Extracts from
FCDO questions (Commons)
Gaza
(Sheffield South East)
(Lab)
1. What recent diplomatic steps he has taken to help secure a
sustainable ceasefire in Gaza.(901233)
(Caithness, Sutherland and
Easter Ross) (LD)
14. What diplomatic steps he is taking to help end the conflict
in Israel and
Gaza.(901246)
(Bolton South East)
(Lab)
21. What recent discussions he has had with his counterpart
in Israel on the number of
civilian deaths in Gaza.(901254)
(Sheffield Central)
(Lab)
24. What recent diplomatic steps he has taken to help secure a
sustainable ceasefire in Gaza.(901257)
The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development
Office ( )
We are calling for an immediate humanitarian pause, in order to
get aid in and hostages out as a vital step towards a
sustainable, permanent ceasefire.
Mr Betts
That is all very well, but the problem is that Netanyahu and the
Israeli Government are simply ignoring all the pleas for
restraint—those pleas have become empty words. What will the
Government do to put real pressure on the Israelis to stop the
unacceptable killings, enter into negotiations for a permanent
ceasefire and stop the threats to permanently annex and occupy
Gaza? Has the time come to stop selling to Israel arms that are
being used to raze Gaza to the ground?
Mr Mitchell
As I told the House yesterday, the Foreign Secretary is in the
region today and will pursue the vital policies that the hon.
Gentleman has set out. The hon. Gentleman will know that it is an
absolute priority for Britain to ensure that more aid gets in,
but the Israeli Government have the right of self-defence and, as
the UK Government continually make clear, they must exercise that
right within international humanitarian law.
Like many other Members, I am sure, I have received an
extraordinary number of emails from constituents who are deeply
concerned about what is going on—these are people who would never
normally get in touch with their MP. We must stop the killing. My
party and I believe that an immediate bilateral ceasefire is the
way forward. What steps are the Government taking with partners
in the region and around the world to achieve that end?
Mr Mitchell
All of us want a ceasefire, but it must be sustainable. That is
why the British Government are bent on ensuring that we get a
humanitarian pause so that we can get far more supplies into
Gaza, and, on the back of that, a sustainable ceasefire. As I
said in answer to the hon. Member for Sheffield South East (Mr
Betts), we need a pause in order to get aid and support in and
the hostages out.
According to the UN World Food Programme, over half a million
Palestinians in Gaza are starving. A famine is imminent.
Allegations against 12 United Nations Relief and Works Agency
staff are rightly being investigated, but cutting aid to UNRWA
entirely is disproportionate and punitive. Has the Minister even
considered the consequences of those cuts on women, babies and
the seriously injured, and does he understand that they would
breach the measures issued by the International Court of Justice
to ensure that aid flows into Gaza?
Mr Mitchell
As I have set out to the House repeatedly, we are doing
everything we can, along with others, to ensure that vital
supplies get into Gaza, for the very reasons that the hon. Lady
sets out. On UNRWA, it would be impossible for any of us to
continue business as usual, given the appalling events outlined
over the weekend. That is why we have made it clear that we will
not produce further finance until we are satisfied that those
matters have been addressed. With regard to what we are seeking
to do through UNRWA now, we have provided additional funding in
the past, and that will ensure that aid and vital supplies get
into Gaza.
The Government have consistently repeated their commitment to a
two-state solution, and that is right, but for 30
years Israel has deliberately
undermined that through the settlement of the west bank, in
contravention of international law. Now Netanyahu has come clean
and ruled out a two-state solution, so does the Minister agree
that, if the UK’s policy is to be seen as anything more than
empty words, we need to demonstrate our commitment to a viable
Palestinian state by recognising it and by upgrading current
Government advice against trade with the illegal settlements to a
full embargo?
Mr Mitchell
The Government’s position on the issue of illegal settlements is
absolutely clear. In respect of the two-state solution, I would
point out to the hon. Gentleman that progress has been made
previously, in particular after grievous acts of terrible
conflict and terrorism; that is when the big leaps forward
towards a resolution of this desperate problem have been made. We
hope that on the back of the horrendous events that have taken
place on 7 October and since, additional progress can be made as
soon as the political track can be restarted.
Sir (Northampton North) (Con)
The Palestinian Authority’s grip on security control across the
west bank has been pushed out by the malevolent forces of Hamas,
Palestinian Islamic Jihad and local terror groups funded by Iran.
Is it not the case that unilateral recognition of a Palestinian
state now would risk equipping those dangerous actors with the
trimmings and capabilities of a state?
Mr Mitchell
The British Government have always been clear that we intend to
recognise a Palestinian state when the timing is right. My right
hon. and learned Friend will have heard the comments that the
Foreign Secretary made last night, which in no way deviate from
that policy; the Foreign Secretary is pointing out how important
it is to ensure that people can see that when a political track
gets going, real progress can be made.
