-the-line-on-iran/
[28]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/they-attack-we-defend-how-the-media-toes-the-line-on-iran/

2026-03-10 14:07:21 GMT

How Britain is involved in Trump’s Iran war
[A Super Galaxy transport aircraft arrives at RAF Fairford on 7 March (Photo: Uwe Deffner / Alamy)]
Keir Starmer has said that the UK “does not believe in regime change from the skies” and that lessons from the Iraq war have been learned.
Yet 11 days into the US-Israeli war on Iran, the prime minister is letting the UK become increasingly involved in a conflict which has been roundly criticised for violating international law.
In fact, Britain’s involvement began back in January when both UK and American weaponry started moving east in preparation.
Here’s a break down of Britain’s involvement:
## **Safe passage for US planes **
American planes have been transiting through British military bases on their way to the Middle East since early January after Trump [said][1] the US was “locked and loaded” and ready to help Iranian protesters.
Planes have been tracked passing through RAF Lakenheath and RAF Mildenhall, both in Suffolk, and have also moved through Prestwick Airport, a civilian airport in Scotland.
Over 100 fighter jets have left RAF Lakenheath for the region since January, [according][2] to the Lakenheath Alliance for Peace, an activist group focused on US activity at the base.
Additionally, the group says more than 25 C-17 transport planes, which can carry troops and cargo and are typically deployed before an operation, have transited through during that period.
Activists tracking the activity [argue][3] that the quantity of American planes passing through British military bases show how important they have been for the US strategically.
At least one of the jets from Lakenheath, an F-15, was [reportedly][4] among those which crashed in Kuwait during the war, confirming their involvement in the conflict.
### RELATED
[
## ‘We deserve to know the truth’: 11 questions about US...
][5] [READ MORE **][6]
## **Use of bomber bases **
Before the US and Israel attacked Iran, Starmer refused to allow the US to use RAF Fairford and the British base at Diego Garcia to bomb Iran directly, [reportedly][7] over concerns that such strikes would violate international law.
Unlike the bases being used for transiting aircraft, these bases are important specifically for bombing missions.
RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire has a 10,000-foot runway and is the US Air Force’s only European airfield for heavy bombers. Diego Garcia has a runway long enough for US B-2 stealth bombers to bomb deep inside Iran.
After the US and Israel campaign began, Starmer announced on 1 March that the US had requested – and the UK had approved – the use of British bases to launch “defensive” operations against Iran.
On Monday, three American B-52s [arrived][8] at RAF Fairford, joining other American aircraft (B-1s) that have turned up since Starmer’s announcement.
The deployments come as the US and Israel repeatedly attack civilian targets and oil infrastructure across Iran, plunging the capital Tehran into a black cloud of toxic smoke.
It remains unclear how the UK can ensure the US only strikes targets in Iran that pose a threat to “British interests” on these bombing runs.
### RELATED
[
## Campaigners condemn Starmer’s secrecy over US attack on Iran
][9] [READ MORE **][10]
## **Defensive assets **
Britain moved “defensive assets” to Cyprus and Qatar in January and February “to ensure we were in a heightened state of readiness of any conflict beginning”, Starmer [said][11] last week.
The assets included fighter jets, air defence missiles, advanced radar and systems to take down drones.
Since the start of the war, British forces have [shot down][12] Iranian drones over Jordan, Qatar and Iraq.
The UK is also [flying air patrols][13] with Eurofighter Typhoons and F-35 fighter jets to strengthen its air presence and support allied Gulf monarchies.
Further assets have been moved out or are on their way. Four more Typhoon jets have been sent to Qatar to support air defences to protect Gulf countries.
The UK is [also deploying][14] the destroyer HMS *Dragon* and “drone-busting” Wildcat helicopters to the Eastern Mediterranean after drone strikes on RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus.
*Dragon *has Sea Viper [missiles][15] that can shoot down drones at approximately £1 million a shot.
The post [How Britain is involved in Trump’s Iran war][16] appeared first on [Declassified UK][17].
[1]: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/115824439366264186
[2]: https://lakenheathallianceforpeace.org.uk/over-70-us-jets-left-uk-base-to-attack-iran/
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/campaigners-condemn-starmers-secrecy-over-us-attack-on-iran/
[4]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8xyyv77414o
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62378
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62378
[7]: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/trump-chagos-islands-deal-iran-attack-british-bases-kcj0gzbr8?gaa_at=eafs
[8]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6nHnFJmrL8
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62329
[10]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62329
[11]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlDd5Phh6n4
[12]: https://www.raf.mod.uk/news/articles/raf-f-35-conducts-first-combat-shoot-down-on-operations/#:~:text=An%20RAF%20F%E2%80%9135%20pilot,operation%20over%20Jordan%20this%20week.&text=The%20pilot%2C%20flying%20alongside%20two,them%20with%20two%20ASRAAM%20missiles.
[13]: https://www.facebook.com/royalairforce/posts/four-raf-typhoon-aircraft-have-deployed-from-royal-air-force-coningsby-to-qatar-/1355892456573233/
[14]: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-sends-warship-and-drone-busting-helicopters-to-the-eastern-mediterranean-to-protect-brits-and-allies-in-the-region
[15]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/rishi-sunaks-yemen-war-has-cost-up-to-19m/
[16]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-britain-is-involved-in-trumps-iran-war/
[17]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-britain-is-involved-in-trumps-iran-war/

2026-03-10 04:11:13 GMT

Did Trump bomb Iranian schoolgirls with UK-made weaponry?
[Graves being prepared for the victims of the Minab school massacre. (Iranian Foreign Media Department / Alamy)]
On 28 February, a girls’ primary school in southern Iran was hit by a missile, killing 168 people, mostly children.
The UN education agency, UNESCO, [said][1] the bombing of the Shajareh Tayyebeh school in Minab was a “grave violation of humanitarian law”.
Videos analysed by Bellingcat [revealed][2] yesterday that a US Tomahawk missile was used to hit another building inside the same compound, adding to evidence indicating the US was responsible for the school strike minutes earlier.
Neither Israel nor Iran is known to possess Tomahawk missiles.
The revelation raises serious questions about whether UK-made components were used in the attack.
### RELATED
[
## Government breaks inspection rules at Scottish missile factory supplying Saudi air war
][3] [READ MORE **][4]
This is because a factory owned by US arms firm Raytheon in Glenrothes, Scotland, has won several contracts to produce components for Tomahawk missile systems over recent years.
In 2017, Raytheon won a $260 million [contract][5] to make 196 Tomahawks, with 4.4 percent of the goods being supplied from its factory in Glenrothes.
A similar US navy contract [published ][6]in May 2022 shows that around 3 percent of the Tomahawk supply chain was awarded to Raytheon’s site in Scotland.
Most recently, in December 2025, the Pentagon [announced][7] Glenrothes would have a 2.9 percent stake in making another 350 Tomahawks.
A defence industry website [said][8] this arrangement reflected the missiles’ “longstanding transatlantic supply chain”.
Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT) spokesperson Sam Perlo-Freeman told *Declassified*: “The UK arms industry is deeply entwined with the US. This is true of the F-35 aircraft that has played such a devastating role in Israel’s genocide in Gaza, and is now playing a crucial role in the illegal US-Israeli war on Iran.
“And it is true of the Tomahawk missiles, which appear to have been used to commit this horrific massacre of schoolgirls in Iran.
“Far from being a guarantee of international peace and security as the government claims, this arms producing partnership is a principal source of war, death and destruction across the world. It is time for the UK to stop fuelling this US-led war machine, and disentangle itself from it”.
Asked whether it will review and potentially suspend export of the components, a UK government spokesperson said: “We operate one of the most robust export control regimes in the world and keep export licences under continual and careful review”.
Raytheon was asked to comment.
## **‘Play a key part’**
A parliamentary report published in 2012-13 [noted][9] that Raytheon’s site in Glenrothes “design and manufacture components, predominantly exported to the US, for guidance systems used in weapons like the Tomahawk missile”.
A Glenrothes manager [said][10] in 2020 the factory “designed and manufactured three power supplies” for the Tomahawk, adding: “This work enabled us to be involved in one of the US Navy’s flagship programmes and to play a key part in the manufacture of the electronics used in the system”.
Raytheon UK’s own website notes that its “advanced manufacturing business supports… Tomahawk long-range land attack cruise missile[s]”.
A CAAT report from 2021 [found][11] that “Glenrothes was the only Raytheon facility outside North America to play a part in the US-sold Tomahawk Missile production and is the sixth most involved of the 25-plus factories contributing to the weapon system”.
### RELATED
[
## Yemen: the war the world forgot
][12] [READ MORE **][13]
## **‘It was done by Iran’**
The new evidence contradicts statements made by US president Donald Trump, who said on Sunday that the attack was launched “by Iran”.
He said: “They’re very inaccurate, as you know, with their munitions. They have no accuracy whatsoever. It was done by Iran”.
NR Jenzen-Jones, the director of Armament Research Services, an intelligence consultancy that provides munitions analysis to governments and NGOs, told the [*Guardian*][14]: “The video shows a Tomahawk missile striking a target. Given the belligerents, that indicates it is a US strike, as Israel is not known to possess Tomahawk missiles”.
He added: “Despite various claims circulating online, the munition in question is clearly not an Iranian Soumar missile [as] the Soumar has a distinctive external engine located towards the rear, on the underside of the munition”.
*Reuters *[reported][15] on 5 March that US military investigators “believe it is likely that US forces were responsible” for the “strike on an Iranian girls’ school”.
Raytheon’s site in Glenrothes has previously been linked to war crimes in Yemen by Saudi Arabia, a key customer.
When *Declassified* [visited][16] the town in 2022, local primary school teacher Sharon Rickard said she was “horrified” to hear weapons made in her town might be used on civilians.
“I have a friend who works there as an engineer and she’s never really said too much about her job”, she said, “but maybe that’s why”.
The post [Did Trump bomb Iranian schoolgirls with UK-made weaponry?][17] appeared first on [Declassified UK][18].
[1]: https://news.un.org/en/story/2026/03/1167063
[2]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/09/video-shows-us-tomahawk-missile-hit-base-next-bombed-iranian-school
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=601
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=601
[5]: https://www.war.gov/News/Contracts/Contract/Article/1363076/contracts-for-nov-3-2017/
[6]: https://www.highergov.com/contract/N0001922C0031/
[7]: https://www.war.gov/News/Contracts/Contract/Article/4367503/contracts-for-dec-23-2025/
[8]: https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/us-orders-350-tomahawk-land-attack-cruise-missiles/
[9]: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmscotaf/957/957.pdf
[10]: https://www.raytheon.co.uk/news/2020/12/10/innovation-without-boundaries
[11]: https://caat.org.uk/app/uploads/2021/03/2021-02-28.Made-In-Scotland-Briefing.pdf
[12]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=8052
[13]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=8052
[14]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/09/video-shows-us-tomahawk-missile-hit-base-next-bombed-iranian-school
[15]: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/us-investigation-points-likely-us-responsibility-iran-school-strike-sources-say-2026-03-06/
[16]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/yemen-the-war-the-world-forgot/
[17]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/did-trump-bomb-iranian-schoolgirls-with-uk-made-weaponry/
[18]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/did-trump-bomb-iranian-schoolgirls-with-uk-made-weaponry/

2026-03-05 16:46:56 GMT

Inside the Cypriot campaign to kick out British bases
After a drone hit a Royal Air Force base in Cyprus on Sunday night, the debate in Britain has centred on why the airfield was not better protected. But in Cyprus, anger is focused on why Britain still has military bases there at all.
“We got no sleep last night,” local resident Melanie Steliou [told][1] *Declassified* on Monday, as sirens blared in the background. “My son has not gone to school today because it is next to the base.
“I naturally feel scared, frustrated and mad at what is going on…I’m mad at Keir Starmer for putting Cyprus on the spot,” she said of the prime minister’s announcement the night before that America could use British bases to bomb Iran.
While some UK personnel are being evacuated from Akrotiri, local Cypriots have nowhere else to go. “It’s a sickening example of a colonial mindset,” Steliou said. “The base shouldn’t be there in the first place.”
These are not just idle words. Steliou is a candidate for parliamentary elections being held in Cyprus this May. She is running on a left-wing [slate][2] organised by AKEL, the main opposition party, who currently hold 15 out of 56 seats in parliament and want the British bases gone.
If elected, Steliou will become an MP for Limassol, a coastal constituency next to RAF Akrotiri, which sits on Cyprus’ southernmost peninsula. Miles of land around the airbase, including a salt lake, wildlife centre, farms and beach bars, is occupied by Britain and almost completely encircles parts of the constituency.
The UK claims this as a “sovereign base area”, and has another on the east of the island at Dheklia, near the clubbing hotspot of Ayia Napa. Together these 98 square miles amount to three percent of Cyprus, which Britain refused to fully decolonise when it granted independence to the rest of the Mediterranean island in 1960.
## ‘Spy on the entire region’
For Steliou, the drone strike at Akrotiri came as no surprise. She has warned for years about the risk posed by Britain’s military bases on the island, especially as they allow access to US troops. At the time of writing, it looks like the drone was fired by Hezbollah in Lebanon and hit a [hangar][3] housing American U-2 spy planes, which have previously [spied][4] on the group.
Speaking to *Declassified* a month earlier, on 25 January, Steliou pointed out how Hezbollah’s late leader [Hassan Nasrallah][5] once warned that “if Cyprus gave facilities to Israel to help bomb Iran, Cyprus would be attacked. So it is a danger for the people here.”
Steliou made the prescient comments as she was about to board a coach with dozens of activists from Cyprus’ largest left-wing youth group, [EDON][6]. They hold an annual protest each January on the summit of Mount Troodos, the highest point of Cyprus, where Britain has a spy station that it shares with American intelligence officers.
“The equipment they have on Troodos can spy on the entire region,” she informs the teenagers on the coach as they wind through the mountains from Limassol, while *Declassified* films the journey. Out of the windows, a giant white golf ball-looking radar dome is ever present, crowning Mount Troodos.
Its [capabilities][7] were shrouded in secrecy until 2016, when National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed that spies on Troodos could [hack][8] into Israeli drone feeds. Back in 2008, British intelligence agency GCHQ [regarded][9] Israel as a “real threat to the stability of the region”, and thought the hacking could [provide][10] a “tip-off for any potential pre-emptive or retaliatory strike against Iran.”
Geopolitical shifts mean Britain is now much closer to Israel, having signed a military pact together in 2020. Although the text remains classified, intelligence relations with Israel are thought to be close.
An Israeli special forces veteran [told][11] *Declassified *the pact enhanced military intelligence cooperation between the Israeli army surveillance unit 8200 and GCHQ. “This means that Cyprus, through the bases, is complicit in the wars that are taking place in the region,” Steliou tells the coach party. “It puts the citizens themselves at risk.”
## ‘Can’t tell the world’
Steliou has a unique perspective on the situation. Her mother is English and came to work on the bases as a teacher in the 1960s. She fell in love with a Cypriot, which put her under suspicion from the British military, but their relationship survived.
And so Steliou grew up living next to the bases, including during the first Gulf wars when they were used to attack Iraq. But it has been the genocide in Gaza that galvanised her opposition.
“They’re collaborating with the Israeli military,” she exclaims. “Keir Starmer, when he visited the bases in Cyprus [in 2024], he said ‘although we’re really proud of what you’re doing here, we can’t necessarily tell the world’. Well obviously they can’t tell the rest of the world what they’re doing because he’d have to own up to being complicit in a genocide.”
That complicity consists of [hundreds][12] of surveillance flights Britain sent over Gaza from Akrotiri. Officially looking for hostages, no evidence has ever been provided that they helped find any, raising concerns that Israel could have used intelligence from the planes for its general war effort.
US military transport planes were also allowed to pass through Akrotiri enroute to Israel. “It was a great realisation to understand exactly what the British are doing on the bases and to accept this part of my own history,” she says, as the coach pulls into Troodos junction, about half a kilometer from the summit.
There’s a row of cafes and restaurants, including one named after Ben Nevis, Britain’s tallest mountain. Coaches have come from most parts of the island, as EDON strives to organise their protest to include members of the Turkish community.
A sea of red, green and white flags spills out into the road, as a drummer prepares to lead the crowd up the hill. Eight young women hold letters that spell “bases out”. Steliou greets AKEL candidates from other constituencies as they begin to march up the snow-lined hill.
Hundreds of protesters chant “Out, out, out! British bases out!” Soon they approach a barbed wire fence and assemble outside RAF Troodos, which prickles with antennas, cameras and radars.
EDON holds an annual protest outside RAF Troodos. (Photo: Aleksandar Ljubojevic / Declassified UK)
## ‘Colonialism 101’
EDON’s secretary general, Seviros Koulas, begins to address the crowd: “We do not accept Cyprus as a springboard for war, we do not accept our homeland as part of the war machine that spreads death in our neighbourhood.
“Operations directly linked to the war in Gaza and the massacre of the Palestinian people pass through here. All this is happening while our region is burning. While the Middle East is drowning in blood.
“And some here want to convince us that the deeper we get involved, the ‘safer’ we will be. They are lying. Involvement does not bring security. It brings danger. It makes us a target.”
Koulas, who is standing as an AKEL candidate in Nicosia, the capital of Cyprus, then tries to deliver a declaration to the British staff inside Troodos. However, none of the UK personnel will come out to collect it, and he is forced to pin it on the gate.
Steliou approaches him, confused by the spectacle. “We are here every year, it’s an annual event,” Koulas confides. “It is the first time they didn’t even send an officer or somebody working in the UK bases to come and take our demands…they just said leave it on the door. This is how they think they own the place.”
“This is colonialism 101,” Steliou reflects.
Fellow candidate Orestis Matsas speaks to Melanie Steliou on their way down Mount Troodos. (Photo: Aleksandar Ljubojevic / Declassified UK)
## Far-right threat
With the protest over, the crowd heads back down the mountain to a picnic spot where EDON has organised a small music festival. Steliou catches up with Orestis Matsas, another AKEL candidate, and asks him why he wants to be an MP.
“The rise of the far-right is a reason to support a party that was always against that,” he says, drawing a distinction with AKEL’s traditional left-wing credentials. “The far-right in Cyprus is not anymore an isolated issue,” he stresses, referring to ELAM, a party which is surging in the [polls][13] and threatens to overtake AKEL.
ELAM espouses ultranationalist politics, seeking to unify Cyprus with Greece, and has ties to the banned criminal group Golden Dawn. Steliou shares his concerns. “We need more empathy in the world, and less colonialism and less militarism.”
AKEL is also seeking to challenge the governing party, the centre-right Democratic Rally, which won two more seats than them at the last election. The president of Cyprus, Nikos Christodoulides, is a veteran of Democratic Rally, although he is no longer in the party.
He is close to Benjamin Netanyahu – having bought Israeli air defence systems for Cyprus – and Keir Starmer, whose use of Akrotiri the president failed to challenge throughout the Gaza genocide
“Christodoulides is leading a spineless foreign policy that is not serving the interests of our people,” AKEL MP Marina Nicolaou tells Steliou. A month later, the president would accept Starmer’s assurance that the base was not being used to attack Iran, only for it to be struck regardless.
Although Christodoulides has another two years left in office and is responsible for foreign policy, Nicolaou believes the parliamentary elections in May could heap pressure on him to change course. “The stronger AKEL is in parliament, the more pressure it can put on the government.”
For Steliou, the issue goes to the heart of their liberty. “The bases are a remnant of British colonialism. We think we have the Republic of Cyprus and that we are free. As long as you have bases and they are considered British territory, you are not completely free.”
The post [Inside the Cypriot campaign to kick out British bases][14] appeared first on [Declassified UK][15].
[1]: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DVYwWJuAc7K/
[2]: https://akel.org.cy/akel-left-social-alliance-candidate-list-for-the-parliamentary-elections-in-may-2026/?lang=en
[3]: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/38414897/iran-drone-strike-uk-cyprus-base-us-spy-planes/
[4]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/dec/01/wikileaks-cables-cyprus-rendition-torture
[5]: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/6/20/is-cyprus-about-dragged-war-between-israel-lebanon-hezbollah
[6]: https://www.edon.org.cy/index.php/component/content/article?id=1047:international-relations
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/u-s-spies-have-wide-range-of-facilities-on-uks-cyprus-bases-near-gaza-and-share-material-daily-with-israel/
[8]: https://theintercept.com/2016/01/28/israeli-drone-feeds-hacked-by-british-and-american-intelligence/
[9]: https://www.lemonde.fr/en/archives/article/2022/03/14/britain-has-spent-years-spying-on-israel-s-leaders_5978487_113.html
[10]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/29/snowden-files-us-uk-spied-feeds-israeli-drones-jets
[11]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/raf-spy-flights-over-gaza-risk-complicity-in-israeli-torture/
[12]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/release-gaza-footage-british-victim-demands-in-new-spy-flight-documentary/
[13]: https://www.politico.eu/europe-poll-of-polls/cyprus/
[14]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/inside-the-cypriot-campaign-to-kick-out-british-bases/
[15]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/inside-the-cypriot-campaign-to-kick-out-british-bases/

2026-03-04 23:33:11 GMT

‘We deserve to know the truth’: 11 questions about US bases in Britain
Keir Starmer has given his approval for Donald Trump’s US to attack Iran using British military bases.
But the UK government imposes a considerable veil of secrecy over the US use of these bases, keeping the British public in the dark about how its territory is used in foreign wars.
Former Labour Party leader and independent MP Jeremy Corbyn said: “From transferring equipment to refuelling planes to surveillance flights, we deserve to know the truth about exactly what these military bases are and have been used for, whether to benefit the US or Israel or both.
“There is a reason why the government is so reluctant to tell us: they know that this information could tip British complicity in genocide and war into active participation. We will continue to push for a full, public and independent inquiry into the use of these bases.”
Here are some of the things we need to know about the US military and intelligence presence in the UK and British territories.
## Where exactly are they?
We don’t know where all US military personnel in Britain are. Whenever governments answer questions about the US presence in the UK, they mention major bases which the US Air Force operate – such as at Fairford, Mildenhall and Lakenheath – but have also referenced “undisclosed locations”.
The government also [says][1] that, in addition to the major air bases with a US presence, there are six other designated Nato facilities in the UK, where US military personnel can also be located.
But *Declassified* recently [found][2] a US War Department document highlighting 22 American military sites in Britain, some of which successive UK governments have failed to mention. It is not clear how many of these 22 sites are currently hosting US military personnel.
*Declassified* has [identified][3] other locations in Britain that are likely to host US military or intelligence personnel, bringing the total to 24.
Even this may not cover the full scale of the US military presence in the UK, since it is believed that US military personnel are frequently, if not permanently, stationed at still more sites, such as the key Royal Navy bases at Coulport, Devonport and Faslane.
Keir Starmer’s government is also [refusing][4] to tell parliament how many US forces are located at each of its major bases in Britain. The [reason][5] it gives for not saying is that “we are in a new era of threat that remains more serious and less predictable”.
The government also [refuses][6] to say** **where the US has any navy, army or marine detachments in the UK. Incredibly, it says “the overall US force composition across its UK footprint is a matter for the US”.
## Who really owns the US military sites in Britain?
This is also unclear. The US War Department document we found states that, as of 2024, it owned, leased or otherwise controlled 22 military sites in Britain, and that these are worth £11bn. The UK government [contends][7] that the War Department owns no facilities in Britain, making the exact terms of the US presence even more unclear.
The US [document][8], for example, said its War Department owns 12 buildings covering over 39,000 square feet at RAF Oakhanger in Hampshire, which is a satellite ground station.
Yet in answer to a recent parliamentary question, the MoD said it [owns][9] RAF Oakhanger.
The government also says it [owns][10] MOD Bicester, which is another site where the US War Department says it holds 261 buildings. What are the terms and conditions governing these holdings?
## What military operations does the US conduct from Britain?
Governments have refused to give us the full picture. The standard response is: “The Ministry of Defence does not comment on the operational activity of other nations”, even when they’re operating in Britain.
When the US bombed Iran in June last year, the MoD [refused][11] to say if US aircraft based in Britain had been involved.
The MoD also [refuses][12] to [say][13] if the US has used its British bases to transport arms to Israel.
## What US military operations need UK approval?
Britain has a vague agreement with the US on the use of British bases, going back to a 1952 [communiqué][14] between prime minister Winston Churchill and president Harry Truman.
This mentions “the understanding that the use of these bases in an emergency would be a matter for joint decision by His Majesty’s Government and the United States Government in the light of the circumstances prevailing at the time.”
It is not clear if this “understanding” has any basis in law or what the definition of an “emergency” is. Successive UK governments [routinely][15] [say][16] that “joint decision-making is needed” on the use of British bases.
A US attack on a foreign country from Britain is [said][17] by the UK government to need Whitehall’s approval. But what other US military operations need approval? The US has been using its UK bases to [build up][18] its military forces for a possible attack on Iran. Does this need Starmer’s approval?
When asked recently which types of military operations undertaken from US-operated bases in the UK require approval, the government [responded][19] in vague terms by saying: “Permissions to utilise UK military bases are considered on a case-by-case basis and the decision to grant permission is dependent on the nature and purpose of their activity.”
### RELATED
[
## Campaigners condemn Starmer’s secrecy over US attack on Iran
][20] [READ MORE **][21]
## On what basis does the UK government approve or disapprove of US military operations?
The government refuses to reveal all the factors it takes into account in approving or disapproving of the US use of its British bases.
When asked about this in January, the MoD [said][22] it won’t disclose the factors it considers “due to operational security reasons”. It said only that it considers “the legal basis and policy rationale for any proposed activity”.
It has also [said][23] that granting permission is “dependent on the nature and purpose of their activity”.
The Conservative government [said][24] in 2021 that use of British bases would need to be “in accordance with UK law and the UK’s interpretation of relevant international law”.
When the UK approved a US attack on an ISIS training camp in Libya in 2016, the then defence secretary [said][25] that “permission was granted once I was satisfied with the legality of the operation”.
## What UK laws govern the US use of the bases?
This is not entirely clear. Successive governments have told parliament that the US use of British bases is covered by three agreements: the Nato Status of Forces Agreement 1951, the Visiting Forces Act 1952, and the UK-US Cost Sharing Agreement 1973.
However, in a recent answer to a parliamentary question, the MoD [added][26] that “Classified agreements also apply in some areas, reflecting the sensitive nature of specific operational activities conducted at these facilities”.
When Corbyn recently asked the government what the legislative basis is for the US use of force from bases in the UK being subject to joint decision-making, the MoD refused to answer directly.
It [said][27]: “Permissions to utilise UK military bases by foreign partners are considered on a case-by-case basis. This includes engagement with US partners on the nature and purpose of their activity. For operational security reasons, we do not offer comment or information relating to foreign nations’ military operations”.
## Are UK bases used in US drones strikes?
After a drone strike ordered by Trump killed Iranian general Qasem Soleimani in 2020, a Labour MP asked the MoD whether Yorkshire spy site Menwith Hill – which is known to play a role in US drone operations – had any role.
The government [refused][28] to say, citing a “longstanding policy” of not commenting “on the details of the operations carried out at RAF Menwith Hill in providing intelligence support”. Menwith Hill is believed to be the US’ largest foreign spy base.
Similar [secrecy][29] was imposed in 2022 when the government was asked about the role of RAF Croughton, another major military and intelligence base used by US forces in Northamptonshire, in facilitating US drone operations.
Amnesty International [found][30] in 2018 that four US bases in Britain – Menwith Hill, Molesworth, Croughton and Digby – placed a key role in deadly US drone strikes overseas.
## To what extent does the US military use British civilian airports?
The Conservative government [admitted][31] in 2023 that the US military “routinely” uses civilian airports in Britain “for operational, training or transitory purposes”. “This is a testament to the depth of our defence partnership with the United States”, the government claimed.
Now, Starmer’s administration has drawn a veil of secrecy over this issue, [refusing][32] to comment on the US use of civilian airports.
Are US arms and military equipment now being transported through these airports?
### RELATED
[
## How Britain could be involved in a US attack on...
][33] [READ MORE **][34]
## Is Britain hosting US nuclear arms?
It is believed the US moved nuclear arms to its base at Lakenheath in Suffolk last summer. But British [policy][35] is “neither to confirm nor deny” this.
When asked in parliament what restrictions UK governments place on the US deployment of nuclear arms, the government recently [responded][36] by mentioning two agreements between the US and UK – the Nato Status of Forces Agreement (1951) and the Visiting Forces Act (1952).
Yet neither of these agreements explicitly mentions nuclear weapons.
It follows that neither do UK governments tell parliament what the cost of [storing][37] US nuclear arms is.
## What are US intelligence personnel doing in Britain?
British governments impose a blanket ban on telling the public anything about US (or British) intelligence personnel in the UK.
“Details relating to US intelligence personnel are classified… to protect national security”, is the standard [response][38].
This is despite a substantial US intelligence presence in Britain, at sites such the US National Security Agency facilities at Menwith Hill and at the GCHQ spy base at Bude, a seaside town in north Cornwall. GCHQ doesn’t acknowledge on its website that US personnel work from Bude.
Governments also [refuse][39] to provide “any details” of US intelligence personnel at its base in Croughton, where [hundreds][40] of such US personnel are believed to be stationed.
The government even [refuses][41] to say what agreements between the US and the UK govern the presence of US National Security Agency personnel in Britain.
## What are the costs and benefits of the bases?
Despite the MoD labelling the US bases in Britain as “RAF” sites, it is the US military that runs them and is “[responsible][42] for bearing the cost for the operational running of the bases it occupies such as utilities”.
It is not clear, however, how much the running costs are for Britain.
When asked in parliament about the running costs of three bases this year, the MoD [replied][43] by saying the information “is not centrally held, and could only be collected and verified for the purpose of answering this question at disproportionate cost”.
In 2016, the government did provide figures for the running costs of three US bases (Menwith Hill, Croughton and Lakenheath). This came to £88m over three years, for which the US was to reimburse Britain for the “vast majority” of the costs, the government [said][44].
The UK government is also unable to say what the local economic benefits of the bases are to Britain. When recently asked about this in parliament, the MoD [said][45] it “has not formally evaluated the economic benefit to the UK of the United States Visiting Forces (USVF) and therefore a verified financial estimate is not available”.
The post [‘We deserve to know the truth’: 11 questions about US bases in Britain][46] appeared first on [Declassified UK][47].
[1]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-01-13/105590
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/the-24-site-us-military-network-in-britain-worth-11-billion/
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/the-24-site-us-military-network-in-britain-worth-11-billion/
[4]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-01-08/104134
[5]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-02-12/113028
[6]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-02-04/110712
[7]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-02-12/113025
[8]: https://www.acq.osd.mil/eie/imr/rpid/library.html
[9]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-02-04/110710
[10]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-02-04/110711
[11]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2025-06-26/63238
[12]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2024-10-04/5841
[13]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2024-02-01/12731
[14]: https://www.trumanlibrary.gov/library/public-papers/6/joint-statement-following-discussions-prime-minister-churchill
[15]: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmhansrd/vo050629/text/50629w09.htm
[16]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-01-06/103552
[17]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2016-02-23/28098
[18]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/campaigners-condemn-starmers-secrecy-over-us-attack-on-iran/
[19]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-01-19/106457
[20]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62329
[21]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62329
[22]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-01-19/106458
[23]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-01-19/106456
[24]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2021-07-16/34431
[25]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2016-02-22/27841
[26]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-02-04/110713
[27]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-02-04/110714
[28]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2020-02-04/12409
[29]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2022-01-10/100701
[30]: https://www.amnesty.org.uk/knowledge-hub/all-resources/drones-call-full-public-inquiry-uks-secret-involvement-us-attacks/
[31]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2023-11-09/1248
[32]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-01-19/106460
[33]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62287
[34]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62287
[35]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2025-04-17/45840
[36]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-01-22/107670
[37]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2022-05-11/939
[38]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2023-02-08/142835
[39]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2022-01-10/100700
[40]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/raf-croughton-the-british-base-for-american-spies/
[41]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-02-12/113027
[42]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2025-03-19/39501
[43]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-01-22/107672
[44]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2016-04-19/34618
[45]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-02-12/113029
[46]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/we-deserve-to-know-the-truth-11-questions-about-us-bases-in-britain/
[47]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/we-deserve-to-know-the-truth-11-questions-about-us-bases-in-britain/

