Tahir Ali (Birmingham, Hall Green) (Lab) I beg to move, That this
House has considered the matter of a roadmap to peace in Palestine.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Rees. The
long-standing conflict between Israel and Palestine remains one of
the greatest foreign policy challenges faced by the UK and the
international community. The conflict has been costly in terms of
human life, as well as for the stability and security of the
region. It is...Request free trial
(Birmingham, Hall Green)
(Lab)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered the matter of a roadmap to peace
in Palestine.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Rees. The
long-standing conflict between Israel and Palestine remains one
of the greatest foreign policy challenges faced by the UK and the
international community. The conflict has been costly in terms of
human life, as well as for the stability and security of the
region. It is therefore clear that a road map for peace is
desperately needed. The necessary steps have never been clearer,
but there remain significant obstacles to the peace process that
I will spend some time outlining.
The most recent round of violence between Israel and Palestine
cost countless lives. The attack on Al-Aqsa mosque by Israeli
authorities sparked a wave of violence that culminated with
renewed bombing in Gaza. This violence has emerged as a result of
the ongoing injustices faced by Palestinian people, injustices
which continue to make peace in the region impossible. For
months, Palestinian families have been illegally evicted from
their homes and businesses in several historically Palestinian
neighbourhoods in east Jerusalem. Those evictions are being
driven by illegal state-backed settler organisations whose sole
aim is to displace all Palestinians from their rightful home in
east Jerusalem.
This process goes hand in hand with the growth and consolidation
of illegal Israeli settlements on the west bank and Golan Heights
and the land that was stolen from Palestinian families. If we are
serious about achieving a lasting and just peace between
Palestine and Israel, it is abundantly clear that the injustices,
such as the evictions in east Jerusalem, must be stopped and all
land stolen from the Palestinian people must be returned to
them.
The UK Government can certainly play a positive and leading role
in working out a road map to peace in Palestine. First, our trade
relationships with Israel mean that we can make use of sanctions
to exert leverage over the Israeli Government to ensure that the
human and civil rights of Palestinians are respected and that all
illegally seized land is returned.
It is unfortunate to have to resort to sanctions, but it is clear
from the ongoing violence and evictions that imposing sanctions
is the start of the process to bring about change in the region.
That is why I am pleased to see the Israeli Arms Trade
(Prohibition) Bill introduced by my hon. Friend the Member for
Leeds East (), which would end all arms
trade between the UK and Israel until a meaningful solution to
the conflict has been found.
Furthermore, I believe it is time for the UK to follow many other
countries around the world in finally recognising the state of
Palestine. Many like to speak about the two-state solution to the
conflict, but how can we commit to that if we do not even
recognise Palestine as a rightful state? Moreover, how can peace
be achieved if Israel refuses to recognise the state of
Palestine? It is a prerequisite to peace that the statehood of
Palestine be recognised and respected. The two-state solution has
never been so imperilled as it is today. Recognition of the state
of Palestine is not only the right thing to do, but perhaps a
means of salvaging what is left of the two-state solution.
When speaking of a road map to peace in Palestine, we must
consider what we can do to stand in solidarity with the
Palestinian people and ensure that diplomacy and dialogue can
defeat the drive towards more violence. A meaningful peace
process between Israel and Palestine can occur only when the two
meet as equal partners, which in turn can occur only when the
rights of Palestinians are upheld and respected, when illegally
occupied lands are returned and when the sovereignty of
Palestinian people is recognised. I believe that once these
conditions are met and the rights of the Palestinian people are
firmly respected, we will see strides towards peace in the
region. I still believe we can see peace between Palestine and
Israel within my lifetime, but in order to see this hope
fulfilled we must be willing to take strong and decisive action
now.
(Preston) (Lab/Co-op)
I remember that in 2003 when the first road map to peace was
introduced, there were some 50,000 settlers occupying the west
bank. Eighteen years on, there are now close to half a million.
What was a possible route to peace seems to have been lost
greatly by the vast numbers taking land in the west bank. Does my
hon. Friend not feel that the situation is far worse now than it
was when the road map was first talked about, and is it not the
case that we have seen Israeli Prime Ministers since who are not
interested in the two-state solution, but instead in a one-state
solution, and that is Israel?
I agree with the comments my hon. Friend makes on the two-state
solution. As I have said, it is possible that a two-state
solution can be a means of progress if Palestine is recognised as
a state. Without that recognition, the peace process is going
nowhere.
When we speak of a road map to peace in Palestine, we can no
longer repeat the failed mantras. I believe that progress can be
made, but only if the peace process is recentred around the human
rights of Palestinian people rather than simply on territorial or
security considerations. A human rights-based approach to
brokering peace between Palestine and Israel would focus on
securing civil and political rights for the Palestinian people,
and would place justice at the very heart of the peace process.
