Could you outline your views on how UK foreign policy and endorsement of arms contracts may have contributed to this refugee and migration crisis?
A constituent has contacted me via Facebook about UK foreign policy and arms exports. As my constituents will be aware, I do not respond directly via social media to casework correspondence and so have instead posted my reply here for the convenience of interested parties.
First, it’s important to reiterate the support the Government is providing for refugees and migrants, both in camps in the Middle East and in Europe. This must be the overarching focus of debate and I have made a separate statement on this extent of this support, which can be read under the ‘Campaign Emails’ section of my website.
In terms of UK foreign policy, one key focus is for a more secure, prosperous Middle East. The Foreign Office uses diplomatic influence, practical programming assistance and capacity building to support local efforts to respond to conflict, and build capable, inclusive institutions and economic growth. Likewise, in terms of tackling extremism, we have to look at the root causes and understand why the extremist ideology is proving so attractive.
However, we should challenge the argument that it is just because of historic injustices or recent wars. Countries like Britain have stepped in to protect Muslim people from massacres around the world. It is groups like Daesh, Al Qaeda and Boko Haram that are murdering Muslims. The best way to end the atrocities being committed by Daesh, is to defeat Daesh. The UK is playing a leading role in the Global Coalition committed to doing this.
With regard to arms exports, it is no secret that the UK operates one of the most rigorous and transparent export control regimes. All UK arms exports are scrutinised in detail through established processes and against the EU and National Consolidated Criteria. A licence will not be issued, for any country, if to do so would be inconsistent with any provision of the UK Licensing Criteria. Amongst others, this includes:
· if there is a clear risk that it might be used in the commission of a serious violation of international humanitarian law;
· if there is a clear risk the intended recipient would use the items aggressively against another country.
The Government also takes into account the behaviour of the buyer country, in particular to its attitude to terrorism, as well as the risk that the items might be diverted to a different undesirable end-user.
I trust that this addresses any concerns that my constituents may have.