Extract from
PMQs
(Coventry South) (Lab): The
International Criminal Court's chief prosecutor is seeking arrest
warrants for Israeli and Hamas leaders for war crimes and crimes
against humanity. This House does not aid and abet Hamas, but it
does aid and abet Israel through the sale
of arms, such as components for Israeli F-35s—known as the most
lethal fighter jet on earth—which are raining down hell on Gaza.
Will the Prime Minister uphold international law, drop the
nonsense about the most robust licensing system in the world and
end arms sales to Israel If the ICC
issues arrest warrants, will he comply by ensuring that those
individuals are arrested if they enter the UK?
The Prime Minister: It is always nice to see the changed Labour
party in action. When it comes to the ICC, this is a deeply
unhelpful development, which of course is still subject to a
final decision. There is no moral equivalence between a
democratically elected Government exercising their lawful right
to self-defence and the actions of a terrorist group, and the
actions of the ICC do absolutely nothing to get a pause in the
fighting, or to get the hostages out or aid in.
Extract from remaining
stages (Commons) of the Holocaust Memorial Bill
(Redditch) (Con):...To do
anything else except place the responsibility for this terrible
conflict squarely where it belongs, on the shoulders of Hamas—who
could even now put down their weapons, release the hostages and
stop the bloodshed and starvation of their own people—would be
simply playing into the hands of a murderous terrorist
organisation that does not respect the right of Israel to exist. It is
dedicated only to the elimination of all Jews and the state
of Israel from the planet, just
as the Nazis were dedicated to those same goals...
(Brigg and Goole) (Con):...The
Holocaust began with the demonisation of Jews. We see that now
through the demonisation of the state of Israel
which is a cover for the demonisation of Jews. It began with
boycotts, with people demanding an end to purchasing from Jewish
companies and businesses, shop windows being smashed and
synagogues being attacked. A synagogue in Toronto was smashed up
this week for the second time. It began with attacks on Jewish
community facilities, and we have seen that across the west at
this moment in time...
Sir (Northampton North)
(Con):...Jews love life and they seek peace. They are not an
homogenous group; they do not all speak as one. One need only
look at Israeli democratic politics for five minutes to see the
divisions within Israeli society. They are not all going to agree
about everything, just as all black people do not, or all
redheaded people. They are not an homogenous group, but they love
this country, they are respectful to it and grateful for it, and
many seek to serve it, as I have tried to do, and I hope that
long continues.
I say to those Jewish people who may be listening, “Look not to
the noisy wasps to which I have alluded, but instead to a Prime
Minister whose moral stance has been clear.” The Prime Minister
is a great hero to the British Jewish community, and not because
there are many votes in it—there are not, for the reasons I have
just given—but because it is morally the right thing to do. The
same is true of our royal family. For example, the Prince of
Wales recently visited a synagogue and spoke with an elderly
Holocaust survivor, which is testament to the support of the
monarchy, and I dare say would have made the late Queen
proud.
We need this memorial. Jews are not cowering with trembling
knees, although maybe that happened in previous generations. They
stand in the face of adversity, knowing that in this country
there are many more of the Christian faith, the Hindu faith, the
Sikh faith, the Buddhist faith and the Muslim faith who will
stand with us and protect us, and who will stop those who seek to
harm and intimidate the Jewish community. We need a memorial to
remind people of that. It needs to be in this location because of
its paramount and historic importance, and to remind people why,
indeed, the state of Israel has to
exist.
To those who have an unnatural and unforgiving animus towards the
Jews and who disguise it as hatred towards Israel and
in other ways, I say that they are just twigs cracking in an
empty forest, or birds chirping on a desert island, because their
voices will be weak and ineffectual if those of us in this House
speak as one. Those tiny voices and cracking noises in the
wilderness will be drowned out in a crowd of millions. This
memorial is needed and must continue...
Sir (Gainsborough) (Con):...The
most impactful Holocaust memorials in the world, such as those in
Washington, Berlin and Israel all of which
are visited, are enormous. They take up a space far bigger than
this Chamber, on many levels. As my hon. Friend the Member for
Brigg and Goole () made clear, we have to tell
the story bit by bit. You move from room to room, and you
understand how hate built up. We need to have a proper museum, a
proper Holocaust memorial, similar to those in Berlin and
Washington where the whole story can be told. I do not think that
this small underground learning centre will in any way address
that point...
To read the whole debate, OPEN HERE
Oral answer (Lords) on
President of Iran: Death
Asked by
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of
the implications for UK foreign policy of the death of the
President of Iran.
The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development
Office () (Con)
My Lords, the Iranian President, Ebrahim Raisi, and Foreign
Minister, Hossein Amir-Abdollahian, died in a helicopter accident
on Sunday 19 May. The funeral, as noble Lords will be aware, is
taking place today. Our policy towards Iran has not changed. We
remain committed to supporting the Iranian people in the
challenge of the human rights abuses that they face, and,
importantly, to holding Iran to account for its destabilising
activity. As we have said repeatedly, Iran must adhere to
international norms and standards in any upcoming election.
(Lab)
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer. First, do the
Government have access to any intelligence that may shed light on
the effect of the President's death on the population at large in
Iran? There have been some reports that the reaction has been
somewhat muted. Secondly, are the Government or the West more
generally able to do anything to use the current situation to
assist pro-democracy groups in Iran, as a way of undermining
support for a regime that, among other things, so brutally denies
women their political and civil rights, and recently launched the
first ever direct attack on Israel
(Con)
My Lords, as the noble Viscount will have noted, I made reference
to Iran's destabilising activity. We have all, not least within
the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, been fully
seized of the challenges we are facing in the wider region. That
said, I know we were at one when we saw the tragedy of Mahsa
Amini and the suppression of human rights in Iran. I speak as the
UK Human Rights Minister in saying that it is important that,
while this was clearly a horrific accident, our thoughts remain
with the Iranian people as they continue their struggle for human
rights and dignity within Iran.