(North West Hampshire) (Con)
If we cannot have a ceasefire, a humanitarian pause would of
course be very welcome, but it will only be of any use if we can
get the aid that is so urgently required into Gaza. What are the
Government doing to overcome what the Foreign Secretary has
described as the “ludicrous” checking regime put in place by the
Israelis, and what more can we do to stop or avoid crowds of
Israelis from gathering at crossings into Gaza, aiming to prevent
aid from entering, and so obviate a famine?
Mr Mitchell
On my right hon. Friend’s second point, I can assure him that we
are in regular touch with all the relevant authorities to try to
ensure that does not hinder the entry of aid. On his first point,
we should all be aware that the issue is not that there is not
enough aid in the region, but that it is not getting in. That is
why the Government, under the Prime Minister’s specific
instruction, have been investigating how to get aid in through
all means, including from the sea and from a naval corridor.
(Chipping Barnet)
(Con)
It is really disturbing that BBC Online is reporting that the
Foreign Secretary has changed the UK Government’s approach on
recognition of a Palestinian state. Does the Minister agree that
bringing forward and accelerating unilateral recognition of a
Palestinian state would be to reward Hamas’s atrocity?
Mr Mitchell
My right hon. Friend will be aware that there is no question of
rewarding Hamas for the appalling acts they perpetrated in a
pogrom on 7 October. The point that the Foreign Secretary has
been making is that we must give the people of the west bank and
Gaza a credible route to a Palestinian state and a new future,
but we must do so when the time is right.
Mr Speaker
I call the shadow Minister.
(Wigan) (Lab)
The Minister will know that there is rising anger in the region
about the desperate situation in Gaza, which makes a ceasefire
much harder to achieve. More people are now dying of hunger and
thirst than from bombs and bullets. He said yesterday that the UK
is pausing funding to UNRWA, not cutting it, but given its
critical role, will he reassure us that nothing will disrupt the
supply of aid—not just into Gaza, but through Gaza—now and in the
months ahead? He is right that these are serious allegations and
we should be robust about how UK aid money is spent, but it would
be unconscionable if we allowed anything to stand in the way of
UK aid reaching those children right now. Will he promise that
the UK will move heaven and earth to get that aid to them?
Mr Mitchell
The shadow Minister for development is absolutely right about the
balance that has to be struck. Of course, we need to investigate
rapidly the very serious allegations that have been made against
UNRWA, but the assets we use for getting aid and support into
Gaza depend on the assets that UNRWA owns—warehouses, vehicles
and the other distribution mechanisms. As such, we need that
inquiry to be completed as rapidly as possible. In the meanwhile,
Britain was not intending to give any further support to UNRWA in
this financial year; in the next financial year we will consider
the position in precisely the way the shadow Minister sets out.
Palestinian State: Recognition
(Livingston) (SNP)
3. What recent discussions he has had with his Israeli
counterpart on Israel’s political objectives in Gaza.(901235)
(Bradford West) (Lab)
6. What plans the Government have to recognise a Palestinian
state.(901238)
(Glasgow East) (SNP)
11. What recent assessment he has made of the potential merits of
the recognition of a Palestinian state.(901243)
(Dundee West) (SNP)
13. What recent assessment he has made of the potential merits of
the recognition of a Palestinian state.(901245)
The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development
Office ( )
We are clear that for a peaceful solution to this conflict there
must be a political horizon towards a two-state solution. Britain
will recognise a Palestinian state at a time when it best serves
the objective of peace. Bilateral recognition alone cannot end
the occupation.
Given the evidence of war crimes and crimes against humanity
committed by Israel and now
recognition by the International Court of Justice of the risk of
genocide being committed by Israel have the
UK Government sought to ascertain what the Israeli military
objective is in Gaza, and does the Minister agree with the motion
tabled by the Scottish National party at the Council of Europe
last week, supported by nine nations and 20 members, that an
immediate ceasefire and a resettlement scheme for those bombed
out of Gaza by Israel are absolutely
essential?
Mr Mitchell
I have not seen the motion tabled by the SNP—and I probably would
not agree with it if I had. We are always focused on addressing
the points that the hon. Lady has made. When it comes to the
International Court of Justice, and indeed international
humanitarian law, the Government’s view is not the same as hers,
but she may rest assured that we keep these things under very
close review.
There is now a live ongoing investigation by the ICJ into
genocide in Gaza. Given the British Government’s reluctance thus
far to recognise the state of Palestine, does the Minister not
understand that failure to do so will soon result in the UK
Government just recognising a cemetery?
Mr Mitchell
The Government’s position—and indeed, I believe, the position of
those on the Opposition Front Bench—has always been clear: we
should recognise the state of Palestine when the time is right.
