The chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee in the House of Commons, Conservative MP Alicia Kearns, according to an audio excerpt circulated by The Observer last Sunday, warned that the Foreign Office had received official legal advice indicating Israel had violated international humanitarian law. She said the government did not disclose this information and did not halt arms exports. She added that the government had completed its assessment of Israel’s compliance with international humanitarian law and concluded that Israel had not met its obligations. She emphasised that transparency is essential to uphold the rules of international order.
In Madrid, a spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, European Union and Cooperation responded to questions about arms exports to Israel, reiterating a February statement. The ministry stated that since October 7, 2023, no arms export authorisations to Israel have been issued.
The same newspaper also asked the spokesperson and the Ministry of Presidency, Justice and Relations with the Cortes whether any advisory opinions or reports existed after January 26, 2024, when the International Court of Justice in The Hague ruled in a South Africa versus Israel case about possible genocide in Gaza and its implications for treaty signatories, including Spain, which have ongoing arms trade with Israel. A response was awaited.
Embargo, the cursed word
Spain’s government, through the Foreign Minister, has never used the term embargo publicly. When pressed on the matter, the minister indicated that in Spain, embargo status already exists in practice.
On January 22, 2024, the European Union’s foreign ministers, meeting in Brussels with Israel’s Foreign Minister, discussed the possibility of an embargo. José Manuel Albares explained to a journalist why a total arms embargo on Israel had not been pursued, in a later interview. He stated that since October 7, 2023, no new arms sales to Israel had been authorised, and that Spain supported measures aimed at de-escalation and a cessation of violence. While his words did not explicitly say embargo, they suggested a de facto halt, though no formal government resolution or legal opinion had been published to that effect.
Industry insiders noted that the government had likely directed the Interministerial Board on Defense and Dual-Use Equipment to refrain from formalising new contracts. The aim appeared to be halting new authorisations, while contracts already signed before October 7, 2023 could still progress. The time from authorisation to delivery can vary greatly, from months to longer periods if production is required, according to Alejandro Pozo Marín, a researcher at Centre Delàs d’Estudis per la Pau.
Control systems
An embargo or prohibition on arms sales to Israel would necessitate a control framework and sanctions for non-compliant companies. Spain has not changed its stance on imports from Israel, continuing to rely on Israeli technology for its armed forces. Pozo notes that Spain has not halted imports and that much of the Israeli equipment used domestically is produced in Spain or by Spanish firms under transfer agreements. The focus, he says, remains on refraining from authorising new exports. Some large industry players have maintained ongoing business relations, with Elbit Systems highlighted as an example.
The January 26 ICJ ruling and subsequent provisional measures add a new dimension: potential accountability for states that not only refrain from genocide, but also avoid aiding it. The prohibition of genocide, complicity, and prevention duties are part of customary international law (ius cogens) and cannot be ignored.
The Arms Trade Treaty
Beyond genocide concerns, the UN Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), which Spain has incorporated domestically, would have prevented arms sales and business with Israeli firms under the conduct observed before October 7, 2023. Article 6.3 states that a transfer should not be authorised if there is knowledge the arms could be used to commit genocide, crimes against humanity, serious breaches of the Geneva Conventions, or other war crimes. If the ATT obligations are not applied in a crisis like this, questions arise about who should be held to account.
Current discussions in Washington consider new large contracts with Israel for fighter aircraft and missiles. Countries such as Italy and Canada, which had announced sanctions on arms exports to Israel, continue to honour pre-October 7 contracts, while the EU, with Germany as a major supplier after the United States, faces scrutiny over its stance on the potential genocide and embargo measures as Gaza witness casualties surge.