Question asked by (April 24, 2018)
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what proposals they have for
processes by which Israel might be held accountable for its
treatment of the inhabitants of Gaza.
(Con)
The United Kingdom is deeply concerned about the recent violence
in Gaza. Israel has the right to protect its borders, and
Palestinians have the right to protest. There is a need to
establish the facts, including why such a volume of live fire has
been used and what role Hamas has played. All sides must now
commit to restraint and peaceful protest. The UK remains
committed to a two-state solution which ends the conflict.
(CB)
My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness for her reply, which deals
more with the present situation. I am concerned with the
background. Do the Government agree with United States Senator
Bernie Sanders, who is Jewish, and who said last week:
“Hamas’s … violence … cannot excuse trapping … two million people
inside Gaza”?
He added that the United States,
“must play a … role in ending the Gaza blockade”.
If Israel will not change its policy, how can it be held
accountable for breaches of international law—for example,
collective punishments? Will the Government consult the United
Nations General Assembly about a possible tribunal?
As I said, the Government remain gravely concerned about the
humanitarian situation in Gaza and continue to monitor it
closely, including the effect that electricity shortages are
having on the health sector. We are supportive of the Palestinian
Authority resuming government functions in Gaza, helping to
improve the dire humanitarian and economic situation. We continue
to call on the Israeli Government to ease restrictions, and for
Israel, the Palestinian Authority and Egypt to work together to
ensure a durable solution for Gaza. We share the commitment of
the United States to improving the situation in Gaza and bringing
forward a viable peace plan. We remain committed to a two-state
solution which ends the conflict and alleviates the suffering of
the Gazan people.
(Lab)
My Lords, I do not know whether the Minister has had the
opportunity to read the leader in yesterday’s Guardian, which
summed up the situation extremely well. For the two-state
solution to be viable, we have to articulate very strongly why it
is important. If people in Israel think that by destroying and
harming the Arab cause in the way that they are doing now will
help with peace and the long-term security of Israel, they are
mistaken. We need to make the case for a two-state solution
strongly, and we need to argue it very strongly with the current
Government in Israel. If they continue with their current policy,
they will undermine the cause of peace but also ensure that the
Arabs will stand up and fight back strongly.
The noble Lord paints a true picture of the situation and of the
angst and frustration at the fact that we seem unable to bring
about a two-state solution; the angst of that is palpable. I have
not read the leader in the Guardian, but I will make sure the
officials get me a copy and I will make sure that I read it.
People are continually trying to make the case that the actual
motivation and desire to achieve peace in a two-state solution
must come from the individuals involved, in Israel and Palestine,
and we will do everything we can to help that happen.
(LD)
Does the noble Baroness think it acceptable that Israel is not
allowing out for treatment those who have been wounded in the
recent protests to which she referred? Have the Government made
any assessment of whether the sniper rifles and components given
export licences and sold to Israel by UK firms have been used on
protestors?
Of course, such behaviour is unacceptable. The information I have
is that we take our responsibilities for the export of defence
arms extremely seriously. We approve only equipment that is for
Israel’s legitimate self-defence, and all applications for export
licences are assessed on a case-by-case basis against strict
criteria. We will not issue a licence if there is a clear risk
that the equipment might be used for internal repression.
(CB)
My Lords, in her answer, the Minister referred to the Government
welcoming the United States’ support for the people of Gaza. Can
she tell us what that consisted of? I seem to have missed it.
Perhaps she can say what support the United States is now giving
to the people of Gaza. Once again, can she explain why the
Government rejected the view of the International Relations
Committee of this House that the best way we could show our
support for a two-state solution is by recognising the state of
Palestine?
On the support that the United States is giving to Gaza, I will
need to write to the noble Lord about the detail of that. On the
two-state solution, given the lack of experience on my part in
Foreign Office matters, all I will say is that everything I have
learnt about this confirms that it is indeed a two-state solution
that we look to. It is complicated and difficult, but I remind
noble Lords of the debate we had on Syria where the noble Lord,
, spoke. Of
course, one likes to think that the situation in Syria can be
resolved, but it looks hopeless. Quoting Nelson Mandela, the
noble Lord said—I paraphrase—that everything looks impossible
until it happens. We must hope that we can get the peace that we
need in these two states.
The Lord
My Lords, can the Minister say whether the Government support the
UN Secretary-General’s call for an independent investigation into
the recent bloodshed in Gaza?
I can confirm that there is an urgent need to establish the
facts. The UK is supportive of accountability and transparency,
and we welcome Israel’s commitment to investigate the conduct of
operations. We urge for those findings to be made public and,
where wrongdoing is found, for those responsible to be held to
account.