The Foreign Secretary last night added some further words to that
commitment, but that is the commitment of the British
Government.
Last night the Foreign Secretary indicated that the UK Government
will consider recognising the Palestinian state in order
“to give the Palestinian people a political horizon so that they
can see that there is going to be irreversible progress to a
two-state solution”.
Can the Minister explain how that is possible when both the
Israeli National Security Minister and the Finance Minister have
advocated using the ongoing war as an opportunity to permanently
resettle Palestinians from Gaza and establish Israeli settlements
there, and the Israeli Prime Minister has openly said he is proud
to have prevented the establishment of a Palestinian state?
Mr Mitchell
The Foreign Secretary was making it clear that we need a credible
route to a Palestinian state and the offer of a new future. It is
very important to lift people’s eyes to the possibilities once a
political track is established. I point out to the hon. Gentleman
that progress has been made. Progress that was made at Oslo took
place on the back of appalling events when people reached for a
political solution. The same is true of what followed the second
intifada. The aim of the British Government is to get a
sustainable ceasefire and move to that political track.
(Preseli Pembrokeshire)
(Con)
My right hon. Friend’s comments about a big leap forward are
noble—I recognise that—but as long as Hamas, who believe not in a
two-state solution but in killing and raping Jews, cling on in
Gaza; as Fatah is barely able to control the west bank; and
as Israel is still in
trauma, still trying to get 130 hostages, including babies, back
from Gaza, what does he think that talk about early recognition
of Palestinian statehood can achieve?
Mr Mitchell
I recognise the voracity of what my right hon. Friend says, but
there is no change in the policy. He is right that Hamas must
agree to the release of all hostages, that Hamas can no longer be
in charge of Gaza, and that we need an agreement to provide
governance, service and security there, which will involve the
Palestinian Authority. The Foreign Secretary, in his meetings
with President Abbas last week, sought to advance that
agenda.
(Meon Valley) (Con)
On Sunday, a third of Knesset Members attended a conference
calling for the return of settlements to Gaza and to the north of
the occupied west bank. Some of those Members have also asked for
a voluntary migration of Palestinians from Gaza,
with Israel taking over
control. Does the Minister agree that that is not in the best
interests of Israel and that there
should be a return to the pre-1967 borders, with both countries
working together to maintain peace in the interests of their
citizens?
Mr Mitchell
Yes, I do. The only viable long-term pathway is a two-state
solution based on 1967 lines, with Jerusalem as a shared capital,
that guarantees security and stability for both Israelis and
Palestinians.
(Buckingham) (Con)
Surely the only political objective in Gaza is inextricably
linked to the security objectives, because the grim reality is
that Hamas do not seek a ceasefire, and Israel cannot be
reasonably expected to pursue one with a group who actively seek
its destruction, not least the commitment made by a senior Hamas
official, Ghazi Hamad, who recently said:
“We must teach Israel a lesson, and we
will do this again and again”,
and that the 7 October massacre was
“just the first time, and there will be a second, a third, a
fourth.”
The only political solution must be the elimination of Hamas and
the release of the hostages.
Mr Mitchell
That is why the Government have made it clear that calls for a
ceasefire on its own will simply not work. First, Israel absolutely has
the right of self-defence, to address and deal with the cause of
the terrible events of 7 October. Secondly, Hamas have made it
absolutely clear that they do not want a ceasefire; they want to
replicate the events that took place on 7 October.
Mr Speaker
I call the shadow Foreign Secretary.
(Tottenham) (Lab)
For a decade now, the Labour party has supported Palestinian
recognition. As my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for
Holborn and St Pancras () has said,
“statehood is not in the gift of a neighbour. It is the
inalienable right of the Palestinian people.”
I welcome the Foreign Secretary adopting that position and
rejecting the notion that recognition can only follow the
conclusion of negotiations. After the unacceptable comments by
Prime Minister Netanyahu, does the Prime Minister agree that no
country has a veto over the UK’s decision to recognise
Palestine?
Mr Mitchell
I can tell the shadow Foreign Secretary that we will pursue the
policy that we think is right. The Foreign Secretary set out
clearly in his remarks last night the importance of a credible
route to a Palestinian state and a new future. In respect of the
conversations that the Foreign Secretary will have had last week
with Prime Minister Netanyahu, I cannot trade the details across
the House, but I can tell the right hon. Gentleman that the
Foreign Secretary will have represented the British position with
Prime Minister Netanyahu, whom he knows very well, with great
accuracy.
Mr Speaker
I call the SNP spokesperson.
