Thread: Announcing a resumption of arms sales to Saudi Arabia, the UK Govt claims to have identified no "patterns, trends or systemic weaknesses" in Saudi-led Coalition compliance with international humanitarian law [IHL]. But how can we trust that claim? https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-statement/Commons/2020-07-07/HCWS339/

2) The UK's own determinations of civilian harm from @RoyalAirForce airstrikes are not fit for purpose, as Airwars and others have repeatedly demonstrated. The UK claims, absurdly, just 1 civilian death from 4,400 anti-ISIS weapon releases over six years.

3) Even where US military personnel determined RAF strikes had in fact killed civilians, @DefenceHQ cleared itself. The investigative bar has been set so high in the UK that it's effectively impossible, in our view, for civilian harm to be admitted. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51900898

4) IHL violations in Yemen by the Saudi-led Coalition have been competently and comprehensively recorded for years, eg by @YemenData. So bad has the air campaign been that until recently, the Saudis were on a UN blacklist for killing so many children. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/07/year-saudi-led-forces-listed-yemen-child-killings-190727061648880.html

5) How then can the UK be trusted to determine whether the Saudis have regularly breached IHL in Yemen - particularly given HMG's clear desire to resume arms sales? And its demonstrable inability to measure civilian harm even from its own military actions? In short, it can't.