2026-03-02 20:07:15 GMT

Iran could be next Syria, warns former British ambassador
[Smoke rises after a strike in Tehran on 2 March 2026 (Photo: Mohsen Ganji / Alamy)]
Iran could easily end up mired in civil war like Syria, Afghanistan or Libya, a prospect the US and Israel have ignored, a former UK ambassador to Iran has warned.
Sir Richard Dalton, Britain’s top official in Tehran from 2003 to 2006, said the break up of Iran could see regime supporters take up arms against an uprising which would also be armed.
Countries across the region and those further afield with interests in Iran could be drawn into the fighting to try to control a spillover of refugees and disorder.
“One’s sympathy goes out to the 85 million Iranians who did not deserve that – if that comes to pass – and who have been under an oppressive government for too long and do not deserve the fate of the Syrians, the Afghans and the Libyans,” Dalton told *Declassified* on Monday.
In the face of such prospects, Dalton said the British government should be calling for a ceasefire and working with other “middle-ranking powers” to make it happen.
Less than two months ago, Canadian prime minister Mark Carney [called][1] on “middle powers” to act together and counter great power rivalry which he said had abandoned even the pretense of rules-based order in the world.
But Carney’s evocation of countries banding together “has evaporated at the first whiff of gun smoke”, said Dalton, as Canada and Australia publicly supported the US-Israel attack on Iran.
“At least [the British government] has refused to do so explicitly, and are crafting their responses as dealings with the consequences responsibly,” he said.
“The terms of Britain’s involvement are strictly drawn and correctly drawn as carrying out their duties as allies and partners of certain countries in the Middle East who have a right of self-defence against the attacks coming in from Iran and let us hope that the British government is resolute about not being drawn in further.”
### RELATED
[
## How Britain could be involved in a US attack on...
][2] [READ MORE **][3]
## **Nuclear propaganda**
He said the idea that Iran’s nuclear programmes constituted an imminent threat was not borne out by Israeli and American intelligence assessments and, instead, was used by the two countries “to propagandise their own peoples as well as the international community”.
“What we saw when Israel and the US put in place their long-planned attack on Iran was a geopolitical objective going back many years in both countries but kept under control hitherto by fear of the consequences to obliterate the Islamic Republic,” he said.
“In so doing, they have destroyed an effective diplomatic channel to deal with those problems and they’ve brought on the world the kind of complications in security and the economy that we are seeing again to develop.”
Dalton said he now thinks both sides “are settling down to slug it out and see whose supply of missiles lasts longest”.
Iran will likely continue attacking targets across the region as long as they can hold out against continued Israeli and American attacks to degrade Iran’s capabilities.
The drone attack at RAF Akrotiri on Sunday evening, he said, was a warning that British assets in the region are now a legitimate target for the Iranians.
They “will not distinguish [between] attacks to its missiles and other wider attacks on its political, military and economic institutions and leaders,” he said.
“They will say that these are attacks facilitated by Britain on Iran as part of the United States campaign to destroy the Islamic Republic.”
However, he cautioned: “It would be unwise to retaliate against British bases and I very much hope they won’t.”
The post [Iran could be next Syria, warns former British ambassador][4] appeared first on [Declassified UK][5].
[1]: https://www.weforum.org/stories/2026/01/davos-2026-special-address-by-mark-carney-prime-minister-of-canada/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62287
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62287
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/iran-could-be-next-syria-warns-former-british-ambassador/
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/iran-could-be-next-syria-warns-former-british-ambassador/

2026-02-26 15:33:08 GMT

How Labour megadonor won Israeli medal of honour
[Labour donor Sir Trevor Chinn. (Photo: Alex Morris / Declassified UK)]
A British businessman who funded Keir Starmer and several senior Labour ministers was awarded the Israeli medal of honour for his “dedication” to and “love” for Israel, it can be revealed.
The information was obtained via a Freedom of Information request issued to the Israeli president’s office by lawyer Elad Man from NGO Hatzlacha and shared exclusively with *Declassified*.
It exposes how Sir Trevor Chinn, an influential entrepreneur and one of Britain’s leading pro-Israel lobbyists, was awarded Israel’s highest civilian honour in November 2024.
The medal was granted by Israel’s president Isaac Herzog, whose words were [cited][1] by the International Court of Justice earlier that year as plausible evidence of incitement to genocide.
Herzog had said the “entire nation” of Gaza was responsible for the October 7 attacks, adding that Israel would “fight until we’ll break their backbone”.
The death toll in Gaza when Chinn received his medal stood conservatively at 43,000 Palestinians, including 13,000 children and 7,200 women.
Files seen by *Declassified* now expose how Herzog’s office celebrated Chinn’s “uncompromising commitment to Israel…, especially after October 7”.
Alongside seven others, Chinn was celebrated for his “extraordinary contribution” and “skills and work to the benefit of the State of Israel”.
Chinn has been approached for comment.
### RELATED
[
## Foreign Office met pro-Israel lobbyist to discuss arms exports
][2] [READ MORE **][3]
## **Friends of Israel**
The documents further detail how Chinn, who is 90 years old, was nominated for the prize by several Zionist advocacy organisations in Britain.
Those included the United Jewish Israel Appeal, Labour Friends of Israel, the Jewish Leadership Council (JLC), and the Board of Deputies.
Chinn is directly associated with three of them.
He was the chair of the Joint Israel Appeal (now United Jewish Israel Appeal) between 1973 and 1993, has donated to Labour Friends of Israel and joined its delegations to Israel, and is currently vice president of the JLC.
The Board of Deputies’ chief executive [attended][4] the award ceremony alongside Chinn’s son, David.
Recommending Chinn for the award, one of the groups wrote: “We cannot think of another community leader in Britain who is more deserving of this honour than Sir Trevor, for his dedication, commitment, support, leadership and love for the people and the State of Israel”.
“Sir Trevor’s lifelong support of the British Jewish community, the charitable sector and the bilateral relationship between Britain and Israel has been transformative”, said another.
It was further noted that Chinn’s “long-standing support of the British Jewish community, the philanthropic sector and the UK-Israeli relationship was a game-changer”.
British-Palestinian journalist Hamza Yusuf commented: “It’s astonishing that the president of Israel, who has been singled out for inciting genocide and has signed bombs that rained down on Gaza, is handing out awards to an influential businessman in Britain. Had this involved the president of Russia, it would undoubtedly be front page news.
“This is the latest illustration of the extensive and deeply embedded influence of pro-Israel lobbying networks in the UK. It is a matter that should alarm anyone committed to democratic accountability. Instead, it continues to be met with a systemic and thunderous silence, especially from the mainstream media”.
## Labour Together
The revelation comes as another organisation linked to Chinn, Labour Together, is in the spotlight over undeclared campaign donations and dirty tricks [campaigns][5] against journalists.
In March 2016, Chinn became a director of Labour Together – which claimed its aim was to seek unity within the Labour party – alongside MPs Steve Reed, Lisa Nandy, and John Cruddas.
As Paul Holden exposed in his book [*The Fraud*][6], Labour Together’s objective was in fact to destroy the Corbyn movement and propel the Labour Right back to power.
It raised start-up funds and provided office space for an organisation called the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), which launched a secret campaign against pro-Corbyn media organisations through an initiative called Stop Funding Fake News.
On 2 August 2019, Stop Funding Fake News [boasted][7] that, “thanks to our campaign, [The Canary’s] business model ‘no longer works’ & they’re downsizing. We want to spend more time and resources on this campaign & target new sites”.
When setting up CCDH, Reed had [engaged][8] “directly with the Community Security Trust (CST) and the Jewish Leadership Council for consultation and advice” – two organisations closely linked to Chinn.
The next year, Reed would secretly [pledge][9] to Chinn that Labour would oppose the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions campaign, and promote the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s “[working definition][10]” of anti-semitism.
### RELATED
[
## Morgan McSweeney’s ‘plot without precedent in Labour history’
][11] [READ MORE **][12]
## Donations
Between June 2017 and September 2020, Chinn also donated £175,500 to Labour Together.
Those donations formed part of a £739,429 trove which the thinktank failed to properly report to the Electoral Commission, with other key funders including hedge fund manager Martin Taylor.
When those unreported donations were exposed, Labour Together paid a public relations firm named APCO Worldwide to investigate the source of the leak in 2023.
Under a £36,000 contract, APCO produced a dodgy dossier naming several journalists as “significant persons of interest”, including Holden, Gabriel Pogrund, Harry Yorke, Henry Dyer, Matt Taibbi, Kit Klarenberg, Paul Thacker, and one of the authors of this article.
A version of that dossier was then passed to Britain’s National Cyber Security Centre by Josh Simons, then the director of Labour Together, containing false allegations that the information originated with a Russian hack.
While there is no evidence that Chinn knew his donations were not being properly declared, it seems clear that the businessmen knew what kind of political project he was sponsoring.
Indeed, Chinn’s motivation for funding Labour Together was closely linked to Corbyn’s position on Palestine.
He “had great concerns about the election of an outspoken opponent of the Jewish state as Labour leader”, wrote Gabriel Pogrund and Patrick McGuire in their book [*Get In*][13].
In 2020, Chinn also provided £50,000 towards Starmer’s campaign to become Labour leader, a donation which was not declared until after the election was over.
Other cabinet members [funded][14] by Chinn include health secretary Wes Streeting, chancellor Rachel Reeves, justice secretary David Lammy, education secretary Bridget Phillipson, and culture secretary Lisa Nandy.
Earlier this week, it was further [revealed][15] that Simons, now a Cabinet minister under investigation for his role in the Labour Together scandal, failed to properly declare a recent £1,250 donation from Chinn.
In an [interview][16] with *Jewish News* last year, Chinn reportedly said he does not regret his support for individual politicians – or any of his actions behind closed doors – because he “always tried to think through the consequences of what I do”.
Paul Holden told *Declassified*: “For years it was considered an antisemitic slur to speculate that Sir Trevor Chinn’s politics were animated by a love for Israel. Now we find out that his life’s contribution to Israel is so profound he is among a handful of people being honoured at the highest level by the Israeli government.
“I think many Labour members and voters will find it grotesque that a major funder and supporter of the political project that thought it was a good idea to bring Peter Mandelson back into the centre of political life is being recognised by Isaac Herzog, a man cited by the ICJ for making plausibly genocidal statements.
“This must now raise serious questions about whether Chinn’s donations to Labour politicians and organisations like Labour Together were intended to encourage the adoption of pro-Israeli policies”.
### RELATED
[
## David Lammy held off the books meeting with pro-Israel lobbyist
][17] [READ MORE **][18]
## Who is Trevor Chinn?
In 2013, Chinn publicly declared: “I’ve spent my entire life working for Israel”.
While the businessman has spent decades working in the motor industry, he wasn’t lying about his dedication to Israel.
Trevor Chinn’s father, Rosser Chinn, was the [president][19] of the Jewish National Fund (JNF) in Britain.
The JNF is a quasi-governmental organisation which has supported illegal Israeli settlements in Palestine, and was [described][20] by historian Ilan Pappé as a “colonialist agency of ethnic cleansing”.
Chinn first visited Israel in 1958 at the age of 23, after becoming involved in the Charities Aid Committee, which raised money for the JNF.
“I have to admit, I was just blown away. What no-one ever tells you is how beautiful the country is… Basically, that was the beginning of my work for Israel”, he [said][21].
During the 1967 Six Day War and the 1973 Yom Kippur War, he raised millions of pounds for Israel and changed the name of the Joint Palestine Appeal to the Joint Israel Appeal.
“We raised £58 million in three weeks”, Chinn said of the funding effort in 1973. “I set out to get million pound gifts, and I think I got 12 [separate] million pound gifts”.
Recently declassified files show how Chinn repeatedly [lobbied][22] John Major’s Conservative government regarding its policy towards Israel during the early 1990s.
“He can be quite a tough protagonist of the Israeli cause and is by no means a dove”, one Foreign Office official wrote about Chinn in November 1991.
“My own feeling is that he is not very subtly tuned into the Israeli political scene, although he meets a number of leaders through his fund-raising activities”, the diplomat continued.
Since the 1980s, Chinn has [funded][23] Labour Friends of Israel and Conservative Friends of Israel and played a leading role in the British Israel Communications and Research Centre (BICOM).
The *Guardian* [described][24] BICOM in 2009 as “Britain’s most active pro-Israel lobbying organisation – which flies journalists to Israel on fact-finding trips and organises access to senior government figures”.
In 2012, Chinn signed a joint statement defending Israel’s Operation Pillar of Defence, during which over 200 Palestinians were [killed][25] and a further 1,000 injured.
“We take pride in the commitment of Israel’s political and military leadership to leave no stone unturned in seeking to avoid civilian casualties”, the letter declared.
Amid the Gaza genocide, Chinn [met][26] privately with Foreign Office diplomat Christian Turner to discuss arms export licences to Israel.
Chinn even offered “recommendations” on the issue, with Turner enquiring whether other British diplomats might also try “reaching out” to him and “hearing” his views.
An additional off-the-books [meeting][27] was held with Britain’s former foreign secretary David Lammy in February 2025. *Declassified* asked Chinn last year why he donates so much money to the Labour party. He ignored our questions.
The post [How Labour megadonor won Israeli medal of honour][28] appeared first on [Declassified UK][29].
[1]: https://www.icj-cij.org/node/203447
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=59347
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=59347
[4]: https://x.com/BoardofDeputies/status/1877644860943225252
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/labour-think-tank-paid-pr-firm-to-investigate-declassified-journalist/
[6]: https://orbooks.com/catalog/the-fraud/
[7]: https://x.com/SFMisinfo/status/1157267260970622979
[8]: https://orbooks.com/catalog/the-fraud/
[9]: https://asawinstanley.substack.com/p/secret-document-reveals-israel-lobbys
[10]: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2020/nov/29/palestinian-rights-and-the-ihra-definition-of-antisemitism
[11]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=58945
[12]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=58945
[13]: https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/463746/get-in-by-pogrund-patrick-maguire-and-gabriel/9781529939446
[14]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/israel-lobby-funded-half-of-keir-starmers-cabinet/
[15]: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/feb/24/minister-under-investigation-over-targeting-of-reporters-makes-late-donation-declaration
[16]: https://www.jewishnews.co.uk/trevor-chinn-at-90-i-regret-nothing/
[17]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=60214
[18]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=60214
[19]: https://www.jta.org/archive/president-of-j-n-f-in-britain-honored-at-dinner-in-london
[20]: https://electronicintifada.net/content/revealed-israel-charity-funded-campaign-against-antisemitism/38351
[21]: https://www.jewishnews.co.uk/trevor-chinn-at-90-i-regret-nothing/
[22]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/israel-lobby-funded-half-of-keir-starmers-cabinet/
[23]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/two-fifths-of-keir-starmers-cabinet-have-been-funded-by-pro-israel-lobbyists/
[24]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/two-fifths-of-keir-starmers-cabinet-have-been-funded-by-pro-israel-lobbyists/
[25]: https://mondoweiss.net/2022/01/david-vs-goliath-the-epic-military-mismatch-between-palestine-and-israel/
[26]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/foreign-office-met-pro-israel-lobbyist-to-discuss-arms-exports/
[27]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/david-lammy-held-off-the-books-meeting-with-pro-israel-lobbyist/
[28]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-labour-megadonor-won-israeli-medal-of-honour/
[29]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-labour-megadonor-won-israeli-medal-of-honour/

2026-02-26 07:16:14 GMT

Campaigners condemn Starmer’s secrecy over US attack on Iran
Anti-war campaigners have accused the British government of “playing down” its support for an illegal US attack on [Iran][1] as American warplanes continue to transit through UK military bases this week on the way to the Middle East.
The opaque decision-making, they say, has left much of the British public in the dark about the role the UK is playing and therefore unable to challenge what is happening.
Dozens of US warplanes have been able to transit through sites in Suffolk, with fighter jets going via Lakenheath while intelligence and refueling planes left from nearby Mildenhall.
“Where is the government’s announcement on this?” asked Sophie Bolt, general secretary of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament.
“The total secrecy and denial, refusing to confirm or deny – which is their standard response to anything going on ostensibly at a US military base – means that you can’t hold them to account.”
Last week, the *Times*, [citing][2] unnamed government sources, said that British prime minister Keir Starmer had blocked a request from US president Donald Trump to use RAF Fairford or British facilities at Diego Garcia for any attack on Iran.
Trump has signalled that the bases could be crucial to attacking Iran. RAF Fairford has a 10,000-foot runway and is the US Air Force’s only European airfield for heavy bombers.
Diego Garcia has a runway long enough for US B-2 stealth bombers that could bomb deep inside Iran.
But Starmer was said to have told Trump that such an attack would be in breach of international law, according to the *Times*.
The Ministry of Defence, however, declined to confirm that position when *Declassified* asked on Tuesday for the second time in a week.
### RELATED
[
## How Britain could be involved in a US attack on...
][3] [READ MORE **][4]
## **Amassing an armada**
Some of America’s most advanced aircraft and aerial refuelling tankers have transited through RAF Mildenhall and RAF Lakenheath on their way to the Middle East [this week][5], continuing a six-week trend that has seen Trump’s so-called [“massive armada”][6] amass in the region.
*Declassified* visited Lakenheath on 21 January to [witness][7] the build-up which has continued unabated.
Why, activists ask, can American planes pass through RAF bases to participate in an attack Trump has threatened to launch in the [coming days][8], but not use Fairford or Diego Garcia?
*Declassified* put that question to the MoD this week, along with asking whether the government has taken formal legal advice about its potential involvement in a US attack on Iran and if plans are in place to protect British personnel and citizens if there is an attack.
The MoD did not answer the questions. A government spokesperson said: “As routine, we do not comment on operational matters.
“There is a political process ongoing between the US and Iran, which the UK supports. Iran must never be able to develop a nuclear weapon, and our priority is security in the region.”
Campaigners from Lakenheath Alliance for Peace said that even if the current use of the RAF bases offers indirect help for an attack on Iran, the UK is “clearly complicit” in aiding and assisting an internationally wrongful act.
“It is essential that all peace loving people oppose and disrupt in any peaceful way they can the continuing deployment of planes from Lakenheath,” Angie Zelter, one of the group’s members and a veteran activist, said.
A spokesperson for Nukewatch UK said it was clear from the quantity of American planes that have passed through British military bases since January how “hugely important” they are for the US strategically.
“Trump wouldn’t be able to undertake the strike in the same way if the aircraft weren’t able to stop off at these bases on their way to the Middle East,” they said.
“If you are serious about saying we don’t want an illegal act of war to take place, then you have to do everything you can to stop it and that includes letting your bases not be used for aircraft to fly through.”
There is further uncertainty over whether British naval personnel are embedded on US ships headed towards Iran. The USS Winston S. Churchill, which traditionally has a British navigator, is steaming east through the Mediterranean.
The ship is accompanying the USS Gerald Ford aircraft carrier, which had UK personnel stationed onboard in recent months. The Royal Navy declined to clarify when asked by the [Canary][9].
### RELATED
[
## The 24-site US military network in Britain worth £11 billion
][10] [READ MORE **][11]
## **‘Controlling the narrative’**
Bolt said the lack of information about the decisions being taken in relation to the American use of British bases is not new, but something her organisation has found to be especially true in relation to RAF Lakenheath.
Last year, it was widely reported, though never confirmed by the US or UK governments, that the US Air Force transported nuclear weapons for storage at the airbase in Suffolk, returning the weapons removed under the Obama administration in 2008.
It was unclear at the time, she said, whether US forces at the base would be expected to abide by British regulations around nuclear weapons. So Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament had lawyers from Leigh Day send a letter to the MoD to find out.
In response, the MoD declassified a certificate issued by former defence secretary Ben Wallace in 2021 which, it turns out, had exempted all US military bases across Britain from abiding by UK emergency radiation regulations.
That exemption could have massive ramifications for residents in proximity to bases if there was a nuclear accident.
“It means that the local councils that have a duty of care in terms of emergency planning wouldn’t be informed that there were US nuclear weapons at the base,” Bolt said.
“It means they are under no obligation to have robust emergency procedures.”
It was around this time, Bolt said she observed, that the clamping down on transparency from the government about decisions relating to the US base began in earnest.
“It’s totally controlling the narrative. How are we supposed to properly interrogate this and hold the government to account,” she said.
“We don’t know, do we? It’s just sort of inferred through indirect reporting. And that’s just what British foreign policy is about, particularly in relation to Britain’s relationship with the US.”
The post [Campaigners condemn Starmer’s secrecy over US attack on Iran][12] appeared first on [Declassified UK][13].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/iran/
[2]: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/trump-chagos-islands-deal-iran-attack-british-bases-kcj0gzbr8?gaa_at=eafs
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62287
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62287
[5]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vv9JsHtpF6g
[6]: https://www.iranintl.com/en/202601285784
[7]: https://youtu.be/P89XmWdn5Vw
[8]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c86yjnw4x49o
[9]: https://www.thecanary.co/uk/analysis/2026/02/24/iran-british-personnel/
[10]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61881
[11]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61881
[12]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/campaigners-condemn-starmers-secrecy-over-us-attack-on-iran/
[13]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/campaigners-condemn-starmers-secrecy-over-us-attack-on-iran/

2026-02-24 16:50:50 GMT

Declassified wins battle over access to Parliament
[Parliament initially blocked Declassified from getting a media pass. (Photo: Hanna-Johara Dokal / Declassified UK)]
*Declassified* has won a seven-month battle to report from Parliament, after officials were accused of a “partisan attempt to suppress investigative journalism”.
Westminster authorities initially rejected our application for a press pass in June, claiming there wasn’t enough space.
But we obtained [internal emails][1] showing that the officials considering our application had cited the “particular standpoint” of our coverage.
They flagged an article about pro-Israel bias in Westminster and even claimed that Declassified’s focus on foreign affairs does not count as “politics”.
The revelation sparked widespread criticism and around 5,800 Declassified readers signed an open letter calling on Parliament to review its decision.
The letter was also signed by more than 100 politicians, journalists and campaigners including the MPs Jeremy Corbyn, John McDonnell, Clive Lewis and Liz Saville-Roberts.
Other signatories included journalists Peter Oborne, Ash Sarkar and Owen Jones; comedians Nish Kumar, Josie Long, Fern Brady; as well as the heads of Reporters Without Borders, The Committee to Protect Journalists and The Centre For Investigative Journalism.
In Westminster, 27 MPs from across the political spectrum also signed an [Early Day Motion][2] urging authorities to reverse the decision.
Now, more than seven months after our original application, officials have u-turned and granted *Declassified* access to Parliament.
### RELATED
[
## Parliament blocks Declassified, citing our Gaza ‘standpoint’
][3] [READ MORE **][4]
## Changes
Media passes are already held by almost 500 journalists from other news outlets, providing vital access to the corridors of power in Westminster. But the vast majority are from mainstream or right-wing media organisations.
In fact, the system is specifically designed to make access difficult for small, independent newsrooms. [Guidelines][5] say that passes will “not normally” be given to freelance journalists, trade press or independent production companies, while other applicants must have a “substantial” audience and be regulated by Ofcom, IPSO or Impress.
However, in response to *Declassified’s* campaign, authorities have reformed the way journalists apply for media passes. This includes clarifying the criteria, introducing an appeals process, and changing the rules on resubmitting an application.
The initial decision to block *Declassified* was made by the Sergeant At Arms, but this responsibility has now been given to other officials – although Parliament insists this change was not connected to our campaign.
Officials eventually invited *Declassified* to submit a fresh application after we submitted a lengthy official complaint in October.
And now, Parliament has finally issued us with a media pass, marking a remarkable victory for press freedom.
It comes after *Declassified* reporters were also blocked from entering the Labour Party [conference][6] and a major London [arms fair][7] last year.
*Declassified’s* co-director Laura Pidcock said: “What should have been a straightforward process to access parliament for journalistic purposes, became an issue of press freedom and fair process. We are pleased the application has now been approved and procedural changes made.
“I have no doubt that the overwhelming support of the public helped us achieve this – huge thanks to everyone who signed the open letter.”
She added: “There is a creeping trend to restrict civil liberties in the UK, and press freedom is crucial. It was therefore important we pushed back on the Parliamentary authorities’ decision and, with your help, won!”
The post [Declassified wins battle over access to Parliament][8] appeared first on [Declassified UK][9].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/parliament-blocks-declassified-citing-our-gaza-standpoint/
[2]: https://edm.parliament.uk/early-day-motion/64576
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=60565
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=60565
[5]: https://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/offices/commons/media-relations-group/guidance-and-resources/
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/labour-bars-journalists-from-party-conference/
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/declassified-barred-from-london-arms-fair-as-israeli-weapons-dealers-arrive/
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/declassified-wins-battle-over-access-to-parliament/
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/declassified-wins-battle-over-access-to-parliament/

2026-02-23 13:23:58 GMT

UK aid still helping Ukraine join Nato
[Keir Starmer hosts President Zelensky in London. (Photo: Ben Dance / FCDO)]
The UK is still trying to help Ukraine join Nato as the war enters its fifth year on Tuesday.
A British aid project, worth up to £38m, is meant to help Ukraine “make progress on conditions for membership of the EU and Nato” while “attracting international investors” and creating “an improved business environment”.
Known as the Governance Reform Programme, the [project][1] began last year and is slated to run until 2028.
It runs counter to Russia’s blanket opposition to Ukraine joining Nato and President Zelensky’s own recent offer to drop his ambition to join the military alliance.
The project document’s initial outline, drawn up in 2024, notes that, to meet the conditions for membership of Nato and the EU, Ukraine needs to embark on “fundamental reform areas such as tackling corruption, strengthening the rule of law, building state capacity, and improving the investment climate”.
In this, “the war… provides opportunity for reform progress”, the document adds.
It also outlines UK officials’ belief that Britain is well-placed to promote reforms in Ukraine, due to the vast quantities of arms it has provided to Kyiv.
It notes: “Since the invasion, our bilateral partnership has deepened significantly and we are often viewed as Ukraine’s diplomatic partner of choice, aided by our reputation of being a ‘first mover’ on military support”.
It adds: “We are viewed as influential, trusted and well placed by the GoU [government of Ukraine] to support them to deliver on some of the more controversial and hard-to-reach reforms”.
Britain’s trusted role in the country should translate into influence over Ukraine’s agenda, officials observe. “We will use our trusted voice to advance critical reforms and defend institutions against attempts from vested interests to undermine their independence”.
Indeed, a key outcome of the project is intended to be that “The UK is better able to track and influence reform conversations.”
### RELATED
[
## UK sees privatisation ‘opportunities’ in Ukraine war
][2] [READ MORE **][3]
## ‘Foreign direct investment’
The project is not the first UK aid [programme][4] in Ukraine intended to open up the country to international investors.
Britain’s new project is a successor to the Good Governance Fund which [ran][5] from 2022-25. That project aimed to ensure that “Ukraine adopts and implements economic reforms that create a more inclusive economy, enhancing trade opportunities with the UK”.
Reforms encouraged by the UK are described as pointing to “better integration with Euro-Atlantic markets” and “aligning it [Ukraine] more closely with Western markets”.
The Governance Reform Programme will help tackle “some of the core issues (e.g. judicial reform, procurement) which are holding back foreign direct investment and are key to unleashing private sector growth”.
One key reform London is pushing is privatisation of state-owned enterprises (SOEs). The document notes that “their reform is intricately linked to EU accession and the Ukraine Plan, which aims to create a ‘functioning market economy’ and a level playing field between private companies and SOEs”.
A $100m joint US-UK programme known as SOERA (State-Owned Enterprise Reform Activity) has been promoting the privatisation of Ukraine’s SOEs since 2022 “and it is performing well”, the document claims.
It is blunt in saying that “We may experience resistance in some reform areas”. This may arise “due to power of vested interest and/or centralised decision making which blocks progress or undermines work in other areas”.
### RELATED
[
## Blair and Major reassured Russia about Nato expansion
][6] [READ MORE **][7]
## Nato accession
UK officials’ desire to see Ukraine in Nato is less and less likely to come to fruition now that President Zelensky has himself [offered][8] to drop his ambition to join the alliance in the face of Russian opposition.
It has long been clear that Ukraine’s possible accession to Nato has been a red line for Moscow, and at least partly explains Russia’s brutal invasion in 2022, which has caused hundreds of thousands of deaths and casualties.
Prime ministers Tony Blair and John Major both [reassured][9] Russia in the 1990s that any expansion of Nato would take account of Russia’s security interests: assurances which were reneged on by subsequent leaders.
Boris Johnson’s government [avoided][10] promoting the possibility of a compromise peace in Ukraine soon after Russia invaded while Labour sees the Ukraine war as [beneficial][11] to the UK arms industry, and key to its overall economic growth plan for Britain.
Nato’s [policy][12] is that “Ukraine’s future is in NATO” and that members of the organisation “will continue to support it on its irreversible path to full Euro-Atlantic integration, including Nato membership”.
Last year, in what Nato [described][13] as an “historic first”, the Ukrainian Navy led the opposing force in a Nato exercise, “incorporating battlefield experience into Nato’s collective training”.
A joint training centre has been established in Poland as “the first joint Nato-Ukraine organization in the Nato Command Structure”. Nato says the centre is “a key enabler of Nato–Ukraine cooperation, a driver of operationally informed innovation, and a catalyst for interoperability”.
The post [UK aid still helping Ukraine join Nato][14] appeared first on [Declassified UK][15].
[1]: https://devtracker.fcdo.gov.uk/programme/GB-GOV-1-400398/summary
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=57558
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=57558
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-sees-privatisation-opportunities-in-ukraine-war/
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-sees-privatisation-opportunities-in-ukraine-war/
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=59368
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=59368
[8]: https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2025/12/15/zelensky-offers-to-drop-nato-bid-for-security-guarantees-but-rejects-us-push-to-cede-territory_6748501_4.html
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/blair-and-major-reassured-russia-about-nato-expansion/
[10]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/lets-just-fight-how-britain-prefers-war-over-peace-in-ukraine/
[11]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/keir-starmers-plan-for-uk-growth-the-ukraine-war/
[12]: https://www.nato.int/en/what-we-do/partnerships-and-cooperation/relations-with-ukraine#:~:text=NATO%20stands%20in%20unwavering%20solidarity,Ukraine's%20membership%20aspirations
[13]: https://www.act.nato.int/article/jatec-one-year/
[14]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-aid-still-helping-ukraine-join-nato/
[15]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-aid-still-helping-ukraine-join-nato/