(Con)
My Lords, my noble friend the Minister just used the phrase
“adhere to international norms and standards”, talking about
internal elections. Can he think of any regime that has less
adhered to those standards in its foreign policy and in its
disrespect for territorial jurisdiction and national sovereignty,
from the siege of the US embassy through to sponsoring attacks as
far afield as London and Buenos Aires, through to this most
recent horrific attack on Israel Does my noble
friend the Minister see any prospect for regional peace as long
as we have that regime there, in Leninist terms, exporting its
internal contradictions—in other words, trying to replicate its
revolution far afield?
(Con)
My Lords, my noble friend articulates the extreme and intense
challenges that many in the region face, not least from the
destabilising activity of Iran. We have seen this in the context
of the current conflict in Gaza, in support for Hamas, and
through support for Hezbollah and for the Houthis in Yemen. We
are determined to ensure that peace, security and stability must
come when we see progressive Governments across the piece, but
equally people committed to ensuring that peace, security and
stability can be achieved only when it is for the whole
region.
(LD)
My Lords, commentators have noted that these deaths are not
likely to change the direction of the Government of Iran. Could
the Minister update us on discussions that the Government may be
having with the EU and whichever US Administration may come in
after its elections on what can be done to take forward the
curbing of Iran's nuclear programme?
(Con)
My Lords, the noble Baroness is quite right to draw attention to
the issue of Iran's nuclear ambitions. She will be well aware
that we kept the JCPOA on the table, notwithstanding America's
withdrawal. We have seen increasingly—coming back to the point my
noble friend articulated—Iran going directly against this by, for
example, immediately prohibiting IAEA access to Iran. We have
pressed on that; my noble friend the Foreign Secretary recently
met Mr Grossi to assess the levers we currently have to ensure
that Iran's nuclear capability is not weaponised. We continue to
be focused, including in our discussions with both the United
States and European partners, and, I also add, with other key
partners in the region.
(Lab)
My Lords, as we have heard, this is a regime that is repressive
at home but also aggressive abroad, not least in this country. We
have seen attacks on individuals, and attacks on and threats to
the BBC, et cetera. I could continue. The Minister knows that we
have repeatedly asked in this Chamber what the Government will do
to ensure that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps cannot
operate. Will he commit his Government to take urgent action to
proscribe this organisation as soon as possible?
(Con)
My Lords, the noble Lord will know that I am not going to say
what we may or may not do around proscription. What is very clear
is that we have taken action directly against the influences of
Iran, its people and its organisations, including the IRGC. The
noble Lord is aware that we sanctioned the IRGC in its entirety,
including key individuals. Iran's actions have not gone
unpunished. We have now sanctioned over 400 individuals and
organisations in this respect and remain very much focused on
ensuring that the very actions that we have seen here in the
streets of London, which the noble Lord mentioned, are fully
curbed. In that, I pay tribute in particular to our agencies, as
well as other key components, including the police, who have had
to deal with this to provide the security that every person in
the United Kingdom deserves.
(CB)
I do not want to be a pain in the rear, but I feel like one
because I want to talk about history. I wish the Americans, the
British, the CIA and all that had not screwed up Mosaddegh,
overthrown him and brought back the Shah. That led exactly to
where we are today. When will we start learning from our history?
We seem to forget it. We are the products of these problems.
(Con)
My Lords, I never see the noble Lord in the way that he describes
himself. The challenges that any Minister faces from him in your
Lordships' Chamber are regarded with great respect. I welcome his
insights. I assure him that the lessons of history inform the
policies and programmes that the Government undertake. Both our
personal as well as our professional experience lead us to ensure
that we do not forget the lessons of history.
(CB)
Does the Minister share my dismay that our representative at the
United Nations stood in tribute to the death of the person who is
now called the “Butcher of Tehran”? Will he ensure that all our
actions in the United Nations are designed to keep Iran in its
proper place, and not, for example, chairing committees on human
rights and women, et cetera?
(Con)
My Lords, I assure the noble Baroness, as I am sure she
recognises, of the action that the Government have taken. It was
the United Kingdom, together with the US, that led the campaign
to ensure that Iran was removed, for example, from CEDAW, an
organisation very much focused on the rights of women. We remain
focused in that respect.
(Non-Afl)
My Lords, as I understand it, the Government have not proscribed
the IRGC because they believe that we have to keep open channels
of communication so that we can moderate Iran's behaviour. Given
that this is a state that exports terror right across the Middle
East and here in the UK, kidnaps British citizens and launched an
appalling attack on Israel just a few weeks
ago, can the Minister point out what benefits the Government's
policy of engaging with Iran has brought?
(Con)
My Lords, as my noble friend the Foreign Secretary has said on a
number of occasions, we have incredible differences and
challenges, and we have held Iran to account. Importantly, the
engagement that we have had even in recent weeks, in advance of
the attack on Israel which the noble
Lord referred to, ensured that representations were made so that
we did not see an increase in Iran's destabilising influence.
Those were conveyed not through any third party but directly to
the now deceased Foreign Minister. It is important, as my noble
friend has indicated, that when we are required to deliver those
very direct messages, as we do consistently, we can do so
directly to the particular representative of that given
state.
(Con)
I will follow up the wise words of the noble Lord, , and go into the history. We
know that the current Iranian regime is appalling and atrocious,
but can we also reflect on the fact that our policies in the
Middle East over recent decades have led to failure and disaster?
The war in Iraq, the war in Afghanistan, Libya—we set out to do
good things and we failed, and in many cases we made the
situation much worse. Can my noble friend assure me that the
Government will be much more realistic about their handling of
the situation and our relations with Iran? There is no magic wand
or weapon that we can use to change the situation there. Our
foreign policy will be much more effective if we make it more
realistic to what we are able to do rather than what we would, in
some circumstances, simply want to do.
(Con)
My Lords, having two questions posed to me about learning the
lessons of history, I keep looking in the direction of the noble
Lord, , but I fear he has run out of
time on this Question. I agree with my noble friend. We have
reviews that look at our interventions and strategies in
conflicts past and at having a direct strategy on exit policies,
for example. There are many noble and gallant Lords in your
Lordships' House who have reminded us of the importance of
operational planning to ensure that, when we go in, as my noble
friend said, with noble intent, we recognise what the intention
is and how we will extract ourselves from conflicts. The lessons
of history are important, but it is also important to remain
seized of current challenges from those who oppose us, and to
stay united in our response from your Lordships' House and the
other place as we look to these international challenges across
the world.
