On January 4, the lead story in the UK’s Daily Telegraph featured Scotland Yard’s investigation into alleged war crimes by Israel, and more specifically the condemnation of the police operation by former prime minister Boris Johnson.
The hundreds of thousands of people flying into the UK every day are currently being faced with posters written variously in Arabic, Hebrew, and English, addressed to “Travellers who have been in Israel/Palestinian Territories.” Produced by the Metropolitan Police’s Counter-Terrorism Command, they continue: “If you have been in Israel/Palestinian Territories and have witnessed or been a victim of terrorism, war crimes or crimes against humanity, then you can report this to the UK police.”
After suggesting various ways in which would-be informants can contact the police, including approaching a police officer at the airport, the poster concludes: “UK policing is supporting the work of the International Criminal Court (ICC), which is investigating alleged war crimes in Israel and Palestine from June 2014 onwards. Any evidence gathered may be shared with the ICC in support of their investigation.”
In short, Britain’s Metropolitan Police force is actively soliciting accusations of Israeli war crimes. And, of course, that is precisely what they are likely to receive – reams of unproven testimony obviously emanating in the main from individuals or organizations with an anti-Israel or antisemitic agenda.
Why are Britain's police trying to find anti-Israel war crime accusations?
The Metropolitan Police, known as the Met, is Britain’s largest police force. It is responsible for policing the whole of London, excluding the ancient once-walled central financial and business center known as the City of London, which is self-policing. With its remit covering the UK’s capital, the Met has significant responsibilities, such as protecting 164 foreign embassies and high commissions; policing the Heathrow and London City airports; protecting the Palace of Westminster; and providing security for the royal family and foreign dignitaries.
Counter-terrorism policing within the Met, which is based in New Scotland Yard, is carried out by a unit led by a senior officer with the rank of commander. Its main remit is clearly to frustrate attempted terrorist activity within the UK. However, the unit told the Daily Telegraph that the British police force had a “responsibility to support” the ICC, and that with “higher volumes” of British nationals returning to the UK since the Israel-Hamas war broke out, it anticipated a greater number of potential witnesses and victims of war crimes arriving from the region. Hence its poster campaign.
That appears to be a highly disingenuous statement, implying that most of the allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity would emanate from British nationals. However, the posters, in three languages, are addressed to everyone entering the UK. Antisemitism is known to be alarmingly on the increase. This campaign by the Met is an open invitation to all and sundry – and especially individuals and organizations dedicated to delegitimizing Israel – to flood the police with antisemitic and anti-Israel bile.
The Met seems to presume that those making allegations of “terrorism, war crimes, or crimes against humanity” know what those crimes entail. In fact, each is very carefully defined in a range of internationally accepted judicial documents. For example, Britain’s Terrorism Act 2000 defines terrorism, both within and outside the UK, as the use or threat of a number of actions designed to influence the government or intimidate the public, and aimed at advancing a political, religious, racial, or ideological cause.
War crimes are extensively and precisely defined in Article 8 of the Rome Statute of the ICC. Essentially, they must amount to grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949.
Crimes against humanity – such as murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and a whole host of other crimes – are set out meticulously in Article 7 of the Rome Statute of the ICC. They must be committed knowingly as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population.
Is the police’s Counter-Terrorism Command prepared to separate the wheat from the chaff in the material it receives? Will it discard material that is obviously specious, spurious, or malign? Even more importantly, perhaps, is it prepared to recognize what it is not receiving? How widespread, for example, is the knowledge that hostage-taking is a war crime, and that those guilty of it can be prosecuted in virtually every country in the world?
The UN Human Rights Council has set up a commission to investigate “possible international crimes and violations of international human rights law in Israel and the Palestinian territories since October 7, 2023.” On October 10, the commission included the following in a media release: “The taking of hostages is a violation of international law and constitutes an international crime.”
The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has a unique role in the system of international humanitarian law, and its special role is now formally recognized by the states party to the Geneva Conventions – that is, practically the whole world. According to the ICRC, the prohibition on hostage-taking is now “firmly entrenched in customary international law and is considered a war crime.”
Boris Johnson, mentioning a recent report of police removing posters of Israeli hostages held by Hamas, described the Counter-Terrorism Command’s campaign as “a worrying politicization of the Met Police.” At the time, Scotland Yard had defended the two police officers seen tearing down the posters, claiming they had been acting to defuse local tensions.
Gideon Falter, the chief executive of the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism, said: “At a time when protesters are marching in London every week wearing Hamas-style headbands, shouting genocidal chants, calling for jihad against the Jewish state, and inciting violent intifada with apparent impunity, the Met is concerned with acts of terrorism and allegations of war crimes halfway around the world…Britain’s cities have become no-go zones for Jews. Where are the Met’s posters addressing that unacceptable reality?”
A spokesman for the Met Police is reported as saying that the force had a duty to assist the ICC. “Under the terms of the 1998 Rome Statute, our war crimes team is obliged to support any investigations opened by the ICC that could involve British subjects” and said the posters were put up to meet that obligation. The ICC opened an investigation in 2019 into alleged war crimes in Israel and Palestine. It could be argued that supporting ICC investigations carries no obligation to indulge in a proactive campaign calculated to elicit a wave of anti-Israel and antisemitic sentiment.
As if to demonstrate its evenhandedness, the Met spokesman added that the Counter-Terrorism Command “also continues to gather direct information and evidence relating to the terrorist attack in Israel on October 7, in support of the UK coronial investigations into British nationals who were killed during those attacks.”
As for identifying potential “terrorism offending” during the course of the weekly pro-Palestinian marches in London and other major cities, the Met spokesman said the force was “working round the clock” to identify such offenses and has set up a task force to investigate potential crimes committed online and during protests. The Telegraph reports that in total, about 150 cases are being investigated. About 30 are linked directly to alleged offenses committed during London protests. The problem is that it took sustained pressure from a variety of sources to waken the Met up to the need to take any action at all.
Despite its best endeavors, the Met’s attempts to justify mounting this campaign are unconvincing. There can be little justification for encouraging Israel’s enemies – individuals or organizations – to offer the police testimony alleging terrorism, war crimes, or crimes against humanity. It is legitimate to ask what sort of unbiased assessment is likely to be made of the material acquired by the British police, or will they simply send everything, lock, stock and barrel, to the ICC for them to sort? Will any attempt be made to verify the charges made? If a selection is to be made before material is dispatched to the ICC, who will undertake this? Another pertinent question is whether the Met intends to seek a response or explanation from Israeli sources for the wilder charges, or will it perhaps adjudge that its responsibility begins and ends with seeking allegations of criminality and passing them to the ICC?
This eager effort to gather testimony charging Israel with criminality sits uneasily with the police’s initial failure to arrest pro-Palestinian demonstrators clearly voicing antisemitic and genocidal slogans during the marches, held every Saturday starting on October 14. The claimed impartiality of the British police hangs in the balance. ■