Brendan O'Hara (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Palestinian recognition is an inalienable right, not a privilege
to be conferred by others. Although I was pleased to hear the
Foreign Secretary say last night that the UK,
“with allies, will look at the issue of recognising a Palestinian
state”,
I feel we have been here before, most notably in 2014. Given
Netanyahu’s categorical rejection of a Palestinian state, what
are the next steps? When will we hear about them, and how
confident can we be that we will not be sitting here in another
10 years, wishing we had acted to prevent a genocide?
Mr Mitchell
It is not easy to sustain the view that we have been here
before—at least not to this extent. The British Government’s
policy has been clear on the recognition of the state of
Palestine. We are working extremely hard in the region and more
widely internationally to secure a political track. The hon.
Gentleman will recognise that that will be in the mix once that
political track is able to start.
Middle East: Conflict Prevention
(Stockton North) (Lab)
7. What recent steps he has taken to help prevent an escalation
of conflict in the middle east. (901239)
The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development
Office ( )
The Government are engaging extensively to prevent an escalation
of conflict in the middle east. The Prime Minister spoke to
President Biden last week about that specific issue.
I think we can all understand the anger towards Israel for the way it
is systematically demolishing Gaza and needlessly killing so many
of the people, as well as the need for it to be properly held to
account. Does the Minister recognise that we must do everything
to protect against others joining the conflict, and that
activities such as those against the Houthis must also be
proportionate and accompanied by more diplomatic work across the
region to stop wholesale killing?
Mr Mitchell
The hon. Gentleman is right to make clear that all of us seek
that there should not be an escalation of this conflict in the
middle east. That is why right at the start Britain moved
military assets to the eastern end of the Mediterranean. More
recently, as he alluded to, we are expressing strong support for
freedom of navigation on the high seas, stopping attacks by the
Houthis. We are degrading their capacity to carry out their
attacks, and have made clear that we will not accept that
challenge to international freedom of the sea.
(Gainsborough) (Con)
One problem with the middle east is the sense of hopelessness
among the Palestinian people, which is fuelling terrorist
outrages. What steps can the Government take with our American
friends to try to put pressure on the Israeli state to stop the
imposition of new settlements in the west bank, so that we can
gradually reduce tensions in the whole region? Is that not the
way forward?
Mr Mitchell
We have made it clear that the settlements are illegal and should
not have gone ahead and should not go ahead. On the wider point,
we are working closely with our American friends and others
through the superb diplomatic network that Britain possesses, to
try to lift people’s eyes and move to the day after, when a
political track can start. That is the answer to my right hon.
Friend’s question—the political track, which can then start to
offer hope in resolving this dreadful and long-standing
problem.
Mr Speaker
I call the shadow Minister.
(Caerphilly) (Lab)
Today the middle east is in danger of seeing a major escalation
of conflict, and whether it is in Gaza, the Red sea, Lebanon,
Iraq, Syria or Jordan, we are seeing aggression. If there is a
common denominator in those conflicts, it is the malign influence
of Iran, usually through its proxies. What are the Government
doing to disrupt and stop the disruptive activities of Iran?
Mr Mitchell
My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary had a meeting recently
with the Iranian Foreign Minister to set out Britain’s view of
and requirements from the relationship with Iran, and I think
that was a most useful contact to have. The Foreign Secretary is
in the region today, trying to ensure that the very points behind
this question are accepted and honoured. We are working
extensively with Jordan, Egypt, Qatar, Israel
Saudi Arabia and America. Those discussions are ongoing, and will
address the point that the hon. Gentleman has raised.
Iran and Pakistan
(Carmarthen East and
Dinefwr) (Ind)
9. What recent discussions he has had with his international
counterparts on the state of relations between Iran and Pakistan.
(901241)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign,
Commonwealth and Development Affairs ()
The Foreign Secretary has made it clear to his Iranian
counterpart that Iran must stop using regional instability as
cover to act recklessly. He and Lord Ahmad have also underlined
to Pakistan’s Foreign Minister the importance of avoiding further
escalation. We welcome Iran and Pakistan’s subsequent commitment
to dialogue in a joint statement released on 22 January,
confirming that ambassadors will return to post, and we continue
to monitor the situation.
As the Minister said, diplomatic efforts have eased tensions
following the exchange of missiles earlier this month. However,
the Minister will be aware that, over the weekend, Iranian gunmen
murdered nine Pakistanis in the Iranian city of Saravan. The fact
that both countries have launched air strikes against each other
indicates how fragile the situation is in the middle east, and
how interconnected acts of war and violence are across the whole
region. How will the British Government ensure that their own
actions do not escalate tensions?
As I said, Iran must stop using regional instability as cover to
carry out its reckless acts. We recognise that it bears
responsibility for any further escalation, and we are looking at
all the tools that we have to bear down on the Iranian regime,
including sanctions.