Lords repeat of Commons
statement on Israel and Gaza
The following Statement was made in the House of Commons on
Monday 20 May.
“With permission, I would like to make a Statement
on Israel and Gaza. Over
seven months since the horrors of 7 October, there is no end to
the current conflict in sight. This Government want to bring the
conflict to a sustainable end as soon as possible but, as so
often with conflicts of this nature, the question is not about
our desire for peace, but rather about the best means of
achieving it. We continue to believe that the fastest way to end
the conflict is to secure a deal that gets the hostages out and
allows for a pause in the fighting in Gaza. We would then have to
work with our international partners to turn that pause into a
sustainable permanent ceasefire.
Building momentum towards a lasting peace will require a number
of elements, including removing Hamas's capacity to launch
attacks against Israel It was a deal
of that kind that secured a pause in the fighting before
Christmas—the only such pause since Hamas's horrific attack. It
was that approach that the United Nations Security Council
endorsed just last month, following some effective British
diplomacy.
A deal with Hamas for a pause in the fighting would involve
exchanging hundreds of Palestinian prisoners charged with serious
acts of terrorism in return for the hostages' release. I do not
underestimate how difficult that must be for the Israeli
Government, but it is the best way forward that we see right
now.
We continue to work closely with the United States and partners
in the region to support such a deal. We do not believe that the
International Criminal Court prosecutor seeking warrants will
help in that regard. As we have said from the outset, we do not
think that the ICC has jurisdiction in this case.
A deal as I have described offers the best prospects of reuniting
more hostages with their families; the anguish for them is
unbearable. I am sure that the whole House joins me in holding
the family of Nadav Popplewell in our thoughts at this deeply
distressing time. We are still working intensively to establish
the facts after the awful video that his Hamas kidnappers
released last week. The Foreign Secretary met the family last
week to hear more about their ordeal at first hand. Likewise, we
send our condolences to those families whose loved ones the
Israeli authorities stated last week had died.
At the same time, the toll on civilians in Gaza continues to
rise. Images from the Strip give us some sense of what they
endure: civilians piling belongings on to a cart led by a donkey,
or seeking to scrape together a meal in a makeshift shelter. We
have seen appalling attacks on aid convoys and UN offices by
Israeli extremists, and the tragic deaths of UN and other
humanitarian personnel in Gaza.
We keep in close contact with Sigrid Kaag, the UN humanitarian
co-ordinator, and we condemn all attacks on aid workers and
support the United Nations' call for an independent
investigation. The Government of Israel have
previously set out publicly their commitment to increase the flow
of aid into Gaza significantly, but we need to see far more. The
Prime Minister impressed the urgency of that on 30 April. In the
past 10 days, the Foreign Secretary has spoken to Israeli
Ministers Ron Dermer and Israel Katz. He has
called on them to implement in full Israel's aid commitments. We
want to see: humanitarian aid allowed to enter through all
relevant crossing points, including in Rafah; critically needed
goods flowing in, particularly fuel and medical supplies;
effective deconfliction processes to ensure that aid can be
distributed safely and effectively; critical infrastructure
restored and protected; evacuations for all those eligible;
concrete action to protect civilians and minimise casualties;
and, as Israeli Minister Benny Gantz said over the weekend, more
planning for reconstruction and a return to Palestinian civilian
governance of Gaza once the fighting has ceased.
We remain absolutely committed to getting aid into Gaza to
alleviate the suffering, and we are working with a wide variety
of other Governments and aid agencies to deliver aid by land, sea
and air. I am delighted to confirm to the House that we have now
successfully delivered British aid to Gaza's shore using the
Cyprus maritime corridor, which we and our partners—notably, the
United States, the United Arab Emirates and Cyprus—made
operational just last week. We have committed almost £10 million
in funding. RFA ‘Cardigan Bay' is acting as a logistics hub for
the operation.
We have now delivered more than 8,000 shelter coverage kits
alongside aid from the US and the UAE, with more aid to follow in
the coming weeks, including hygiene kits and forklift trucks.
Work to develop other effective partnerships for the delivery of
aid continues. My noble friend is in Qatar today,
discussing a health partnership for Palestinians so that a
British medical training agency can support doctors and health
practitioners treating Palestinian patients.
We know that much, much more aid is required, but that delivery
by land remains the quickest and most effective option, so we
continue to work closely with Oman to maximise the aid delivered
via the Jordan land corridor. I pay tribute to all those aid
workers, military personnel, diplomats and medical professionals
who are involved in Britain's efforts to save lives and alleviate
the suffering of civilians in Gaza. I confirm to the House that,
last week, intense efforts by the Foreign Office led to the
departure from Gaza of three British aid workers who were at risk
from an outbreak of fighting.
As the fighting continues, we estimate that around 800,000
Palestinian civilians have fled from where they were seeking
shelter in Rafah to other parts of the southern Strip. The extent
of this displacement is why we have been clear that we would not
support a major Israeli military operation in Rafah, unless there
was a very clear plan for how to protect people and save lives.
We have not seen that plan. We and 13 of our partners, including
France, Germany, Italy and Australia, set out our concerns in a
detailed letter to the Israeli Government.
After more than seven months of fighting, it is becoming
difficult to imagine the realisation of a lasting peace, but
Britain continues to try to build momentum towards that goal.
That will require not only the release of all the hostages and an
end to the current fighting, but the removal of Hamas's capacity
to launch attacks against Israel Hamas no longer
being in charge in Gaza; the formation of a new Palestinian
Government for the West Bank and Gaza; and a political horizon
for the Palestinians, providing a credible and irreversible
pathway towards a two-state solution. That is what we continue to
strive towards: peace and security for Israelis and Palestinians
alike. I commend the Statement to the House”.
4.02pm
(Lab)
My Lords, the focus of all politicians should be on achieving an
immediate ceasefire to end the war in Gaza, free the hostages,
alleviate the humanitarian crisis and create a pathway towards a
lasting political solution. In March, the Foreign Secretary said
that we needed to work with our international partners to give
hope to that process and to move towards recognising a
Palestinian state, not wait for the end of the process. Can the
Minister tell us what assessment the Foreign Secretary and the
Government have made of the announcement today by Norway, Spain
and Ireland recognising a Palestinian state?