That, of course, would mean recognition from both sides of the
conflict of the centrality of the principles enshrined in the
universal declaration of human rights.
The peace process must centre around equality,
non-discrimination, participation, and accountability and the
rule of law. That would be a clear set of criteria by which the
peace process could be monitored by both Israel and Palestine,
and would establish a universally held basis for a solution to
the crisis. Instead of focusing on security and stability, the
international community should be seeking strategies that instead
focus on human lives and the rights and wellbeing of individuals
and families. That means drawing into the peace process groups
from civil society that are often excluded from negotiations.
That means including charities, non-governmental organisations,
women’s organisations and other groups in the peace process, from
both sides. With that approach, the traditional
actors—Governments and political parties, with the hostilities
between them—can be meaningfully held in check by the interests
and concerns of Israeli and Palestinian civil society.
That humanitarian approach, however, is clearly not being adopted
by Israel, Palestine or the international community as a whole.
It is a step that needs to be taken, and it is one that the UK
could be the first to take towards bringing about a peaceful
resolution for Palestine and Israel. Only if Israel recognises
the humanitarian injustices being committed against Palestinians
can new steps be taken towards peace.
(in the Chair)
I will call the SNP spokesperson to speak at 5.08 pm, so I have
to put a time limit of about two and a half minutes on those who
want to speak. I call .
16:41:00
(Strangford) (DUP)
Thank you, Ms Rees. I did not expect to be called first, but I
appreciate the opportunity. Indeed, I am astounded.
This matter is close to my heart. I seek to be a tool for the
building of bridges between two nations, not tearing them down.
My opinions may be clearly different from those of others, but I
respect everyone’s opinion and hope that they will respect mine.
I will not claim any superiority of knowledge or compassion over
any other Member of this House, but I represent a part of our
United Kingdom that has known the harsh reality of conflict. With
some experience, I can say that we cannot deliver peace or a road
map to peace by ignoring the history of appeasing aggressors or
by repeating meaningless phrases.
History records the facts. In May 1948, Israel was attacked by
multiple Arab armies. In ’67, it was forced to defend itself when
Arab armies again gathered on its borders to attack. In 1973, it
was attacked on Yom Kippur. In between those events and since
1973, Israel has been at the centre of more acts of terror than
any other nation in the world. As a young boy, I remember
watching the news about the six-day war, wondering how that tiny
nation was defending itself against all the odds. The images of
women and children on the streets, defending themselves and their
neighbours, is imprinted on my mind.
I do not support early-day motion 300, calling on the UK not to
sell arms to the most threatened state on the planet. The
incongruity of it is that Israel sells more military technology
to us than we sell to them. Similarly, in America the Democratic
party wants to stop military aid to Israel that funds the Iron
Dome, a defence system that saves lives. Can you believe that, Ms
Rees? Some of my fellow parliamentarians—in advance of what they
will say, but based on what they have said in the past—want to
strip the world’s only Jewish state of the means to defend
itself. For the life of me, I cannot understand that.
I have always been taught to focus on the ties that bind, rather
than the things that divide. I believe that everyone in the House
can subscribe to these. First, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and
the Palestinian Authority must accept and respect Israel’s right
to exist; there is no other starting point. Secondly, all armed
terror groups must lay down their weapons. Thirdly, peace talks
without preconditions on either side must be opened to reach a
full and final peace settlement between the state of Israel and
the Palestinians.
In the 25 seconds I have left, I conclude with this comment: when
Israel led the vaccine roll-out, it was notable that that
roll-out rightly included people from every faith and political
persuasion. The greater good was put above all else. That has to
be reciprocated and the greater good of peace and change must be
put above personal belief and political aspiration. That is what
I am calling for from Members present today—in advance of what
they say. That is what I believe, and I hope that someone else
who is present to speak believes the same.
16:43:00
(Batley and Spen) (Lab)
In my constituency, the Palestinian flag is flown proudly by
people for whom a viable internationally recognised state of
Palestine is a life-long dream. I want that dream to be turned
into reality, but I am under no illusion about how distant it
feels and how difficult the path to achieving it is.
The illegal occupation continues, and the dignity and human
rights of the Palestinian people are trampled on each and every
day. If we have learnt anything from the long and delicate road
to peace in Northern Ireland, it is that progress is impossible
without first establishing a sufficient degree of trust for
genuine dialogue to take place. Long-standing and apparently
irreconcilable differences can be unpicked, but only if the will
to do so is there from all parties.
There are clearly people of good will and good sense in both
Israel and Palestine who recognise that, and their voices must be
heard as we work towards a two-state solution of an independent
internationally recognised Palestine alongside a safe and secure
Israel. When it comes to political leadership, however, sadly
that good sense does not always prevail. As long as leaders see
political advantage in their own communities from exacerbating
differences rather than seeking areas of agreement and common
ground, the road to peace will remain blocked.