2026-02-21 08:40:22 GMT

How Britain could be involved in a US attack on Iran
US president Donald Trump has signalled that British military bases may be crucial to an attack on Iran, without offering a legal justification for bombing that country.
Trump posted on Wednesday: “Should Iran decide not to make a Deal, it may be necessary for the United States to use Diego Garcia and the airfield located in Fairford in order to eradicate a potential attack by a highly unstable and dangerous Regime.”
RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire has a 10,000-foot runway and is the US Air Force’s only European airfield for heavy bombers.
It can host B-52s, which flew daily missions from the base to bomb Iraq during the 2003 invasion.
Diego Garcia is part of the [Chagos Islands][1], an archipelago in the Indian Ocean which has a runway long enough for US B-2 stealth bombers that could bomb deep inside Iran.
Britain illegally occupies the Chagos Islands and has only just agreed to return them to Mauritius, while retaining a 99-year lease on Diego Garcia for US-UK military purposes.
Trump now opposes the proposed handover, despite it being necessary to comply with a ruling from the International Court of Justice, and denounced it as “wokeism”.
*The Times* reported his opposition is based on Britain’s apparent refusal to let him use Diego Garcia to stage attacks on Iran, which could happen over the coming days.
Trump did not use Diego Garcia or Fairford last June when he bombed Iran in Operation Midnight Hammer, opting instead to send heavy bombers all the way over the Atlantic from US soil.
Britain’s Ministry of Defence (MoD) declined to comment on Thursday when asked by *Declassified* if Trump had permission to use Diego Garcia or Fairford to bomb Iran this time.
An MoD spokesperson said: “As routine, we do not comment on the operational activity of other nations, including third party use of UK bases.
“The US is the UK’s principal defence and security partner. The depth of our defence relationship with the US remains an essential part of our security.”
## ‘Not enough’
The ministry also refused to comment on whether such an attack on Iran would be lawful.
Trump is not publicly making any legal case for his potential attack on a sovereign state, other than to suggest Iran might try to attack the US in future.
For a strike to be conducted in self-defence, the attack must be imminent.
This threshold was highlighted during the debate on invading Iraq in 2003, when Keir Starmer himself [wrote][2]: “The mere fact that Iraq has a capacity to attack at some unspecified time in the future is not enough”.
Trump’s bombardment of Iran in June 2025 also failed to reach that threshold, [according][3] to Sir Richard Dalton, the UK’s former ambassador to Tehran.
He told *Declassified*: “By every standard, this was not a legal preemptive attack.”
Despite these legal concerns, Starmer has allowed Trump to use US bases in Britain for his troop build-up around Iran.
There has been a [surge][4] in US fighter jets and refuelling aircraft passing through RAF Lakenheath and Mildenhall in Suffolk on their way to the Middle East since January.
## ‘Unprecedented’
Any British participation in an attack on Iran could result in serious consequences for UK troops abroad, as well as triggering an economic or refugee crisis.
Iranian officials have vowed an “unprecedented” response against “all who support the aggressor” if Trump attacks, signalling they will go much further than previous choreographed responses.
Britain has [hundreds][5] of military personnel in the Gulf that are well within range of Iran’s missile arsenal, especially the naval facility HMS *Juffair* in Bahrain, spy stations in [Oman][6] and airbases in Qatar and the UAE.
Although protected by air defences including Typhoon fighter jets, these could potentially be overwhelmed if Iran fires a high volume of short-range missiles at the bases.
UK military and intelligence personnel stationed at bases further from Iran could be within range, including staff in Jordan and even on Cyprus.
British naval personnel may also be dotted throughout the US carrier battle groups being deployed to the region, as several were believed to be ahead of Trump’s attack on [Venezuela][7].
They too could be vulnerable to Iranian counter-attacks.
Tehran could also mine the narrow Strait of Hormuz, through which a fifth of the world’s oil supplies flow each day, causing an energy price shock.
Iran [announced][8] the temporary closure of the Strait of Hormuz on Tuesday for the first time since the 1980s for “live-fire naval drills”.
In any retaliatory strike, Iran is likely to target Israel, whose prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has advocated for a US-led war against Tehran for decades.
In October 2024, RAF Typhoons and Voyager refuelling aircraft [played ][9]a role in intercepting missiles which were fired by Iran at Israel.
Several of Britain’s most advanced fighter jets, the F-35, were moved to Cyprus a fortnight ago to boost air defences in the eastern Mediterranean.
The post [How Britain could be involved in a US attack on Iran][10] appeared first on [Declassified UK][11].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/the-chagos-islands-were-never-britains-to-give-away/
[2]: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2003/mar/17/foreignpolicy.iraq1
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/israel-not-an-ally-says-former-british-ambassador/
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-secrecy-over-u-s-bases-amid-new-military-build-up/
[5]: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8794/
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-quietly-expands-secret-gchq-spy-base-near-iran/
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-britain-helped-trump-destabilise-venezuela/
[8]: https://www.thenationalnews.com/business/economy/2026/02/18/oil-price-hormuz-shipping-us-iran/
[9]: https://www.forcesnews.com/middle-east/healey-confirms-uk-forces-played-their-part-attempt-preventing-further-middle-east
[10]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-britain-could-be-involved-in-a-us-attack-on-iran/
[11]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-britain-could-be-involved-in-a-us-attack-on-iran/

2026-02-20 07:30:03 GMT

Palantir UK chief walks away from Gaza genocide questions
[Palantir UK chief Louis Mosely outside the BAFTA building last week (Declassified UK)]
It’s a rainy Wednesday evening in Mayfair and we’re waiting outside the BAFTA building where a historic event is about to take place.
Inside, American tech firm Palantir is holding a drinks reception for British politicians and military officials to celebrate a new £240 million contract with the Ministry of Defence (MoD).
Outside, protesters are gathering, angry that Palantir’s technology has been supplied to Israel at a time when its military has killed huge numbers of people in Gaza.
There are even concerns that Peter Mandelson, friend of notorious paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, helped to broker the deal with the MoD.
So when we see Palantir’s UK chief Louis Mosley walking down the road, one of us calls out: “Has your technology been used to facilitate war crimes in Gaza?
“Is this the same technology that you are selling to the British army?”
He did not respond.
## **‘Mostly terrorists’**
Palantir has been making headlines all over the world in recent months from the Epstein files, to ICE raids in the US and Israel’s genocide in Gaza.
Two months ago, Palantir signed a three-year Ministry of Defence [contract][1] worth £240m to “modernise UK defence” by “supporting critical strategic, tactical and live operational decision making” in the armed forces.
The contract was awarded without competition. The MoD [has said][2] this was “due to an absence of competition for technical reasons” and because there were “no reasonable alternatives”.
The deal was only the first step in a [strategic partnership][3] agreed between the company and the MoD last September which will see Palantir base its European headquarters in the UK and invest £1.5bn “to deliver new jobs, growth and national security”.
In January 2024, Palantir also agreed to a strategic partnership with the Israeli defence ministry “to help the country’s war effort”, according to media reports.
But it is unclear exactly what technology Palantir has supplied to Israel as part of that new partnership, and whether or how any of that technology – or previously technology supplied to the country – has been used in Gaza.
Palantir [has denied][4] being involved in Lavender and Gospel, two AI systems that the Israeli military has used to target Palestinians in Gaza.
British defence secretary John Healey and Palantir CEO Alex Karp sign the partnership agreement in September 2025 (Photo: Lucy North/Alamy)
In a public forum in 2025, Palantir’s CEO Alex Carp [was confronted][5] by a protester who said the company’s AI technology killed Palestinians. “Mostly terrorists, that’s true,” he responded.
He then said he supported the protester’s right to free speech, but questioned why she wouldn’t let him give his side. “If your argument is that strong, why will you not let the other side talk?” he said to applause.
“By the way, the pain of Palestinians is something that everybody – and anyone who dies in war, obviously people care about – I care about that,” he said.
“The obvious solution to war is to have the West having the strongest, most precise deadly weapons possible so that we can minimise unnecessary, innocent deaths.”
*Declassified* asked Palantir on Thursday if it knew whether any of the technology it has provided to Israel has been used for targeting in Gaza, but did not receive an immediate response.
When asked, the MoD did not clarify for *Declassified* whether it was buying technology from Palantir that has been battle-tested in Gaza.
A spokesperson said: “Palantir is a significant investor in the UK economy, and we have a decade-long partnership with them.
“There are robust processes in place to ensure government contracts are awarded fairly and transparently. All suppliers are subject to rigorous due diligence and must deliver value for money while complying with our security and legal obligations.”
The post [Palantir UK chief walks away from Gaza genocide questions][6] appeared first on [Declassified UK][7].
[1]: https://www.find-tender.service.gov.uk/Notice/083874-2025?utm_source=chatgpt.com
[2]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-02-09/111951
[3]: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-strategic-partnership-to-unlock-billions-and-boost-military-ai-and-innovation
[4]: https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/latest-news/palantir-response-to-the-allegations-over-its-complicity-in-war-crimes-amid-israels-war-in-gaza/
[5]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQCazCId_9o&t=5019s
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/palantir-uk-chief-walks-away-from-gaza-genocide-questions/
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/palantir-uk-chief-walks-away-from-gaza-genocide-questions/

2026-02-18 17:45:18 GMT

Israel secretly sought legal advice about Britons serving in the IDF
Israel sought secret advice on the legal implications of UK nationals serving in its army, it can be revealed.
The information comes in leaked Israeli ministry of justice documents which were published by file-sharing website Distributed Denial of Secrets ([DDoS][1]).
The documents highlight concerns that UK nationals in the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) might become liable to criminal prosecution in Britain.
Israeli officials were alarmed by criticism in the media from a former Conservative government minister and commissioned advice from powerhouse law firms to determine the legal exposure of foreign soldiers serving in its army.
The advice focussed specifically on whether UK nationals “can serve in foreign militaries” and whether they would “be at risk when travelling back to the UK”.
Additional advice was requested on the legal status of German, French, Belgian, Spanish, and South African nationals in the IDF.
The revelation comes after *Declassified* [found][2] that over 50,000 foreign nationals served for Israel amid the Gaza genocide, almost 10 percent of its total manpower.
Those figures included more than 2,000 Britons, with the other major cohorts coming from the US, Russia, Ukraine, France, and Germany.
So far no members of the IDF have been arrested in the UK over their role in Gaza.
Human rights lawyer Daniel Machover told *Declassified*: “If a person is coming from a conflict zone and has been involved in serving an army or a force where there is a suspicion of international criminal law being breached, why aren’t those people questioned on their return about their military service? It’s an act of negligence of this government”.
### RELATED
[
## Over 2,000 Britons served for Israel amid Gaza genocide
][3] [READ MORE **][4]
## ‘Not brave enough’
In 2014, Baroness Sayeeda Warsi [resigned][5] from the cabinet over the UK government’s failure to condemn Israel’s assault on Gaza, known as Operation Protective Edge.
In her resignation letter, she said Britain’s support for Israel was “morally indefensible” and “not in [the] national interest”.
Three years later, in an interview with *Middle East Eye*, Warsi [called][6] on Britons serving in the Israeli army “to be treated as foreign fighters and prosecuted on their return to the UK”.
The UK government had created a major loophole, Warsi argued, by allowing its citizens to fight for state actors but not non-state actors.
“If you go out there and fight for any [non-state] group, you will be subject to prosecution when you get back. If you go out and fight for [former Syrian president] Assad, I presume, under our law, that is okay. That can’t be right”, Warsi said.
“The only reason we allow the loophole to exist is because of the IDF, because we are not brave enough to say if you hold British citizenship, you make a choice. You fight for our state”, she added.
Warsi’s interview raised alarm bells within the Israeli ministry of justice, the leaked files show.
One day after it was published, Marlene Mazel, a senior official in the justice ministry, asked lawyers to look into the issue and provide advice.
“It is a matter of concern to us and we would appreciate it if you could prepare 5-6 talking points and why the passage of such a regulation/provision would be problematic”, Mazel wrote.
She further instructed counsel to “address any pivotal people in this regard, dates and time frames in which this matter will be handled”.
The lawyers responded by referencing the Foreign Enlistment Act (1870), which makes it an offence for Britons to “fight for a state at war with another state with which the UK is at peace”, and universal jurisdiction as important pieces of legislation.
They described “the biggest concern for the UK [as] people attending training camps or fighting in war zones and returning to the UK as terrorists”, but said it was “unlikely that an attempt would be successful that sought to characterise membership of… the IDF as terrorism”.
## Providing safeguards
Two years later, in 2019, the Israeli ministry of justice was once again shopping around for legal advice about the status of British nationals in the IDF.
The department produced a questionnaire to be sent to “lawyers in England” about “laws or regulations” addressing “whether UK citizens can serve in foreign militaries”.
The overall objective of the questionnaire was to provide “adequate safeguards for… current and former officials and IDF service members traveling abroad”.
To this end, the justice ministry wanted clarity on whether a “UK citizen who served or is currently serving in the IDF [would] be at risk when travelling back to the UK”.
This was particularly important given “some IDF soldiers are dual UK citizens, though a small number are foreign citizens who voluntarily serve in Israel”.
The Israeli government therefore sought clarity on whether “enlistment in a foreign military [was] strictly forbidden under UK law, or is there a requirement and mechanism under which a UK citizen must notify and/or seek authorization to enlist in the foreign army”.
Another question focussed on the “civil or criminal sanctions [which a UK citizen could] face for non-compliance with these laws or regulations”.
Similar questionnaires were produced for other jurisdictions including South Africa, Belgium, France, Spain, Switzerland, and Germany.
Other emails show that legal advice was subsequently provided to the Israeli ministry of justice, but its full contents do not appear to be among the leaked documents seen by *Declassified*..
### RELATED
[
## Israel lobbied Britain to change law on war crimes arrests
][7] [READ MORE **][8]
## Sar-El
A further concern for the Israeli ministry of justice was the legal status of foreign nationals who were volunteering for the IDF in non-military roles.
Officials wanted to know whether the legal position would change if a foreign national was “providing logistical support [to the IDF] such as organizing uniforms and supplies… and other non-combat related activities”.
These concerns likely focussed on the activities Sar-El, the national project for volunteers for Israel, which operates under the direction of the Israeli Logistics Corps and effectively functions as an IDF unit.
Foreign [volunteers][9] with Sar-El are “completely integrated into military life”, according to the IDF, wearing the Israeli army uniform and working under the direction of soldiers.
Around 700 people from the UK and Ireland have travelled to Israel with Sar-El since 7 October, helping to fill labour shortages caused by reserve duty and foreign workers leaving the country.
## Universal Jurisdiction
While seeking advice on the legal status of Britons in the IDF, the Israeli government also waged a campaign to protect its own officials from criminal proceedings in Britain.
Universal jurisdiction allows for the most serious crimes such as genocide and torture to be prosecuted in another country.
After several arrest applications were issued for Israeli officials visiting Britain during the 2000s, the Israeli government [lobbied][10] the UK government to modify its approach to universal jurisdiction legislation.
One Israeli memo addressed to Britain’s ministry of justice, for instance, outlined concerns about the “misuse of existing criminal procedures in the UK in universal jurisdiction cases, as it affects Israeli nationals”.
The memo urged that “serious consideration be given to addressing these concerns, in the immediate term, through specific legislative amendments”.
Israel’s proposed amendments included requiring “the consent of the Attorney-General or the DPP [Director of Public Prosecutions] before an arrest warrant or summons is issued”.
The UK government was also pressed to outline what considerations would be taken into account by the Attorney General or the DPP before such consent would be offered.
Israel’s recommendations were apparently well received.
In September 2011, David Cameron’s coalition government [passed][11] new legislation requiring the consent of the DPP before universal jurisdiction arrest warrants could be issued – precisely what Israel had requested.
Britain’s then foreign secretary William Hague indicated how the changes were being implemented with Israeli officials in mind.
“We cannot have a position where Israeli politicians feel they cannot visit this country”, he declared.
The post [Israel secretly sought legal advice about Britons serving in the IDF][12] appeared first on [Declassified UK][13].
[1]: https://ddosecrets.org/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/over-2000-britons-served-for-israel-amid-gaza-genocide/
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62095
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62095
[5]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28656874
[6]: https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/prosecute-british-who-fight-israeli-army-says-baroness-warsi
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=56940
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=56940
[9]: http://www.inminds.co.uk/img/2007-05-20.idf.sar-el2.png
[10]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/israel-lobbied-britain-to-change-law-on-war-crimes-arrests/
[11]: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/universal-jurisdiction
[12]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/israel-secretly-sought-legal-advice-about-britons-serving-in-the-idf/
[13]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/israel-secretly-sought-legal-advice-about-britons-serving-in-the-idf/

2026-02-13 11:16:34 GMT

Terrorism ban on Palestine Action ruled unlawful by High Court
The Home Office’s decision to ban Palestine Action as a terrorist group last year was unlawful, a three-judge panel at the High Court [has ruled][1].
In a hearing on Friday, Dame Victoria Sharp, one of the judges, said there had been “very significant interference with the right to freedom of speech and freedom of assembly”.
The court, she said, considered the proscription of the group “disproportionate”.
Despite the ruling, the group will remain proscribed until a further court order because it has “yet to hear argument on whether there should be a stay of any order setting aside the proscription order pending the possibility of appeal,” the judges said.
The judgment is a major blow for former home secretary Yvette Cooper as well as the Israeli arms companies who lobbied for a crackdown on the group.
It will be a relief for over 2,700 protesters who have been arrested for showing support for the group since the controversial ban.
The ruling comes a week after a jury [decided][2] not to convict six Palestine Action members accused of some of the most serious criminal charges leveled against the group.
Huda Ammori, the co-founder of Palestine Action who challenged the proscription order, said on Friday: “This is a monumental victory both for our fundamental freedoms here in Britain and in the struggle for freedom for the Palestinian people, striking down a decision that will forever be remembered as one of the most extreme attacks on free speech in recent British history.”
Ammori won on two of the four grounds that she brought in her challenge. The court found that the proscription decision violated rights enshrined in UK law, namely freedoms of expression, peaceful assembly and association with others.
It also upheld her claims that Cooper’s decision to proscribe the group was not consistent with the Home Office’s own policy.
The decision to authorise a judicial review had been made in part to expedite the unprecedented number of terrorism-related cases moving through the courts.
Home secretary Shabana Mahmood said she was “disappointed” by the ruling and that the government will appeal the decision.
“I am disappointed by the court’s decision and disagree with the notion that banning this terrorist organisation is disproportionate,” Mahmood said.
The court has directed parties to provide written submissions by 20 February on what should happen next in light of the judgement.
### RELATED
[
## Revealed: How Palestine Action was banned
][3] [READ MORE **][4]
## **‘Honourable history’**
The ban on Palestine Action was [announced][5] in June 2025 shortly after activists broke into RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire and sprayed red paint into the turbines of two military aircraft used for refuelling and transport.
Cooper told parliament that month: “The UK’s defence enterprise is vital to the nation’s national security and this Government will not tolerate those who put that security at risk”.
An [order][6] was pushed through parliament in July which added Palestine Action to the list of banned groups under the Terrorism Act 2000.
The Home Office included two Russian neo-Nazi organisations, the Maniac Murder Cult and Russian Imperial Movement, within the same order.
It marked the first time in British history that the government used terrorism legislation to ban a civil disobedience organisation. Only [26][7] out of 650 MPs voted against the ban.
Raza Husain KC, representing Ammori, told the High Court in November that “civil disobedience on conscientious grounds has a long and honourable history in this country”, arguing that Palestine Action followed in the footsteps of direct action protest groups stretching back centuries.
“It is the mark of a civilised society that protests of this type can be accommodated”, Husain added. “Our client Ms. Ammori has been inspired by a long tradition of direct action in this country from the suffragettes to anti-apartheid activists to Iraq war protesters”.
### RELATED
[
## Did Trump pressure Starmer to ban Palestine Action?
][8] [READ MORE **][9]
## **Iran**
The Home Office sought to justify the ban on Palestine Action by briefing the press that the group might be funded by Iran.
On 23 June, the day of Cooper’s statement to parliament, the *Times* published a [report][10] saying “Iran could be funding Palestine Action, Home Office officials claimed”.
It added: “Officials are understood to be investigating its source of donations amid concerns that the Iranian regime, via proxies, is funding the group’s activities given that their objectives are aligned”.
Shortly afterwards, the *Daily Mail* asked: “Does Palestine Action’s cash trail lead all the way to Iran?”, with GB News, the *Spectator*, and the *Telegraph* also picking up on the story.
This point was contested by the UK’s independent expert on terrorism, Jonathan Hall KC, who told Channel 4 News earlier this week that those press briefings were “wrong”.
Hall was “not aware” of any evidence behind those claims, he added.
British intelligence reports first exposed by *Declassified *in July [indicated ][11]that the ban was in fact largely driven by Palestine Action’s impact on the Israeli arms industry in Britain.
The post [Terrorism ban on Palestine Action ruled unlawful by High Court][12] appeared first on [Declassified UK][13].
[1]: https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/huda-ammori-v-secretary-of-state-for-the-home-department-3/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/palestine-action-protesters-found-not-guilty-of-elbit-burglary/
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=59964
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=59964
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/revealed-how-palestine-action-was-banned/
[6]: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2025/803/pdfs/uksiem_20250803_en_001.pdf
[7]: https://youtu.be/JV8ltkSIuMc
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61310
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61310
[10]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-government-used-media-to-claim-iran-link-to-palestine-action/
[11]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/revealed-how-palestine-action-was-banned/
[12]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/terrorism-ban-on-palestine-action-ruled-unlawful-by-high-court/
[13]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/terrorism-ban-on-palestine-action-ruled-unlawful-by-high-court/

2026-02-12 12:21:33 GMT

Death of Iraqi teacher ‘a stain’ on British Army, says former top lawyer
[British soldiers inspect a prison in Basra in June 2003 (Photo: Alamy)]
The death of an Iraqi civilian after British soldiers forced him to perform exercises in dangerously hot weather “is a stain on the reputation of the British army,” the UK’s former top army lawyer in Iraq said.
Lieutenant Colonel Nicholas Mercer made the comments after reviewing the findings of an official inquiry by retired British judge Dame Anne Rafferty in [a report][1] released in late November.
Rafferty concluded that she had “no difficulty” in finding that Mousa Ali’s death was “the result of being forced to perform circuit-type exercises immediately prior to collapse”.
However, none of the soldiers involved will be prosecuted because the terms of the inquiry effectively gave them immunity.
Ali was a 35-year-old school teacher in Basra, southern Iraq when British soldiers detained him at his home in May 2003 in front of his wife and children, months after the US-led invasion.
Ali, described by witnesses as “very obese”, tried to communicate that he had a medical issue by pointing at his heart, but was ignored by soldiers at Camp Stephen, the Iraq Fatality Investigations (IFI) inquiry found.
Instead, he was forced by two soldiers to do “circuit-type exercises” and hold stress positions for two hours in over 40 degrees celsius “to relieve the boredom, play with his mind, make him feel uncomfortable and ‘muck about and have a bit of fun’”.
Camp Stephen in Basra where Mousa Ali and Radhi Nama died in May 2003 (Iraqi Fatality Investigtaions)
At the end of this gruelling ordeal, Ali collapsed from exhaustion.
Rafferty characterised what the soldiers subjected Ali to as “acts of bullying and cruelty by those in a position of power”.
Mercer, senior military legal adviser to the 1st Armoured Division during the Iraq war, said the IFI finding into his death revealed “a catalogue of abuse and failings in Iraq 2003”.
“From the proper supervision of prisoners, the failure of command and the failure to provide proper medical supervision, Dame Anne Rafferty quite rightly concluded that the soldiers caused the death of Mousa Ali,” he said.
However, Mercer said, such findings have been “treated with indifference”.
“Immunity from prosecution has been granted to those responsible and, meanwhile, the popular political narrative that British soldiers are subject to a witch hunt continues,” he said.
## **‘Please, please’**
The IFI was set up by the Ministry of Defence in 2014 after the High Court found that the existing mechanism to investigate allegations of abuse by British forces in Iraq was insufficient.
Run on a [“quasi-inquest”][2] model, it was made clear that soldiers who gave evidence would not be subject to prosecution on the basis of what they revealed.
In fact, an earlier investigation into Ali’s death by the Iraq Historic Allegations Team, a British government unit investigating allegations of abuse and unlawful killing of Iraqi civilians by British armed forces, [recommended][3] that war crime charges be brought against the soldiers involved.
But the Service Prosecuting Authority, the equivalent of the Crown Prosecution Service for military personnel, [declined][4] to proceed.
Five years later, the IFI found that Ali was in significant distress before he died. He repeatedly said: “Please, please, mister mister” and continuously fell over.
But whenever he fell, one of the soldiers “forcibly grabbed him by his clothes and lifted him back to his feet”.
Eventually, one soldier testified, Ali keeled over and fluid started coming out of his mouth – “perhaps foam or vomit”.
A medic found no signs of life when he arrived to help. Ali’s body was taken the following day to Basra Teaching Hospital “where it was left without any conversation with staff”.
### RELATED
[
## Forgotten photos expose UK army abuses in Iraq
][5] [READ MORE **][6]
## **Wider problems**
The IFI’s report also noted a broader culture of detainee abuse at Camp Stephen in Basra, with soldiers testifying that they witnessed detainees being verbally abused, kicked, slapped, forced into stress positions, and forced to do rigorous exercise.
“A blind eye was turned to mistreatment and there was a culture of ‘us’ and ‘them’ as to the local population”, the report said, paraphrasing a soldier who gave evidence to the inquiry.
Rafferty found that another Iraqi civilian, Radhi Nama, died at the camp during the same period as Ali, after British soldiers subjected him to hooding and forced him into a stress position.
While she was unable to determine the exact cause of Nama’s death, she concluded that “the stress position should not have been used on Radhi Nama whilst he was asked questions”, and that it was unlawful for him to be “hooded for an unspecified period” while being transported to the camp.
She also observed that despite being banned as an interrogation technique in 1972, on account of causing extreme discomfort and exhaustion to detainees, stress positions were “unacceptably still used on detainees by British Forces in Iraq until at least September 2003”.
The unit responsible for detaining both Mousa Ali and Radhi Nama, she found, had “a widely held understanding… that use of stress positions on detainees was appropriate.”
During the inquiry, she noted, it had been put to one soldier that investigators believed Nama had been beaten for “an unaccounted for period” while detained.
The soldier responded: “Nobody gives a fuck, really. It was war . . .”
The International Criminal Court has [concluded][7] that both Ali and Nama were victims of “the war crime of wilful killing/murder” at the hands of British soldiers.
## ‘Sobering reading’
Responding to the IFI report in parliament, Louise Sandher-Jones, minister for veterans and people, [said][8] that it “makes for sobering reading”, but did not condemn the lack of prosecutions, suggesting that the majority of British soldiers in Iraq served honourably.
She said: “The misconduct of a small number of service personnel has detracted from the reputation of the thousands who served bravely and loyally through some of the most challenging operational circumstances we have encountered since the end of the second world war.”
Mercer took a different view, recalling the case of Baha Mousa, a 26-year-old hotel worker who died at the hands of British soldiers in Basra four months after Mousa Ali.
An inquiry in 2011 found that Baha Mousa sustained at least 93 separate injuries after an “appalling episode of serious gratuitous violence” including beatings, stress positions and episodes of sexual humiliation.
That inquiry also found that eight Iraqi civilians had been tortured by the same unit.
“Like Baha Mousa,” Mercer said of the IFI findings, “it is a stain on the reputation of the British Army.”
The post [Death of Iraqi teacher ‘a stain’ on British Army, says former top lawyer][9] appeared first on [Declassified UK][10].
[1]: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/iraq-fatality-investigations-consolidated-report-into-the-deaths-of-radhi-nama-and-mousa-ali-and-the-death-of-ahmed-jabbar-kareem-ali#:~:text=Independent%20report-,Iraq%20Fatality%20Investigations:%20Consolidated%20report%20into%20the%20deaths%20of%20Radhi,December%202025%20%E2%80%94%20See%20all%20updates
[2]: https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-11-24/debates/25112442000013/IraqFatalityInvestigationsReport
[3]: https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/itemsDocuments/201209-otp-final-report-iraq-uk-eng.pdf
[4]: https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/itemsDocuments/201209-otp-final-report-iraq-uk-eng.pdf
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61126
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61126
[7]: https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/itemsDocuments/201209-otp-final-report-iraq-uk-eng.pdf
[8]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-statements/detail/2025-11-24/hlws1088
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/death-of-iraqi-teacher-a-stain-on-british-army-says-former-top-lawyer/
[10]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/death-of-iraqi-teacher-a-stain-on-british-army-says-former-top-lawyer/