Labour has been clear throughout this conflict that international
law must be upheld, the independence of international courts must
be respected and all sides must be accountable for their actions.
As signatories to the Rome statute, the United Kingdom should
support the independence of the ICC, which is a corner- stone of
the international legal system. We must remember that the
decision of the ICC chief prosecutor is only the start of the
process. Therefore, we should wait for the decisions of the wider
court, which will assess the information before it and decide
whether to issue a warrant. It must be allowed to do so with
independence.
Labour has been opposed to an Israeli offensive in Rafah for
months. The UK Government's priority must be to work with the
United States and other allies to prevent a full-scale Rafah
offensive. Does the noble Lord accept that, if the Rafah
offensive goes ahead, we should join our American allies in
suspending weapons or components that could be used in that
offensive?
At the Business and Trade Select Committee this week, confirmed that the
assessment that no serious risk of a breach of international
humanitarian law exists undertaken on 8 April only included
evidence taken
“up to the end of January”,
so any actions the IDF may have taken over the last four months
have not been taken into consideration. His department has said
that it reviews its assessment of Israel's actions on a rolling
six-weekly basis, which means that a fresh assessment should have
been published by Ministers on Tuesday. Can the Minister confirm
whether a new assessment has taken place and when it would be
announced?
In that same Select Committee meeting, also said:
“You cannot use starvation as a weapon of war and remain within
international humanitarian law: that is clear”.
Yesterday, I reminded the Foreign Secretary of the United Nations
Security Council Resolution 2417, which condemns the use of
starvation against civilians as a method of warfare. It also
condemns
“the unlawful denial of humanitarian access”
and the act of “wilfully impeding relief supply”. The Foreign
Secretary acknowledged that Israel has not
had
“a clean bill of health[”.—[Official Report, 21/5/24; col.
947.]](/search/column?VolumeNumber=&ColumnNumber=947&House=2&ExternalId=ACD94FA0-D090-4B8B-8343-F5EF14307365)
on allowing humanitarian aid to enter Gaza. Does the Minister
accept the Foreign Secretary's description of the Israeli action
and, if so, does he believe such action to in breach of
Resolution 2417?
On Monday, the chair of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee,
, welcomed
“the effort on the maritime port[”.—[Official Report, Commons,
20/5/24; col.
648.]](/search/column?VolumeNumber=&ColumnNumber=648&House=1&ExternalId=2A7FEB66-1A7C-4D9B-A72D-02ADBBA66A59)
However, as we have heard, the United Nations has expressed deep
concern about that and particularly stressed that land routes are
the most viable, effective and efficient aid delivery method,
which is why we need all crossing points to be opened.
Since 6 May, when the attacks on Rafah started, only 40 trucks
have gone through the Kerem Shalom crossing. In Rafah, no fuel
has gone in, no medical evacuations have taken place, and aid
agencies have started to suspend the sending in of their own
people to support aid distribution.
acknowledged the importance
of getting aid in by road—the Minister himself has said this—and
the difficulties caused by Rafah having been effectively closed
for the last few weeks. He pointed out the ability to do that is
one of Britain's specific demands of the Israeli Government.
also expressed the hope
that there will soon be a deal between Egypt and Israel to put that
right. Can the Minister give us an update on those talks? Will
they succeed?
Concern has also been expressed about the safety of aid workers.
On 5 April, the Foreign Secretary called for an independent
inquiry into Israel's killing of seven aid workers, including
three Britons. Israel did take some
action against those responsible for the decisions made in those
attacks. However, said on Monday that
“we are considering, with our allies, the best way to inject
further independence into that investigation[”.—[Official Report,
Commons, 20/5/24; col.
655.]](/search/column?VolumeNumber=&ColumnNumber=655&House=1&ExternalId=B7D0566A-8D61-4CD1-AE0F-D3B6E0168D34)
Can the noble Lord tell which allies we are talking in this
respect and what action will be taken?
Finally, I want to raise something else that we have considered
in this Chamber, which is the increased violence against
Palestinians living in the West Bank. They are facing increased
attacks, clearly in breach of international humanitarian law. I
have also raised the attacks on the UNRWA headquarters. Can the
Minister tell us what steps he and his department are taking to
boost accountability for settler violence?
of Newnham (LD)
My Lords, like the noble Lord, Lord Collins, we on these Benches
have been making a set of points, essentially from early October,
when the terrorist attacks against Israel started a cycle
of violence and killing, and a situation that no one could have
wished to see.
The first duty is surely for the Israeli Government and Hamas to
come together and for Hamas to return the hostages. Like some
other Members of your Lordships' House, I have a small yellow
lapel badge. Nobody has asked about it, but I was given it when I
was in Israel before Easter,
as declared in the register of interests. It basically calls for
a return of the hostages. What are His Majesty's Government doing
to try to work further with the Israeli Government, and through
other means, to get negotiations going again, to bring about a
ceasefire and to discuss an appropriate way of bringing back the
hostages? There are still over 100 hostages, some of whom we hope
are still alive. What is going on? At the moment there seems to
be very little discussion about a negotiated ceasefire, temporary
or permanent, yet that is absolutely essential. And, again, we
have long called for a two-state solution.
The Foreign Secretary, who I understand is due back in the
UK—sadly not to repeat the Statement in your Lordships' House but
to be at a Cabinet meeting, I gather—has talked about recognition
of Palestine “when the time is right”. As the noble Lord, Lord
Collins, pointed out, three countries have today recognised
Palestine. Although I do not expect the Minister to say now
whether there is likely to be an announcement from His Majesty's
Government, what is the British Government's longer-term thinking
about what a future settlement might look like?
Minister Mitchell in the other place was very clear that His
Majesty's Government cannot support an Israeli attack on Rafah
without seeing a plan. He explicitly stated that the United
Kingdom
“and 13 of our partners, including France, Germany, Italy and
Australia, set out our concerns in a detailed letter to the
Israeli Government[”.—[Official Report, Commons, 20/5/24; col.