It breaks my heart that the rights of ordinary Palestinian men,
women and children are being denied, and their hopes of a better
future are being crushed. With no voice of their own, they rely
on human rights defenders to speak up for them, which is why the
Israeli Government’s attack on six leading civil society
organisations must be unequivocally condemned.
(Bedford) (Lab)
Cases of covid-19 are rising in Gaza and the health system is
almost broken. The people of Gaza deserve much better. Does my
hon. Friend agree that Israel must stop the blockade now so that
the health authorities can get in there and people can get
vaccinations and proper healthcare?
I agree entirely that we have to end the blockade of Gaza. It is
every individual’s right to healthcare, particularly during the
pandemic.
We have a decision to make. Will we condemn another generation of
Palestinians to a future full of fear, insecurity and
hopelessness? Or will we stand shoulder to shoulder with those
demanding the democratic space to criticise the status quo and
defend the human rights of a people who deserve better than
continued oppression and suffering because political leaders lack
the courage to recognise that a better future is possible?
16:46:00
(Islington North) (Ind)
I will do my best to set out the case in two and a half minutes.
I thank the hon. Member for Birmingham, Hall Green () for initiating the debate.
The principal point must be that Britain should give
unconditional full recognition to the state of Palestine. It was
in the Labour party manifesto and it is something that I believe
strongly in. Most countries around the world have no problem with
that and have recognised the state of Palestine, as does the
United Nations—it is generally accepted. We should do exactly the
same, so that we are seen as honest brokers and proper
participants in the whole process.
The occupation of the west bank by Israel has gone on since 1967.
Let us try to imagine what it is like to live under occupation.
Everywhere someone goes there is a checkpoint, an occupying force
or a soldier who will stop them. A law that they have not voted
for, and that does not have their consent, can be used against
them. Many people are in prison for many years and are abominably
treated there.
Similarly, the siege of Gaza goes on. I have had the good fortune
to visit Israel, the west bank and Gaza on many occasions. I am
always struck by the number of people in Gaza who suffer from
profound mental health conditions because of the siege that they
are under and the inability to travel or work. It is the most
educated population in the world with the highest number of
graduates of any country bar none, yet unemployment is between
60% and 70%. In fact, there is no real functioning economy in
Gaza. That is another major factor, which has to end.
Some 600,000 people live in settlements. They are industrial and
trading complexes and they have taken land and water away from
Palestinian farmers. There are settler-only roads, which
Archbishop Desmond Tutu recognised was like apartheid where
people could not travel on certain roads. They are a breach of
international law.
Many people in Palestine, in Israel and around the world are
desperate in their search for peace. What I have noticed on the
many Zoom calls I have had in the past two years is the unity of
people all over the world demanding justice for the people of
Palestine. That must be the basis for peace for the future.
16:49:00
(Birmingham, Yardley)
(Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Rees. I thank
my hon. Friend and neighbour the Member for Birmingham, Hall
Green ()—in fact, my own MP—for bringing
forward this debate. As my hon. Friend the Member for Batley and
Spen () said, the idea of a free
state of Palestine—the desire of my constituents and hers, and I
am sure all of ours—seems so far away, so I wanted to focus on
the things that we can do and, as my hon. Friend the Member for
Birmingham, Hall Green, and others have mentioned, how we in
Britain should facilitate the development and support of civil
society in the region.
My constituents, like many others, have been writing regarding
Israel’s decision to criminalise six Palestinian human rights and
civil society organisations and label them terrorists. When I was
last in Palestine, I met Omar Shakir from Human Rights Watch, who
was constantly facing deportation, the suggestion being that he
had something other than peace and the people of Palestine at his
heart, which was completely unfair, as it is unfair today. The
accusation is that these are terrorist organisations, despite a
74-page dossier prepared by the Israeli security services
providing little concrete evidence of links between Palestinian
human rights groups and designated terrorist groups. These
organisations include the most well-established Palestinian human
rights groups that work in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
They provide healthcare to the most vulnerable communities, they
organise legal support for those detained and they collect
evidence of human rights violations—which I suspect is where the
problem is.
The work that these organisations undertake is integral to
supporting the most vulnerable and to understanding the reality
on the ground for Palestinian people. As others have mentioned,
what we have seen in other conflicts, such as in Northern
Ireland, is that without strong, stable, supported civil society,
a pathway and a plan to peace can never be realised on the
ground, let alone around the world in fancy buildings such as
this one. I ask the Government to seek to support capacity
building of Palestinian civil society.
