The sale of the UK for the F-35 fighter parts that Israel uses by the Supreme Court

Digest opened free editor

Rola Khaleda, FT editor, chooses her favorite stories in this weekly newsletter.

The UK Supreme Court ruled that the government’s decision to continue to provide parts of the F-35 fighter plane to Israel through a global group of legal components, despite the broader ban on arms sales to the country after the actions of the Netanyahu government in Gaza.

Activists of the Palestinian Human Rights Organization have taken legal measures against the Ministry of Business and Trade on the offer in the UK for the critical parts of the combat aircraft.

The UK does not sell the F-35 components directly to it IsraelBut keep them with a global set of parts that Israel could reach. The United Kingdom cited the needs of national security and its allies in the F-35 program-which was challenged in court on the basis that they could be used to violate international humanitarian law.

On Monday, the court ruled that the “sensitive and political case” was “a matter of the executive authority, which is a democratic official before the parliament and at the end of the voters, not the courts.”

Last September, the Sir Kerr Starmer government suspended some export licenses to Israel for weapons used in military operations in Gaza, after Israel found a possible governmental by Israel. However, the decision included a dedicated excavation for the F-35 program.

“We reject all the reasons for the challenge extending to the demands of the September decision.”

The ruling means that sales of components from the UK to the Global Parts Collection for Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Sefer Jet will continue. The United Kingdom is one of the eight partner countries participating in the F-35 program, including the United States, Israel, Italy, Canada, Norway, Denmark and the Netherlands.

The relationship of the UK government with Israel has been increasingly pressure in recent months, as the Netanyahu government has been handing over aid in Gaza and tried to prepare the United Nations.

Starmer described the situation in Gaza as “unbearable” and called for the immediate appeal of aid flows to avoid hunger and hunger. This month, the United Kingdom offered the punishment of the United Kingdom to Israeli Finance Minister Bezallil Sottic and National Security Minister Itamar bin Ghafir for “their frequent incitement to violence against Palestinian civilians.”

However, the British Prime Minister has repeatedly stated that Israel has the right to defend itself, and indicated that he was ready for the United Kingdom to help defend Israel from missile attacks and drones during its conflict with Iran. Israel said it had never requested assistance in the United Kingdom, unlike in 2024 when the Royal Air Force helped to drop the incoming Iranian projectiles.

While the UK government line around Israel has been stiff, it has argued that cutting the UK-made components to the global group would lead to the exposure of international security by hurting the maintenance and F-35S operations in other countries.

The inventory judicial challenge was supported by Oxfam, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, who was entering into the case and argued that the government was on the duty to “respect and ensure respect” of the Geneva Conventions, which protect civilians in the war areas, “in all circumstances.”

He also argued the claimants – which includes their legal team, Philippa Kaufman K.

“The fact that these parts are now indirectly transferred to Israel via the United States of America, rather than providing them directly to Israel, do not reduce the severity of their effect on the ground in Gaza,” they said.

The legal team of the UK government, led by Sir James Eddie Ki, who represents the government in important cases, claimed that his decision not to suspend all arms export licenses was legal and justified.

Government lawyers said that the suspension of the F-35 components will have a negative impact on international security, including NATO, and highlights “the risk of the F-35 program, and to international peace and security if it is supposed to penetrate the F-35 program” by stopping exports.

They added that the commitment to preventing grave violations of international humanitarian law relates to “actual knowledge” that such a violation will happen.