646.]](/search/column?VolumeNumber=&ColumnNumber=646&House=1&ExternalId=A4C181A3-B2B4-4904-BD81-12457B037E25)
What is the basis of that letter? Do His Majesty's Government
feel that they have any leverage? Yesterday, the Foreign
Secretary ruled out a suspension of arms sales, pointing out that
UK arms sales are very small in quantity compared with American
sales of arms. But Germany is the second-largest exporter of arms
to Israel—has it considered a suspension of arms sales? Is that
being considered? Is there a position of saying that we do not
support attacks on Rafah and that a way of leveraging might be to
say that we would potentially suspend arms sales?
I will finish with questions about one brief mention of the ICC,
because we have now heard that the prosecutor has put forward his
recommendations and , the Lib Dem leader, has clearly pointed out the
importance of giving the ICC our full support to deliver justice.
Clearly, that is the Lib Dem position, and surely it should be
the United Kingdom's position, because we are signatories to the
Rome treaty. The problem is that Israel is not—nor
is the United States. So what is the Government's position on
persuading Israel and the United
States to take notice of the ICC?
Finally, Minister Mitchell pointed out that the Minister was in
Qatar on Monday, looking at provision for health support for
Palestinians. Is he able to elaborate on those discussions and
whether it is now possible to evacuate some of the sickest
children from Palestine?
The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development
Office () (Con)
My Lords, I thank the noble Lord and the noble Baroness for their
questions and their observations, many of which I agree with and,
indeed, are reflective of the Government's position. I assure the
noble Lord, Lord Collins, that we continue to work with
international partners. As he clearly outlined, that is exactly
the focus of the Government: bringing the war in Gaza to an end;
ensuring that hostages are returned after—as the noble Baroness
pointed out—being held for so long; and ending the suffering of
innocent Palestinian civilians in Gaza. That remains the number
one priority of the United Kingdom Government, together with our
key partners.
The noble Baroness mentioned Qatar; that was not just about a
health partnership. We announced a new health partnership on
psychosocial support, looking at each other's equities, and how
we are currently working with key partners in the Gulf
states—again, noble Lords have raised this in your Lordships'
House before—on how to work practically to get people out, who
are now receiving support. We are also, working with key
partners, extending training not just to Qatar, which we have
announced formally, but to other Arab states, including Kuwait. I
will continue to update your Lordships' House in that
respect.
The hostages themselves were part of the discussions with Qatar,
which continues to play an important role, together with Egypt.
Earlier this morning, I convened a meeting with Arab ambassadors
to gauge their updates. There was of course interest in the
United Kingdom's position on a number of issues that both the
noble Lord, Lord Collins, and the noble Baroness, Lady Smith,
have raised. I will go through those in turn.
I stress that we remain very much focused on this. My noble
friend and I have been engaged in
extensive diplomacy. On Sunday, I hope to be in Brussels for
specific meetings to follow up recent engagements in Riyadh with
Arab partners and—I know that noble Lords have raised this as
well—with EU partners on how we work together. It is clear to me,
from a number of meetings that we have had, that we need to
ensure that this is not just about the current conflict, which
must cease, but that we get the hostages out. Anyone who has met
with hostage families realises that. I have met with Palestinians
who have left Gaza and seen their predicament, and I have met
with doctors who are treating Palestinian children and women in
Qatar. We need to ensure that humanity prevails in all that we
do. That is the guiding beacon—if I may put it that way—in all my
engagements.
My noble friend spoke to Minister Gantz
yesterday and he has also spoken to Minister Dermer. The Prime
Minister has also engaged at prime ministerial level with Prime
Minister Netanyahu. In all these, the primary focus is on the
humanitarian, as well as seeking a resolution on getting the
conflict ended —and the long term.
I would add that, when you see certain statements from Defence
Minister Gallant and Minister Gantz recently, there is a real
question that Israel needs to answer
on whether the option of Palestinian governance is a real
one—recognised not just by us in your Lordships' House or by the
United Kingdom Government, but within Israel and its Cabinet.
It is important that that point continues to be emphasised. We
are pressing on the humanitarian issues that were raised and on
the issue of getting the Erez crossing fully opened. The noble
Lord, Lord Collins, mentioned the challenges there. He will be
aware that I myself called out the attacks on those convoys. I am
travelling to Jordan next week to see how we can enhance our
partnership and get more through the Jordan corridor.
The issue of settlers was raised quite specifically by the noble
Baroness. As she will know, earlier this month, the Foreign
Secretary announced new sanctions on extremist groups and
individuals for inciting and perpetrating settler violence in the
West Bank. We will not hesitate to take further actions in this
regard. I know that noble Lords across the House have been
supportive of curbing those particular actions.
We are very much seized of the two-state solution, and I come on
to the point of recognition. My noble friend articulated very clearly the
United Kingdom Government's position. Of course, we have noted
what has been announced today by Norway, Ireland and Spain, and
we are engaging with those countries: I have done so. Our
position is also different from that of the United States. We
have said repeatedly, as the Foreign Secretary recently
articulated, that Israel does not have a
veto on Palestine coming into existence. We have also said that
this is not something that should wait until the end of any given
structured process for peace. We remain focused on that. But the
first step must be, as I am sure that noble Lords will agree,
bringing this current conflict in Gaza to an end for the sake of
both Israelis and Palestinians, particularly the hostage families
and those who are suffering in Gaza.
On the issue of IHL, questions were asked reflecting Minister
Mitchell's recent appearance before the Business and Trade
Committee. I was very clear when I appeared before the Foreign
Affairs Committee last week that the principle of law must
prevail. I assure noble Lords that, both in the advice that I
give and in the decisions that my noble friend the Foreign
Secretary takes, those are the key principles that are considered
in terms of the overall position when it comes to export
licences. Noble Lords know of our very extensive and robust
regime in that regard, but its application is also important. We
are not a state supplier of weapons to Israel and, equally,
the processes that are undertaken are well tested. Of course, the
issue of the World Central Kitchen workers forms a big part of
the assessment process which is currently being undertaken. I
cannot give a specific or definitive date; what I can share with
the noble Lord is that it is imminent, and I know it is being
looked at specifically.