16:51:00
(Hammersmith) (Lab)
These debates on the middle east peace process used to be rather
groundhog day-like events, where we recorded no progress or the
Government having done nothing but repeat the same phrases over
and over again. I look back on those times with nostalgia,
because now we simply seem to be going backwards. After the
appalling chaos of the Trump Administration, we should be getting
back on track and supporting a two-state solution, the rule of
law and human rights in the Palestinian territories. In the very
short time I have, I want to ask the Minister to respond on the
subject of the most egregious barriers to the peace process.
The first is recognition, which this House overwhelmingly voted
for seven years ago. That should be a precondition —an attempt to
negotiate on equal terms. The second is the establishment of new
settlements. There are 13,000 about to be approved, and it is not
just what is being approved; it is where. These are strategically
placed to cut off East Jerusalem from Ramallah, or they are being
built 20 km inside the west bank to ensure that a two-state
solution becomes impossible.
What are the Government saying on settler violence, which is now
endemic? There were 450 recorded attacks since early 2020—that is
from B’Tselem, the Israeli human rights organisation. Those
attacks are specifically designed to terrorise Palestinian
farmers or force them off their land. Why are we trading with
illegal settlements? We are not talking about boycotts here; we
are talking about settlements that are illegal under
international law, but which the Government will do nothing to
prevent British companies profiting from.
What has the Government’s response been to the six
non-governmental organisations—respected civil rights and human
rights organisations—being banned by the Israeli Government? What
are they doing about the all-time highs in evictions and
demolitions? They could start with the finding last week against
JCB, in which it was found that that major British company had
not shown human rights due diligence in ensuring that its
equipment was not being used to demolish Palestinian homes.
These are the questions that the Government have to answer, and
not just as a precursor to re-establishing a peace process; if
they do not, they are abdicating responsibility, there is no hope
for peace going forward, and they are effectively colluding with
what the Israeli Government are doing.
16:54:00
(Vauxhall)
(Lab/Co-op)
It is pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Rees. I, too,
pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Hall
Green () for calling this really
important debate.
Next month will mark two years since I was elected to this place.
In those two short years, I have been contacted by so many
Vauxhall constituents who are concerned about the reality that
many Israelis and Palestinians face. The fact is that none of us
can fail to be appalled by the situation in Palestine: the
continued blockade in Gaza, the deconstruction of homes, the
eviction of Palestinian families, the construction of illegal
settlements and the cruel treatment of children in detention.
That should shame us. Those incidents are not just inhumane, but
huge barriers to peace.
Peace in Palestine will never be found with the discrimination
against and suppression of many people in the area. The actions
will simply lead to resentment and the continuation of the toxic
atmosphere that has allowed the current situation to exist for
far too long. We all want to see peace in Palestine.
(Battersea) (Lab)
I appreciate that we are very short of time, so I thank my hon.
Friend for giving way. Does she agree that unless we recognise
Palestine as a state, we cannot make that route map towards
peace?
I thank my colleague for that really important point. Both
Israelis and Palestinians have the right to exist, and they can
do so in a safe space. However, to do that, our Government and
Governments across the world need to work tirelessly to
facilitate the de-escalation of the conflict.
I have one simple question for the Minister. Will the Government
commit to working with both Israeli and Palestinian groups to
amplify the voice of the good faith actors who are working so
hard on the ground to bring about this peace? We need to advance
the two-state solution and bring peace for everyone in the
region, not continue having debates in this Chamber.
16:56:00
(Birmingham, Selly Oak)
(Lab)
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Hall
Green ()—my neighbour—on securing the
debate. I am the chair of Labour Friends of Israel, so I will be
a lone voice here. Let me be straightforward. The debate sounds
less like seeking conditions that might help create peace, and
more like setting conditions as a prerequisite for peace. That is
what is wrong with it.
We are told we must recognise Palestine, but what Palestine? Is
it the bit controlled by the Palestinian Authority, or the bit
under military occupation by Hamas? What kind of state would we
be recognising, given its current condition? Why is it
impossible, in a debate like this, to recognise that there is a
new coalition Government in Israel? Why is it impossible to look
at the arguments about the “economy for security” plan that was
announced recently? Why are the Abraham accords automatically
dismissed?
I listened to what my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Hall
Green, and others said about co-existence, and I agree. I hope
that means that they are also supporting the Alliance for Middle
East Peace plan for an international peace fund to bring those
opposing people together, as we did successfully in Northern
Ireland. I hope we will be united in saying to the Government
that Britain should seek to take up one of the places on the
international body supervising that fund.
I hear people talk about recognition and sanctions; what I want
to know is, when people are chanting, “From the river to the
sea”, what do they think that actually means? We all know that it
actually means the dismemberment of Israel—Israel not having a
right to exist. No one can back that and a two-state solution
simultaneously.
I genuinely want a two-state solution. I genuinely want peace.
However, I also want recognition that the state of play is that
Hamas is supported and financed by the Iranian revolutionary
guard, and that its objective is the destruction of the state of
Israel. We have to bear that in mind.