Topical
Questions
(Liverpool, West Derby) (Lab):
The United Nations special rapporteur on the right to food,
Michael Fakhri, said at the weekend that more than 2 million
people in Gaza were facing “inevitable famine”. Now that the
Government have opted to halt funding to the UN Relief and Works
Agency for Palestine Refugees, how do they intend to ensure that
the urgently needed humanitarian aid—as called for in the
International Court of Justice ruling last week and which was
central to the ruling—will continue to be delivered to the
innocent men, women and children in Gaza, who must have a right
to food?
Mr Mitchell
As I set out, the Government’s highest immediate priority is to
ensure that aid and humanitarian support get into Gaza. We are
relentlessly pursuing that objective. I have set out where we are
on UNRWA, but there is no immediate effect on the food that it
seeks to deliver in Gaza today.
(Linlithgow and East Falkirk)
(SNP)
T3. Tensions are soaring across the middle east after Washington
vowed to respond to the drone attack by Iran-backed militants
that killed three American soldiers. Does the Minister share my
concern that we may be dragged into another regional war at the
Americans’ demand?(901261)
Mr Mitchell
The American Government and the British Government have made it
absolutely clear that they do not wish to see this conflict
escalate more widely. Equally, the hon. Gentleman will accept
that no country can accept with equanimity the appalling deaths
of those American soldiers.
(Kilmarnock and Loudoun)
(SNP)
T5. The decision to pull funding from UNRWA, the United Nations
Relief and Works Agency, the day after the International Court of
Justice called for increased aid to get into Gaza has been
branded reckless by 21 aid agencies, including Oxfam. What
assessment have the Government made of the number of additional
Palestinians now at risk of death from disease or starvation as a
result of pulling that funding?(901263)
Mr Mitchell
The Government have been very clear about the position with
UNRWA. We cannot overlook the appalling events that have been
reported, but we are seeking to ensure that they are properly
investigated. Britain has no additional funding plans for this
financial year. We have already funded UNRWA, as have others, so
I have no doubt that UNRWA’s support, getting food to those who
desperately need it, will continue, but we cannot ignore the
information that was brought to our attention.
(Buckingham) (Con)
As new heartbreaking testimonies of Hamas’s use of sexual
violence and rape come to light from survivors of the 7 October
attack, what assessment has my right hon. Friend made of the
silence of many international organisations, such as the
International Red Cross, on that appalling issue?
Mr Mitchell
I hope that my hon. Friend will draw strength and satisfaction
from the fact that the British Government are not silent on that
very important matter.
(City of Durham) (Lab)
As the death toll rises in Gaza, so does the misery of women and
girls in the occupied territories. I am increasingly concerned
that aid is not getting to them. The United Nations says that
there is a chronic aid access problem, and that women are having
caesarean sections without anaesthetic. What is going on? Is the
aid not getting to them? What steps is the Department taking to
ensure that it does?
Mr Mitchell
Tackling this is Britain’s central aim; the aim is to get
humanitarian aid into Gaza, but also to ensure that there is a
plan on the west bank to take forward a political initiative.
Everything that we are doing is bent on trying to get the aid
that is in the region through the narrow entrances into Gaza. We
will continue to do that.
(Edinburgh East) (SNP)
The Minister has said several times in the last few days that the
Government’s decision to suspend funding for UNRWA should not
affect that agency’s ability to deliver immediate aid in the
region. If it transpires in the days and weeks ahead that the
opposite is the case and the agency is being compromised, will
the Government immediately review their decision?
Mr Mitchell
Yesterday, I spoke to the head of UNRWA, Philippe Lazzarini. I
made the point that it is essential that his review—which of
course he is not conducting; the UN is conducting it—is completed
as fast as possible for the reasons the hon. Gentleman set out. I
am reasonably confident that it can be conducted within the next
two months, and the British Government are watching this
carefully.
(Hammersmith) (Lab)
I have 10 and 11-year-old constituents—British citizens—who are
stuck in the Israeli fire zone in southern Lebanon. The Foreign
Office is urging them to return to the UK, but as their mother is
not a British citizen, the Home Office is preventing that. Will
the Minister help me to persuade the Home Office to relent on
this issue?
Mr Mitchell
I am happy to look at the case that the hon. Gentleman raises
immediately after Question Time, if that is convenient to him.
The Foreign Secretary is in the region today, not far away from
the country that the hon. Gentleman mentions, and I am sure that
we will be able to advance the talks that are going on.
Petition
Ceasefire and the State of Palestine
(Glasgow North) (SNP)
This petition, on behalf of the residents of Glasgow North, was
drafted before the ruling of the International Court of Justice
and the decision of the UK Government to cut funding to that
United Nations Relief and Works Agency, but that makes the
petition calling for an end to the collective punishment of the
Palestinian people, the urgent release of all hostages and an end
to the siege of Gaza to allow vital supplies of food, fuel,
medicine and water to reach civilian populations all the more
urgent.