2026-02-11 17:02:40 GMT

Over 2,000 Britons served for Israel amid Gaza genocide
More than 2,000 Britons served in the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) during the Gaza genocide, it can be revealed.
The information was obtained by *Declassified* via a Freedom of Information request issued to the IDF by lawyer Elad Man from the NGO *Hatzlacha*.
The data outlines the number of people with dual and multiple nationalities who were IDF service members as of March 2025.
It shows how 1,686 British-Israelis and a further 383 people with British, Israeli, and another nationality served in the IDF amid the annihilation of Gaza.
They were among over 50,000 IDF soldiers with Israeli and at least one other nationality.
The largest cohorts come from the US, Russia, Ukraine, France, and Germany.
Prior to this, data was only available on the number of Britons without Israeli citizenship serving in the IDF, so-called lone soldiers, a figure that was as low as [54][1].
## ‘Authorities must investigate’
The revelation that far more UK passport holders served in the IDF will raise serious legal questions for the British authorities, which have thus far failed to prosecute any citizens returning home after fighting in Gaza.
Paul Heron, a lawyer with the Public Interest Law Centre (PILC), told *Declassified*: “There must be no impunity where credible evidence links British nationals to grave breaches of international law.
“The UK has clear duties to prevent genocide and avoid assisting unlawful military action.
“Where dual nationals have served in units implicated in atrocities, the authorities must investigate promptly and, where the evidence meets the threshold, pursue arrest and prosecution like any other serious crime”.
*Declassified* contributor Hamza Yusuf previously [exposed][2] how Britons were serving in some of Israel’s “craziest” combat units in Gaza where they viewed Palestinian fighters as “rats” and “animals”.
Among the Britons identified by Yusuf was Levi Simon, who was seen “rummaging through the underwear drawers of Palestinian women forced to flee their homes” in Gaza.
Another was master sergeant Sam Sank from London, who filmed himself fighting in Gaza between December 2023 and January 2024.
Sank had [told][3] *The Times* that “based on the number of his friends in the IDF, which includes a Scot in his own small unit, [he] believes there are hundreds, if not thousands, more Britons fighting in Israel.”
His estimates match with the data *Hatzlacha* has now obtained from Israeli authorities.
The UK Foreign Office declined to comment on the new data but confirmed that it does not collect information on the number of Britons in the IDF.
### RELATED
[
## British fighters in Israel’s military: Is it legal?
][4] [READ MORE **][5]
## ‘No one is above the law’
The Metropolitan police’s war crimes unit was handed a complaint against ten Britons serving in the IDF last year.
Although their names were not made public, the 240-page dossier accused the British suspects of “targeted killing of civilians and aid workers, including by sniper fire, and indiscriminate attacks on civilian areas”.
It was submitted by the Public Interest Law Centre (PILC) and the Gaza-based Palestinian Centre for Human Rights.
“British nationals are under a legal obligation not to collude with crimes committed in Palestine. No one is above the law”, [said][6] Michael Mansfield, one of the lawyers who issued the complaint.
Heron told *Declassified*: “In our report to the Metropolitan Police, we set out credible evidence that 10 British nationals served in the Israeli Defence Forces and were involved in war crimes and acts giving rise to genocide.”
He said our findings showed “the issue is far deeper than we could ever believe.”
The Metropolitan Police did not respond when* Declassified* asked last year whether the people referred by PILC would be investigated for potential involvement in war crimes.
## Lone soldiers
In addition to dual nationals, over 50 “lone soldiers” from Britain – defined as IDF members without family in Israel to support them – have [served][7] for Israel amid the genocide.
That data was released last year in a [report][8] on “lone soldiers” published by the Knesset Research and Information Center within Israel’s parliament.
“Lone soldiers” also include immigrants who arrive in Israel alone and volunteers from abroad.
The Knesset report detailed how 54 Britons were among around 3,000 lone soldiers serving in the IDF in August 2024.
Thirty-three of those Britons joined through the Tzabar programme, which is an Israeli support system for young Jewish adults to “make Aliyah” (emigrate to Israel) and serve in the IDF.
In the past, the UK government itself has offered support to “lone soldiers” in Israel.
Chaim Schryer, originally from Manchester, served in *Netzah Yehuda*, an Israeli military unit which the US considered sanctioning in 2024 over evidence of gross human rights violations.
Schryer was [invited][9] onto a British Royal Navy ship in 2021 alongside other British ‘lone soldiers’ who joined the IDF without family in Israel to support them.
He was pictured walking onto the HMS Richmond wearing his *Netzah Yehuda* uniform, before being given a tour of the boat and meeting Britain’s defence attaché in Israel, Colonel Jim Priest.
Schryer is among at least three Britons identified by *Declassified*, using open-source data and facial recognition software, who served with Netzah Yehuda over recent years.
Chaim Schryer (right) boards HMS Richmond in 2021. (Photo: Royal Navy / X)
## Legal concerns
In July 2024, the International Court of Justice handed down its advisory opinion on the legal consequences of Israel’s occupation of Palestine.
The court advised that all UN member states – including the United Kingdom – were obligated to refrain from assisting Israel in maintaining its occupation.
In January 2024, the ICJ also put all member states on notice of the serious risk that genocide was being committed by Israel in Gaza.
“The duty to prevent genocide was triggered due to the actual or constructive knowledge of the immediate plausiblity that genocide was being or was about to be committed”, the UN commission of inquiry subsequently wrote.
To this end, the UK government’s failure to investigate or even monitor the activities of Britons serving in the IDF could be interpreted as tacit support for Israel’s military campaign.
Britain’s recent recognition of a Palestinian state might also mean that British nationals serving in the IDF could be in breach of the Foreign Enlistment Act.
This law, passed in 1870, makes it an [offence][10] for Britons “to fight for a foreign state at war with another state with which the UK is at peace”
A spokesperson for the International Centre of Justice for Palestinians (ICJP) said: **“**No one in the UK wants to live next door to a potential war criminal.
“And yet, British people who fought in the IDF are allowed to return to this country and live freely amongst us, despite fighting for an army that is committing genocide.
“It is utterly inexcusable that the UK government is failing to take action to hold citizens accountable for potential violations of international and domestic law”.
***Read the FOI response from the IDF below (in Hebrew)***
The post [Over 2,000 Britons served for Israel amid Gaza genocide][11] appeared first on [Declassified UK][12].
[1]: http://www.declassifieduk.org/revealed-over-50-britons-fought-for-israel-amid-gaza-genocide/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/the-british-israeli-soldiers-at-risk-of-gaza-war-crimes-probe/
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/british-fighters-in-israels-military-is-it-legal/
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=53713
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=53713
[6]: https://www.theguardian.com/law/2025/apr/07/ten-britons-accused-of-committing-war-crimes-while-fighting-for-israel-in-gaza
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/revealed-over-50-britons-fought-for-israel-amid-gaza-genocide/
[8]: https://fs.knesset.gov.il/globaldocs/MMM/7d0e8fd4-e91c-ef11-815f-005056aac6c3/2_7d0e8fd4-e91c-ef11-815f-005056aac6c3_11_20806.pdf
[9]: https://x.com/ukinisrael/status/1411664197113503744
[10]: https://novaramedia.com/2025/10/09/brits-serving-in-israeli-military-could-get-prison-time/
[11]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/over-2000-britons-served-for-israel-amid-gaza-genocide/
[12]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/over-2000-britons-served-for-israel-amid-gaza-genocide/

2026-02-10 21:21:39 GMT

‘Israel wiped out my family’, Survivor warns as UK considers arms sales
[An Israeli strike on a building in Gaza City this month, days after the al-Mawasi tent attack (Photo: Jehad Alshrafi / Alamy)]
Hanan Abu Hadaid’s family was fast asleep in their tent when the attack began.
“Suddenly, everything was turned upside down,” the 60-year-old told *Declassified* of the Israeli airstrike on 31 January that hit their shelter in al-Mawasi, an area in southern Gaza that the Israeli military has designated as a “safe zone”.
“The place filled with shrapnel. I was injured in my foot and thigh, and when I looked around, I saw my sons and grandchildren lying on the ground. I started calling out to them one by one, screaming, but no one answered.”
Her husband, Rebhi, and her sons, Muhammad, Hazem, and Hajar, as well as her grandchildren, Lia, Sham, and Jibril, were all dead.
The tent where they were living – after being displaced four times- had burned to the ground, together with all of their belongings, from bedding and blankets to kitchen utensils and clothes.
Hanan, who had been awake to perform dawn prayers when the explosion erupted, was the sole member of the family in the tent to survive.
Speaking to *Declassified* as a constant stream of surveillance drones buzzed above, she said the attack had dispelled any illusions she might have had that there is a ceasefire in Gaza.
“We posed no danger and were not a threat to anyone,” Hanan said.
“What happened is proof that the targeting of civilians and displaced people continues, even in the places we are told to flee to.”
A Quran was burnt by the attack. (Photo: Shaimaa Marwan)
## Repeated ceasefire violations
The family is among at least [581][1] Palestinians who have been killed by Israel since the October ceasefire agreement.
Despite these violations, trade secretary Peter Kyle said last month that 30 UK arms export licences to Israel suspended in 2024 could be “unblocked” when the ceasefire entered phase two. US officials [announced][2] in mid-January that phase two had begun.
Asked on Monday whether the suspended licences would be resumed soon, the business department pointed *Declassified* to [recent comments][3] from trade minister Chris Bryant in which he said the situation continued to be regularly assessed.
In private, some ministers have gone much further, with health secretary Wes Streeting saying in WhatsApp [messages][4] last July that “Israel is committing war crimes before our eyes”.
Streeting said Netanyahu’s government “talks the language of ethnic cleansing”, was behaving like a “rogue state” and should be treated like “pariahs”.
But comments in private mean nothing to victims like Hanan who stressed that staying silent on such massacres encourages Israel to commit more violations and reduces treaties to little more than ink on paper.
Many Palestinians in Gaza are wary of the ceasefire plan led by US president Donald Trump, which has also seen the establishment of the so-called “Board of Peace” and the Civil-Military Coordination Centre (CMCC).
The CMCC is responsible for monitoring the truce and facilitating the entry of aid into the enclave among other tasks, but has come under heavy criticism including for failing to halt ceasefire violations.
Several European countries are [now reportedly][5] having doubts about participating in the CMCC and are considering reducing or pulling back personnel working at the centre.
In late October, a small team of British planning officers embedded within the CMCC. The government said at the time that they were there “to ensure that the UK remains integrated into the US-led planning efforts for Gaza post-conflict stability”, but were not monitoring the ceasefire in Gaza.
*Declassified* understands that this team is still in place, and asked the Ministry of Defence on Monday what role they were playing.
A ministry spokesperson said: “The UK is committed to supporting the transition from a ceasefire to a sustainable peace.
“We will continue to play our part, not just in supporting the implementation of phase one of the peace initiative, but also on the crucial work on progressing phase two, towards recovery and reconstruction.”
### RELATED
[
## ‘Not welcome’: Palestinians condemn Blair’s role on Gaza ‘peace board’
][6] [READ MORE **][7]
## Shattered lives
Nearby the Abu Hadaids’ tent at the moment of the attack was Nozha Abu Hadid, the sister of Hanan Abu Hadaid’s husband, Rebhi, who was living in a neighbouring tent.
More than 20 people were injured in the vicinity of the targeted tent, she said.
“We pulled the wounded out from the fire and shrapnel with our bare hands. There were only burned bodies and cries for help,” Nozha recounted.
Among the injured, Nozha said, was a young woman who was four months pregnant.
“A single piece of shrapnel shattered the fetus inside her. Doctors struggled greatly to save her life and were forced to clear the uterus of the fetal remains. She is now receiving treatment at Nasser Medical Complex,” she said.
Nozha Abu Hadaid and her grandson sit near the sit of the attack in al-Mawasi. (Photo: Shaimaa Marwan)
An Israeli military source [told][8] journalists that several attacks on 31 January, including the one in al-Mawasi were “in response to Hamas’ blatant violations of the ceasefire agreement” without further detail.
Nozha said she is profoundly shocked after losing her brother and his family during what was supposed to be a ceasefire.
“The presence of [ceasefire] monitors is meaningless if massacres are being committed before their eyes without accountability,” Nozha said.
“Silence here is not neutrality; it is a clear form of bias.”
She added: “There is no safe place in the Gaza Strip. Everyone is either conspiring against the Palestinian people here or hiding behind silence.”
Her sister-in-law, Hanan, recalled her husband’s words before he was killed: “He was not optimistic about the ceasefire. He used to tell me: this is a devastating war, a war of annihilation. I didn’t want to believe him, but he was right.
“After my entire family was wiped out, I no longer believe a single word about a ceasefire. The occupation killed them in cold blood and took them all from me: my husband, my sons, my grandchildren.”
The post [‘Israel wiped out my family’, Survivor warns as UK considers arms sales][9] appeared first on [Declassified UK][10].
[1]: https://www.unrwa.org/resources/reports/unrwa-situation-report-207-situation-gaza-strip-and-west-bank-including-east-jerusalem
[2]: https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/trump-administration-says-phase-two-gaza-ceasefire-has-begun
[3]: https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-01-29/debates/05476930-C060-4966-820E-F26B80C60E8D/details
[4]: https://news.sky.com/story/read-wes-streetings-messages-with-mandelson-in-full-13505439
[5]: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/some-european-states-rethink-presence-us-backed-gaza-base-diplomats-say-2026-01-20/
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61769
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61769
[8]: https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2026/01/31/gaza-civil-defense-says-22-killed-in-israeli-strikes_6750009_4.html
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/israel-wiped-out-my-family-survivor-warns-as-uk-considers-arms-sales/
[10]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/israel-wiped-out-my-family-survivor-warns-as-uk-considers-arms-sales/

2026-02-10 21:21:34 GMT

Mandelson ‘lobbied Israel for Tory government’ during Gaza genocide
Peter Mandelson claimed he conducted unofficial diplomacy with Israel on behalf of the last Conservative government after fresh details of his ties to Jeffrey Epstein had emerged, *Declassified* has found.
The disgraced Labour grandee said he raised questions with the Israeli government in the early months of the Palestinian genocide “on behalf” of then-foreign secretary, David Cameron, who returned to government in November 2023.
New details of Mandelson’s friendship with Epstein had emerged in June that year, with UK media outlets reporting that he stayed in contact with the billionaire long after his conviction for child sex offences.
Yet Mandelson boasted about an apparent role with Rishi Sunak’s government months later during a Zoom call with a former Israeli military spokesman in April 2024.
The revelation comes as the Conservatives are heavily criticising Labour for appointing Mandelson as British ambassador to Washington, saying he should have had no role in UK foreign policy once details of his ties to Epstein became known.
Cameron did not initially respond to requests for comment. But since this article was published, his spokeperson has said he does not recognise Mandelson’s claims.
## Personal gain?
Mandelson’s Zoom meeting took place weeks after three British aid workers were killed by Israel in Gaza.
It was organised by the European Leadership Network (ELNET), which describes itself as “the most influential pro-Israel advocacy organisation in Europe”. A recording was [later published][1] on its YouTube channel.
The video shows Mandelson saying: “[The Israeli government is] allowing aid to come in through Ashdod port, which they have been asked to do repeatedly by its allies since the beginning of the year.
“Indeed, I did myself on behalf of the Foreign Secretary when I was in Israel.”
He also suggested that he had been in discussions days earlier with the head of the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT), the Israeli defence ministry unit overseeing policies and coordinating aid in the occupied Palestinian territories.
Mandelson concluded his comments on the Zoom call by saying: “The [Israeli] government might be better off if it listened more to the IDF. If you can pass on that one.”
A spokesperson for the UK Foreign Office refused to comment about Mandelson’s stated role, saying it would be inappropriate for them to discuss allegations against the previous government.
Cameron’s spokesperson said of the Mandelson claims: “We do not recognise this at all. Peter Mandelson was never asked to represent Lord Cameron or the government on foreign affairs.
“It was, however, the government’s policy to ask Israel repeatedly to open Ashdod Port to allow for more aid to flow into Gaza, something Lord Cameron regularly referred to in the House of Lords and in the media.”
At the time, Mandelson did not hold any official government positions and was still director of his lobbying firm, Global Counsel.
The company’s clients include the spy tech company Palantir, co-founded by Jeffrey Epstein’s “great friend” Peter Thiel.
John McDonnell, the former Labour shadow chancellor, told *Declassified*: “The question to be asked about Mandelson’s involvement in any political or diplomatic venture is whether its motive was public service or personal gain.”
### RELATED
[
## Revealed: Peter Mandelson asked Jeffrey Epstein for Israel advice
][2] [READ MORE **][3]
## ‘Shadowy back channels’
Mandelson’s diplomatic efforts are likely to have come in January 2024, when he attended an ELNET trip to Israel.
The delegation included former Conservative Party leader Lord Michael Howard and the former director of Conservative Friends of Israel, Lord Stuart Polak.
They spent an hour with the Israeli president, Isaac Herzog, as well as attending a military briefing from the IDF and dining with “high-ranking Israeli policy makers”.
During the trip Mandelson attended an ELNET dinner where Britain’s ambassador to Israel was present.
One delegate later said that the Israeli side “came to talk to us and not to listen”, adding: “Israel needs an election soon to get rid of these terrible politicians.”
The independent MP Zarah Sultana told *Declassified*: “It is another stain on our democracy that Peter Mandelson was conducting unofficial diplomacy with Israel while it was committing genocide in Gaza, and doing so ‘on behalf of’ the foreign secretary.
“This is the same rotten pattern we keep seeing: a political establishment that operates through shadowy back channels, beyond democratic scrutiny, where the same well-connected figures resurface again and again no matter how many scandals trail behind them.”
She added: “The government must urgently remove Palantir from all public contracts, and establish a full independent public inquiry into Peter Mandelson’s role, his contacts, and who he was really working for.”
The Conservative Party and Global Counsel did not respond to questions from *Declassified*.
The post [Mandelson ‘lobbied Israel for Tory government’ during Gaza genocide][4] appeared first on [Declassified UK][5].
[1]: https://youtu.be/yao_rCumGvQ?si=Ex8IxYfW2UVa5K3p&t=1658
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=60369
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=60369
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/mandelson-lobbied-israel-for-tory-government-during-gaza-genocide/
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/mandelson-lobbied-israel-for-tory-government-during-gaza-genocide/

2026-02-09 20:17:10 GMT

Starmer ‘on borrowed time’ after losing Mandelson and McSweeney
Keir Starmer’s reputation will “forever…be associated with the decision to appoint the best friend of the world’s most notorious paedophile” as British ambassador to Washington, the author of a book on the prime minister has said.
Investigative journalist Paul Holden told *Declassified* that after the resignation of the prime minister’s chief of staff Morgan McSweeney: “Keir Starmer is on borrowed time. He’s done. There’s no coming back from this.
“I mean he was pretty much toast before this because he was so deeply unpopular and there were already moves to remove him.
“The problem is we now have this political vacuum because the success of the McSweeney-Mandelson-Starmer political project has been to totally take utter control of the commanding heights of the Labour party. It’s bureaucracy but also the cabinet.”
***Watch our interview with Paul Holden***
Holden, who wrote a [book][1] about Starmer’s top aide called *The Fraud*, said “The eight most senior people in cabinet all have links to McSweeney going back years and decades. This entire political project is implicated and tainted by this scandal.
“And that’s a real problem because in normal governments you’ll have a cabinet that is chosen from a wide range of talents within a broad political movement. This isn’t.”
Starmer’s most likely challenger as prime minister, health secretary Wes Streeting, has even closer ties to Mandelson, potentially ruining his leadership bid.
“This is a cabinet chosen from a tiniest fraction, of the tiniest fraction, of the tiniest fraction of the Labour party,” Holden commented. “Not only are they despicable, not only are they loathed by the public, there’s nobody there to take over the reins as a result because they are all tainted by it.”
### RELATED
[
## How Keir Starmer conned the British electorate
][2] [READ MORE **][3]
## **‘They didn’t care’**
Holden believes that Starmer’s team must have known about Mandelson’s ties to Epstein when they appointed him US ambassador.
JP Morgan bank had investigated its own links to Epstein and the results were [disclosed][4] as part of “open court submissions” in the US at least a year before the appointment.
Holden described the bank’s findings as “a forensic detailed analysis of all the emails between JP Morgan senior staff and Jeffrey Epstein in which Peter Mandelson’s relationship was uncovered.”
The bank’s report “sets out on a timeline of every single email they have which indicates Jeffrey Epstein and Peter Mandelson had a close friendship after Jeffrey Epstein had been convicted of soliciting prostitution with a 14-year-old minor.
“So the idea that [Labour] wouldn’t have known this is nonsense. Everyone knew this. They didn’t care. And they didn’t care because Petie was one of them,” Holden said, referring to an email in which Epstein referred to Mandelson by that nickname.
### RELATED
[
## Labour think tank paid PR firm to investigate Declassified journalist
][5] [READ MORE **][6]
## **‘Obvious’**
Mandelson’s appointment as US ambassador was inevitable in Holden’s understanding because “it was the culmination of a long term political project in which Mandelson and McSweeney were operating together.
“When Sir Keir Starmer becomes prime minister and Morgan McSweeney becomes his chief of staff, it was obvious that Peter Mandelson was going to be chosen because why on earth wouldn’t they choose someone who Morgan McSweeney had been working with for absolute[ly] years?
“This is what they do…when they assume this sort of power, this is how they behave – and they behave in ways that most people find despicable”.
The consequences could even be felt in Gaza, Holden argued, saying McSweeney had a “really profound impact on the way in which the Labour party approached Israel and it’s an impact that has been created over a decade.”
When Jeremy Corbyn led the Labour party, McSweeney was “secretly, for two years, working to inflame the so-called antisemitism crisis, which was then used when the Labour party came to power under Keir Starmer to effectively purge the left-wing from the labour party,” Holden reflected.
“But what it also did was make it almost impossible to express any sort of meaningful solidarity with Palestine or to be robustly critical of Israel.”
Looking ahead to the day after Keir Starmer, Holden warned: “If anybody takes over from this [same] political faction we are not going to see any change.”
The post [Starmer ‘on borrowed time’ after losing Mandelson and McSweeney][7] appeared first on [Declassified UK][8].
[1]: https://orbooks.com/catalog/the-fraud/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=60748
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=60748
[4]: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeffrey-epstein-peter-mandelson-jpmorgan-b2361580.html
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62019
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=62019
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/starmer-on-borrowed-time-after-losing-mandelson-and-mcsweeney/
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/starmer-on-borrowed-time-after-losing-mandelson-and-mcsweeney/

2026-02-07 10:44:35 GMT

Labour think tank paid PR firm to investigate Declassified journalist
A think tank with ties to the top of the Labour government paid a PR firm £30,000 to investigate journalists from media outlets including *Declassified UK*, it has emerged.
Our chief reporter [John McEvoy][1] was among the journalists targeted by the group Labour Together in November 2023, according to a [report][2] by *Democracy for Sale*.
Labour Together turned to PR firm APCO Worldwide for help after media revelations about its undeclared funding, which resulted in a penalty from the Electoral Commission.
The PR firm, which has also represented Israel’s largest arms firm Elbit Systems, was reportedly tasked with profiling journalists that might be investigating Labour Together’s funding.
McEvoy had not, at that point, written about Labour Together for *Declassified*. However he believes an [article][3] he wrote in 2020 for the Canary could have put him on their radar.
“It was the first time anyone had made the connection between Labour Together, Morgan McSweeney, the Centre for Countering Digital Hate, and Stop Funding Fake News, which was running an astroturf campaign against the Canary, where I worked at the time”, McEvoy commented.
This article may have been particularly sensitive for McSweeney, who reportedly told Labour Together MPs: “Destroy the Canary or the Canary destroys us”.
### RELATED
[
## How Keir Starmer conned the British electorate
][4] [READ MORE **][5]
By 2023 McSweeney was Keir Starmer’s chief of staff, having passed command of Labour Together to Josh Simons, who is now a government minister.
Simons personally commissioned and reviewed the intelligence report prepared by APCO on behalf of Labour Together, according to a [report][6] in the *Guardian*.
Labour Together was instrumental in making Starmer leader of the Labour Party after Jeremy Corbyn’s tenure.
McSweeney steered the party back to the right, frequently turning to Peter Mandelson for advice and pushing for him to become Britain’s ambassador to the US.
Labour Together has received significant funding from Sir Trevor Chinn, one of the most prominent pro-Israel donors in the UK.
Stuart Polak, a stalwart of the pro-Israel lobby in Britain, was a Senior Counsellor at APCO between 2020 and 2025.
In a statement on social media, Simons described the claims as “nonsense”, saying: “APCO were asked to look into a suspected illegal hack, which had nothing to do with UK journalists at Sunday Times, Guardian, or any other brilliant UK newspaper”.
Simons did not add any further comment on whether he will commit to releasing the report.
The post [Labour think tank paid PR firm to investigate Declassified journalist][7] appeared first on [Declassified UK][8].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/author/john-mcevoy/
[2]: https://democracyforsale.substack.com/p/exclusive-morgan-mcsweeneys-labour-together-investigators-journalists
[3]: https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2020/12/01/exclusive-labour-right-linked-to-campaign-to-shut-down-the-canary/
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=60748
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=60748
[6]: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/feb/06/labour-minister-intelligence-files-gathered-on-journalists-josh-simons
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/labour-think-tank-paid-pr-firm-to-investigate-declassified-journalist/
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/labour-think-tank-paid-pr-firm-to-investigate-declassified-journalist/