16:59:00
(Middlesbrough) (Lab)
It is a privilege to serve under your chairship, Ms Rees. I
congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Hall Green
() on securing the debate, but I
must say, very sadly, that the prospect of peace in Palestine
looks more distant than ever. With each illegal home the Israelis
construct, the dream of a viable Palestinian state is dealt
another blow. The Palestinian people are subjected to yet more
intolerable brutality and oppression, with Israeli forces giving
settlers licence to attack Palestinian civilians.
The human rights group B’Tselem has documented a staggering 451
incidents of settler violence against Palestinians since early
2020, and Israeli forces failed to intervene to stop the attacks
in two thirds of cases. The organisation has also recorded how
settlers have been used as a tool of the state to expropriate 11
square miles of Palestinian farm and pasture land in the west
bank over the past five years alone.
There is no other way to look at this than as a state-sanctioned
project of colonisation and ethnic cleansing. A Human Rights
Watch report published in April this year concluded that
“the Israeli government has demonstrated an intent to maintain
the domination of Jewish Israelis over Palestinians across Israel
and the OPT”—
that is, the Occupied Palestinian Territories. The report goes
on:
“In the OPT, including East Jerusalem, that intent has been
coupled with systematic oppression of Palestinians and inhumane
acts committed against them. When these three elements occur
together, they amount to the crime of apartheid.”
The crime of apartheid cannot be allowed to stand, but thanks to
the international community offering little more than hollow
words of condemnation, the Israeli authorities wilfully continue
to break the law, safe in the knowledge that they will not face
the repercussion of proper sanctions.
If the Government will not provide moral and substantial
leadership on this issue, it will be up to civil society to do
so, through the boycott of, and divestment from, companies
engaged in violations of Palestinian human rights. The Government
need to lead the international community in providing more than
mere denunciations. We need actions and sanctions, and we need
them now.
17:01:00
(Edinburgh East) (SNP)
I congratulate the hon. Member for Birmingham, Hall Green (), on bringing forward the
debate. For almost 30 years, we have been discussing, and there
has been international consensus on, the prospect of a two-state
solution. Most people in this Parliament, and most nations across
the world, would endorse that approach. It is the approach that
my party fully supports. However, we recognise that we have to
consider that policy objective against the reality of what is
happening on the ground. We cannot turn our eyes away and pretend
that one of those states has not been engaged, ever since the
Oslo accords, in systematically destroying the building blocks on
which the other state will emerge and develop.
First, and most obviously, the Israeli state is occupying the
lands designated to become the Palestinian state. Not only is it
militarily occupying them, but it has no policy objective to ever
end that occupation. Secondly, as has been referred to, the
programme of settler colonisation has seen more than 600,000
people move into the militarily occupied areas, which has led to
the displacement of the Palestinian populations that were there.
The infrastructure that comes with that results in the de facto
annexation of the territory, even if it is not legally claimed.
Thirdly, there is the question of Jerusalem, as has been
indicated. There is what can only be called the ethnic cleansing
of Palestinian communities to remove them from the east of In
East Jerusalem. That has been given a veneer of legitimacy and
respectability by Israel’s law, although that law would not pass
any international test of fairness.
Finally, the Israeli Government are, as a matter of policy,
systematically trying to reduce and deny the capacity of
Palestinian society to represent itself politically. That is why
the recent criminalisation of six non-violent civil organisations
is of so much concern. The extension of that criminalisation, by
military law, to the occupied territories may well result in
arrests and offices closing. All of that denies Palestinian
people the ability to organise and be represented. I say to the
hon. Member for Birmingham, Selly Oak (), that all of that creates
conditions in which young Palestinians have so much despair and
so little hope that they are attracted to the ideas put forward
by Hamas and others.
We need to try to do something about this. I expect that the
Minister will say that the Government also believe in the
two-state solution. If somebody says that they believe in a
two-state solution in the middle east, and yet they do
nothing—make no comment, take no action—about the things that are
happening to actively undermine that objective, they are being
insincere and not serious.
Our Government have to be seen to be taking action to make sure
that the conditions are brought about in which a two-state
solution could become a reality once again. First, they need to
fully implement UN resolution 2334, and make a distinction
between Israel proper and the Occupied Palestinian Territories,
given the settlement economy that is going on there. The
Government should take serious economic action to end economic
trade with settlements in the occupied areas that sustain the
occupation.
Secondly, as has been said, we should recognise the state of
Palestine. Why not? If we believe that it should exist, we should
recognise it, and try to help it and develop it, so that it
becomes a proper state. Our not doing that puts the Palestinians
always at a disadvantage.