On starvation as a weapon of war, there is no way of holding
back: of course, no one should use starvation as a weapon of war,
and where it is seen, as I have said before, it brings serious
questions. We rely on the strength of our relationship
with Israel which means
that, as an ally and a friend, we continue to raise these issues,
privately at times and quite directly. Equally, where we feel it
necessary to take public action, we continue to do so.
The issue of the maritime port was raised. I pay tribute to those
who worked to bring this into operation but, to be clear, what
was delivered was a payload of only about 20 trucks. My noble
friend Lord Clarke, who is in his place, asked me previously
about British troops. The decision was taken to position no
British troops, which then provides logistical challenges on the
ground. We were able to deliver some of this, working with key
partners such as the World Food Programme, but this is a
desperate humanitarian situation on the ground, people are
suffering and we need to alleviate that. That is why we are
focused on land routes, on the situation in Rafah, on Kerem
Shalom, and on the crossing in Erez, to get more aid in. The
Ashdod port is also key. That is now operationalised but we now
need that flow of aid. It was Israel that said
quite publicly, “We need to flood Gaza with aid”. Yes, that is a
good intent; it needs now to be seen in action.
4.22pm
(CB)
My Lords, will the Minister take the opportunity to clear up some
of the misinformation that is being put out, not least, I am
sorry to say, by the BBC? For example, there are already 142
states that recognise Palestine and it has not made a scrap of
difference. Humanitarian aid is being sent in but it is not being
distributed, or it is being stolen by Hamas and sold. Even the
United Nations has now admitted that the casualty figures
relating to women and children should be halved—we have been
given false casualty figures. Finally, I am puzzled by the way
that we put Israel under a
microscope but no one has anything to say about the hundreds of
thousands of people who have died recently in Congo, in Yemen, in
Syria and all over the place, without any concern, it seems, for
their humanitarian aid.
(Con)
My Lords, on the noble Baroness's last point, I disagree with
her. On Yemen, we have announced additional funding of £139
million. On Syria, we have announced further funding of £89
million, so we are very much seized of the humanitarian plight of
those suffering across the region. On Congo, the situation is
desperate. I myself visited Congo with Her Royal Highness the
Duchess of Edinburgh on the prevention of sexual violence in
conflict, so the noble Baroness is wrong to say that. I cannot
speak for others, nor will I: I speak for the British Government
and our country. We are very much focused on that.
On the casualty figures, yes, the UN revised them because they
are based on casualties that it is now finding. I fear, and I do
not want to add to speculation, that we need to make a full
assessment on the ground. I agree with the noble Baroness
inasmuch as we need to have these figures established and
verified. To do that, we need the UN agencies and we need the
verification process to take place, because what is undoubtedly
true is that much of Gaza is currently in ruins and we need to
ensure that those souls who have been buried under that are given
dignity.
At the same time, I recognise that we hold Israel to a high
standard because it is a democracy with a rule of law. We do not
have the same standard for Hamas. It is a terrorist group. When
we hold Israel to account, we
do so as a friend and constructive partner. It is important that
we continue to focus on that.
On recognition, and I am sure the noble Baroness will, on
reflection, agree with me, I have said repeatedly that stability,
security and peace will be possible only once there is stability,
security and peace for Israelis and Palestinians alike.
(LD)
The Statement refers to
“a political horizon for the Palestinians, providing a credible
and irreversible pathway towards a two-state solution”.
Is that not a mountain the top of which will never be reached?
Why will the Government not do as the Foreign Affairs Select
Committee does—of course, now Norway, Ireland and Spain are added
to the 142 countries—and recognise the state of Palestine? My
party has long argued for this so that we can move forward in the
way that the Minister describes, to a peaceful and just existence
for both the Israelis and the Palestinians.
I am proud of the work done by the late, lamented and many other British
lawyers to bring about the ICC. Is it not important that we do
not undermine its work?
(Con)
I agree with the noble Baroness about the importance of
international law and the role that the ICC has played. We have
seen this in areas such as Russia and Ukraine. As the noble Lord,
Lord Collins, articulated, it allows a pre-trial process to be
followed and it is important that that process is now undertaken.
Many have expressed their personal perspectives on that, but when
it comes to legal processes, less is more. Let the ICC get on
with its process. There will be an opportunity to discuss it
further at an appropriate time.
It is very clear that we continue to engage with Israel as a
constructive partner. There are those in Israel who recognise
the same credible, irreversible pathway to the two-state
solution. On recognition, I have articulated the United Kingdom's
position. We will continue to work constructively with Israelis
and Palestinians, and do so in quite a dynamic fashion, between
my noble friend the Foreign Secretary's engagements and my own.
We have been working in tandem on this.
The noble Baroness mentioned a mountain, the top of which will
never be reached. If there is one commodity one must have in
abundance when it comes to public service, it is to never give up
on hope.
(Con)
My Lords, I commend my noble friend for his support for the
two-state solution, which I share. Israel has sought to
live in peace with its neighbours. For the last few decades, it
has offered a two-state solution and every time the Palestinians
have rejected it. Israel has withdrawn
from territory to make peace with Egypt and Jordan. It has given
back Gaza unilaterally and withdrawn from the settlements. It is
willing to do so in exchange for peace.
Meanwhile, we have recently seen the Palestinians using Gaza to
attack Israel The Hamas
leaders of the Palestinians have hijacked the aid that is going
in. They are making threats against America for building a pier
to distribute aid. They have targeted and attacked the crossings,
killing Israeli soldiers who were trying to facilitate the aid.
Can my noble friend tell us what evidence there is of the
Palestinians or their leaders actually wanting to live in peace
with the State of Israel or taking care
to avoid the deaths of their own civilians?
(Con)
My noble friend raises some very important points. To achieve
peace, you need to have partners for peace. It is very clear that
Hamas is not a partner for peace.
From engaging with people who have left Gaza, it is my opinion
that Hamas has not done the Palestinians any favours. It is
abundantly clear it has not put any security or protection in
place for the people of Gaza. That is why we have been consistent
that Hamas cannot be the governing authority in Gaza.