The petition also recognises the resolution of the House on 13
October 2014, calling on the UK Government to recognise the state
of Palestine, alongside the state of Israel
The petition states:
“The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons
urges the Government to join with others in the international
community in urgently pressing all parties to agree to an
immediate ceasefire, and to call on the UK Government to
recognise the state of Palestine alongside the state
of Israel
And the petitioners remain, etc.”
Following is the full text of the petition:
[The petition of residents of the constituency of Glasgow
North,
Declares that the attacks by Hamas on Israel on
7th October 2023 were acts of terror, and unequivocally condemns
the taking of hostages and the loss of innocent lives in those
attacks; further that the petitioners condemn the
disproportionate response of the Israel Defence
Forces, and affirms that there must be an end to the collective
punishment of the Palestinian people; further declares for the
urgent release of all hostages and an end to the siege of Gaza to
allow vital supplies of food, fuel, medicine and water to reach
the civilian population; further declares support for the calls
by the United Nations and many other international actors for an
immediate ceasefire on all sides of the conflict and supports the
global consensus in support of a two-state solution with a
sovereign, prosperous Palestinian state, living side by side with
a safe and secure Israel and notes the
resolution of the House of Commons on 13th October 2014 calling
on the UK Government to recognise the state of Palestine
alongside the state of Israel
The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges
the Government to join with others in the international community
in urgently pressing all parties to agree to an immediate
ceasefire, and to call on the UK Government to recognise the
state of Palestine alongside the state of Israel
And the petitioners remain, etc.]
Lords repeat of
Commons statement (Jan 29) on Situation in Israel and the Occupied
Palestinian Territories
The following Statement was made in the House of Commons on
Monday 29 January.
“With permission, I will update the House on the situation
in Israel and Gaza.
Last week, my noble friend the Foreign Secretary visited the
region as part of sustained British efforts to end the fighting
and build towards a lasting solution. This statement will also
cover the International Court of Justice’s decision on
provisional measures, and the appalling allegations against the
United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees. As
we debate these events, I know the whole House shares my horror
at the heart-wrenching impact of this conflict.
One hundred and fourteen days on from Hamas’s barbaric attacks,
they still hold more than 130 hostages. Innocent Palestinians are
suffering, with over 25,000 people having died, and hunger and
disease spreading. The Government’s end goal is clear: Israelis
should be able to live without fear of Hamas terrorism, and
Gazans should be able to rebuild their lives.
My right honourable friend the Prime Minister has led our
engagement in the region and with partners to achieve that goal.
Last week, he spoke to President Biden and met families of
hostages, while my noble friend Lord Ahmad joined a Security
Council debate in New York. The Foreign Secretary
visited Israel the Occupied
Palestinian Territories, Qatar and Turkey, meeting leaders,
Ministers, and other hostage families. The Foreign Secretary
called for an immediate pause to get more aid in and to get
hostages out, and for that pause to turn into a sustainable,
permanent ceasefire, without a return to fighting.
The British Government have identified five vital steps for that
to happen: a political horizon that provides a credible and
irreversible pathway towards a two-state solution; forming a new
Palestinian Government for the West Bank and Gaza, accompanied by
an international support package; removing Hamas’s capacity to
launch attacks against Israel the release of
all Israeli hostages; and key Hamas leaders agreeing to leave
Gaza. All those things are intricately linked, and we cannot
secure one without all the others. There are also many other
elements to consider, such as Arab-Israeli normalisation,
security guarantees, and financing the rebuilding of Gaza, but we
need to generate momentum now towards a permanent peace. That is
why pushing for a pause now is so important, and why we need a
Contact Group meeting, bringing together the key players as soon
as possible.
I will now turn to the desperate humanitarian situation. The
Government are focused on practical solutions to get aid into
Gaza. We have trebled our aid to the Occupied Palestinian
Territories since 7 October, committing £60 million this
financial year. In Israel the Foreign
Secretary pressed for changes to allow unhindered humanitarian
access, such as opening more crossing points for longer and
permitting deliveries via Ashdod port. He announced work with
Qatar to get more aid into Gaza, with our joint consignment
containing 17 tonnes of family-sized tents being flown last
Thursday. Earlier this month, Royal Fleet Auxiliary ‘Lyme Bay’
delivered 87 tonnes of aid into Port Said. Crucially, we are
supporting the United Nations World Food Programme to deliver a
new humanitarian land corridor from Jordan into Gaza, which has
already delivered over 1,000 tonnes of aid into Gaza. We know the
desperate plight of civilians caught up in this and the suffering
they are going through, and we will continue to do all we can
with our partners to save lives.