2026-02-06 13:00:01 GMT

One hundred years of British interference in Venezuela
[Oil installations on Lake Maracaibo in Venezuela in 1935 (Photo: Alamy)]
In October 2001, two years into his presidency, Hugo Chávez made a trip to London to meet with then UK prime minister Tony Blair and other high-level officials.
Official records detail how the Venezuelan president’s proposed Hydrocarbons Law, a major restructuring of Venezuela’s oil industry, was high on the British agenda.
The law aimed to assert sovereignty over Venezuela’s resources by mandating at least 50% state ownership in mixed enterprises and increasing royalties on foreign oil interests.
This was a serious cause for concern for Britain, whose main interests in Venezuela centred on Shell, BP, and BG Group’s investments in the oil and gas industry.
“British companies have over $4bn already invested” in Venezuela, noted one Foreign Office official, with new investments of another $3bn planned for the oil industry.
Blair was thus instructed by advisers to impress on Chávez that the UK government was “following your proposed hydrocarbons legislation very closely”.
In private, Blair’s adviser and future MI6 chief John Sawers wrote that “the only reason for seeing him is to benefit British oil and gas companies”.
Sawers’ note drove at the core issue which had been guiding Britain’s relations with Venezuela for over a century: oil.
*Declassified* has combed through dozens of files in the National Archives which expose how the UK government has repeatedly sought to thwart the nationalisation of oil in Venezuela since it was first discovered during the early twentieth century.
Working in partnership with Britain’s leading oil corporations, the Foreign Office has resorted to political pressure, propaganda activities, and covert operations to maintain control over Venezuela’s lucrative crude.
## **The origins of Britain’s interest in Venezuela’s oil**
In 1912, Royal Dutch-Shell[ began][1] operations in Venezuela and, two years later, the company – alongside US firm General Asphalt – [discovered][2] a petroleum field in the small town of Mene Grande.
George Bernard Reynolds, a geologist at Venezuelan Oil Concessions Limited (VOC), a Shell subsidiary, [described][3] the supplies as “enough to satisfy the most exacting”.
By 1920, the CIA [reported][4] that practically all of Venezuela’s oil production and its most promising concessions were held by Royal Dutch-Shell and two American companies, Jersey Standard (SOCNJ) and Gulf.
Indeed, Venezuelan oil [controlled][5] by Royal Dutch-Shell had increased by over 600% from 210,000 barrels in 1917 to 1,584,000 in 1921.
“Is there any other company more conclusively British than this”, [asked][6] Sir Marcus Samuel, chairman of the Shell Transport and Trading Company, in June 1915, “who have proved themselves more willing and able to serve the interests of the Empire?”
But foreign control over oil had serious consequences for Venezuela’s land and people.
In 1936, oil workers in Maracaibo called a general strike in response to low wages, poor living conditions and the association of oil firms with the late dictator, Juan Vicente Gómez. It lasted for 43 days, during which time oil production [decreased][7] by 39%.
In[ response][8], Venezuelan president General Eleazar López Contreras introduced a series of reforms to improve labour conditions.
This made him unpopular with the British and US oil executives, who were described by US ambassador Meredith Nicholson as belonging to “the old school of ‘imperialists’ who believed that might – in the business sense – was right”.
Venezuela’s oil nonetheless remained central to the British imperial project and, by the outbreak of World War Two, Venezuelan oil “took on particular significance within the British war effort as oil from the Middle East became less accessible following the closure of the Mediterranean in 1940”, according to [research][9] by academic Mark Seddon.
Officials therefore became increasingly worried about nationalisation in Latin America, particularly after foreign oil interests – including those of Shell – had been expropriated in Mexico in 1938.
That year, for instance, British diplomat John Balfour[ wrote][10]: “We should do all we can to show that it is not in the interests of a Latin-American country like Mexico to eliminate British interests from participating in the exploitation of its oil resources”.
### RELATED
[
## How Britain helped Trump destabilise Venezuela
][11] [READ MORE **][12]
## **A dangerous opponent of capital**
Concerns around nationalisation arose once again during the Rómulo Betancourt administration in the 1940s.
He was described by the Foreign Office in 1945 as “by far the most dangerous opponent of capital in Venezuela”, while the oil companies worried about his past support for communism.
These concerns proved overblown as Betancourt developed into a staunch anti-communist. According to a CIA [file][13] dated March 1948, Betancourt and his predecessor, Rómulo Gallegos, met to discuss “the proposed outlawing of the Communist Party in Venezuela.”
The first step, according to the document, “was the dismissal from the [oil workers union] Fedepetrol of all Communist Party petroleum syndicate delegates”.
Shell’s directors nonetheless responded positively to the military coup which toppled Betancourt in 1948.
They believed, as UK ambassador John H. Magowan noted in February 1949, that the new administration would “reverse the Betancourt tendency to hostility towards the ‘capitalists’ and ‘colonial’ powers”.
While US-owned SOCNJ had emerged as Venezuela’s main oil producer by this time, Shell remained the second most important player and, by 1950, the company had centralized its operations,[ building][14] a modernist headquarters in northern Caracas.
## **The propaganda campaign**
During the 1960s, as the shadow of the Cold War cast over Latin America, a propaganda unit within the Foreign Office secretly worked to protect Britain’s oil interests in Venezuela.
That unit, named the Information Research Department (IRD), had been set up in 1948 to collect information about communism and distribute it to contacts worldwide.
The goal was to build resilience against communist and other national liberation movements while cultivating foreign agents of influence such as journalists, politicians, military officers, and businessmen.
By 1961, the IRD viewed Venezuela as the third most important country in Latin America in light of the risk of left-wing “subversion” and Britain’s strategic stake in the country’s oil industry.
That year, the IRD [worked][15] with Britain’s intelligence services to promote a boycott of *El Nacional*, the largest newspaper in Venezuela, with the goal of forcing it “to abandon its campaign in favor of expropriating foreign companies and promoting communist agitation”.
The campaign not only had the backing of powerful conservative and anti-communist groups in Venezuela but also the foreign oil companies, who agreed to suspend their advertising in the newspaper.
By 1962, IRD officer Leslie Boas was able to boast that *El Nacional* had “changed its tone in a great way”, with the newspaper’s circulation also dropping from 70,000 to 45,000 per day.
Reactionary networks in Venezuela were also being covertly funded by Shell in this period, according to recently declassified files.
In April 1962, Boas wrote to IRD chief Donald Hopson about the Latin American Information Committee (LAIC) which was “now doing quite active work… in Venezuela”.
The first director of LAIC was Enno Hobbing, who divided his work between Time/Life magazine and the CIA and later played a role in Chile’s 1973 coup d’état.
Boas explained that he “had a long talk with Hobbing […] and there do seem to be one or two ways in which we can be of mutual help without either of us burning our fingers”.
A 1962 letter sent from Information Research Department officer Leslie Boas to his boss at the Foreign Office (National Archives)
Such help would include “an unattributable supply of IRD material to contacts” of LAIC in return for LAIC supplying Boas with access to and information about local anti-communist networks.
Remarkably, Boas disclosed that Shell was “contributing financially to” LAIC alongside US retailer Sears Roebuck and other “International Business Machines”.
He added that “none of the local branches of these companies such as Shell de Venezuela are cooperating either financially or overtly in any way, it is being done through their head offices and LAIC who have their own offices in New York”.
It was during this period that Shell and BP were also [providing][16] direct, “handsome” subsidies to the IRD to promote their oil interests across Latin America, the Middle East, and Africa.
## **Nationalisation rekindled**
The IRD continued to promote Britain’s oil interests in Venezuela through the 1960s and 1970s, until the unit was closed down in 1977.
In a country assessment sheet for Venezuela, dated 1969, an IRD official noted how “we have considerable investments in the country, particularly those of Shell, whose fixed installations alone have been conservatively valued at £300 million”.
The official continued: “Shell’s operations in Venezuela play an important role in the company’s very substantial contribution in invisibles [earnings through intangible assets] to our balance of payments”, noting that Britain’s key objective was therefore “to protect our investments”.
Two years later, IRD field officer Ian Knight Smith wrote to London with concerns about how “the emotional issue of economic nationalism, always a potent force in a country whose main natural resources are largely in the hands of foreign companies, was [being] rekindled”.
Worse still, the Venezuelan president, Rafael Caldera, had “made his own contribution to the new nationalism – in the shape of a law nationalising all natural gas deposits”.
The IRD consequently prepared briefings “on communist instigation of charges against the international oil companies” to be shared with contacts across Venezuela.
In addition, the propaganda unit “cast around for material with which to brief IRD contacts who are in a position to influence government policy or legislation affecting foreign investments in Venezuela”.
Officials were particularly interested in commissioning a “well-researched paper on the positive aspects of foreign investment in developing countries, helping to counter the growing assumption, carefully fostered by the extreme left, that all foreign investment is basically suspect”.
It was within this context that the Foreign Office privately advised that “we should protect as far as we are able Shell’s continued access to Venezuelan oil”.
## **Share of the gravy**
For all its efforts, the IRD was not able to turn the tide of nationalisation in Venezuela, with plans developed during the 1970s for the early reversion of foreign oil interests to the state.
Venezuelan oil was officially nationalised in 1976, with foreign companies including Shell being replaced by the state-owned Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA).
In 1976, President Carlos Andres Pérez and well-wishers celebrate as Venezuela’s oil industry is nationalised (Photo: Alamy)
But this was by no means the end of the road for Britain’s oil interests in Venezuela.
In a background briefing for a visit by Venezuelan president Carlos Andrés Pérez, dated November 1977, the Foreign Office observed that “Shell is still our largest single interest”.
The official added: “It should not be forgotten that despite nationalisation our largest commercial stake in this country is still Shell, and although they no longer, since nationalisation, produce oil here, they earn millions of dollars from their service and marketing contracts with their former company”.
The company also continued “to off-take very large volumes of Venezuelan oil for sale mostly in the US and Canada”.
Another official remarked upon the “furious activity of all European countries, including ourselves, in trying to get our share of Venezuela’s economic gravy”.
By 1978, the *New York Times* went so far as to say that Shell was “busier in Venezuela than before the oil industry was nationalized”.
## ‘**Shell has been active**‘
Even still, Britain’s oil firms wished to return to Venezuela’s oilfields.
Those hopes were stoked in the early 1990s by the “Oil Opening” of President Carlos Andrés Péres, whose austerity measures led to an explosion of poverty and street protests, but dashed once again by Chávez’ proposed Hydrocarbons Law in 2001.
In the lead-up to Chávez’ visit that year to London, Britain’s leading oil companies were once again in the prime minister’s ear about the projected impact on their interests.
Blair’s briefing noted unambiguously that UK and US companies were “concerned” about the oil reforms and wanted them watered down.
Days before the visit, Shell’s chairman Philip Watts offered suggestions on how Blair might handle Chávez.
Letter sent in 2001 from Shell chairman Philip Watts to the Foreign Office (National Archives)
“As you may have appreciated, Shell has been active in helping in the preparations for the visit through the Foreign Office”, Watts wrote.
“Considering the importance of the energy sector for both the Venezuelan and UK economies, I thought the PM may appreciate a small briefing on our… plans in Venezuela”, he added.
Those plans involved ameliorating the “uncertain investment climate” and softening the “fiscal and legal framework” in the country.
As part of the charm offensive, Watts also hosted a “farewell” banquet for Chávez, to which foreign secretary Jack Straw and other senior ministers were invited.
BP and BG Group also “registered their interest with No.10 about the visit”, with BP preparing “to put their case… forcefully” in favour of a meeting between the two leaders.
## ‘**The Americans are concerned**‘
The US government also weighed in on the matter.
On 18 October, an official in the British embassy in Washington wrote to London that “the Americans are concerned about the impact that the Hydrocarbons Law will have on investment in the energy sector”.
They continued: “The major oil companies, including BP, had all made clear that its tax and restrictive joint venture productions would hinder their operations”.
The US state department “thought it would be particularly useful for Chavez to hear these concerns in London, given his tendency to discount messages from the US”.
To this end, the George Bush administration hoped Blair would “talk sense into [Chávez] on the Hydrocarbons Law, where BP are among those who stand to lose”.
[Blair hosts Chávez at Downing Street in October 2001 (Photo: Gerry Penny / Alamy)]Blair hosts Chávez at Downing Street in October 2001 (Photo: Gerry Penny / Alamy)
Further pressure was applied by Gustavo Cisneros, a Venezuelan billionaire and media mogul who was introduced to Blair in 2000 by *Daily Telegraph* owner Conrad Black.
Sawers, Blair’s adviser, noted that Cisneros’ “sole message” for Blair “was that Chávez was a real danger to stability and free markets (and, of course, rich Venezuelans like himself)”.
A briefing document prepared by Cisneros, for instance, warned that “Chavez will likely react” to oil prices dropping “by lashing out at the private sector”.
Sawers viewed Cisneros with suspicion but broadly agreed that Chávez was objectionable. There was, he wrote, “a chance that the picture [with Chávez] at the front door [of Downing Street] would come back to haunt us”.
He continued: “This is one of the World’s tyrants whose hand I won’t have to shake”.
## **The coup against Chávez**
A coup against Chávez broke out in April 2002, orchestrated by dissident military and political figures with support from Washington.
Pedro Carmona, an economist who was unconstitutionally appointed Venezuela’s president, quickly set about dismantling the country’s democracy and reversing Chávez’s oil reforms.
He happened to be in the offices of Cisneros, the mega mogul who had taken the opportunity to “pour poison” into Blair’s ears about Chávez, when the coup broke out.
The declassified files show how Britain quietly hoped the Carmona regime would be more accommodating to foreign interests while noting the unconstitutional nature of the coup.
“The Cabinet is strong on experience and business” and “hopefully its management capability will be much higher”, wrote the British embassy in Caracas.
The embassy was also informed by UK business leaders in Venezuela that “their operations should be back to normal by 15 April”, while Shell’s “production of oil was unaffected”.
At the same time, however, the Foreign Office was disturbed by the fact that “no one” had “ever elected” the Carmona regime.
“Venezuela may or may not have wanted to get rid of Chavez, but not necessarily to lose the other parts of their democratic system”, one official wrote. “The right-wing businessmen seem to have shot themselves in the foot”.
Notably, the UK government seemed to have some knowledge of Washington’s role in the events.
On 14 April, with Chávez imprisoned in a military barracks, the British embassy in Caracas cabled to London that the US ambassador had been spending “some hours in the Presidential Palace”.
“Please protect [the information]”, they instructed.
### RELATED
[
## Secretive UK team met in Venezuela to promote British energy...
][17] [READ MORE **][18]
## **The opposition**
The coup was short-lived.
Chávez was reinstated within 47 hours following a wave of popular mobilisations across Caracas.
With Chávez back at the helm, the Foreign Office quietly hoped that “the events of the last few days” would be seen as “a serious warning to change his ways”.
But the situation remained tense, with UK foreign secretary Jack Straw noting in July 2002 that Chávez’s position “remain[ed] shaky”.
The political opposition in Venezuela was seen by Whitehall as particularly intransigent, with Straw declaring that Chávez looks “positively resplendent compared with [them]”.
The Venezuelan opposition, Straw continued, “appear to be united, indeed motivated, by sheer indignation that someone like Chávez (not one of them and above all not white) should be in charge and have such a popular power base”.
An official in Britain’s embassy in Caracas similarly noted in 2002 that the Venezuela opposition “looks like a train that tried to breach a wall on one track in April and are now seeking to do the same on a slightly different track and at a slightly different angle”.
They added: “The opposition’s self-delusion is growing worse by the day: they claim alternately they are living in either a fascist or communist dictatorship”.
One of the key opposition figures in this period was María Corina Machado, with whom the UK government is currently in talks amid a renewed regime change campaign in Venezuela.
The post [One hundred years of British interference in Venezuela][19] appeared first on [Declassified UK][20].
[1]: https://www.shell.com.ve/sobre-nuestra-empresa/la-historia-de-shell-en-venezuela.html#:~:text=1912:%20Inicio%20de%20las%20actividades,lubricantes%20y%20estaciones%20de%20servicio
[2]: https://x.com/retro_series/status/1055481202487054336
[3]: https://www.thetimes.com/tto/archive/article/1914-10-30/13/3.html#start%3D1914-07-01%26end%3D1915-01-01%26terms%3Dvenezuela%26back%3D/tto/archive/find/venezuela/w:1914-07-01%7E1915-01-01/o:date/3%26prev%3D/tto/archive/frame/goto/venezuela/w:1914-07-01%7E1915-01-01/o:date/21%26next%3D/tto/archive/frame/goto/venezuela/w:1914-07-01%7E1915-01-01/o:date/23
[4]: https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP57-00384R000700130001-2.pdf
[5]: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=iUUDAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=venezuela&f=false
[6]: https://www.thetimes.com/tto/archive/page/1915-06-23/13.html#start%3D1915-06-23%26end%3D1915-06-24%26terms%3Dtimes%26back%3D/tto/archive/find/times/w:1915-06-23%7E1915-06-24/1%26next%3D/tto/archive/frame/goto/times/w:1915-06-23%7E1915-06-24/2
[7]: https://www.hbs.edu/businesshistory/Documents/maurer-article-mexican-oil.pdf
[8]: https://www.jstor.org/stable/157250?read-now=1&seq=2#page_scan_tab_contents
[9]: https://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/id/eprint/6901/
[10]: https://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/id/eprint/6901/
[11]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61621
[12]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61621
[13]: https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP82-00457R001400130002-4.pdf
[14]: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/26419671_La_arquitectura_urbana_de_las_corporaciones_petroleras_Conformacion_de_Distritos_Petroleros_en_Caracas_durante_las_decadas_de_1940_y_1950
[15]: https://www.bbc.com/mundo/noticias-america-latina-58647201
[16]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/exclusive-how-shell-and-bp-financed-britains-cold-war-propaganda-machine/
[17]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=7121
[18]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=7121
[19]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/one-hundred-years-of-british-interference-in-venezuela/
[20]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/one-hundred-years-of-british-interference-in-venezuela/

2026-02-05 16:26:27 GMT

‘Why was she shot?’ Iraqi family’s quest for justice after UK raid
[Riyaadh Kadhim Alateya, his son, Ali, and his wife, Sabeeha Rasheed Mashi (Supplied)]
One August night, Riyaadh Kadhim Alateya and his family’s lives changed forever.
The 54-year-old** **lived in the southern Iraqi city of Basra with his wife, Sabeeha Rasheed Mashi and his teenage son, Ali.
He ran a livestock trading business, and when he wasn’t working, his preferred way to unwind was being out on his fishing boat. They had a comfortable life.
Then it all changed suddenly. On the evening of 11 August 2007, Riyaadh said British military aircraft opened fire on the family’s home, amid accompanying gunfire.
Ali, 17, was killed and Sabeeha was left in critical condition after sustaining a gunshot wound that caused severe internal bleeding and required urgent medical intervention.
Riyaadh told *Declassified* that he couldn’t understand why the attack happened. But the consequences were catastrophic. “My house was completely burned down along with my belongings,” he said.
Riyaadh’s testimony is corroborated by a consistent body of contemporaneous evidence, including medical reports, court documents, legal correspondence, a death certificate, and a formal complaint lodged with and acknowledged by Iraqi police and judicial authorities in 2007, all of which were seen by *Declassified*.
He also shared a letter sent from the British government’s Iraq Historic Allegations Team (IHAT) in June 2015.
The unit was set up to investigate allegations of abuse, torture and unlawful killing of Iraqi civilians by British armed forces between 2003 and 2009.
In the letter, IHAT’s leader Mark Warwick expressed condolences for Ali’s death and promised to complete an investigation into what had happened in 2007, and acknowledged an involvement of British armed forces which was sufficient enough to trigger investigations.
He noted it might take time for his team to get to Riyaadh’s complaint given the sheer number that had been filed.
But Warwick assured Riyaadh that the unit “takes all allegations of misconduct and treatment very seriously”.
Nearly 20 years later, Riyaadh said he is still waiting for answers.
“Believe me, on that day, I wish I died rather than witness what happened to my family,” he said.
### RELATED
[
## Forgotten photos expose UK army abuses in Iraq
][1] [READ MORE **][2]
## **Unresolved crimes **
Riyaadh’s testimony adds to the extensive archive of the human cost of the illegal US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.
Tony Blair, then UK prime minister who made the decision to back the invasion, has [since justified it][3], and faced zero accountability.
He’s now joined US president Donald Trump’s controversial “Board of Peace” which is set to govern the future of Gaza, ostensibly free to persist with his ethically fraught legacy in the region.
The British military, which has still not fully withdrawn from Iraq, developed a reputation for committing atrocities that were often left uninvestigated and unprosecuted.
The practice of shooting unarmed civilians was rife, to the degree that it constituted legitimate rules of engagement, as testimonies of former soldiers have [revealed][4].
In Basra, British forces faced an armed uprising against their occupation in August 2007, with four soldiers [killed][5] in the week before the attack on Riyaadh’s home.
However, *Declassified* was shown evidence indicating that he was not involved in any military activity, nor affiliated with any armed group that might have been used to justify the targeting of him or his family.
The evidence includes a certificate from 2007 confirming his completion of a statistics course at a centre run by coalition forces in Dhi Qar governorate.
Still, that palpably offered no protection or legitimacy for his family.
“I do not know what pretext or justification there could be for opening fire on a residential home,” Riyaadh said.
IHAT, which had previously informed Riyaadh it would pursue accountability and justice, was shut down in June 2017.
[None][6] of IHAT’s investigations resulted in prosecutions in connection with unlawful killing or the ill-treatment of detainees.
IHAT did refer one case of unlawful killing and one case of ill-treatment to the Director of Service Prosecutions who in both cases decided not to proceed.
For Riyaadh, this sounds familiar. His son Ali’s case was among a group of cases taken up by Public Interest Lawyers (PIL), a UK-based law firm that brought thousands of claims to IHAT.
In a follow-up letter dated November 2015, PIL explained to Riyaadh that the cases had been considered by UK authorities and referred to the High Court.
However, the firm told Riyaadh, they were ultimately rejected, following a decision by the then UK defence secretary, on the basis that the cases were historic or further investigation was not necessary.
### RELATED
[
## Exclusive: British army sent unqualified investigators to Iraq where troops...
][7] [READ MORE **][8]
## Lingering harm
Two decades later, Riyaadh and Sabeeha still suffer from the impact of that night.
Sabeeha sustained life-changing injuries including spinal degeneration and liver damage during the attack which have left her with chronic pain and restricted mobility.
Despite this, it took until 2017 for Iraq’s Ministry of Health to formally certify that she has a permanent disability.
After their home was destroyed, they relocated to another home in Al Tannouma in east Basra. Riyaadh devoted his time to following up on his wife’s medical condition and pursuing all avenues of treatment.
But he said the prevailing chaos and instability after the invasion meant the specialist treatment and urgent medical care required was unavailable.
In 2019, they moved to Beirut through a United Nations asylum programme and Sabeeha underwent surgery for her liver.
Sabeeha Rasheed Mashi undergoing treatment in Lebanon (Supplied)
Still, she is in need of continuous treatment which Riyaadh said has been tough to secure. Seeing her reduced to a painful state has been an agonising ordeal.
“What is her fault? Why is this her fate? We are a family that loves peace, we hold no hatred or resentment towards anyone,” he said.
“My wife, she is the rock of my life, the pillar of my family. Now look – more than 20 years of suffering, and for what? What is her crime? Why was she shot?”
He concluded long ago that the pursuit of justice was futile, but there are no other options.
“Peace and tolerance must prevail. The rule of law protecting civilians and human rights must be applied equally,” he said.
“Too many people with no responsibility for conflicts and wars have paid a fatal price, and greater efforts are needed to assist those affected.”
The Ministry of Defence was asked to comment.
The post [‘Why was she shot?’ Iraqi family’s quest for justice after UK raid][9] appeared first on [Declassified UK][10].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61126
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61126
[3]: https://www.politico.eu/article/tony-blair-i-regret-mistakes-but-iraq-war-was-justified/
[4]: https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/exclusive-british-army-permitted-shooting-civilians-iraq-and-afghanistan
[5]: https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/aug/11/iraq.military
[6]: https://www.ecchr.eu/fileadmin/Juristische_Dokumente/ECCHR_Follow_Up_Communication_to_OTP_War_crimes_by_UK_forces_in_Iraq_July_2019.pdf
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=606
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=606
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/why-was-she-shot-iraqi-familys-quest-for-justice-after-uk-raid/
[10]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/why-was-she-shot-iraqi-familys-quest-for-justice-after-uk-raid/

2026-02-04 17:07:00 GMT

UK ignores corruption scandals when awarding major military contracts
[Business secretary Peter Kyle and defence secretary John Healey. (Photo: Yui Mok / Alamy)]
The Ministry of Defence is reportedly [set][1] to award a £2 billion contract to a consortium led by Raytheon UK despite major corruption and fraud violations recently levelled against its American parent company RTX.
The contract, which aims to modernise the army’s training infrastructure using “advanced simulation”, will be awarded through a competitive process in which Raytheon UK seeks to displace a rival bid led by Israel’s Elbit Systems UK.
RTX is already a major [supplier][2] to the UK Ministry of Defence, having completed integration trials for the Paveway precision-guided missile on the Typhoon aircraft in 2025.
The company [says][3] it has a “decades-long partnership with the British army”, and holds licences to [export][4] F-35 fighter jet components which are used by Israel.
Yet in 2024, RTX [faced][5] significant legal sanctions in the US relating to alleged bribery of foreign officials, defective pricing, and export control violations.
The company settled several federal investigations with overall penalties exceeding $950 million.
Crucially, Freedom of Information requests suggest that UK export-licensing authorities have taken no action in response to these developments.
The Department for Business and Trade and the Export Control Joint Unit (ECJU) said in October 2025 they hold no internal correspondence, briefs, or risk assessments relating to the RTX enforcement actions.
This is despite the UK’s [own guidelines][6] for military export licences explicitly requiring ongoing assessment of risk of diversion, misuse, and breach of international humanitarian law.
The guidelines also direct authorities to consider exporter conduct and compliance history.
### RELATED
[
## Revealed: The secret Whitehall committee that holds ‘no records’
][7] [READ MORE **][8]
In response to further FOI requests, the Ministry of Defence also refused to clarify whether RTX’s enforcement actions abroad were internally discussed when deliberating the award of major contracts to the company.
This apparent inaction raises fundamental questions about whether systemic reassessment of exporter behaviour takes place when serious misconduct comes to light.
It also comes as the UK’s National Audit Office has found in [a new report][9] released last week that the defence ministry could “make significant savings” if it better managed losses from economic crimes, including procurement fraud.
The business and trade department and defence ministry did not respond to requests for comment about whether they consider foreign corruption scandals when awarding export licences or training contracts to firms.
Raytheon has been the [subject ][10]of past enforcement [controversies][11] in Britain, with the company refusing to explain its activities to the government’s committees on arms export control in 2019 while arming Saudi Arabia’s brutal war on Yemen.
Its competitor for the army training contract, Elbit Systems, is also [facing][12] accusations of breaching business appointment rules while continuing to hold export licences granted by the ECJU.
Campaign Against Arms Trade ([CAAT][13]) spokesperson Emily Apple told *Declassified*: “Time and again successive governments have lied, repeatedly telling us the UK has one of the most robust arms export control systems in the world. Nothing could be further from the truth”.
The business and trade department said: “The UK operates one of the most robust and transparent export control regimes in the world.
“All export licensing decisions are made in line with our Strategic Export Licensing Criteria, and our assessments take all information relevant to the risk of diversion or misuse into account”.
### RELATED
[
## Israeli fighter pilots training with UK equipment
][14] [READ MORE **][15]
## **Moog**
The issue is not unique to RTX.
Another defence contractor, Moog Inc., resolved a Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) administrative [order][16] in October 2024 involving bribery by its Indian subsidiary.
The FCPA is a US federal law which makes it illegal for US persons or companies to bribe foreign government officials to gain a business advantage.
However, the ECJU also holds “no information” about any discussions relating to that FCPA order, according to the FOI documents seen by *Declassified*.
Together, the RTX and Moog cases represent the only publicly reported defence industry FCPA-related enforcement actions in 2024.
Moog currently [holds][17] UK licenses to export components for trainer aircraft used by the Israeli air force, and contributes to the global F-35 programme.
Public information raises further questions about how Moog’s compliance oversight function was structured during the period in which these violations allegedly occurred.
According to a LinkedIn profile, Moog’s compliance manager has had oversight of both Moog UK and Moog India since before 2020 — the period during which the company’s Indian subsidiary was later found by US authorities to have engaged in bribery of state officials.
“While the existence of a group-level compliance function does not itself imply wrongdoing, it underscores that Moog’s UK operations were not operating in isolation from wider corporate compliance arrangements at the time, and raises legitimate questions about how compliance risks were identified, escalated, and addressed across the group”, said Emily Apple from CAAT.
Despite these questions, Moog Wolverhampton has not been subject to an ECJU compliance visit since 2022, according to further FOI requests issued in November.
This is notable given that the site was inspected twice within a two-month period that year, a pattern potentially associated with follow-up or remedial reviews.
Yet the company’s sites in Britain have apparently not been revisited in the three years since, including after Moog’s US parent company agreed a major FCPA settlement in 2024.
Emily Apple added: “Whether it’s ignoring corruption scandals, or trampling over international law, it appears there are no limits to the steps the government is prepared to take to prioritise arms dealers’ profits. This is a system beyond reform. It is out of control, devoid of ethics and operating beyond the law”.
Moog and RTX did not respond to requests for comment.
The post [UK ignores corruption scandals when awarding major military contracts][18] appeared first on [Declassified UK][19].
[1]: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/defence/article/israeli-firm-denied-army-training-contract-rn8qss0g8?gaa_at=eafs&gaa_n=AWEtsqeb1sHSc8oOI1JaS5__5bJVNt8NpV0daX1Pa-MfDLKIHBt1EdyoIxbV_J0gyRA%3D&gaa_ts=69788d39&gaa_sig=NgvMnKMX-pkHeFz4UYMz4sJZA_365nfAuZbci28SPlHVkzUpmmICq-M2xDMet7ksf77mkF5M3dQugaG-moGw4A%3D%3D
[2]: https://caat.org.uk/data/companies/rtx/
[3]: https://www.raytheon.co.uk/news/2024/11/14/raytheon-uk-secures-two-year-extension-for-command-and-staff-training-with-british-army
[4]: https://caat.org.uk/data/countries/israel/mapped-all-the-uk-companies-manufacturing-components-for-israels-f35-combat-aircraft/
[5]: https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2024-171
[6]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-statements/detail/2021-12-08/hcws449
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=1291
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=1291
[9]: https://www.nao.org.uk/press-releases/smarter-approach-to-tackling-fraud-and-economic-crime-could-save-mod-millions/
[10]: https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2019/mar/20/britain-arms-export-watchdog-in-danger-of-becoming-toothless
[11]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/exclusive-british-government-breaks-inspection-rules-at-scottish-missile-factory-supplying-saudi-air-war-in-yemen-its-fourth-breach/
[12]: https://www.thenational.scot/news/25410239.former-british-soldier-broke-rules-meeting-israeli-arms-firm/
[13]: https://caat.org.uk/
[14]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=59833
[15]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=59833
[16]: https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2024-170
[17]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/israeli-fighter-pilots-training-with-uk-equipment/
[18]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-ignores-corruption-scandals-when-awarding-major-military-contracts/
[19]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-ignores-corruption-scandals-when-awarding-major-military-contracts/

2026-02-04 17:06:46 GMT

Palestine Action protesters found not guilty of Elbit burglary
[Palestine Action dismantle Elbit equipment, 6 August 2024. (Photo: Handout)]
Six Palestine Action protesters have been found not guilty of aggravated burglary at an Elbit weapons site near Bristol.
Zoe Rogers, Fatema Zainab Rajwani, Charlotte Head, Samuel Corner, Leona Kamio and Jordan Devlin were also not convicted of any other charges by a jury at Woolwich Crown Court on Wednesday.
The group were on trial for a break-in at an Israeli-owned arms factory on 6 August 2024 at the height of the genocide in Gaza.
Keir Starmer’s Labour government only placed partial restrictions on arms exports to Israel the following month.
The activists spent 18 months on remand before their trial began in November 2025.
Jurors did not convict them of any charges despite the judge trying to limit defences available to the activists.
A spokesperson for Defend Our Juries said: “These verdicts are a huge blow to government ministers who have tried to portray Palestine Action as a violent group to justify banning it under badly drafted terrorism legislation.
“Despite government efforts to prejudice this trial, citing the allegations of violence to justify treating Palestine Action as ‘terrorists’, as if they were already proved, the jury which heard the evidence has refused to find the defendants guilty of anything, not even criminal damage.
“It shows how out of step this government is with public opinion, which is revulsed by the Government and Elbit’s complicity in genocide.”
Around 40 family and friends of the defendants were gathered outside Woolwich Crown Court, hugging and crying.
Inside bail hearings were ongoing for the six with rulings expected before 3pm. Friends said they hoped they would be coming out today.
Moved to a patch of grass outside the court, several in the crowd shared a meal on paper plates and greeted an increasing number supporters who arrived by public transport.
“I’m so happy,” one supporter shouted.
A truck carrying prisoners passed by with an audible banging sound from inside. The crowd welped and started to cheer. One drummed.
A supporter acknowledged the truck probably didn’t hold the defendants. “We’re just excited,” they said.
The post [Palestine Action protesters found not guilty of Elbit burglary][1] appeared first on [Declassified UK][2].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/palestine-action-protesters-found-not-guilty-of-elbit-burglary/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/palestine-action-protesters-found-not-guilty-of-elbit-burglary/