We also need to ensure that Israel comes to
the diplomatic table. My noble friend is correct that peace
agreements have been signed with Jordan and Egypt, but there are
further chapters in that process with Bahrain, Morocco and the
United Arab Emirates. There is talk of normalisation with the
wider Gulf region. These are important elements, and, ultimately,
that is what we strive to achieve. I agree with my noble friend
about the recent appointment of a new Prime Minister in the
Palestinian Authority, with whom we are engaging. We also need
the Palestinian Authority to mitigate the previous issues that
have arisen with the Palestinian leadership, to ensure that there
is an inclusive approach and that, when direct discussions begin,
both parties are committed to the notion of peace, stability and
security. That should remain the aim of any Government.
(Lab)
My Lords, we all share the sense of outrage at the massacres on 7
October. Is it not now unrealistic to expect Hamas to give up the
remaining hostages for a pause and not a ceasefire, knowing that
giving up its main bargaining counter will open the door
for Israel to seek to
eliminate the remaining Hamas militants in Gaza itself? Can the
Minister say what the preferred solution is for the post-conflict
governance of Gaza?
(Con)
My Lords, on the noble Lord's second point, it is important
that Israel is very much
part and parcel of that discussion. We have seen Ministers in the
Israeli Government ask that very question of their own Prime
Minister. It is important that that discussion takes place
within Israel Two options
currently prevail, both of which are unpalatable: that Hamas
remains in governance or that the Israelis retain the security of
Gaza. Neither is palatable—that is not me saying that as a
British Minister; that is the opinion of the Israeli Defence
Minister.
On the issue of hostages, I have just come back from Qatar, and
while I cannot go into detail, we will continue to pursue that
particular avenue. I have met with the hostage families, and I
assure the noble Lord that anyone who has done the same knows
that they can never give up. Even if it is the 59th minute of the
11th hour, we should continue in that endeavour if it means that,
with all our efforts, we get one more hostage out.
(CB)
My Lords, I refer to my register of interests. Can the Minister
turn his mind again to the ICC? It is my understanding that the
prosecutor usually declines to act where there is an independent
and effective legal system in the state concerned that can
address any legal charges. Are we really suggesting that that is
not in place in Israel
(Con)
My Lords, we have previously talked about the strength of
accountability and the justice systems in Israel As I said
earlier, the prosecutor has submitted his evidence and a process
is now under way. What we also implore Israel to
do—and which it has demonstrated on certain issues—is to show
accountability; for example, by investigating the tragic events
around the World Central Kitchen that resulted in the killing of
people, including British nationals. In that vein, we have asked
for further details, including how it can be looked at
independently.
To answer the earlier question from the noble Lord, Lord Collins,
we are talking with key partners, including Australia, which are
also undertaking a similar process. When we look at these
processes, we of course look at the local system, but the ICC is
an independent organisation that will make its own judgment.
(LD)
My Lords, can the Minister confirm that the ICC seeks to
prosecute individuals and not states, in answer to some of the
questions that have been floating around here? What does he have
to say, and what is the response of the British Government, to
the comments made by the National Security Minister
of Israel Itamar
Ben-Gvir, the day after the ICC's announcement? He said:
“Only Israel will control
Gaza … Israel will occupy
Gaza, completely & fully including Jewish settlement in”
the “entire enclave”, and he called for the
“‘encouragement of voluntary migration' of Gazans”.
He also stated that he wanted to live there in Gaza. Today, he
stormed the al-Aqsa Mosque, in response to the declarations from
Norway and Spain.
The Minister will know that Netanyahu's Government oppose a
two-state solution; the ambassador to this country has said very
clearly, on record on the radio and television, that her
Government oppose a two-state solution. In the light of that, why
are our Government—who are committed to a two-state solution, as
are all parties in this House—giving so much comfort, and not
showing more resistance, to those opposed to it? We must consider
those demonstrating against Netanyahu and the hostage families
who want a ceasefire and to see their families brought home—which
is not in the interest of Netanyahu, who is just trying to cling
on to power to avoid corruption charges.
(Con)
My Lords, ultimately, who governs Israel will be a
matter for Israelis. On the noble Baroness's point about the
hostage families, we are extending extensive support to them by
facilitating engagement, including in private meetings with key
negotiators.
On the issue of statements by Israeli Ministers, I and the United
Kingdom Government are clear on what needs to happen. The
prevailing view of one Minister within the Israeli Government is
not necessarily the view of other Ministers within that same
Government. However, I agree with the noble Baroness that the
current Government in Israel do not believe
in this two-state solution; it is a stated policy of the Prime
Minister and the current Government. That does not stop us
engaging quite directly on this important issue and making the
case in advocacy that, ultimately, as I say repeatedly, that will
be the time for the realisation of the two-state solution, and of
peace and security for both peoples, while equally recognising
that the long-term future is an interdependency between Israelis
and Palestinians to ensure the long-term prosperity of those two
nations.
(Con)
My Lords, I recognise His Majesty's Government's position to wait
for the second report into allegations of UNRWA staff involvement
on the 7 October terror attack before making a final decision on
the new funding, once our current allocation has expired at the
end of this month. UNRWA supports 3.7 million Palestinians, 2.3
million of whom live in Jordan, and hundreds of thousands of whom
live in Syria and Lebanon. If there is no further commitment to
aid, refugees who have nothing to do with 7 October or the
situation in Gaza are going to suffer as a result. In order to
avoid this scenario, will my noble friend consider exploring the
option of restoring the funding for UNRWA's activities outside
Gaza or outside the Occupied Palestinian Territories as an
interim measure, pending the second report?
(Con)
On my noble friend's second question, our funding structures do
not allow for that differentiation. We are waiting for the OIOS
report—the oversight report—which is due this month, because it
is specific to the abhorrent events of 7 October. However, this
has not stopped us extending humanitarian support into Gaza,
which is now well over £100 million. Last week, I met the head of
the World Food Programme, Cindy McCain, when she was in London;
earlier today, I met the executive director of UNICEF, Catherine
Russell, to focus on how we can extend the best level of support.
However, I agree with my noble friend, though I know that there
are others who have differing perspectives. There are mitigations
which are required, and UNWRA is addressing them. Philippe
Lazzarini is very much focused on this, and I have seen the
detail of some of the direct mitigations he is putting in place.