Finally, it is time to understand that Israel, as a matter of
Government policy, has been conducting its activities with
impunity for many years in breach of international law. Its
military action is in breach of the Geneva convention, and it has
been undertaken with no sanction and no impediment. That must
stop. We might wish to be good friends with the state of Israel,
but we need to say to its Government, “You cannot continue with
these policies. If you do, there will be consequences. This
country will not stand by and idly watch this happen.”
17:06:00
(Caerphilly) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairpersonship, Ms Rees. I
congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Hall Green
(), on securing this important
debate.
I begin by reminding people that this debate has been about a
road map to peace in Palestine. Over the past two decades, there
have been a number of attempted road maps to peace between
Palestine and Israel, but sadly, as we know only too well, none
of them has brought about peace. We have in recent years seen
initiatives by President Obama, supported by President Mubarak of
Egypt and King Abdullah of Jordan; by President Abbas of
Palestine; and by John Kerry. We even saw an initiative by
President Trump, though it hardly merits that description,
because it was rightly thrown in the dustbin by most responsible
parties. I mention those points because they serve to underline
that peace between Israel and Palestine cannot be a quick fix. It
has to be thought out, well planned and based on certain
principles, and the agreement must be acceptable to all parties
concerned. That is the essence of achieving a peace
settlement.
I am absolutely clear that there must be a negotiated peace.
There are some who seek to destroy the state of Israel, and some
who wish to deny any kind of statehood to the Palestinian people.
Those who hold such views are profoundly wrong. Our aim should be
the creation of a viable Palestinian state alongside a secure
Israel that can live in peace. I very much agree that there must
be an emphasis on human rights. Now, in future negotiations and
when the two-state solution becomes a reality, human rights
should be at the top of the agenda.
I condemn the labelling of the six non-governmental organisations
in Palestine as terrorist organisations by the Defence Minister
of Israel, and I ask the Government to respond to that point,
rather than take the holding position of, “We’ll see what the
evidence is.” Others who have been told by the Israeli Government
that there is evidence are yet to see it, and there is no
evidence at all, I suspect, to justify that designation, so I ask
for a firm Government response on that. It has been a number of
weeks since the designation was made.
A two-state solution must therefore be the goal on which we
continuously focus.
My hon. Friend says that our goal must be a two-state solution,
and he mentioned the contributions of previous US Presidents in
trying to broker a solution. He will be aware that the Biden
Administration have voiced opposition to Israel’s settlement
expansion plans, saying that they will damage the prospects for a
two-state solution. Our Government can play a role. However, does
he not think that the Biden Administration—the US Administration
is the Government to which the Israelis probably listen the
most—should play a major role in pursuing that and putting
pressure on the Israelis to make it impossible for them to rule
out the two-state solution through de facto developments on the
ground?
I very much agree with all the points that my hon. Friend made,
and I will touch upon each one in just a few moments.
Britain and the international community have to focus on a number
of principles and key positions, so that we lay the groundwork
for an eventual peace. Those must include, first, an adherence to
the rule of international law—not ifs, no buts. There must be an
adherence to international law by all parties, including the
Palestinians, and including the state of Israel. Moreover, the
forced evictions of Palestinians from Sheikh Jarrah and other
communities in east Jerusalem and the west bank must stop. The
ever-growing number of Israeli settlements in the Occupied
Palestinian Territories are clearly illegal under international
law, and the displacement of Palestinians from land that they
have held for generations is clearly wrong. That is one
principle—what follows from international law.
The second principle is that the city of Jerusalem must be shared
by Israelis and Palestinians. The annexation of east Jerusalem by
Israel cannot be accepted. Those two principles are the
cornerstones on which any future negotiation has to be based.
However, before we get to any meaningful negotiations, we have to
press for a number of things.
That is a fairly balanced point of view. However, Israel is
surrounded by enemies; there are rocket attacks and terrorist
attacks on a regular basis. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that
the protection of Israel’s own people needs to be ensured before
anything can happen?
Absolutely. I am a strong supporter of the state of Israel, as I
am of a future state of Palestine. The state of Israel has a
right to protect itself against Hamas, or anybody else for that
matter, as any other state has according to international law.
That is why international law is so important; it must apply to
everyone in all circumstances.
The time is right for the state of Palestine to be recognised.
Parliament itself has voted in principle in favour of recognising
the state of Palestine, but it has not indicated a timescale, and
the Government have paid, dare I say it, lip service to this
principle. We now need to firm things up, and ensure that there
is a recognition of the state of Palestine, which will give an
impetus to the move towards meaningful negotiations.
We also need to press firmly for elections to be held in
Palestine, so that those who are elected have a clear mandate to
negotiate on behalf of their people. There is nothing like
democracy, and nothing gives a mandate for negotiation as
effectively as democracy. That is why the Palestinians need to
have elections. The broadly based Israeli Government should do
everything that they can to de-escalate tensions in the Occupied
Palestinian Territories, and the new Government must place an
embargo on all future settlements on the west bank.