I turn to the ICJ ruling and allegations against UNRWA. Right
honourable and honourable Members will know that we had
considerable concerns about South Africa’s decision to bring this
case. Israel has the right to
defend itself against Hamas, and we do not believe that Israel’s
actions in Gaza can be described as a genocide. Of course, we
respect the role and independence of the ICJ, and the court has
now reached a decision on provisional measures. It called for
increased aid into Gaza, and measures to ensure basic services,
as we have been calling for. It has ordered Israel to preserve
evidence relating to allegations of genocide, reporting to the
court on progress within one month. It has also ordered the
immediate release of all hostages, and reminded all parties to
the conflict that they are bound by international humanitarian
law. Those are points that we have been pressing consistently,
and we will continue to press them after the court’s decision.
For our part, Britain continues to engage closely with the
Israeli Government on the conduct of their military campaign in
Gaza. We have said that they must take greater care to avoid
harming civilians and civilian infrastructure.
Finally, I turn to the very serious allegations about UNRWA first
publicised last week, with further media reporting over the
weekend. The agency is critical to delivering humanitarian
assistance into Gaza and across the region. It plays a
stabilising role at a time when we need focus on de-escalating
tensions. The UK is a long-standing donor to UNRWA, as are our
closest partners, notably the United States. Since 7 October, we
have allocated a further £16 million to it as part of our
response to the crisis. UNRWA’s 13,000 staff in Gaza continue
their working at great personal risk in the most dangerous
circumstances: 152 UNRWA staff members have lost their lives.
The UK is however appalled by allegations that any agency staff
were involved in the 7 October atrocities. We welcome the swift
action that UNRWA has taken to terminate contracts while it
launches an immediate investigation. We and several partners are
temporarily pausing future funding until we have reviewed these
investigations. We continue to fund vital aid delivery through
multiple other partners, including other UN agencies and
international and British non-governmental organisations.
This week, the Government’s engagement continues. The Foreign
Secretary and Lord Ahmad will again travel to the region. I am
travelling to Qatar next week. We will continue to drive progress
towards a lasting solution. As the Government have said, it is
only when the prize of peace is more attractive than the
potential benefit of continued conflict that there will be the
chance of a better future. The time to start is now”.
4.29pm
(Lab)
My Lords, the horrors of recent months in Israel and Gaza have
been intolerable. Millions are displaced, desperate and hungry,
and Israel continues to use
devastating tactics that have seen far too many innocent
civilians killed. With unacceptable blocks on essential aid and
nowhere safe for civilians, there is a humanitarian catastrophe
and, now, warnings of a deadly famine. Meanwhile, Hamas
terrorists continue to hold hostages, hide among civilians, and
fire rockets into Israel
The need for a sustainable ceasefire is clear. The fighting must
stop urgently; we need a humanitarian truce now. A humanitarian
truce leading to a sustainable ceasefire is a necessary step from
which we can begin a bigger push towards a political solution and
a just and lasting peace. A sustainable ceasefire means that
Hamas must release all remaining hostages and end attacks
on Israel and
that Israel must end its
bombing campaign and allow full humanitarian access to Gaza. I
hope the Minister will be able to update the House on the latest
negotiations to secure the hostages’ release and a humanitarian
truce. There must be a new political process to turn the rhetoric
around two states living side by side in peace into a reality.
Israeli and Palestinian leaders must engage with this process as
the only long-term hope of delivering peace and stability.
Last night, the Foreign Secretary, the noble Lord, , said that the United Kingdom
has “a responsibility” to set out what a Palestinian state would
look like. He stressed that the Palestinian people would have to
be shown “irreversible” progress towards a two-state solution,
and that
“as that happens, we with allies will look at the issue of
recognising a Palestinian state, including at the United
Nations”.
This morning, in FCDO Questions, my right honourable friend
welcomed this, arguing that
recognition should not wait for the final status agreement but
should be part of efforts to achieve one. Can the Minister tell
us how we will take this forward at the United Nations, and which
allies will be backing the Foreign Secretary’s call?
The International Court of Justice’s interim ruling under the
genocide convention on the situation in Gaza is a profoundly
serious moment. International law must be upheld, the
international courts must be respected, and all sides must be
accountable for their actions. The ICJ’s interim ruling does not
give a verdict on this case, but it sets out urgent provisional
measures that must be followed. said yesterday that he
welcomed the ICJ’s call for the immediate release of hostages and
the need to get more aid into Gaza, making it clear that an
immediate pause is necessary to get the aid in and the hostages
out. He then stressed that the United Kingdom regularly calls on
Israel
“to uphold its obligations under international humanitarian law,
and … will continue to do so”. —[Official Report, Commons,
29/1/24; col. 623.]
Can the Minister confirm that this included calling
on Israel to comply with
the orders in this ruling in full? Have we made that call?