2026-02-03 12:43:41 GMT

The 24-site US military network in Britain worth £11 billion
[RAF Oakhanger in Hampshire is one site in the UK where the US owns property (Photo: Alamy)]
The US military owns 22 sites in Britain whose “replacement value” is $15.6bn (£11.4bn), according to a US War Department document found by *Declassified* *UK*.
This number of sites is larger than previously believed and more than UK governments have told parliament.
A US [document][1] published online identifies 16 of the US military’s locations in the UK and notes six “other sites” which are not specified. The document, published last year, outlines the US military’s “property portfolio” around the world as of September 2024.
*Declassified* has identified other locations in Britain that are likely to be hosting US military or intelligence personnel, bringing the total to at least 24.
This doesn’t cover the full scale of the US military presence in the UK, since it is believed that US military personnel are frequently, if not permanently, stationed at still more sites, such as the key Royal Navy bases at Coulport, Devonport and Faslane.
The 16 locations in Britain specified by the US War Department include the major US air bases at Lakenheath, Mildenhall, Croughton and Fairford but also lesser-known sites.
The smaller locations include a 35-acre US Air Force (USAF) site at RAF Bicester in Oxfordshire and a location said to comprise 35,397 square feet of buildings at RAF Oakhanger in Hampshire.
The document also notes US ownership of facilities at the top secret Fylingdales spy station in Yorkshire, where it possesses 5,860 square feet of building space.
Fylingdales is a joint enterprise between the US and UK and “[provides][2] a 24/7 missile warning and space surveillance capability for the UK and its allies”.
While most of the locations are operated by the USAF, the single site where the US Navy is said to be active is Lossiemouth near Inverness, the only location mentioned in Scotland.
A recent [investigation][3] by The Ferret found the US established a base there in May 2024, with the US navy helping to fund the construction of facilities for its Poseidon P8 anti-submarine spy and warplanes at the site.
The investigation also found the Scottish government was not consulted about stationing US aircraft at Lossiemouth.
Other US sites mentioned in the War Department document include a 736-acre ammunition storage location at RAF Welford in Berkshire and a “transmitter annex site” at RAF Barford St John in Oxfordshire.
These US sites stretch over 20 square miles, which is equivalent to around 11,500 football pitches, or an area larger than the city of Oxford.
## **Specified US military sites in Britain**
*Figures correct for September 2024*
*Source: [US War Department, Assistant Secretary of War, September 2025][4] *
Successive UK governments have failed to mention in parliament some of these 16 sites as being US military operating locations, such as RAF Oakhanger and RAF Bicester. The last time Oakhanger was mentioned in parliament was in November 1996.
More recently, in [answer][5] to a parliamentary question in February 2022, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) mentioned only eight sites from where US personnel were operating, along with “undisclosed locations”.
Two years earlier, in June 2020, a minister [listed][6] 11 bases which were “designated for use by the United States Visiting Forces” in the UK. This form of words appears to keep open the possibility that US personnel are also based elsewhere.
## **Where are the six other sites?**
The US document specifies sites in Britain that are larger than ten acres or have a replacement value of over $10m (£7.3m).
The six “other sites” identified are said to cover 7.28 acres and have a “replacement value” of £21.99m (£16m). It is not clear where these are, and the UK government imposes secrecy around the locations of US military sites and personnel in Britain.
The US list of 22 sites does not include all locations where US military or intelligence personnel are stationed, such as its **embassy in London**.
Another US [base][7] is **RAF Wyton in Cambridgeshire**, which [houses][8] Britain’s National Centre for Geospatial Intelligence and “provides intelligence support to UK Armed Forces on operations globally”.
US forces also operate in Britain as part of Nato forces in the Allied Rapid Reaction Corps (ARRC) at **Imjin Barracks in Gloucestershire** and at the **Allied Maritime Command (MARCOM) in Northwood** in London.
US military personnel are also likely to be based, either permanently or frequently, at other locations in Britain. These sites include Nato’s **Joint Electronic Warfare Core Staff (JEWCS) based in Yeovilton** in Somerset and the British army’s intelligence base at **RAF Digby in Lincolnshire**, which is home to the Joint Service Signal Unit.
US personnel may now or in the future also be stationed at **Cawdor Barracks in Pembrokeshire**, where the UK is developing a so-called Deep Space Advanced Radar Capability (DARC).
This is part of a [network][9] of ground-based radars in Australia, the UK and US to “provide global space monitoring, increasing AUKUS nations’ ability to detect, track and identify objects in deep space”.
*Declassified* also believes it likely that US military and/or civilian War Department personnel are working at the European Regional Office of the Nato Defence Innovation Accelerator for the North Atlantic (known as [DIANA][10]), which is based at **Imperial College, London**.
In addition to strictly military personnel, US forces also operate at intelligence sites, which are also shrouded in secrecy. As well as Fylingdales, it is known that air base **Molesworth in Cambridgeshire** [houses][11] both a US Defense Intelligence Agency team and the US Africa Command’s [Joint Intelligence Command][12].
US officers also work at the Nato Intelligence Fusion Centre (NIFC) at Molesworth while two US air force intelligence squadrons are [based][13] at **Mildenhall**.
US intelligence personnel are also believed to be [stationed][14] at **Bude, Cornwall, **GCHQ’s top secret spy base which is run jointly with the US National Security Agency (NSA).
GCHQ says almost nothing about its Bude spy site but it is at the heart of a global eavesdropping network run by the NSA, which has in the past funded the upgrade of the facility.
**Menwith Hill in Yorkshire**, which is mentioned in the War Department document, is run by the NSA as an intelligence base, and [hosts][15] around 1,000 US personnel.
Comprising dozens of radomes, the ultra-secretive spy site is the [largest][16] intelligence-gathering, interception and surveillance base outside the US. The US documents notes the War Department owns facilities at Menwith Hill covering 545 acres, with a replacement value of $850m (£622m).
The UK government reveals nothing about CIA activities or locations in Britain.
## **A $16bn empire**
The US sites that are said to be the most expensive to replace are the sprawling air bases at Lakenheath and Mildenhall in Suffolk, valued at $5.7bn (£4.2bn) and $3bn (£2.2bn) respectively, and Fairford in Gloucestershire, valued at $1.5bn (£1.1bn).
Overall, the British facilities, valued in total at $15.6bn (£11.4bn), are the ninth most valuable in the US’s overseas military empire, the largest being Japan ($139bn) and Germany ($60bn).
The US base empire around the world has an overall “replacement value” of slightly over $500bn (£366bn), according to the US document.
*Declassified* asked the MoD how many US personnel were based at Oakhanger and Bicester and their roles and purpose at the sites, and why ministers have not mentioned the sites when asked in parliament about where US personnel are based in Britain.
*Declassified* also asked if the ministry could confirm that US military personnel are stationed at RAF Digby, RAF Wyton and the JEWCS at Yeovilton.
The ministry declined to comment and suggested *Declassified* file at Freedom of Information request.
The post [The 24-site US military network in Britain worth £11 billion][17] appeared first on [Declassified UK][18].
[1]: https://www.acq.osd.mil/eie/imr/rpid/library.html
[2]: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/uk-space-command
[3]: https://www.theferret.scot/us-war-plane-base-scotland/
[4]: https://www.acq.osd.mil/eie/imr/rpid/library.html
[5]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2022-02-21/126833
[6]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2020-06-11/58638
[7]: https://rafalconbury.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/ToRCH-Alconbury-Molesworth-Wyton.pdf
[8]: https://www.raf.mod.uk/our-organisation/stations/raf-wyton/#:~:text=The%20Station,Vice%2DMarshal)%20Don%20Bennett.
[9]: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/plans-announced-to-redevelop-cawdor-barracks-for-landmark-radar-initiative#:~:text=Plans%20announced%20to%20redevelop%20Cawdor%20Barracks%20for%20landmark%20radar%20initiative,-English&text=Plans%20to%20redevelop%20Cawdor%20Barracks,by%20the%20Ministry%20of%20Defence.&text=Known%20as%20the%20Deep%20Space,the%20rest%20of%20the%20world.
[10]: https://www.diana.nato.int/
[11]: https://installations.militaryonesource.mil/military-installation/raf-alconbury-raf-molesworth/base-essentials/major-units
[12]: https://www.africom.mil/article/34993/us-africa-command-team-visits-raf-molesworths-joint-intelligence-command
[13]: https://installations.militaryonesource.mil/military-installation/raf-mildenhall/base-essentials/major-units
[14]: https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/snowden-documents-show-gchq-targeted-european-and-german-politicians-a-940135.html
[15]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2022-02-21/126833
[16]: https://www.themhac.uk/bases/nsausaf-menwith-hill
[17]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/the-24-site-us-military-network-in-britain-worth-11-billion/
[18]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/the-24-site-us-military-network-in-britain-worth-11-billion/

2026-02-03 10:11:55 GMT

British spy gear sold to Gulf state amid crackdown
The UK government has approved over £11m worth of surveillance exports to a repressive Gulf state in the past five years, *Declassified* has found.
British companies have been issued 11 licences for exporting “telecommunications interception equipment” to Oman since 2021, with three earmarked for law enforcement users.
The Royal Oman Police, their main law enforcement agency, works closely with the Internal Security Service (ISS), the equivalent of MI5, to crack-down on protest, dissent, and activism.
Gatherings of more than 10 people are banned, with participants and organisers facing years in prison.
Some of the [technology][1], exported under control entry “5A001f2”*,* is “designed for the extraction of client device or subscriber identifiers (e.g. IMSI, TIMSI, or IMEI), signalling, or other metadata” transmitted wirelessly.
This is consistent with an IMSI-catcher, notorious tracking devices commonly [deployed][2] at protests. Many are capable of intercepting calls, texts, and geolocating devices with alarming accuracy.
The volume of sales indicates that Oman accounts for just under a third of all of Britain’s IMSI-catcher exports since 2021.
*Declassified* can also reveal two of the exporting companies whose 5A001f2 licences were approved in 2024 for law enforcement users.
Freedom of Information disclosures show that a temporary licence worth £50,000 was approved for Surrey-based Cellxion to export to law enforcement for the purposes of “communication and network surveillance”.
UK police forces previously [refused][3] to confirm the alleged use of IMSI-catchers from Cellxion. The secret is so closely guarded that police began [defying][4] their legal requirements to disclose spending data to prevent further information from being identified.
Another licence was given to Smith Myers Communications to deliver equipment worth £5m to Omani law enforcement. This company also provided interception equipment to a commercial user in [Singapore][5] for “communication and network surveillance, interception purpose” in 2024.
A third licence was approved by Britain’s trade department for similar technology in 2021, again to be used for Omani law enforcement, in a package worth £5m.
Other licences were issued in 2023 worth at least £1.4m for exporting “interception equipment designed for the extraction of voice or data” to commercial users in Oman. The exporters are unknown for these.
### RELATED
[
## Largest protests since Arab Spring sweep Oman as UK support...
][6] [READ MORE **][7]
## Secret state
Oman’s Musandam peninsula was forcibly annexed during a British military [operation][8] in 1970, against the wishes of its Shihuh community, who have lived under heavy surveillance ever since.
Sources in the area, who could face arrest if identified, claimed Omani security forces oversaw the installation of phone masts in a range of areas on the east coast of the peninsula in 2023, including Zighy Bay.
This is home to a luxury five-star hotel [part-owned][9] by an Emirati Sheik, Sultan bin Muhammad al-Qasimi. The resort has [reportedly][10] been visited by Tony Blair and several Saudi princes.
It is possible that interception equipment was installed alongside the phone masts in Musandam, however this cannot be confirmed.
The total lack of public transparency in Oman means it is impossible to identify how these technologies could be being used by law enforcement and commercial users.
A UK government spokesperson said: “All export licensing decisions are made in line with our Strategic Export Licensing Criteria, and we will not grant a licence where there is a clear risk that the items might be used to commit or facilitate internal repression or human rights violations.”
Cellxion and Smith Myers Communications did not respond to requests for comment.
## Activists hacked in Oman
The UK’s exports of invasive surveillance technology risk deepening Oman’s lack of freedom of expression; which should make them unlawful under British export criteria.
Hani Al-Sarhani, an exiled activist now based in London, was involved in organising protests in Oman on April 12th last year. This movement was mostly in response to Oman’s crippling economy, a [crisis][11] spanning years.
He told *Declassified* that his phone number, managed by Omantel, was hacked on the day of the protests, giving malicious actors unauthorised access to his account.
Documents seen by *Declassified* show that a new SIM-card had been requested which Omantel granted without Al-Sarhani’s signature.
The activist said that several people were sent messages from his X (formerly Twitter) account, which used his phone number for two-factor authentication, and other organisers who had recent contact with him were swiftly arrested in Oman.
Al-Sarhani believes that Oman’s security forces accessed his account with the telco’s assistance, telling *Declassified* that “[Oman’s authorities] don’t care about laws. They just want to control the situation.”
Omantel, which is state-owned and has [links][12] to GCHQ, did not take action on Al-Sarhani’s incident report, nor did it respond to *Declassified’s* request for comment.
Last month, Talib Al-Saedi, was forcibly [disappeared][13] and later sentenced to three months in prison under cybercrime laws for criticising Oman’s regime online, [according][14] to the Gulf Centre for Human Rights. He is only one of [many][15] to have been [arrested][16] for online activity.
Mohammed Al-Fazari, an exiled journalist and author of a new [book][17] about Oman, told *Declassified*: “There are no human rights activists anymore. They’ll arrest maybe one-in-ten, and then the other nine fall into place after.”
### RELATED
[
## UK Quietly Expands Secret Spy Base Near Iran
][18] [READ MORE **][19]
## Oman’s cyber capabilities, built by Britain
Oman’s chilling effect grew after the Cyber Defence Centre was established in 2020. It is governed by the ISS, which was [previously][20] run by MI6 spies after a British-backed coup helped install Sultan Qaboos, who ruled Oman for half a century.
The CDC gave Oman’s security services the authority to import technology to “monitor any electronic network in the country,” which lets them track activists, [according][21] to rights groups.
As with the creation of Oman’s security apparatus, the UK showed its interest in the CDC’s establishment.
A secret Privy Council advising Sultan Qaboos – including the heads of MI6 and British military at the time – “managed to land some important messages on … cyber-protection” in 2017, according to the diaries of former foreign minister, Alan Duncan.
MI5 and MI6 later [trained][22] Omani intelligence directors in 2019, despite concerns about how they uphold the Sultanate’s authoritarian regime.
The Foreign Office’s desire to promote cyber-development in Oman became much clearer after the establishment of the cyber-security agency.
It [spent][23] £1.8m on technology programmes in Oman, including [hiring][24] CyLon to build a cyber-security accelerator under the context of “enhancing national security capabilities.”
CyLon has deep links to national security and intelligence infrastructure, while also enjoying very close proximity to the government.
One of its founders, [Grace Cassy][25], was a former Foreign Office diplomat and later worked as a foreign policy aide to Tony Blair.
The company has also been advised by former directors of GCHQ, the National Cyber Security Centre, and Israel’s Shin Bet.
The Foreign Office did not respond to queries on its interests in Oman’s cyber-security. CyLon was also approached for comment.
The post [British spy gear sold to Gulf state amid crackdown][26] appeared first on [Declassified UK][27].
[1]: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/69415ba1f065108822537524/uk_export_control_list_2025.pdf
[2]: https://san.com/cc/exclusive-fake-cellphone-tower-likely-surveilled-protesters-at-portland-ice-facility/
[3]: https://thebristolcable.org/2016/10/imsi/
[4]: https://www.computerweekly.com/news/252485535/Police-secrecy-over-IMSI-catcher-mass-surveillance-of-mobile-phones?utm_source=chatgpt.com
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/inside-singapore-from-british-colony-to-global-finance-nerve-centre/
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=1240
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=1240
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/stealing-a-nation-musandam-intradon-sas-oman-oil/
[9]: https://www.breakingtravelnews.com/news/article/six-senses-hideaway-zighy-bay-two-times-winner-at-world-travel-awards/
[10]: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/hotels/galleries/How-to-holiday-like-Tony-Blair/
[11]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/largest-protests-since-arab-spring-sweep-oman-as-uk-support-for-regime-rises/
[12]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-quietly-expands-secret-gchq-spy-base-near-iran/
[13]: https://www.gc4hr.org/human-rights-defender-talib-al-saedi-and-other-innocent-citizens-face-unfair-trial/
[14]: https://x.com/Talibalsaidi453
[15]: https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/mde20/9971/2019/en/
[16]: https://en.omanhr.org/oman-two-internet-activists-sentenced-to-prison/
[17]: https://www.waterstones.com/book/qaboosism-in-historical-perspective-british-policy-rule-legitimacy-and-resistance-in-oman/mohammed-al-fazari/9783032056474
[18]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=54381
[19]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=54381
[20]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/colonialism-never-ended-the-elite-british-cabal-propping-up-a-gulf-dictatorship/
[21]: https://en.omanhr.org/oman-internal-security-service-establishes-new-mechanism-of-control-over-the-internet/
[22]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/revealed-mi5-and-mi6-are-training-senior-spies-from-saudi-arabia-uae-and-egypt/
[23]: https://www.contractsfinder.service.gov.uk/notice/1e4064a7-50d3-443d-8587-b5688fc14247?origin=SearchResults&p=1
[24]: https://www.contractsfinder.service.gov.uk/notice/8b5cbd59-20db-4ec3-9492-88b3b64a1eb4?origin=SearchResults&p=1
[25]: https://www.newstatesman.com/long-reads/2006/01/rendition-cover
[26]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/british-spy-gear-sold-to-gulf-state-amid-crackdown/
[27]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/british-spy-gear-sold-to-gulf-state-amid-crackdown/

2026-01-28 17:29:54 GMT

Labour Friends of Israel reported to election watchdog
[Labour Friends of Israel director Michael Rubin in Downing Street, 4 June 2025. (Photo: Ian Davidson / Alamy )]
Labour Friends of Israel has been referred to the Electoral Commission over concerns about its opaque funding.
Activist Andrew Feinstein, who filed the complaint, said he was concerned that the pro-Israel group “may have breached electoral law”.
Labour Friends of Israel (LFI) has previously described itself as “a Westminster based lobby group working within the British Labour Party to promote the State of Israel,” and has funded dozens of British politicians to travel to Israel.
But it has repeatedly refused to disclose where its money comes from, other than to deny that it is funded by the Israeli government.
Feinstein’s complaint explains that there is “ambiguity over whether LFI is (or ever was) a members association”.
He added: “This question is vital because ‘members associations’ may have to register with the Electoral Commission as a regulated donee. This would also create an obligation for LFI to disclose details about certain donations that it receives.”
LFI has denied being a members association, yet many senior politicians have claimed they are “members”.
Seven ministers – including Rachel Reeves and David Lammy – have each stated they are a “member” of the group in the List of Ministerial Interests. And the trade secretary, Peter Kyle, also [claimed][1] to be an LFI “member” at an event earlier this month.
In 2019, LFI itself referred in writing to its former chairman, Louise Ellman, as “a highly active member of LFI”.
Groups that meet the criteria for members associations, set out by the Electoral Commission, may be required to declare any large donations they receive.
For instance, the Carlton Club – an elite private members’ club in London that has long funded the Tories – had to declare a £50,000 donation last year from a business linked to wealthy foreign nationals.
### RELATED
[
## Trade Secretary accused of ‘egregious’ rules breach over Israel links
][2] [READ MORE **][3]
## Membership form
Feinstein’s letter to the Electoral Commission also cites evidence from 2011, raising questions over whether any historical breaches may have occurred.
In 2011, the *Jewish Chronicle* reported that Labour Friends of Israel “is to re-invent itself as a membership organisation” and the group’s director referred in writing to “our members”.
An archived version of LFI’s website from the same year contains a “membership form” which references an annual membership fee.
The form invited payments to be made to an account with Bank Hapoalim, an Israel bank that has since been named by the UN as one of 112 businesses linked to illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank.
Feinstein also cited archived copies of LFI’s website, which had a “Members Area” until 2008.
And, until 2003, its website stated: “Within the British Labour Movement, LFI has a large membership, organised into local branches.”
## Denial
An LFI spokesperson has previously said: “LFI is not a membership organisation, and therefore no Labour parliamentarians are members.
“Labour parliamentarians who participate in LFI delegations to Israel and the Palestinian Territories declare the value of those trips to the Electoral Commission”.
However, experts have told *Declassified* that the group’s denial will not – in itself – be a defence.
It is likely the Electoral Commission will now have to consider what “membership” means in practice, and whether LFI fits the definition. This might include questions over the precise nature of the relationship MPs have with the group.
The case has echoes of a complaint against Labour Together, a thinktank closely associated with Keir Starmer.
In 2017, the Electoral Commission said that it considered the organisation to be a “members association”, and therefore required it to declare donations.
Labour Together was subsequently fined £14,250 for failing to properly declare around £740,000 of donations, with the breach being blamed on an “administrative error”.
Speaking to *Declassified*, Andrew Feinstein said that LFI was “very influential in the Labour Party and British politics”.
“Given this influence it is very problematic that their donors remain secret,” he said.
“For a democracy to function it is essential that the electorate know who is funding our politicians, so that we can be clear about whose interests they are really serving.
“This basic democratic transparency is particularly crucial at a time when many feel unrepresented by our MPs as the genocide in Gaza continues and the Labour government continues its indefensible support of Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump.”
LFI has been approached for comment.
The post [Labour Friends of Israel reported to election watchdog][4] appeared first on [Declassified UK][5].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/trade-secretary-accused-of-egregious-rules-breach-over-israel-links/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61742
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61742
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/labour-friends-of-israel-reported-to-election-watchdog/
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/labour-friends-of-israel-reported-to-election-watchdog/

2026-01-28 14:36:44 GMT

Cameron met top government lawyer while dodging ICC prosecutor
[Cameron leaves Downing Street after a July 2024 Cabinet meeting (Photo: Lucy North / Alamy)]
David Cameron did not meet with ICC chief prosecutor Karim Khan last April but did see a top government barrister a day later to “discuss international humanitarian law”.
The 16 April 2024 meeting in London between Cameron, who was then the foreign secretary, and Sir James Eadie KC is recorded in newly released [transparency logs][1] of Foreign Office ministerial meetings.
Eadie, who has [been described][2] as “Whitehall’s secret weapon”, frequently represents the government in high-stakes legal cases.
Known in legal circles as the “Treasury Devil”, he is the barrister to whom “the Government turn first for their major pieces of advice and litigation”, [according][3] to his chambers.
At the time of his discussion with Cameron, Eadie was representing the business and trade department in a High Court legal challenge over its continued arms exports to Israel, seven months into the war on Gaza.
The case involved [revelations][4] about the extent to which Cameron continued to recommend British arms sales to Israel despite serious concerns raised in the Foreign Office that Israel had breached international law in Gaza.
Cameron and Eadie’s meeting fell a day after internal Foreign Office emails [suggest][5] that Cameron’s office had pencilled in an in-person meeting with Karim Khan, the ICC’s chief prosecutor.
Government logs, which cover a three-month period from Spring 2024, confirm that Cameron did not meet Karim Khan on 15 April despite the Foreign Office’s top lawyer strongly [advising][6] him to do so.
The records were published late last month after *Declassified* asked why they were missing from the public record.
They also show Cameron having a “personal lunch” in his office with the Crown actor Dominic West and drinks with Newsmax Media CEO and Trump confidante, Chris Ruddy, ahead of a US trip.
Jonathan Purcell, head of public affairs for the International Centre of Justice for Palestinians, said: “Cameron’s short and turbulent term as foreign secretary was already mired by controversies, from allegedly ignoring legal advice on banning arms exports to allegedly threatening the ICC.
“This revelation not only emphasises the previous government’s opaque and tarnished reputation on international law, but it also shows woeful prioritisation and a failure in leadership that the current government has continued to perpetuate.”
### RELATED
[
## Cameron was urged to meet ICC prosecutor days before ‘threatening’...
][7] [READ MORE **][8]
## **The phone call **
Khan had requested the meeting with Cameron in late March, presumably to brief the foreign secretary about his plans to pursue warrants for Israeli and Hamas leaders, weeks after he had already briefed the Biden administration.
But an in-person meeting never happened, according to released records.
Instead, a government source told *Declassified *that the men had a phone conversation during the three-month period which would not have been captured in ministerial meeting logs.
Khan [alleged][9] last month that it was during a call on 23 April 2024 that an unnamed senior British official threatened to withdraw UK funding and support for the ICC if arrest warrants were pursued for Israelis.
Cameron has not responded to requests for comment about the allegations.
The Foreign Office did not respond to *Declassified’s* request last month to confirm that the call was on 23 April, but in response to a FOI request filed by Unredacted and reported by Middle East Eye, the department [has revealed][10] that the only person on the call with Khan was Cameron.
It has also been reported that Khan met in London on 15 April – the day that Foreign Office staffers said would work for Cameron – with British justice minister Alex Chalk to relay the forthcoming warrants.
The Ministry of Justice ministerial [meetings log][11] has no record of the meeting. Asked about the logs, the MoJ’s press office told *Declassified* they would not know about meetings held during a previous government and suggested that Chalk be approached.
Chalk did not respond to requests to confirm the meeting.
## **Cameron trip to Israel and occupied territories**
On 15 April, social media posts show that Cameron [met][12] in the morning with Yulia Navalnaya, Alexei Navalnaya’s widow who now leads his Russian opposition movement, and [later on][13] with Chilean foreign minister Alberto van Klaveren.
Ministerial travel records and social media show that Cameron traveled to Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories on 16 April, presumably after his meeting with Eadie.
There he [met][14] with Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, then Israeli foreign minister Israel Katz and Palestinian Authority prime minister Mohammed Mustafa among other leaders.
Travel costs for the three-day trip, which also included a stop in Capri for the G7 Foreign Ministers meeting, came to just over £200,720, [travel records show][15].
A month later, Khan announced that he was requesting arrest warrants for Netanyahu, then Israeli defense minister Yoav Gallant and Hamas leaders Yahya Sinwar, Ismail Haniyeh and Mohammed Deif.
The post [Cameron met top government lawyer while dodging ICC prosecutor][16] appeared first on [Declassified UK][17].
[1]: https://www.gov.uk/csv-preview/694543a172075a1d4a508950/FCDO_ministers_meetings_April_to_June_2024.csv
[2]: https://www.lawfuel.com/the-uk-bars-law-star-devil-sir-james-eadie-kc/
[3]: https://www.blackstonechambers.com/barristers/james-eadie-kc/
[4]: https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/war-gaza-uk-israel-cameron-arms-sales-despite-legal-concerns
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/cameron-was-urged-to-meet-icc-prosecutor-days-before-threatening-him/
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/cameron-was-urged-to-meet-icc-prosecutor-days-before-threatening-him/
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61501
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61501
[9]: https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/icc-karim-khan-senior-uk-officlal-threatened-israel-probe
[10]: https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/exclusive-uk-confirms-threatening-call-between-cameron-and-iccs-karim-khan
[11]: https://www.gov.uk/csv-preview/66c5abbe95bd109d30d76603/moj-ministers-meetings-january-march-2024.csv
[12]: https://x.com/David_Cameron/status/1779804077041267113
[13]: https://x.com/AlbertoKlaveren/status/1779900730154856886
[14]: https://x.com/David_Cameron/status/1780651377389105649/photo/1
[15]: https://www.gov.uk/csv-preview/67237ae946aa392ce3565561/FCDO_ministerial_travel_April_to_June_2024.csv
[16]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/cameron-met-top-government-lawyer-while-dodging-icc-prosecutor/
[17]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/cameron-met-top-government-lawyer-while-dodging-icc-prosecutor/

2026-01-22 22:50:11 GMT

Israel pays for UK adverts attacking Doctors Without Borders
[An injured Palestinian man carried into Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza (Photo: Abed Khaled / Alamy)]
Israel’s government is funding an advertisement campaign in Britain to attack medical charity Doctors Without Borders (MSF), *Declassified* can reveal.
MSF has provided crucial medical care to Palestinians throughout the Gaza genocide, with international and local staff working in hospitals across the besieged strip.
Transparency data [shows][1] the Israeli Government Advertising Agency is paying for an advert to appear as the top result on Google when users search for information about the charity.
The advert leads to an official Israeli report accusing MSF of “grave misconduct” in Gaza and behaviour “that contradicts the fundamental ethics of international humanitarian action”.
The propaganda offensive comes as Israel seeks to limit the work of MSF and other humanitarian organisations in Gaza as part of its wider dismantling of life-saving services for Palestinians.
MSF’s registration to operate in Gaza and the West Bank has not been valid since the start of January and the organisation says it might be forced to cease operations by 1 March.
Patients in Gaza have responded to the news with horror, with one [saying][2]: “If MSF stops working, people will lose their lives”.
MSF [said][3] in a statement: “We remain committed to providing assistance to Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank and call on the Israeli authorities to reverse their decision… and to put in place acceptable operating conditions”.
The UK government is reportedly [mulling][4] reversing its arms suspensions to Israel, despite one of the core reasons for those suspensions being Israel’s restriction of humanitarian aid into Gaza.
Israel’s efforts to propagandise the British public about MSF therefore appears to be in direct conflict with UK policy, and might reinforce arguments to keep the suspensions in place.
*Declassified* has asked the Israeli government to comment.
## **Paid advertisement**
Israel’s advert has been appearing on Google in Britain when users search for “Doctors Without Borders”, “Médecins Sans Frontières”, or “MSF”.
The advert leads to a report on the “Systematic Conduct of Médecins Sans Frontières”, authored by an “Inter-Ministerial Team” in Israel and dated December 2025.
The report accuses MSF of authoring “official publications… that far exceed the bounds of legitimate criticism”, constituting “a deliberate campaign to undermine and deny the legitimacy of the State of Israel”.
This forms part of a “systematic pattern aimed at depriving Israel of its fundamental right to exist as a sovereign state and as a member of the international community”, the report says.
The Israeli government is particularly incensed by MSF’s use of the terms “genocidal war”, “genocide”, and “ethnic cleansing”.
It argues that “these terms do not constitute legitimate criticism of policy or military actions; rather, they attribute to the State of Israel an intent to systematically destroy a population”.
The UN Commission of Inquiry recently [concluded][5] that Israeli forces have been “deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about the destruction of the Palestinians in whole or in part”.
Israel’s report further alleges “indications of links” between MSF and “terrorist organizations” in Gaza including Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP).
Similar accusations were made by Israel in 2023 in order to remove international support for the UN agency for Palestinian refugees, UNRWA, whose headquarters in East Jerusalem were [bulldozed][6] earlier this week.
MSF said: “By accusing MSF, as well as other NGOs, of not cooperating and creating smear campaigns against aid organisations, Israel is using unfounded allegations to arbitrarily restrict access to critical care for Palestinians and limit witnessing from independent organisations working on the ground”.
### RELATED
[
## ‘Not welcome’: Palestinians condemn Blair’s role on Gaza ‘peace board’
][7] [READ MORE **][8]
## **Francesca Albanese**
The transparency data published by Google shows that the Israeli government has also been paying for adverts in Britain attacking UN special rapporteur Francesca Albanese.
Albanese, one of the most outspoken advocates for Palestinian rights, recently [told ][9]*Declassified *that UK ministers “must be investigated” over their role in the Gaza genocide.
This advert linked to an Israeli [report][10] saying “Albanese’s conduct… is fundamentally incompatible with the responsibilities and ethical standards of her mandate”.
It continued: “Albanese has repeatedly violated the norms of impartiality, universality, and professional integrity that are foundational to her UN mandate”.
Other publicity campaigns by Israel aimed at British audiences have sought to discredit UNRWA as well as the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC), which [declared][11] famine in Gaza last August.
It is unclear how much the Israeli government has paid for the advertisements targeting British audiences, including the one attacking Doctors Without Borders.
Recent reports found Israel [spent][12] US$50m “on a deal with platforms such as Google” and other social media platforms “to deny famine in Gaza”, targeting several countries across Europe.
*Declassified* previously [exposed][13] how the Israeli government was paying social media companies to share videos in Britain which were designed to cultivate support for its war on Gaza.
The post [Israel pays for UK adverts attacking Doctors Without Borders][14] appeared first on [Declassified UK][15].
[1]: https://adstransparency.google.com/?region=GB&query=govextra.gov.il&domain=govextra.gov.il
[2]: https://archive.is/20260119094958/https:/www.nytimes.com/2026/01/17/world/middleeast/gaza-doctors-without-borders-c.html
[3]: https://msf.org.uk/addressing-frequently-asked-questions-and-allegations-about-msfs-work-gaza
[4]: https://www.thejc.com/news/uk/government-revisit-israel-arms-licenses-phase-two-gaza-ceasefire-a72x4veb
[5]: https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/09/israel-has-committed-genocide-gaza-strip-un-commission-finds
[6]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/20/israel-bulldozes-unrwa-headquarters-in-east-jerusalem
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61769
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61769
[9]: https://x.com/declassifiedUK/status/1891532342058971405
[10]: https://govextra.gov.il/mda/francescaalbanese/un-misconduct-review/
[11]: https://reliefweb.int/report/occupied-palestinian-territory/gaza-strip-famine-confirmed-gaza-governorate-projected-expand-1-july-30-september-2025-published-22-august-2025
[12]: https://www.aa.com.tr/en/world/israel-spending-millions-on-online-ad-campaigns-to-deny-gaza-famine-report/3689634#:~:text=ISTANBUL,the%20global%20narrative%20on%20Gaza.
[13]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/israel-is-targeting-the-british-public-with-war-propaganda/
[14]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/israel-pays-for-uk-adverts-attacking-doctors-without-borders/
[15]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/israel-pays-for-uk-adverts-attacking-doctors-without-borders/