It has to be said that the United States needs to be encouraged
to be more proactive in the region, as touched on by my hon.
Friend the Member for Preston ( ). The United States needs to
work with allies in the region and build on the new relationships
that are being established through the Abraham accords. I know
that some Members have reservations about the Abraham accords,
but they nevertheless exist, and we must use them as an
opportunity to encourage the United Arab Emirates and others to
raise the issue of Palestine directly with the Israelis. This is
a new opportunity, and we must take every advantage of it. It
might be an important avenue to explore with the UAE, because the
country will be on the United Nations Security Council for two
years, starting from this January.
Of course, our Government can do a heck of a lot more than they
are currently doing. I was interested to read that the Minister
for the Middle East and North Africa spoke at a conference this
morning and issued a tweet in which he said it is important that
we support the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for
Palestine Refugees in the Near East. He said:
“Important we support UNRWA to deliver on its mandate until there
is an agreed solution.”
That is all well and good, but I respectfully remind the
Government that they have, quite disgracefully, just reduced
their funding to UNRWA. I have the figures to prove it. The
British Government gave $64.1 million to UNRWA in 2020—a
reduction from $76.2 million in 2019—and the projection for 2021
is $39.1 million. The Government can say what they like about
supporting UNRWA and the peace process, and about ensuring that
the infrastructure is in place and that the groundwork is done
for successful negotiations, but they are actually undermining it
through their ham-fisted policies. I respectfully ask the
Government to reconsider whether those cuts are morally justified
and make any kind of sense whatsoever.
It is important for our Government to recognise that the peace
process is a process. It will not happen overnight, and nor will
it happen over weeks or months. It will happen over years, and it
is absolutely essential that the groundwork is done to ensure
that there is rapprochement between people on the ground. We have
to learn lessons from the situation in Northern Ireland. Great
progress was made in Northern Ireland, and not just because
politicians came together, talked to one another and made
compromises, which are essential in any negotiations. There was
also investment in the means to bring people together, so that
the old enmities of the past were put to one side, or at least
minimised.
We have to do a something similar with regards to Israel and
Palestine. That is why I think it is extremely important that the
Government give their full-hearted support to the International
Fund for Israeli-Palestinian Peace. I know the Government say
they support it, but as my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham,
Hall Green said, the Government have the opportunity to give
their full-hearted support and to take up one of the seats on the
board. They can support the initiative that has come from America
to ensure that the essential groundwork is done, so that the
Israeli people and the Palestinian people learn to come closer
together. It is only when that happens that we can have a basis
for a genuinely sustainable and fair peace, which is what we all
want.
17:19:00
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign,
Commonwealth and Development Affairs ()
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Rees. I am
grateful to the hon. Member for Birmingham, Hall Green () for securing this important
debate. This is an issue of great interest to the House, and I am
grateful for the opportunity to lay out more comprehensively the
UK’s current approach.
The Minister for the Middle East and North Africa would have
liked to take part in this debate, but he is currently—right
now—representing the UK at the ad hoc liaison committee in Oslo,
where he is meeting the Palestinian Prime Minister and the
Israeli Minister for Regional Cooperation, as well the Egyptian
and Jordanian Foreign Ministers. It is good that dialogue is
taking place. My right hon. Friend’s meetings will focus on
tangible ways to develop the Palestinian economy, improving
prospects for Palestinians and stability in the Occupied
Palestinian Territories. It is therefore my pleasure to respond
on behalf of the Government.
The UK’s position on the middle east peace process is long
standing and well known. We support a negotiated settlement
leading to a safe and secure Israel living alongside a viable and
sovereign Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as a shared capital.
We firmly believe that a just and lasting resolution that ends
the occupation and delivers peace for both Israelis and
Palestinians is long overdue. We also believe that the best way
to make progress towards such a resolution is through bilateral
negotiations that take account of the legitimate concerns of both
sides.
We remain in close consultation with international partners to
encourage a regional approach to peace. We are working through
multilateral institutions, including the UN, to support
resolutions and policies that encourage both sides to take steps
that rebuild trust, which will be crucial if dialogue is to
succeed. To that end, we welcome recent engagements between the
Israeli Government and the Palestinian leadership. We urge
further direct engagement and call on both parties to work
together to tackle immediate and long-term threats to peace and
stability. We consistently call for an immediate end to all
actions that undermine the viability of a two-state solution,
including acts of terrorism, antisemitic incitement, settlement
expansion, and the demolition of Palestinian property on the west
bank, including East Jerusalem.
A number of Members asked about civil society organisations. We
are in contact with the Government of Israel to understand the
basis of the designations of six civil society organisations. We
have made it clear that human rights and civil society
organisations have a vital role to play in the development of
thriving and open societies.