I agree with my noble friend about the important role that UNRWA
plays, both within Gaza and in neighbouring countries.
of Manor Castle (GP)
My Lords—
(Lab)
My Lords—
(Con)
My Lords, it is the turn of the Green Party and then we will move
on to Labour.
of Manor Castle (GP)
My Lords, in oral evidence yesterday to the Business and Trade
Committee on UK arms exports to Israel two
Ministers, and , confirmed that there is data
available only for the first two quarters of 2023, and that the
data for the following two quarters of the year is overdue, which
the committee expressed concerns about. Does the Minister agree
with me that, in the current situation, it is deeply concerning
that the British public does not know what is going on, and,
perhaps more damaging, that the world does not know what is going
on? Whatever the volume, surely what is being sold is not a
determinant of the UK's legal position on arms exports
to Israel Yesterday, the
noble Lord, , suggested that the US and the
UK were in a different position because our volumes of sales were
much less. I am not a lawyer, but my understanding is that it is
no defence in court to say, “Well, I did not commit very much of
the offence.”
(Con)
On all these assessments, as I have said before, there is a
process. If we are not talking at cross-purposes, it was about
data and information we received, as my right honourable friend
said earlier to the
committee about the assessments made during a particular period
of time in 2024. On the issue of the principle of law, I agree
with the noble Baroness that the principle should be directly
applied.
(Lab)
My Lords, no one can view what is going on in Gaza with any
equanimity; it is truly horrendous, and Israel is
coming in for a lot of criticism for what is happening there. But
one has to look at this with some form of balance and look at who
may be responsible for the majority of the problems. Hamas was
responsible for the original horrendous acts, and its terrorists
are preventing its own people sheltering in its caves. It is
purloining the aid that is getting in and selling it on at a high
price to its population, which is very cynical. It is also
cynically sending rockets to the crossing at two places, closing
them temporarily. So Hamas must bear some of the responsibility,
and I am afraid that UNRWA is not entirely blameless either. Does
the Minister agree?
(Con)
I certainly agree with the noble Lord on the role that Hamas has
played. As I said earlier, I think that many in Gaza recognise
the devastation it has wreaked on the people of Gaza. The United
Kingdom position is very clear: we regard Hamas as a terrorist
organisation, and it cannot be part of the future of Gaza. It
could end this now.
The noble Lord points out the missile attacks on Kerem Shalom
specifically, which curtailed the aid delivery. Equally, the
current Rafah operation has closed the Rafah border, which was
crucial for fuel supplies getting into some of the key hospitals,
so we are also seized of that. On the issue of not holding Hamas
to account, nothing could be further from the truth. We hold it
accountable and responsible but, when we deal with this, this is
not unfair scrutiny of Israel Israel is a country
that everyone from your Lordships' House stood with, and rightly
so, after those abhorrent events of 7 October, and we continue to
work with it as a constructive friend and partner.
Foreign, Commonwealth
and Development Office response to a petition
UNRWA funding
The petition of residents of the constituency of Linlithgow and
East Falkirk,
Declares that the crisis in Gaza has already resulted in
thousands of deaths and shows no sign of a resolution; further
declares that UNRWA has warned that not enough aid is entering
the besieged Gaza strip, and that a quarter of the Gazan
population has been determined as an IPC Stage 5 crisis, which
means that they are under immediate threat of death from
starvation and destitution; notes that whilst the allegations
against the 12 employees of the UNRWA are serious and must be
investigated thoroughly, the UNRWA operates in the West Bank,
Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan as well as Gaza, and the UK government
publishing civilians in these places by pausing funding will have
significant humanitarian repercussions.
The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges
the UK Government to help protect the rights and lives of those
affected by the War in Gaza by reallocating funds to the UNRWA to
ensure the immediate deliverance of humanitarian assistance to
address the adverse threat to life of Palestinians.
And the petitioners remain, etc.[—[Presented by , Official Report, 25 March
2024; Vol. 747, c.
1360.]](/search/column?VolumeNumber=747&ColumnNumber=1360&House=1)
[P002942]
Observations from the Minister for the Middle East, North Africa,
South Asia, United Nations and the Commonwealth (Lord Ahmad):
The UK wants an immediate stop in fighting to get much needed
humanitarian aid access and hostages released, to bring the Gaza
conflict to a sustainable end.
Israel suffered an appalling terrorist attack on 7 October —the
deadliest in its history. It has the right to defend itself but
must do so in accordance with international humanitarian law.
Hamas must release the hostages immediately.
The fastest way to end the conflict is to secure a deal which
gets the hostages out and allows for a stop in the fighting in
Gaza. We must then work with our international partners for a
sustainable, permanent ceasefire.
The situation in Gaza is desperate. A shocking number of
Palestinian civilians have been killed, and there is an urgent
need to get more aid to the people of Gaza to prevent a
famine.
Allegations that UNRWA staff were involved in the events that
took place on 7 October in Israel are appalling,
which is why we took decisive action to pause future funding to
the organisation.
The Prime Minister has been clear that the UK will set out its
position on future funding to UNRWA following careful
consideration of Catherine Colonna's final report, UNRWA's
response and the ongoing UN Office of Internal Oversight Services
investigation into these allegations. We recognise UNWRA's
important role.
We remain committed to getting humanitarian aid to the people in
Gaza who desperately need it, including through other UN agencies
and NGOs. We more than trebled our aid commitment in the 2023-24
financial year and we are doing everything we can to get more aid
in as quickly as possible by land, sea and air.
As of 9 May, the UK has participated in 12 airdrops into Gaza. On
17 April we announced £3 million of additional funding for
equipment to support UN and aid agencies to get more aid into
Gaza, including trucks, forklifts, generators, fuel stores and
lighting towers. This follows a £9.7 million package of military
and civilian support to set up a maritime aid corridor to Gaza,
including the deployment of a Navy ship and the establishment of
the new pier to open up the maritime route which has seen the
delivery of 4,000 shelter kits on 17 May.
UK support includes a field hospital, provided by UK Aid funding
to UK-Med, which is up and running in Gaza and the facility has
already treated thousands of patients. We have provided funding
for the World Food Programme to provide 2,000 tonnes of food aid,
enough to feed 275,000 people in Gaza.
Guaranteed deconfliction for aid convoys and other humanitarian
work is essential.
