Legal and Ethical Implications of India's Defence Exports to Israel
The Supreme Court of India dismissed a petition to stop defence exports to Israel, citing foreign policy as outside its jurisdiction.
The ethical concern arises from allegations that Israel is committing war crimes in Gaza, raising questions about India's role as a defence exporter.
Countries, like the Netherlands and the UK, have restricted defence exports to Israel based on compliance with international humanitarian law (IHL), indicating a growing concern over ethical military trade
Legal Gap
Indian law lacks a framework equivalent to the UK's Export Control Act or EU regulations, which assess IHL compliance before military exports.
Current Indian laws, like the Foreign Trade Act and the Weapons of Mass Destruction Act, do allow for considering international obligations
but do not mandate a review of a recipient country's IHL compliance.
This gap means India can export defence goods without assessing whether they might be used to commit violations of IHL
What International Law Says
The Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) prohibits countries from exporting arms if they know those arms would be used for war crimes.
However, India is not a signatory, making the treaty non-binding
Common Article 1 of the Geneva Conventions obligates India to ensure respect for IHL, meaning India should not supply weapons to nations likely to violate these laws.
While Indian laws imply a duty not to export to violators, there is no explicit legal requirement to assess IHL compliance in practice.
Way Forward
To enhance accountability and align with international standards, India should amend its existing laws (WMDA and FTA) to include explicit assessments of IHL compliance before approving defence exports.
Establishing a clear legal framework would strengthen India’s position as a responsible defence-exporting nation and ensure adherence to international humanitarian principles.
Such reforms could also help prevent complicity in potential war crimes and enhance India’s global standing in defense diplomacy.
COMMENTS