2026-01-22 11:14:40 GMT

MP broke rules at Maccabi hearing by not declaring husband
A Labour MP broke parliamentary rules by failing to declare that she was married to a witness who appeared before her at a committee hearing.
Labour Friends of Israel member Jo White did not say that Lord John Mann was her husband when he gave evidence to MPs last month about a ban on Israeli football fans.
Mann, who is the government’s independent adviser on antisemitism, was critical of police for stopping Maccabi Tel Aviv fans attending a match against Aston Villa.
White did not ask Mann any questions during the home affairs committee session, later claiming this was to avoid conflicts of interest.
However parliament’s standards commissioner ruled on Wednesday that White had breached Westminster rules on transparency.
In a letter to White, Watchdog Daniel Greenberg [said][1]: “The complainant has suggested that ‘the complete absence of questioning may reasonably give the appearance of unequal treatment or avoidance of scrutiny’…
“I agree with that, and do not agree with your suggestion that by not asking any questions you avoided the requirement for a declaration.
“The overall aim of declaring interests is openness and transparency: whether you asked any questions or not, the public were entitled to be made aware of the close family relationship between you, a committee member, and Lord Mann, a witness giving evidence to your committee.”
## ‘Frenzy’
Greenberg is also investigating whether a second Labour MP on parliament’s home affairs committee, Peter Prinsley, has broken transparency rules.
The nature of this investigation has not been made public but it could relate to Prinsley omitting that he had [received][2] £2,600 from Labour Friends of Israel.
Prinsley has already been [reprimanded][3] once for failing to properly declare this donation which he received for a trip to Israel in May 2025.
The committee hearing was dominated by MPs criticising West Midlands police chief constable Craig Guildford for banning Maccabi fans.
The club’s hooligans have close links to Israel’s army and have been involved in violent attacks on Muslims at matches in Europe.
Guildford was forced into early retirement over his decision to ban their fans amid accusations he gave incomplete evidence to the committee.
A probe by the police watchdog cleared Guildford of antisemitism but criticised the chief constable for “confirmation bias”.
Guildford [said][4] he stood down following a “political and media frenzy”. Three other MPs on the committee had links to pro-Israel groups.
### RELATED
[
## Labour MP broke rules over Israel trip
][5] [READ MORE **][6]
## Ministerial code
Greenberg’s decision comes as *Declassified* [revealed][7] this week that trade secretary Peter Kyle has not declared his membership of Labour Friends of Israel (LFI) in the official List of Ministerial Interests.
Kyle is responsible for government policy on arms exports.
Seven other ministers have declared their membership of LFI, a lobby group which is at odds with Labour’s stance on recognition of Palestine and a partial weapons embargo.
The ministerial code says members of the government must declare relevant interests and not belong to groups that conflict with official policy.
The prime minister’s independent advisor on ministers’ interests, Sir Laurie Magnus, has not investigated the matter.
The post [MP broke rules at Maccabi hearing by not declaring husband][8] appeared first on [Declassified UK][9].
[1]: https://www.parliament.uk/globalassets/documents/pcfs/rectifications/ms-jo-white-mp-rectification.pdf
[2]: http://www.declassifieduk.org/friends-of-israel-trip-not-declared-by-labour-politicians/
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/labour-mp-broke-rules-over-israel-trip/
[4]: https://www.westmidlands.police.uk/news/west-midlands/news/news/2026/january/retirement-of-chief-constable-craig-guildford/
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=60395
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=60395
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/trade-secretary-accused-of-egregious-rules-breach-over-israel-links/
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/mp-broke-rules-at-maccabi-hearing-by-not-declaring-husband/
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/mp-broke-rules-at-maccabi-hearing-by-not-declaring-husband/

2026-01-21 16:07:57 GMT

Legality of fighter jet transfer from UK to Israel questioned
[An Israeli Air Force F-35 ‘Adir’ (Photo: Ofer Zidon / Alamy)]
The transfer of three new F-35 fighter jets from a British air base to Israel has raised questions about whether their delivery violated arms export sanctions imposed by the Labour government.
The [delivery of the jets][1] through RAF Mildenhall in the Suffolk countryside over the weekend has also left campaigners criticising the use of British bases for activities that contradict UK policy.
Although the site is known for hosting US forces, campaigners said “RAF Mildenhall is a British base and is on UK sovereign territory and is therefore subject to the law and the will of the UK government”.
The Lakenheath Alliance for Peace, a coalition of campaign groups focused on nearby RAF Lakenheath, said “Yet a foreign power has flagrantly gone against the wishes of the UK government.”
The jets, produced by Lockheed Martin in the US, arrived at the British air base on Friday and then departed on Sunday for Nevatim air base in southern Israel.
They [reportedly][2] raise the total of F-35s available to the Israeli air force to 48. The fleet has been [relied][3] upon for Israel’s recent attacks on Gaza, Yemen, Syria, Lebanon and Iran, including civilian sites.
In 2024, the UK government suspended around 30 arms export licences to Israel due to the “clear risk” that they might be used to “commit or facilitate a serious violation of international humanitarian law” in Gaza.
The measures included the suspension of F-35 components directly from the UK to Israel, though left a ‘carve out’ for UK-made F-35 parts sent to a global spares pool.
Sam Perlo-Freeman, research coordinator with the Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT), said it was “horrendous” that the F-35s were transiting through the UK, but was unsure if the activity violated the ban on direct exports.
“The government should be challenged on how this is legal, and even if it is legal, it’s something they absolutely shouldn’t be doing,” said Perlo-Freeman.
Asked how the transfer of F-35s squared with the ban on direct exports of the fighter jet components to Israel, a UK government source suggested that the 2008 Export Control Order includes exemptions for aircraft transiting through the UK if they were imported as part of a scheduled journey that will end elsewhere.
Peter Lux, an activist with the Lakenheath Alliance for Peace, told *Declassified* he was concerned that the planes were being delivered to the Israeli government from an RAF base.
“It is British sovereign territory and the British government has banned certain arms exports to Israel. This goes against that,” he said. “Who is actually in control of that base?”
The post [Legality of fighter jet transfer from UK to Israel questioned][4] appeared first on [Declassified UK][5].
[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwyoUaop4p8
[2]: https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/defense-news/article-883764
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/what-is-the-f-35-fighter-jet-israel-uses-to-bomb-gaza-and-iran/
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/campaigners-question-legality-of-fighter-jet-transfer-from-uk-to-israel/
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/campaigners-question-legality-of-fighter-jet-transfer-from-uk-to-israel/

2026-01-21 16:07:52 GMT

‘Not welcome’: Palestinians condemn Blair’s role on Gaza ‘peace board’
Donald Trump’s pronouncements about his so-called “Board of Peace” seem far removed from daily reality in the Gaza Strip, where residents are preoccupied with securing water, bread and warmth.
Yet Trump’s choice of members such as former UK prime minister Tony Blair has reopened old questions about the meaning and limits of peace, and whether it is possible to discuss it apart from justice.
Inside his tent west of Gaza City, Palestinian journalist Abdullah al-Turkmani says the concerns are not just about Blair as a person, but about what this proposal represents politically.
“We fear that the ‘Board of Peace’ will be a prelude to long-term dominance that entrenches division and erases the unity of the Palestinian people and geography between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip,” he comments.
Al-Turkmani believes the inclusion of Blair’s name has revived a sense that the suffering of Gazans is likely to continue rather than come to an end.
Palestinian Omar Barhoum, 52, says: “We live in dilapidated tents, and the cold is killing us and our children.
“Meanwhile, Trump and others choose figures from abroad, many of whom have supported Israel or remained silent about its crimes, and then decide what kind of peace is appropriate for us.
“When we heard the names, we felt that this board would entrench a reality imposed on us. Blair’s name, in the minds of many of us, is associated only with war, destruction, and close relations with Israel and the United States.”
He continues: “We feel that the Palestinian people, despite all the sacrifices they have made in Gaza, have lost their role in expressing who represents them and who governs them. Names are imposed on us, and we are asked to accept them by force.”
He adds: “True peace does not need guardians. It needs an end to the occupation and accountability for those who committed crimes against us. We are no longer able to live with dignity. We have lost our homes, our children, and our women, and we are still paying the price.”
### RELATED
[
## In Gaza, outrage spreads at Trump’s ‘Governor Blair’ plan
][1] [READ MORE **][2]
## ‘Ease our suffering’
On the other hand, Gaza is not without less hardline voices, reflecting the extent of exhaustion and despair left by the war.
A Palestinian woman who preferred not to give her name says: “If this board, regardless of Blair or anyone else, will ease our suffering even a little, which has become unbearable – open the crossings, speed up the reconstruction of our homes, bring a normal life back to our children, and stop wars forever – then let it do so.”
She adds: “After the war, we are like drowning people clinging to a straw. We are searching for any sign that tells us our suffering will end and that life will return to how it was. We no longer have the luxury of choice after all this pain.”
Despite the focus on Blair, many Gazans are also following the circulation of the name of the current British prime minister, Keir Starmer, as a possible member of the “Board of Peace”.
Esraa al-Khaldi, an Arabic language teacher who lost her job because of the genocide, says that her intensive following of the news during the war did not give her confidence in putting forward Starmer’s name, or even Blair’s.
She adds: “I listened carefully to the statements and monitored them, and I did not hear from Starmer a clear condemnation of Israel over the famine that has exhausted our bodies, nor an explicit description of it as a crime of genocide. Therefore, it is difficult to believe that his presence on any council would make a real difference.”
She continues: “We do not need symbolic peace boards or international envoys. We need a clear recognition that what we are living through is occupation and collective punishment. Any peace that does not begin from this truth is a lie.”
Regarding Blair in particular, al-Khaldi believes that “the West is still rewarding politicians who turned a blind eye to the war crimes that took place in Gaza.”
In the Palestinian collective consciousness, Blair name is associated with his previous role as a Middle East envoy of the [Quartet][3], accused by many of failing in his mission due to his pro-Israel stance.
### RELATED
[
## Why Tony Blair governing Gaza would result in more war...
][4] [READ MORE **][5]
## ‘We do not want it’
Ferial Abu Qadous, a 40-year-old Palestinian sheltering in one of the evacuation schools, says: “I am not aware of the names that have been put forward, nor do I know exactly who Starmer or anyone else is. But from his name, he seems Western, and I am against being governed by anyone who is not Palestinian.”
She adds: “When I heard the news, I wondered: Will the candidates for the Peace Board rebuild our house that was destroyed by the occupation? Will they hold Israel accountable for the cold-blooded murder of my sister’s children? Or will they hold it accountable for starving my brother’s children? Certainly not. Therefore, we will not accept them.”
From his displacement tent in Al-Mawasi, Khan Younis, an elderly Palestinian Mustafa Abu Haddaf says: “We are tired of words. In every war we have lived through in Gaza, we hear talk of peace while we are killed and besieged. If this is their peace, we do not want it.”
He adds: “Any talk of genuine peace will have no credibility unless it is accompanied by political and moral accountability, an end to the occupation, and a guarantee of our right to return to the lands from which we were forced to emigrate in 1948.”
He concludes: “In short, we have not and will not trust initiatives that ignore the true balance of power.”
The post [‘Not welcome’: Palestinians condemn Blair’s role on Gaza ‘peace board’][6] appeared first on [Declassified UK][7].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=60694
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=60694
[3]: https://www.quartetoffice.org/category.php?id=a374y41844Ya374
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=60705
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=60705
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/imposed-on-us-palestinians-reject-blair-role-on-gaza-peace-board/
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/imposed-on-us-palestinians-reject-blair-role-on-gaza-peace-board/

2026-01-19 14:47:42 GMT

British investment in U.S. warplane scheme struggles to break even
Britain’s military is struggling to recover its multi-million pound investment in an American-led stealth jet, *Declassified* has found.
The revelation comes as US president Donald Trump threatens to impose 10% tariffs on the British economy after prime minister Keir Starmer criticised his plans to take over Greenland.
The UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) ploughed $200 million into the F-35 warplane programme in the late 1990s.
The aircraft would become a key part of Nato’s air defences against Russia.
British officials planned to recover their investment in F-35s through “foreign military sales” – essentially exports to allied nations including Israel and now Saudi Arabia.
But a quarter century later, [only $94m][1] has been recouped – less than half the original investment – and far short of the $2 billion (£1.7bn) total investment made in later years.
It provides more context to claims by ministers that the F-35 is of major benefit to Britain’s economy and shows how UK defence spending subsidises American arms firms.
Ministers have [said][2] that “around £35-billion will be contributed to the UK economy through the F-35 programme”, however this value has gone to British and US arms companies rather than returning the taxpayers’ initial investment.
The $94m figure also provides evidence for the first time that the MoD receives income from F-35 sales to repressive regimes.
## ‘Cushy deal’
There have been 579 F-35 sold to foreign customers, with 75 going to Israel (25 of which were [agreed][3] during the Gaza genocide).
The figures would suggest that Britain’s MoD earned $12m from the sales to Israel, if each customer paid the same price for its planes.
The MoD, when asked, did not provide a more accurate breakdown.
A spokesperson said: “Partner Nations within the F-35 programme who contribute to F-35 development can recoup elements of those costs from foreign sales of the F-35.”
Campaign Against Arms Trade told *Declassified* this was indicative of the “enormously cushy deal the arms industry gets from this sort of major procurement in both the US and the UK.
“They get all the Research & Development paid for up-front…the government helps them export it, which makes them even more profit, and in return they pay back a measly amount of the development costs through the export levy.”
Britain’s National Audit Office (NAO) [found][4] in July that the F-35 “programme’s whole-life costs are considerably higher than the MoD has publicly reported.”
It recommended that “to enable full accountability, the MoD should calculate…costs to date, including all sunk costs”.
### RELATED
[
## What is the F-35 fighter jet Israel uses to bomb...
][5] [READ MORE **][6]
## Civilian casualties
More foreign military sales are on the horizon after Trump signed a deal with Saudi Arabia in November allowing it to buy an unspecified number of F-35s.
Saudi Arabia and Israel have been accused of using fighter jets to kill civilians in Gaza and Yemen.
Over the past two years, MPs and campaigners have demanded that the UK stop exporting F-35 parts that could end up in Israeli jets being used in its war on Gaza.
Israel used F-35s to drop 2,000 pound bombs on the enclave and also to keep as many aircraft as possible available to maintain a high volume of strikes.
In September 2024, Britain’s newly elected Labour government suspended licences for the direct export of F-35 parts to Israel, but allowed exports to a global spare parts pool to continue.
The government has argued that it would be impossible to halt the supply of UK-made components specifically for Israel without endangering the entire global fleet of F-35s.
That’s because the F-35 programme claims not to track and trace parts sent to the global pool, making it impossible to know which components could end up in Israeli aircraft.
The scheme is managed by the Joint Program Office (JPO) in Washington, where “there are currently 38 MoD staff embedded”, according to the NAO.
This number is “more than any other partner nation”, but the MoD [declined][7] to tell parliament whether the embedded British staff could track parts.
The post [British investment in U.S. warplane scheme struggles to break even][8] appeared first on [Declassified UK][9].
[1]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2025-10-10/78338
[2]: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-to-double-f-35-fleet-with-17-jet-order-defence-secretary-announces
[3]: https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-inks-deal-to-buy-25-more-f-35-fighter-jets-for-3-billion/
[4]: https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/the-uks-f-35-capability.pdf
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=59570
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=59570
[7]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2025-07-14/67395
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/british-investment-in-warplane-scheme-struggles-to-break-even/
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/british-investment-in-warplane-scheme-struggles-to-break-even/

2026-01-15 14:39:55 GMT

UK plotted ‘covert’ measures against Irish republican hunger strikers
The UK government planned “covert” measures to monitor “everything” which was said and written by Irish republican hunger strikers in prison in 1980, declassified files reveal.
The strike had been called in response to the removal of political status for convicted paramilitary prisoners, with seven men in HMP Maze refusing their first meal on 27 October.
It ended 53 days later, with some of the hunger strikers claiming the UK government had gestured towards meeting their demands before reneging.
The incident set the scene for the 1981 hunger strike, which saw ten Irish republicans including Bobby Sands starve themselves to death amid a showdown with Margaret Thatcher.
Files released to the [National Archives][1] in London now detail how the UK government was acutely concerned about the domestic and international implications of the 1980 hunger strike.
It produced weekly bulletins on the situation, monitored media coverage, liaised with the Catholic church, and even considered meeting some of the strikers’ demands, the files show.
Plans were also made to employ “covert techniques” in order to “find out as much as possible about the day-to-day state of mind of each striker”.
This would apparently include eavesdropping on the prisoners’ private conversations and intercepting mail so that the British state could know “everything” that was said and written.
The goal was to put the British state in a privileged position to put pressure on the strikers when they were most “vulnerable”.
The revelation comes after Keir Starmer’s government refused to engage with the “Prisoners for Palestine” hunger strike, the largest since the 1980s.
Britain’s prisons minister Lord Timpson sought to downplay the significance of the strike, which was mostly halted yesterday, claiming “we have averaged over 200 hunger strike incidents every year”.
But the government did not release data on how many of those were waged collectively or sustained over long periods of time.
Last month, UK justice secretary David Lammy even tried to claim ignorance about the issue, telling family members of one of the strikers: “I don’t know anything about this”.
Against this backdrop, the newly declassified files offer a window into the kinds of official deliberations – and underhand techniques – which may have taken place behind closed doors.
### RELATED
[
## David Lammy ‘waiting for us to die’, Palestine hunger striker...
][2] [READ MORE **][3]
## ‘Covert techniques’
The document discussing “covert techniques” against the hunger strikers was authored by B.A. Blackwell, a security official in the Northern Ireland Office (NIO).
Blackwell observed in November 1980 how the UK government had “acquired a world-wide reputation for being particularly adept at dealing with hostage-takers”.
He therefore contemplated whether there were “lessons to be learned from the well-tried tactics used to deal with the taking of hostages” when dealing with hunger strikers.
An important pre-requisite to advising ministers on possible courses of action, he wrote, would be getting “to know every possible detail about those with whom we are dealing”.
That would include gathering information on the “personalities” and the “views and state of mind” of the strikers.
“We need a complete psychological, historical and physical picture of each striker”, Blackwell wrote.
“We need his school records, his medical records, police records and every other possible piece of information so that we can assess as accurately as possible what makes him tick”, he added.
In terms of acquiring information about their “views and state of mind”, Blackwell wrote that “we need to know everything he says and writes”.
This might “require the sort of covert techniques used in dealing with hostage-takers and is almost certainly technically feasible”, he continued.
A small team would then need to be assembled, with support from a consultant psychiatrist, in order “to assist in interpreting the information”.
That analysis would then be used by Britain’s security agencies to understand “the timing” and “best way” to “influence matters” in a way which “assists the government’s objectives”.
Another official wrote how “much greater knowledge of the protesters… is needed if they are to be approached at the time when they are likely to be most vulnerable to the prospects of ending their protest”.
This was a “specialist matter referred to in Mr Blackwell’s paper”, they added.
### RELATED
[
## ‘Lodged in skulls’: The army’s deadly plastic bullets scandal
][4] [READ MORE **][5]
## Handling the media
The UK government also placed emphasis on monitoring domestic and international responses to the hunger strike, and sought to ensure “balanced” media coverage.
Work was done “conditioning leader writers, journalists and television companies”, with a booklet on the “facts” distributed to the press across the UK and Ireland.
Conor Cruise O’Brien, the Editor-in-Chief of the *Observer*, for instance, was given “full background material on the Dirty Protest and the Hunger Strike”.
Officials were informed – “by no less an authority than The Cruiser himself” – that a front-page spread would appear on the matter.
Further discussions were held on “countering provisional IRA propaganda in the USA”, with UK embassies reporting on how protests on the hunger strike were spreading across the country.
Apparently in order to counter this development, an “Ulsterman” had been appointed as “information officer attached to the British Mission in New York”.
The UK government also remained in close contact with prominent figures in the Catholic church, who they hoped would “help [in] keeping Catholic opinion in the north on the rails”.
## Concessions
The declassified files show how officials within the UK government were also open to permitting some concessions to the prisoners in order to bring an end to the hunger strike.
This was despite the government’s official position that it would “not and cannot make any concessions whatever on the principle of political status for prisoners who claim a political motive for their crimes. All have been convicted of criminal acts by due process of law”.
The hunger strikers’ demands were:
1. The right not to wear prison uniform
2. The right not to do prison work
3. Freedom of association
4. The right to organise recreational facilities, to one weekly visit, to one weekly letter in and out and one food parcel a week
5. Restoration of full remission
NIO official P.W.J. Buxton wondered whether the gap between both positions was really “unbridgeable” and asked if it would be possible to assemble a “package” of reforms which would be acceptable to both sides.
Buxton’s package would include:
1. Allowing prisoners to wear their own clothing of the same approved style and type as that provided by the official civilian-type prison dress and controlled by the prison authorities
2. Widening the scope of prison work to include many of the activities regarded as recreational and educational but within a framework controlled by the prison authorities
3. Making ad hoc provision for those prisoners who wished to do so, to associate together from time to time in self-constituted groups
4. Allowing prisoners to “buy back” remission lost on the protest subject to future good behaviour
5. Confirming those present were “privileged”, which [would] in effect meet the main part of the protesters’ other demands
In order to ensure the success of such a “package”, Buxton noted that it “should be put forward by some party outside Government” and therefore be seen as an “independent” proposal.
However, this party would not be altogether “independent”.
It would be “given precise terms of reference which would exclude the concession of political status or the recommendation of measures which concede de facto political status”, he wrote.
Buxton’s proposal appears similar to concessions that were drawn up for an MI6 officer to propose to Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness.
MI6’s contact with the Republican leadership about the hunger strike was authorised by Thatcher, her permanent secretary at the NIO, Kenneth Stowe, said.
Stowe regarded the MI6 proposal as “a façade of concessions about the treatment of prisoners which gave them a ladder to climb down”, according to Thatcher’s official biography.
The post [UK plotted ‘covert’ measures against Irish republican hunger strikers][6] appeared first on [Declassified UK][7].
[1]: https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C12178318
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61707
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61707
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=12111
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=12111
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-plotted-covert-measures-against-irish-republican-hunger-strikers/
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-plotted-covert-measures-against-irish-republican-hunger-strikers/

2026-01-14 18:38:26 GMT

Police chief considering release of secret MI5 report on Troubles
Northern Ireland’s chief constable Jon Boutcher is reviewing the security classification of an MI5 file from 1973 to see if it can finally be made public.
Jack Morton, a senior MI5 officer, drew up a dossier on how police special branch should respond to the IRA more than half a century ago.
Morton completed his report at the height of the Troubles when the police, army and intelligence agencies were recruiting agents inside the IRA and loyalist paramilitary groups.
Throughout the conflict in Northern Ireland, state agents participated in terrorism including murder and [torture][1].
Boutcher revealed he was reviewing the Morton report’s classification while being questioned by the Northern Ireland Affairs committee in Westminster on Wednesday.
The Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) previously refused to release the Morton report when taken to [court][2] by *Declassified*.
However that decision was made before Boutcher – who is seen by some as a transparency champion – became chief constable.
Claire Hanna MP asked him if releasing the Morton report and other files would “help us to understand better what those in power knew and when about the handling and mishandling of agents?”
Boutcher replied: “I have instigated a piece of work to do a security review of those documents – because this hasn’t happened from a government perspective.
“And my intention is – so this work is underway – is to then go to partners in the security agencies”, the Northern Ireland secretary Hilary Benn and other partners to ask them “how do you feel about that?”
### RELATED
[
## MI5 report on Troubles to stay secret, court rules
][3] [READ MORE **][4]
## **‘Culture of overreach’**
Boutcher anticipated that “having done the security check, these documents can now be put in the public domain.”
He had [recommended][5] that the classification of Morton’s report and a host of other “legacy” files from the Troubles be reviewed in 2024.
He explained that his colleague, Sir Iain Livingstone, “has been pursuing through the Cabinet Office a mechanism for those recommendations to be delivered upon. And that includes the Morton report. That’s on the list of reports.”
Other documents on the list are thought to include the so-called Stalker and Sampson reports into whether police operated a shoot-to-kill policy during the Troubles.
Daniel Holder, director of Belfast human rights group the Committee on the Administration of Justice, told *Declassified*: “We welcome the PSNI announcement that they will review the security classification of legacy reports and that that exercise importantly includes the Morton report.
“At the same time it is concerning that the UK government and Cabinet Office have done nothing to take forward the [2024] recommendation to review the security classification of reports in order for them to be made public.
“It remains unclear if it is the general culture of overreach on secrecy that has kept the Morton report under wraps to date or if there are specific issues in this report into RUC Special Branch or that someone is desperate it does not see the light of day.”
### RELATED
[
## Why I took the police to court over a 48-year-old...
][6] [READ MORE **][7]
## **Who was Jack Morton?**
Morton served as a [colonial][8] police chief in India and was director of intelligence in Malaya (now Malaysia) during a communist insurgency against British rule in the 1950s.
He strongly supported the British empire and once described[ Indians][9] as “a sort of immature, backward and needy people whom it was the natural British function to govern and administer.”
His colonial background gave him extensive experience of undercover operations and armed policing.
He was brought out of retirement in 1973 to review the situation in Northern Ireland.
Victims of the Troubles have expressed concern about what might be contained in his report because, a year after it was compiled, 33 people were killed by Loyalist car bombs in [Dublin][10] and Monaghan.
A subsequent inquiry by former Irish Supreme Court judge Henry Barron concluded: “A number of those suspected for the bombings were reliably said to have had relationships with British Intelligence and/or Royal Ulster Constabulary special branch officers.”
Morton advised the Foreign Office and Colonial Office on counter-insurgency strategies across the world.
He urged Sri Lankan security forces to seek training from battle-hardened SAS troops in 1979 when confronted by the Tamil independence movement.
It was at that stage mostly a peaceful struggle but the country soon became engulfed in a full-scale civil war, with Sri Lanka hiring former SAS mercenaries to help suppress Tamils.
Despite the secrecy around Morton’s report on Northern Ireland, other government departments have released even older dossiers he compiled on security situations in different countries.
Those include a strike at an asbestos mine in [Swaziland][11] (now Eswatini) in 1963.
Miners, who demanded £1 a day, were interrogated by Special Branch and army intelligence using torture methods known as the five techniques.
Morton died in 1985.
The post [Police chief considering release of secret MI5 report on Troubles][12] appeared first on [Declassified UK][13].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/they-knew-victims-of-ira-executioner-condemn-british-collusion/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/mi5-report-on-troubles-to-stay-secret-court-rules/
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=4201
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=4201
[5]: https://www.kenova.co.uk/Kenova%20Report%202024%20Digital%20(002).pdf
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=1315
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=1315
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/why-i-took-the-police-to-court-over-a-48-year-old-secret-document/
[9]: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/northern-ireland-police-cover-up-ruc-report-by-racist-officer-1.3248625
[10]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/who-bombed-dublin-the-50-year-cover-up-must-end/
[11]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/police-overzealous-in-censoring-mi5-report-on-northern-ireland/
[12]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/police-chief-considering-release-of-secret-mi5-report-on-troubles/
[13]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/police-chief-considering-release-of-secret-mi5-report-on-troubles/

2026-01-13 01:26:44 GMT

US aggression, UK support: The ‘special relationship’
[Trump and Starmer at Chequers in September 2025. (Photo: Leon Neal / Alamy)]
Forty years ago, US warplanes bombed Libya, attempting to assassinate its leader Muammar Gaddafi. Failing in that task, they managed to kill dozens of civilians in Tripoli, Libya’s capital.
The attacks, which were in response to the bombing of a Berlin nightclub blamed on Gaddafi, were strongly supported by Margaret Thatcher’s government. Indeed, she allowed some of the US jets to take off from bases in Britain.
In the face of widespread public opposition to the US raid, a defiant Thatcher [told][1] parliament it was “a necessary and proportionate response to a clear pattern of Libyan terrorism” and to “uphold international law”.
However, the UN General Assembly, and most world opinion, condemned the attack as a violation of international law.
But for the British prime minister: “The United States has stood by us in times of need, as we have stood by her. To refuse their request for the use of bases here would have been to abandon our responsibilities as an ally and to weaken the fight against terrorism.”
Fast forward two decades, and we find ourselves in a not dissimilar situation over US attacks on Venezuela.
UK ministers give their backing to the kidnapping of a foreign head of state amidst a military intervention, condemned in the wider world but supported in Whitehall because of the so-called “special relationship”.
### RELATED
[
## How Britain helped Trump destabilise Venezuela
][2] [READ MORE **][3]
## **‘Our full support’**
It was always thus. Three years after the attack on Libya, the US invaded Panama in December 1989. US aggression killed up to 3,000 people in this instance, and overthrew President Manuel Noriega, who had been on the CIA’s payroll for decades.
The invasion was widely considered to be illegal and in violation of the charters of both the UN and the Organization of American States.
A Foreign Office legal adviser [wrote][4] on the day of the invasion that “it is not possible to conclude that the American action was justified in international law”.
This didn’t matter in the British corridors of power. In a private phone call, Thatcher assured US president George W Bush that the intervention “was a very courageous decision which would have our full support”.
In the days that followed, Britain even vetoed a UN Security Council resolution which “strongly deplores” the invasion.
## **Clinton/Blair double act**
A change in leadership in London and Washington made little difference to this pattern in the 1990s when the double act became Bill Clinton and Tony Blair.
In August 1998, Clinton launched a wave of cruise missile attacks on targets in Afghanistan and Sudan in retaliation for Al Qaeda’s bombing of US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania earlier that month.
Al Qaeda’s bombings were horrific, killing over 300 people. But while the US retaliation struck terrorist training camps in Afghanistan, its target in Sudan was a pharmaceuticals factory that produced medicines for the country’s population.
The US claimed the plant was manufacturing chemical weapons but no strong evidence ever emerged for this.
Amid the controversy, Bill Clinton [blocked][5] proposals for a UN investigation into the matter while Tony Blair strongly backed his ally’s attacks — against the advice of some British diplomats [reportedly][6] being appalled at them.
## **‘Proper legal authority’**
It was only a few months later, in December 1998, that Bill and Tony worked even more closely together in a new bombing campaign.
They authorised four days of air strikes on Iraq, ostensibly to degrade dictator Saddam Hussein’s ability to store and produce weapons of mass destruction (which, of course, never materialised).
The declassified files [show][7] that Blair and his closest advisers were consistently informed by UK legal advisers that attacking Iraq would not be lawful.
The only exception would be if a new UN Security Council resolution were to be passed saying Saddam was in “material breach” of Iraq’s previous commitments – which London and Washington never secured.
In a sign of Blair’s attitude towards legal requirements, he privately wrote at the time that he found his law officers’ legal advice “unconvincing”.
When he announced military action to parliament in November 1998, Blair misled the house by saying: “I have no doubt that we have the proper legal authority, as it is contained in successive Security Council resolution documents”.
### RELATED
[
## Blair misled parliament over 1998 Iraq bombing, files show
][8] [READ MORE **][9]
## **‘Act of war’**
Over 20 years later, it was the turn of Boris Johnson to acquiesce to Donald Trump in an overtly illegal US act of aggression.
In January 2020, Trump ordered a drone strike that killed Iranian General Qasem Soleimani, the commander of the Quds force, a branch of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps which the US had designated a terrorist organisation.
Washington tried to justify the killing by claiming it had intelligence that Soleimani was plotting imminent attacks on US interests across the Middle East.
But a UN report [found][10] that the assassination was illegal. Indeed, the then UN special rapporteur on extrajudicial executions, Agnes Callamard, said it marked a watershed in international law.
“It is hard to imagine that a similar strike against a Western military leader would not be considered as an act of war, potentially leading to intense action, political, military and otherwise, against the State launching the strike”, she wrote.
By contrast, Johnson defended the US action and [said][11] that “we will not lament” Soleimani’s death. He [added][12] that “the strict issue of legality is not for the UK to determine since it was not our operation” — precisely what Keir Starmer has just said about Venezuela.
London’s support for Washington also came in the form of Johnson’s equally belligerent foreign secretary, Dominic Raab, who [added][13] that the US “had a right to exercise self-defence”.
## **Bombing Iran**
Trump attacked Iran again after Keir Starmer had been in office for nearly a year. In June last year, the US launched air strikes on nuclear-related sites in the country, ostensibly to prevent Tehran developing a nuclear arms programme.
A group of UN experts [condemned][14] the intervention, stating: “These attacks violate the most fundamental rules of world order since 1945 – the prohibition on the aggressive use of military force and the duties to respect sovereignty and not to coercively intervene in another country.”
Yet Starmer’s response was a rehearsal of his reaction to Trump’s recent kidnapping of Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela. The British prime minister failed to condemn the US intervention, instead going along with it by [saying][15] it was “clear Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon”.
Similarly, foreign secretary David Lammy was repeatedly asked whether the US attacks were illegal, and [refused][16] to say.
### RELATED
[
## Britain’s long history of spying on Iran
][17] [READ MORE **][18]
## **Backing the law by violating it**
By the time the US under Trump overthrew the Venezuelan government earlier this month, the UK response was utterly predictable.
Starmer and other ministers welcomed Maduro’s overthrow, failed to identify it as an obvious violation of international law and even had the audacity to claim they remained strong supporters of that law.
Foreign secretary Yvette Cooper [said][19] in a parliamentary debate on Venezuela that “we will always argue for the upholding of international law”, precisely at a time she was supporting an obvious violation of it.
It was the same with her deputy. A day after telling parliament she welcomed the illegal US removal of Maduro, foreign minister Jenny Chapman [told][20] parliament the UK’s “support for international law… is unwavering”.
Maduro’s kidnapping was strongly [condemned][21] by UN experts while its human rights chief, Volker Turk, said it “violates the country’s sovereignty and the UN charter”.
This failed to deter the UK immediately proceeding with military collaboration with Trump’s rogue state. Four days after the kidnapping, the UK provided military support to Washington to help it seize a Russian-flagged oil tanker near the northwest waters of the UK.
*Declassified* [asked][22] legal experts to comment on Trump’s latest military intervention and many are concluding it is yet another violation.
The decades-long cycle goes on. The US and UK have long been repeatedly undermining what exists of a rules-based international order – while claiming to uphold it.
Who knows where it will lead us in terms of future wars and what price will be paid by ordinary people for the world’s leading states creating a global law of the jungle.
The post [US aggression, UK support: The ‘special relationship’][23] appeared first on [Declassified UK][24].
[1]: https://thatchercentre.com/otd-thatchers-defiant-stand-the-1986-house-of-commons-speech-on-the-libya-bombing/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61621
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61621
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/bang-just-like-that-how-thatcher-backed-bush-in-panama/
[5]: https://www.hrw.org/news/1998/09/15/letter-president-clinton-urges-sudan-factory-inspection#:~:text=It%20is%20therefore%20with%20dismay,again%20for%20a%20long%20time.
[6]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/oct/02/afghanistan.terrorism3#:~:text=The%20missiles%20that%20flattened%20al,backed%20him%20to%20the%20hilt.
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/blair-misled-parliament-over-1998-iraq-bombing-files-show/
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=12479
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=12479
[10]: https://www.ibanet.org/article/45C796CC-3EAD-4F7C-BF63-5CC66C984079
[11]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51001236
[12]: https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/boris-johnson-says-qasem-soleimani-had-blood-of-british-troops-on-his-hands-as-he-defends-us-drone-strike
[13]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50996630
[14]: https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/06/un-experts-condemn-united-states-attack-iran-and-demand-permanent-end
[15]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq53l41gl8jo#:~:text=He%20said%20the%20UK%20had,strikes%20on%20Iran's%20nuclear%20facilities
[16]: https://x.com/declassifiedUK/status/1937077346047008799
[17]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=59629
[18]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=59629
[19]: https://x.com/declassifiedUK/status/2008447611297055089
[20]: https://x.com/declassifiedUK/status/2009185936572338515
[21]: https://x.com/UN_SPExperts/status/2008923414241915342
[22]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/did-trump-and-starmer-break-international-law-with-tanker-seizure/
[23]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/us-aggression-uk-support-the-special-relationship/
[24]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/us-aggression-uk-support-the-special-relationship/