Will the Minister give way?
We have only a short time, and this is the first time that the UK
Government have been able to lay out our position on this
specific issue in detail since the last change in Government in
Israel. I believe there have been debates on specific issues, but
this is the first more general debate, and I would like to put on
the record the UK Government position.
The UK remains resolute in its commitment to Israel’s security.
We condemn Hamas’s indiscriminate rocket attacks, and Israel does
have a legitimate right to self-defence, but in exercising that
right, it is vital that all actions are proportionate and in line
with international humanitarian law. The Minister for the Middle
East and North Africa is due to visit Israel and the Occupied
Palestinian Territories in the coming months and is eager to
discuss these important issues with his Israeli and Palestinian
counterparts.
The hon. Member for Edinburgh East () asked about the UK’s views
on trading with the settlements. The UK does not recognise the
Occupied Palestinian Territories, including Israeli settlements,
as part of Israel, so, for example, goods imported from the
settlements are not permitted to benefit from trade preferences
under the UK-Israel trade and partnership agreement.
A number of Members mentioned the humanitarian situation. The
underlying causes of humanitarian crisis and economic decline in
the Occupied Palestinian Territories must be addressed to improve
the lives of Palestinians throughout the west bank, Gaza and East
Jerusalem and preserve the prospect of a negotiated two-state
solution.
The UK remains a key development actor in the region. Our
economic development programme aims to lift the overall standard
of living for Palestinians, to increase trade and job creation,
to enable greater movement and access for people and goods, and
to enhance the supply of electricity and clean water. However, we
remain concerned about the ongoing humanitarian situation in the
Occupied Palestinian Territories, which was further exacerbated
by the recent conflict and damage to civilian infrastructure. The
UK will continue to work to address immediate humanitarian needs
in Gaza, and to work towards a longer-term solution for recovery
and reconstruction.
The Opposition spokesman asked about our commitment to UNRWA. Our
contribution to UNRWA is helping to provide basic education,
access to health services for Palestinian refugees and social
safety net assistance—
Will the Minister give way?
I also point out to the Opposition spokesman that the UK
contributed £3.5 million to the emergency appeal in May to meet
the immediate needs of Palestinians in Gaza who were affected by
the conflict at that time. And I also want to point out to him
that, as the Chancellor set out in the Budget just last month, we
are committed to returning to spending 0.7% on overseas aid as
soon as the fiscal situation allows.
When?
The Chancellor set that out, in detail, in the Budget last month,
and took everyone through the protections. [Interruption.] It is
on the record from the Chancellor in his Budget speech.
We also urge access into and out of Gaza, in accordance with
international humanitarian law, for humanitarian actors,
reconstruction materials and those, including Palestinians,
travelling for medical purposes. We remain in close contact with
UN agencies and key partners on the ground in order to assess the
situation, and we will monitor that situation closely.
rose—
As we have three minutes left, I will give way, rather than being
heckled unnecessarily.
The Minister is so generous. Can I return her to the point that
she originally made about the designation by the Israelis of six
non-governmental organisations? It has to be said that they are
highly respected organisations. She said that she was waiting for
more information. How long will she wait before she makes a
decision about whether or not the designation is correct?
With due respect, I think that really the most important thing is
that right now—today—Israel and Palestine are talking, and
talking about their future and moving towards peace. We believe,
and we make it very clear to Israel, that human rights and civil
society organisations have a vital role to play in developing
thriving and open societies, and we support them. However, it is
important that we continue to make it clear that a strong and
vibrant civil society is in Israel’s own interest. We are
concerned, and we have made that concern clear, about any
developments that would undermine that commitment to being an
open society. Israel is a fellow democracy, it has had a
long-standing commitment to democracy and we make it clear that
civil society has a vital role to play in open democracy.
rose—
To conclude, this occupation will not end and peace will not be
achieved by symbolic measures. Peace will only be achieved by
real movement towards renewed dialogue between the parties that
leads to a viable Palestinian state living in peace and security,
side by side with Israel—
On a point of order, Ms Rees. I find it quite remarkable that,
given how much time was left, the Minister was first reluctant to
give way to our Front-Bench spokesman, which is very
discourteous, and in fact wanted to talk the debate out before I
could make an intervention. She had already finished her speech
earlier.
(in the Chair)
The hon. Gentleman has got his comments are on the record.
Minister.
With respect, I had not finished my speech, and it is important
that the Government make their point. I have accepted
interventions and I would have liked to give the hon. Member for
Birmingham, Hall Green, who secured this debate, a minute in
which to respond.
The most important message that I want to give is that we urge
all parties to continue this dialogue, because that is the
pathway to peace and the two countries—the two parties—being able
to live side by side.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered the matter of a roadmap to peace
in Palestine.
|
