David Cameron appears to rule out proscribing Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). The foreign secretary told a parliamentary committee that the current sanctions regime is sufficient. He added that prescribing the IRGC would prevent the UK and Tehran from maintaining diplomatic communication and weaken the UK’s position, Sky News reported. Cameron opposes the IRGC terrorist designation despite Israel’s insistence on its designation.
Calls to proscribe IRGC
According to the Guardian, Rishi Sunak faces new calls to proscribe Iran’s IRGC after it attacked Israel. He is facing cross-party pressure to proscribe Iran’s IRGC as a terrorist group after Tehran attacked Israel. The former Conservative leader, Iain Duncan Smith and the shadow defence secretary, John Healey, have criticised the Government. They have accused the Government of being slow to act in the face of a growing risk to UK interests. Healey claims that Iran poses a threat to Israel, as well as Arab countries and Western interests across the region. Furthermore, he says IRGC is the leading edge of the danger.
Jews are accusing Iran of having agents operating in the UK
The Jerusalem Post accuses Iran of having agents operating in the UK and claims that Iranian agents threaten public security in the UK. It says Netanyahu was almost undoubtedly aware that, as he spoke, London’s Metropolitan Police were engaged in countering threats to public security from Iranian agents in the UK. This has since been confirmed in an announcement made on March 30, 2024: “Counter-Terrorism Policing,” it said, “continues to deal with threats projected into the UK from Iran.
The president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, Marie van der Zyl, wrote a letter to Rishi Sunak. In the letter, she wrote of a “direct threat” to the Jewish community and Iranian dissidents in the UK.
What would proscribing the IRGC as a terrorist group mean?
According to Reuters, British lawmakers and members of the upper house of parliament have called on the Government to proscribe Iran’s IRGC as a terrorist organisation. They say it would be a step towards restoring stability to the Middle East. Proscribing the IRGC as a terrorist group would have consequences for the group. Belonging to the group, attending its meetings, or carrying its logo in public would become criminal offences. The IRGC is already subject to British sanctions.
As the Atlantic Council Website says, terrorist designation opens the door for prosecutors to bring certain criminal charges for terrorism-related offences against the organisation’s members and associates, such as for the crime of membership in a terrorist organisation.
Why does Israel urge the UK to proscribe IRGC as a terrorist group?
As the Telegraph reports, Israel has urged its allies, including Britain, to proscribe Iran’s IRGC as a terrorist group. Israel did so after the drone and missile attacks on the country. Lior Haiat, spokesman for the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, called for a terrorist ban on the IRGC. Lior Haiat called for the terrorist ban as an “initial price” for IRGC’s “large-scale and unprecedented” aggression against Israel.
Lior Haiat tweeted: “Iran must pay a price for its aggression. The initial price must be the immediate recognition of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps – which launched the extensive terrorist attack last night – as a terrorist organisation.”
Israel and Terrorism
The Israeli attack on Iran’s consulate in Syria on April 1 marks an escalation by Israel against Iran. The United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner explains the Israeli strike as an instance of terrorism. Retaliatory military attacks between Israel and Iran violate the right to life and must cease instantly, UN experts say. Israel presented no evidence that Iran was directly committing an “armed attack” on it or sending non-state armed groups to attack it. Therefore, Israel does not seem to have exercised self-defence on April 1.
The experts note that Israel has not presented any legal justification for the attack or reported it to the Security Council, as required by Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. “Israel’s attack consequently violated the prohibition on the use of armed force against another state under Article 2(4) of the Charter,” the experts say.
“Illegal force was used not only against Iran’s armed forces but also against Syrian territory. Israel’s attack was partly launched from the Golan Heights, which is illegally annexed Syrian territory,” the experts add.
UK’s pro-Israeli stance is a violation of human rights
Cameron opposes the IRGC terrorist designation. However, UK officials are condemning the IRGC’s retaliatory attack on Israel without denouncing the Israeli attack on Iran’s consulate in Syria on April 1. As the Telegraph reports, in a statement, a spokesman reiterated the UK’s condemnation of Iran’s actions. Furthermore, the spokesman added that the UK “will continue to stand up for Israel’s security”. Moreover, Suella Braverman, the former home secretary, and Robert Jenrick, the former immigration minister, have recently led calls for the IRGC to be proscribed. Additionally, Labour renewed its call for the Government to proscribe the IRGC. Besides, David Lammy, the shadow foreign secretary, has said that Iranian missile and drone attacks on Israel on April 1 “highlight once again the extreme danger of the IRGC”.
UN experts have warned that Israeli military personnel and civilian officials responsible for the attack may also have committed crimes. This judgment is based on an international counter-terrorism treaty (convention) 1971. The Convention is on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons. Iran, Israel, and Syria are all parties to the treaty and have criminal jurisdiction over such offences.
US asks UK not to proscribe IRGC
The UK is aware of the IRGC’s power and considers it in its foreign policy. This is why Cameron opposes the IRGC terrorist designation. As the Telegraph reports, the US publicly called for its allies to proscribe the IRGC after the October 7 attacks. The Telegraph understands American diplomats have secretly asked the UK not to do so. The US has not had diplomatic relations with Iran since 1980. Therefore, it relies on other Western allies, including the UK, to act as a backchannel with Iran. Some US authorities have raised concerns that if the UK proscribed the IRGC, Tehran would cut diplomatic relations with London.
According to the Atlantic Council Website, the UK’s Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office worried that a terrorist designation would cause the expulsion of the UK ambassador to Iran. Moreover, the Office knew the EU would unlikely make a parallel terrorist designation. Additionally, according to a report in February 2023, US diplomats were urging the UK not to designate the IRGC as a terrorist organisation.
Cameron opposes the IRGC terrorist designation to maintain relations with Iran
The fact that Cameron opposes the IRGC terrorist designation shows UK officials’ fear of increasing tensions with Iran. According to the Jerusalem Post, some commentators say that Britain’s Foreign Office believed designating the IRGC would probably lead to the expulsion of the UK ambassador and endanger the UK’s capacity to negotiate with Iran.
Some say ministers are reviewing the issue. However, UK authorities argue that the security services need to keep points of contact with the Iranian authorities.
As the Guardian reports, Duncan Smith was one of 90 Tory MPs to sign a letter calling for a ban last year. He said he understood that the US had asked Downing Street to proscribe IRGC. Besides, he described ministers’ justifications for failing to do so as “absurd”. He told the Guardian: “The Government should have already proscribed IRGC. The USA has asked us to do it. The excuses the government uses are [firstly] that if the UK proscribes the IRGC, it will lose influence. That’s absurd, as we have no influence. [Secondly that] the USA needs us an interlocutor. But the USA disagrees as they have already asked us to proscribe the IRGC.”