2026-01-13 01:26:38 GMT

David Lammy ‘waiting for us to die’, Palestine hunger striker claims
A pro-Palestine activist on hunger strike in a London prison has said the government is “just waiting for one of us to pass away”.
Kamran Ahmed, who has not eaten for over two months, told *Declassified* on Sunday that his body was “twitching” uncontrollably and he fears heart failure.
“If I pass out while I have this twitching, I can’t move. I’d probably just end up staying frozen on my bed,” unable to press the alarm button in his cell.
Ahmed, who spoke to *Declassified* by phone from Pentonville prison, described having chest pains and being on the brink of fainting.
The mechanic from east London has been hospitalised six times since going on hunger strike 64 days ago.
He is [protesting][1] at being denied bail following his arrest for an alleged break-in by Palestine Action at an Elbit System factory in 2024.
Elbit is Israel’s largest arms firm and provides 85% of the drones used by Israel’s army in Gaza.
Ahmed was arrested in November 2024 and his trial is not expected to start until June 2026.
Prosecution guidelines say prisoners should normally not be held on remand for more than six months.
Ahmed is among a number of Palestine Action suspects on remand beyond that time limit.
Eight have gone on hunger strike but Ahmed is one of the last still refusing food.
“I thought they would actually negotiate,” Ahmed replied, when asked about the stance of justice secretary David Lammy.
“I genuinely thought they would have negotiated by now, [or] at least meet some of the demands.”
“It seems that they are not willing to do anything really, they are just waiting for one of us to pass away.”
Another prisoner, Heba Muraisi, has not eaten for 71 days.
The Palestine Action hunger strike has drawn parallels with the protest by Bobby Sands and other IRA prisoners in 1981.
Ten Republicans died after going without food for between 46 and 71 days.
Ahmed’s sister, Shahmina Alam, told *Declassified*: “To watch your brother fading away – it’s hard and it’s painful.
“I don’t want to think that I could be burying my brother when he’s my younger brother. He was supposed to outlive me.
“A doctor told him that the muscles around his heart are shrinking…they’ve got concerns that he could go into a sudden cardiac arrest. The fear of him passing away was always there, but that made that fear that much closer.”
She said the family had “done everything within our power” to raise the case among ministers but “they all say the same thing”.
Alam confronted Lammy in public last month but felt his responses had been “insulting” and a “disgrace to his humanity”.
Prisons minister Lord Timpson told ITV News he wanted the hunger strikers to “start eating and get better”.
A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: “His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service has assured us all cases of prisoner food refusal are being managed in line with longstanding policy with daily access to prison and healthcare staff. Prisoners are being supported to end their food refusal at any time.
“Before Christmas, we offered to facilitate a meeting between the prisoners’ solicitors and healthcare officials. This offer was accepted on 8 January, and a meeting took place on 9 January.
“Ministers will not meet with these prisoners or their solicitors. They face serious charges, and no government could agree to their demands, many of which relate to ongoing legal proceedings, including immediate bail, which is a matter for independent judges.
“By law, Ministers must uphold judicial independence and must not intervene in ongoing legal proceedings. To do so would be unconstitutional and would undermine the independent judiciary, the cornerstone of our justice system.”
The post [David Lammy ‘waiting for us to die’, Palestine hunger striker claims][2] appeared first on [Declassified UK][3].
[1]: https://prisonersforpalestine.org/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/david-lammy-waiting-for-us-to-die-palestine-hunger-striker-claims/
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/david-lammy-waiting-for-us-to-die-palestine-hunger-striker-claims/

2026-01-09 11:21:13 GMT

Did Trump and Starmer break international law with tanker seizure?
[Footage of the US pursuit of the Marinera (Photo: US Coast Guard)]
The US seizure of a Russian-flagged oil tanker, with British military support, in the North Atlantic may have violated international law, legal experts tell *Declassified*.
“Overall, there would appear to be no credible basis in law for this interdiction,” Douglas Guilfoyle, professor of international law at the University of New South Wales in Sydney said.
The US Coast Guard intercepted the Marinera early Wednesday afternoon as it travelled in the wintry waters between Iceland and Scotland.
The US had been pursuing the ship, accused of violating US sanctions and being part of a fleet used by Russia, Iran and [Venezuela][1] to dodge sanctions, for two weeks after it evaded capture in the Caribbean.
Along the way, fleeing northwards into the Atlantic, the ship changed its name from Bella-1 to Marinera and re-registered as a Russian vessel.
A steady build-up of US aircraft at British air bases following the US attack on Venezuela last week sent plane spotters into overdrive and led to speculation that an operation on the tanker was imminent.
Just before 2pm on Wednesday, US European Command [announced][2] the ship’s seizure, with Britain’s Ministry of Defence confirming soon after that it had provided the US with “enabling support in full compliance with international law”.
The support included Royal Air Force surveillance and the provision of the RFA Tideforce, a Royal Navy auxiliary ship “designed to provide key underway replenishment at sea”.
Defence secretary John Healey justified the UK’s involvement, citing the ship’s “nefarious history” of Russian-Iranian axis sanctions evasion “fuelling terrorism, conflict and misery from the Middle East to Ukraine”.
Speaking in parliament several hours later, Healey claimed that the vessel was stateless and, therefore, could be “lawfully intercepted and subjected to the law of the interdicting state”.
Experts, however, say this is far from clear.
Professor Guilfoyle said that in order for a vessel to be stateless, it must “either have no claim to nationality or be carrying the paperwork required to claim nationality in two flag states and be using those at convenience”.
However Russia’s claim to have granted the ship temporary nationality “disposes of the issue” since ”one state cannot challenge the validity of another state’s grant of its flag to a vessel – the result would be legal chaos”.
### RELATED
[
## How Britain helped Trump destabilise Venezuela
][3] [READ MORE **][4]
## **‘Contested area of law’**
Karen Scott, a law professor at the University of Canterbury in New Zealand, said that under the [UN Convention on the Law of the Sea][5] (Unclos), vessels cannot change their state of registration at sea or in a port of call “save in the case of a real transfer of ownership or change of registry”.
Whether the Marinera’s change of registry was “justified and indeed whether it has been properly completed” appeared unclear, Scott said.
“In this situation, there is precedent allowing a state to refuse to recognise the new state of registration and to treat the vessel as stateless. It is, however, a contested area of law.”
She added: “Of course the US is not currently acting in conformity with international law in a range of situations at the moment. The more interesting issue is the involvement of the UK and whether its support is lawful.”
Donald Rothwell, a professor of international law at the Australian National University, said a vessel could only be stopped, searched and seized on the high seas under four conditions.
These are if it is a pirate ship, engaged in unauthorised broadcasting, is stateless/not-flying a flag or acting in violation of US Security Council resolutions.
“None of those conditions appear to apply in this instance as I understand the tanker was Russian flagged (and that is not in dispute), and the only sanctions it was subject to were US sanctions imposed under US,” he said.
“So, on the facts, this would appear to be extraterritorial US national law enforcement taking place on the high seas/international waters, or even within the UK’s 200 [nautical mile] exclusive economic zone.”
The UK support, he added, was “not exceptional, especially as the tanker was off the coast of Scotland and would have in the normal course of events been under watch by the UK”.
### RELATED
[
## US Air Force deployment in Britain is third largest in...
][6] [READ MORE **][7]
## **Hot pursuit?**
Andrew Serdy, professor of public international law of the sea and director of the Institute of Maritime Law at the University of Southampton, has questioned whether the US was already pursuing the vessel when it changed its flag.
In this case, he [wrote in The Conversation][8], the US “may be entitled to disregard reregistration”.
That’s because, Serdy said, Unclos allows for “hot pursuit”, allowing a vessel to be pursued until the ship enters the territorial sea of its own state or a third one.
The US, he said, is left open to argue that it was “already pursuing the Marinera/Bella 1 and was thus not required to call off its pursuit”.However, he said that the argument has limited usefulness because it’s unclear “whether this was actually a hot pursuit at all”, noting that the term is used for pursuits that begin in one of the maritime zones of the state conducting it not on the high seas.
None of the MPs who spoke on Wednesday evening questioned the legality of the Marinera operation when Healey informed parliament about Britain’s role.
However, one voiced concern at the swift support the UK provided to the US so soon after its military operation in Venezuela which legal scholars [roundly agree][9] broke international law, even as British leaders have [refused][10] to take a public position.
Green MP Ellie Chowns asked: “In a week in which Trump rode roughshod over international law on Monday and threatened a NATO ally on Tuesday, why is it on Wednesday that the UK was so keen to hang on Trump’s military coat-tails when it did not have the courage to call out and condemn his breaking of international law earlier in the week?”
Healey responded: “Quite simply, the US asked for our UK military support because it wanted and needed our UK military support to conduct this operation.
“The legal basis for us doing so was sound and the purpose for this action and operation was strong.”
The post [Did Trump and Starmer break international law with tanker seizure?][11] appeared first on [Declassified UK][12].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/tag/venezuela/
[2]: https://x.com/US_EUCOM/status/2008897287691399504
[3]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61621
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=61621
[5]: https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/unclos_e.pdf
[6]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=9048
[7]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=9048
[8]: https://theconversation.com/us-boards-a-ship-sailing-under-a-russian-flag-what-we-know-and-dont-know-about-the-legal-position-272957
[9]: https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2026-01-07-expert-comment-illegality-us-attack-against-venezuela-beyond-debate-how-world-reacts
[10]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-britain-helped-trump-destabilise-venezuela/
[11]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/did-trump-and-starmer-break-international-law-with-tanker-seizure/
[12]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/did-trump-and-starmer-break-international-law-with-tanker-seizure/

2026-01-09 11:21:08 GMT

Britain refused to help Hugo Chávez amid Venezuela coup
Britain’s embassy in Caracas rebuffed appeals to help Venezuela’s democratically elected president during a right-wing coup, newly unearthed documents reveal.
The coup that ousted Hugo Chávez on 11 April 2002 was orchestrated by dissident military officers and opposition figures, with support from Washington.
After 47 hours, however, Chávez had been reinstated as Venezuela’s president following massive popular mobilisations against his removal.
Newly released documents reveal how, during those two tumultuous days, Chávez appealed to the British embassy in Caracas to help save his life.
The documents were obtained by *Declassified *through a Freedom of Information request to the Foreign Office.
Chávez asked to be flown to Havana, with the Cuban government impressing on the British embassy in Caracas that “they were very concerned” about the president’s welfare.
They were therefore trying to “get him on a plane to Cuba” and looking for a team of ambassadors “to accompany Chavez to the airport in convoy in order to assure his safety”.
On 11 April, shortly before resigning under duress, Chávez also phoned the UK ambassador in Caracas, John Hughes, to ask whether Britain could “help to preserve his wellbeing”.
Tony Blair’s government had more positive relations with Chávez than the US, having hosted him at Downing Street months prior.
However, the British embassy in Caracas was reluctant to help him during the coup.
UK officials worried about the possible reaction from Venezuela’s upper classes, who had overwhelmingly supported the coup against Chávez.
“Local public feeling – at least among the wealthier residents of Caracas – was that Chavez should be put on trial for his part in the recent violence”, one embassy official wrote.
Hughes was also unclear on who “was in control of the country” and recommended “we should not act precipitately [sic]… while a power vacuum remained”.
In addition, the British ambassador was not convinced that Chávez’s life was in “immediate danger”.
His view was that “if conditions deteriorated, then perhaps we should consider helping, given that Chavez was the democratically elected leader”.
After appealing for Britain’s help, Chávez was arrested and taken to a military base during the early hours of 12 April.
“As Chavez is now under arrest”, the Foreign Office noted later that day, “the question” of helping him travel safely to the airport “no longer arises”.
The post [Britain refused to help Hugo Chávez amid Venezuela coup][1] appeared first on [Declassified UK][2].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/britain-refused-to-help-hugo-chavez-amid-venezuela-coup/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/britain-refused-to-help-hugo-chavez-amid-venezuela-coup/

2026-01-06 00:40:51 GMT

How Britain helped Trump destabilise Venezuela
During the early hours of Saturday morning, US forces bombed Venezuela and kidnapped its president, Nicolás Maduro.
This was a clear breach of international law, violating the terms of the UN charter which prohibit interference in and the use of force against sovereign states.
Yet Keir Starmer, a former human rights lawyer, has refused to condemn the attack or even acknowledge its brazen illegality.
“I want to get all the material facts together and we simply haven’t got the full picture at the moment”, the prime minister told the BBC* *on Saturday.
Starmer then wrote on social media that Britain “regarded Maduro as an illegitimate President and we shed no tears about the end of his regime”.
By contrast, it took him less than 24 hours to call Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine a “war of aggression”.
Former British ambassador Sir Richard Dalton told *Declassified* the government has failed to stand up against “the law of the jungle” with its “cynical” stance on Venezuela.
While refusing to condemn Trump’s actions, Starmer insisted there “was no UK involvement in this operation”.
Royal Navy personnel have nonetheless been [embedded][1] in the US armada surrounding Venezuela over recent weeks, with the Ministry of Defence refusing to clarify whether they were present during the attack.
Defence secretary John Healey apparently [ordered][2] them not to take part in strikes on Venezuela and US-UK intelligence sharing was [reportedly][3] frozen in the Caribbean in order to avoid British complicity in breaches of international law.
This is in sharp contrast with the government’s current position that it cannot adjudicate on the legality of Trump’s actions.
But even if British forces did not directly participate in the military operation, the UK government has been quietly backing Washington’s destabilisation efforts in Venezuela for years.
Since 2019, Britain has frozen over $2 billion of Venezuelan gold in the Bank of England, sponsored anti-government initiatives, and even set up a secret “Venezuela Reconstruction Unit” to plan for the day after Maduro’s overthrow.
Starmer is therefore not speaking in abstract terms when he says “the UK has long supported a transition of power in Venezuela”.
### RELATED
[
## Why is Venezuela’s gold still frozen in the Bank of...
][4] [READ MORE **][5]
## Recognising Juan Guaidó
Seven years ago, the UK government made the bold decision to recognise a politician named Juan Guaidó as Venezuela’s president.
Guaidó had never run for presidential office.
Yet on 23 January 2019, he[ swore][6] himself in as Venezuela’s “interim president”, using Article 233 of the Venezuelan constitution to declare that Maduro had abandoned his post and thereby left an “absolute vacuum of power”.
This vacuum, claimed Guaidó, would need to be filled by the president of Venezuela’s National Assembly – a post occupied by Guaidó.
Without the support of the US government, Guaidó’s legal gymnastics would probably not have gotten him very far.
However, the Donald Trump administration moved [quickly][7] to recognise Guaidó, and began pressuring the so-called “international community” to follow suit.
On 24 January, Britain’s then foreign secretary Jeremy Hunt visited Washington, attending a “mid-morning meeting with [US secretary of state] Mike Pompeo, and then Vice-pres Mike Pence”.
During this meeting, Hunt surprised everyone by “suddenly saying that we will consider recognising Guaidó”, according to former foreign minister Alan Duncan.
Duncan’s published diaries note how, the next day, Hunt said “we need to use Venezuela as an issue on which we can be as fully in line with the US as possible, because [Hunt] is out of line on a number of issues such as Syria”.
Weeks earlier, Hunt had vocally disagreed with Trump’s plans to pull US troops out of Syria.
Duncan’s diary entry continued: “It’s one of those trade-off moments which we need if we are to handle the Trump administration cleverly”.
Apparently quoting Hunt, Duncan added: “Venezuela is in their back yard, and it’s probably the only foreign adventure they might just pursue”.
Hunt thus seemingly viewed recognising Guaidó as a means of currying favour with Trump, but Britain also has longstanding interests in the region’s oil reserves.
“The revival of the oil industry [in Venezuela] will be an essential element in any [economic] recovery, and I can imagine that British companies like Shell and BP will want to be part of it”, Duncan had declared in 2018.
British firms are also interested in neighbouring Guyana, which has an ongoing border dispute with Venezuela over the oil-rich Essequibo region.
In January 2019, Guaidó’s representative in London, Vanessa Neumann, was recorded saying the “number one issue identified by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office is that they won’t support us while we continue with the official line, that we want to take back the Essequibo from Guyana”.
Neumann thus instructed her fellow adviser to “drop the topic” of Venezuela’s claim to the region in exchange for Britain’s support for the coup.
### RELATED
[
## Secretive UK team met in Venezuela to promote British energy...
][8] [READ MORE **][9]
## Freezing Venezuela’s gold
Britain’s recognition of Guaidó was a key prerequisite for the Bank of England’s decision to freeze Venezuela’s gold in 2019 – a major British contribution to Washington’s coup efforts.
According to the former US national security adviser John Bolton, Hunt was “delighted” to help with Washington’s destabilisation campaign, “for example freezing Venezuelan gold deposits in the Bank of England”.
The Bank’s directors were uneasy about the legal implications of freezing a foreign state’s assets, but the Foreign Office worked to ease their nerves.
On 25 January 2019, Duncan [wrote][10] in his diary that he held a phone call with Mark Carney, then the Governor of the Bank of England, about Venezuela’s gold:
“I tell Carney that I fully appreciate that, although it’s a decision for the Bank, he needs a measure of political air cover from us. I tell him I will write him the most robust letter I can get through the FCO lawyers, and it will outline the growing doubts over Maduro’s legitimacy and explain that many countries no longer consider him to be the country’s President”.
In other words, the Bank of England required a robust legal rationale for keeping Venezuela’s gold frozen, and the Foreign Office was happy to provide it with one.
In May 2020, the Maduro government sued the Bank of England over its refusal to release the gold.
When the issue moved to the courts, the UK government [supported][11] Guaidó by re-emphasising its recognition of him, with the Foreign Office even spending £80,697 to promote his legal campaign.
This was despite repeated condemnations from UN special rapporteur Alena Douhan on the negative impact of unilateral sanctions on Venezuela.
In 2021, for instance, Douhan [noted][12] the “repeated refusals of banks in the… United Kingdom… to release Venezuelan assets even for buying medicine, vaccines and protective kits” during the Covid-19 pandemic.
With each hearing, Guaidó and his representatives also incurred substantial costs, with published accounts [suggesting][13] Guaidó’s team spent over $8.5m on legal fees – roughly £7m.
Remarkably, Guaidó’s UK legal fees were [paid][14] with money which was originally appropriated from the Venezuelan state in the US.
### RELATED
[
## UK spent public funds backing Venezuelan ‘president’ in gold dispute
][15] [READ MORE **][16]
## Venezuela Reconstruction Unit
After freezing Venezuela’s gold, the UK government set up a secretive “Venezuela Reconstruction Unit [VRU]” in Autumn 2019.
The VRU was [located][17] in the Foreign Office and directed by diplomat John Saville, with three other members of staff attached to it, one of whom was an “external consultant”.
Apparently tasked with planning for the day after Maduro’s overthrow, the VRU met with Guaidó in London in January 2020 and “had contact” with other members of his team, including Neumann.
After the VRU was exposed, the Foreign Office claimed the team had been established to “coordinate the UK approach to the international response to the dire economic and humanitarian situation in Venezuela”.
But documents obtained by *Declassified* exposed Saville holding meetings in Caracas to plan for UK involvement in Venezuela’s energy sector.
A whole day of meetings was scheduled for the topic of “UK involvement in the energy sector” of Venezuela, though the full agenda remains classified for reasons of “national security”.
Meanwhile, the Foreign Office [funded][18] an “anti-corruption” coalition in Venezuela to the tune of £450,000, with the money drawn from the controversial Conflict, Stability and Security Fund.
Following this reporting, the British embassy in Caracas complained internally that: “Articles on our programmes/operations here (particularly from McEvoy) are particularly sensitive”.
The Foreign Office is now refusing to disclose which non-governmental organisations it has been funding in Venezuela over recent years.
It justified this by saying information which “would be likely to prejudice relations between the United Kingdom and [an]other state” needs to remain confidential.
The post [How Britain helped Trump destabilise Venezuela][19] appeared first on [Declassified UK][20].
[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/nov/17/uk-downplays-reports-stopped-sharing-intelligence-us-yvette-cooper
[2]: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/37350097/brit-sailors-board-us-warships-caribbean-sea-venezuela-attack/
[3]: https://edition.cnn.com/2025/11/11/politics/uk-suspends-caribbean-intelligence-sharing-us
[4]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=11629
[5]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=11629
[6]: https://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/14304
[7]: https://2017-2021.state.gov/recognition-of-juan-guaido-as-venezuelas-interim-president/index.html
[8]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=7121
[9]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=7121
[10]: https://jacobin.com/2021/04/alan-duncan-diary-jeremy-hunt-tories-uk-us-venezuela-diplomatic-relations-gold-guaido-bank-of-england
[11]: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1003665/20210818_Foreign_Secretary_s_Case_18_June_2021.pdf
[12]: https://www.ohchr.org/en/statements-and-speeches/2021/02/preliminary-findings-visit-bolivarian-republic-venezuela-special?LangID=E&NewsID=26747
[13]: https://www.bcvadhoc.com/uso-de-los-fondos
[14]: https://www.thecanary.co/exclusive/2021/08/20/revealed-juan-guaido-used-millions-of-looted-dollars-to-asset-strip-venezuela/
[15]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=12607
[16]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/?post_type=post&p=12607
[17]: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2020-06-01/52254
[18]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/revealed-uk-foreign-office-has-spent-nearly-half-a-million-pounds-in-aid-setting-up-anti-government-coalition-in-venezuela/
[19]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-britain-helped-trump-destabilise-venezuela/
[20]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-britain-helped-trump-destabilise-venezuela/

2025-12-18 12:33:21 GMT

How British state secrecy just got worse
The UK government must not use a new Supreme Court judgment as a blank cheque to conceal state wrongdoing
The post [How British state secrecy just got worse][1] appeared first on [Declassified UK][2].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-british-state-secrecy-just-got-worse/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-british-state-secrecy-just-got-worse/

2025-12-17 15:18:56 GMT

Cameron was urged to meet ICC prosecutor days before ‘threatening’ him
Foreign Office staff tried to convince David Cameron to support the ICC and meet Karim Khan shortly before heated phone call reported between them
The post [Cameron was urged to meet ICC prosecutor days before ‘threatening’ him][1] appeared first on [Declassified UK][2].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/cameron-was-urged-to-meet-icc-prosecutor-days-before-threatening-him/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/cameron-was-urged-to-meet-icc-prosecutor-days-before-threatening-him/

2025-12-17 15:18:50 GMT

Westminster group was funded by Israeli government, inquiry confirms
[Benjamin Netanyahu and Bezalel Smotrich at a 2023 news conference (Ronen Zvulun / AP / Alamy)]
Official probe was sparked by Declassified investigation into weapons firm
The post [Westminster group was funded by Israeli government, inquiry confirms][1] appeared first on [Declassified UK][2].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/westminster-group-was-funded-by-israeli-government-inquiry-confirms/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/westminster-group-was-funded-by-israeli-government-inquiry-confirms/

2025-12-17 15:18:45 GMT

Lufthansa resumes military deliveries to Israel
[Lufthansa Cargo plane flies into Tel Aviv (Markus Mainka / Alamy)]
German air freight had halted the shipments for a week, citing UK regulations
The post [Lufthansa resumes military deliveries to Israel][1] appeared first on [Declassified UK][2].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/lufthansa-resumes-military-deliveries-to-israel/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/lufthansa-resumes-military-deliveries-to-israel/

2025-12-12 00:00:30 GMT

Revealed: How British engines ended up in Israeli drones
[The Apus 25 drone seen in promotional material (Israel Aerospace Industries)]
Documents obtained by Declassified suggest the government has allowed UK companies to send drone engines to Israel without export licences.
The post [Revealed: How British engines ended up in Israeli drones][1] appeared first on [Declassified UK][2].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/revealed-how-british-engines-ended-up-in-israeli-drones/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/revealed-how-british-engines-ended-up-in-israeli-drones/

2025-12-12 00:00:25 GMT

‘Release Gaza footage,’ British victim demands in new spy flight documentary
[Neil Henderson’s son was killed by Israel in Gaza. (Photo: Alex Morris / Declassified UK)]
Father of former Royal Marine killed in Gaza says footage captured by opaque UK surveillance programme could clarify what happened to his son.
The post [‘Release Gaza footage,’ British victim demands in new spy flight documentary][1] appeared first on [Declassified UK][2].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/release-gaza-footage-british-victim-demands-in-new-spy-flight-documentary/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/release-gaza-footage-british-victim-demands-in-new-spy-flight-documentary/

2025-12-11 07:02:18 GMT

Palestine Action policing guidance suggests protesters wrongly arrested
[Jon Farley is arrested in July after holding up a Private Eye cartoon (Gerry Clarkson / Alamy)]
A previously unseen counter-terror police document clarifies how demonstrators should be treated. We are publishing it for the first time.
The post [Palestine Action policing guidance suggests protesters wrongly arrested][1] appeared first on [Declassified UK][2].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/palestine-action-policing-guidance-suggests-protesters-wrongly-arrested/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/palestine-action-policing-guidance-suggests-protesters-wrongly-arrested/

2025-12-10 10:09:23 GMT

‘They knew’ – Victims of IRA executioner condemn British collusion
[Moira Todd at the launch of Kenova’s final report. (Photo: Liam McBurney / Alamy)]
Families whose loved ones were killed by a British agent at the heart of the IRA say an official report stops short of revealing the whole truth.
The post [‘They knew’ – Victims of IRA executioner condemn British collusion][1] appeared first on [Declassified UK][2].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/they-knew-victims-of-ira-executioner-condemn-british-collusion/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/they-knew-victims-of-ira-executioner-condemn-british-collusion/

2025-12-08 23:18:48 GMT

How frightening would Nigel Farage’s foreign policy be?
[Reform UK leader Nigel Farage (Iain Masterson/Alamy)]
Reform UK leads the polls in most surveys and could form the next government. What can Britons, and the rest of the world, expect?
The post [How frightening would Nigel Farage’s foreign policy be?][1] appeared first on [Declassified UK][2].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-frightening-would-nigel-farages-foreign-policy-be/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/how-frightening-would-nigel-farages-foreign-policy-be/

2025-12-03 01:06:16 GMT

‘Mauled by a lion’: British army workers in Kenya sue over safety
[The lion attack allegedly happened during a four-day military exercise (Alamy)]
Kenyans are taking the UK military to court over ‘degrading treatment’ during wargames
The post [‘Mauled by a lion’: British army workers in Kenya sue over safety][1] appeared first on [Declassified UK][2].
[1]: https://www.declassifieduk.org/mauled-by-a-lion-british-army-workers-in-kenya-sue-over-safety/
[2]: https://www.declassifieduk.org
https://www.declassifieduk.org/mauled-by-a-lion-british-army-workers-in-kenya-sue-over-safety/