The allegations that a number of UNRWA employees were involved in
the appalling 7 October terror attacks are truly shocking. Anyone
involved should be held to account in full by law. It is right
that contracts have been terminated and UNRWA has launched an
investigation. However, Gaza is in a humanitarian emergency, and
aid getting in must surge, not stop. UNRWA plays a vital role in
providing life-saving assistance.
Yesterday, said that he had spoken to
Sigrid Kaag, the humanitarian and reconstruction co-ordinator for
Gaza, and that
“she made it clear … that while we have zero tolerance of these
dreadful things that are alleged to have been done, we cannot
operate at zero risks”.
In confirming that the United Kingdom will suspend any future
funding until we have the reports of the investigation, recognised that UNRWA
assets are absolutely
“essential to delivering in Gaza”.—[Official Report, Commons,
29/1/24; col. 628.]
Will the Minister this afternoon outline a clear and fast pathway
for future funding to return, so that aid can get in? We cannot
let innocent Palestinians lose life- saving aid because of the
actions of the Hamas terrorists.
(LD)
My Lords, the noble Lord, , is a respected Minister in
this House and I mean no disrespect to him. However, we are
asking questions on a Statement about the Foreign Secretary’s
activities, in the House that he is a Member of, but repeated by
another Minister, it having been made in the House of Commons.
The Foreign Secretary made a very significant contribution to
this debate, outside this House, to the Conservative Middle East
Council, on which we are also going to be asking questions of
this Minister. I think it would be appropriate for the Foreign
Secretary to be in this House, of which he is a Member, to take
questions on speeches that he makes—especially those which could
make a significant change to policy, and which the noble Lord,
Lord Collins, asked valid questions on. We can now only go on a
speech made at a Conservative Party event and an article in the
Daily Mail in trying to elicit whether the Government’s policy on
the recognition of the state of Palestine has changed.
If it has changed, these Benches will welcome it. We have a
long-standing view on the recognition of the state of Palestine.
My honourable friend has twice now launched her
presentation Bill in the House of Commons, and in it she outlined
what practical steps would be necessary if we were moving towards
recognition. That was first presented before the violence in
October and the Hamas atrocities, but it is even more important
now. I look forward to the Minister outlining very clearly what
the Government’s new approach is regarding what practical steps
they will be taking to bring this about. This House has debated
recognition of the state of Palestine. Is it the Government’s
intention that, in government time, we will be debating this
again? That would be a natural corollary of what the Foreign
Secretary’s speech last night indicated.
With regard to the ICJ, it was regrettable from our perspective
that the Government rather undermined the processes, but it is
welcome that they have accepted what the rulings are: the
recognition of the atrocities committed by Hamas and the
responsibilities now upon Israel Previously, I
have asked the noble Lord, Lord Ahmad, what data and information
the UK Government are collecting from our monitoring, both in the
skies and through other monitoring, with regard to activities.
Will we be participating in the work of the ICJ now, given its
ruling, to ensure that proper information is collated about the
tactics of the Israel Defense Forces
within Gaza? We know, even just today, from BBC Verify, of the
estimate that between 51% and 61% of all buildings in Gaza have
now been destroyed or damaged; that is between 144,000 and
175,000 buildings. It is estimated that 26,000 Palestinians have
been killed, 70% of them being women and children. The need for
adherence to the ruling is incredibly important.
On the UNRWA situation and the very serious allegations, I agree
with the noble Lord that the investigation needs to be expedited
and clear, and that those responsible need to be prosecuted. I
welcome the Minister’s Statement that 13,000 staff are providing
life-saving services for the people within Gaza. As we know,
UNRWA is operating outside Gaza too. Can the Minister clarify
what the UK “pause” means in reality? Have we stopped
co-ordinating on the delivery of aid with UNRWA, given that, in
many areas, it continues to be the only provider of assistance?
Is our pause open-ended, or will it be contingent on whether the
report has been made or any prosecutions carried forward?
Finally, there is now likely to be US retaliation for the attacks
and the deaths of their service personnel. There is likely to be
political change in the Israeli Government, depending on
coalition partners’ response to the latest talks in Paris. This
is a time of great volatility and concern. What role is the UK
playing overall? Is it a leading role, if we are changing our
position on the state of Palestine, to ensure a collective
approach to not just a full bilateral ceasefire, but a regional
partnership for peace, in what may be a very dangerous time
ahead?
The Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs, and Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office () (Con)
I am grateful to both the noble Lords. I agree wholeheartedly
with the analysis of the current situation given by the noble
Lord, Lord Collins. The whole House shares his and my horror at
the impact of this war. It is 115 days since Hamas’s attacks
against the State of Israel Hamas continues
to hold more than 130 hostages, and innocent Palestinians are
suffering, with over 25,000 people killed. Israelis must be able
to live in security and Gazans must be able to rebuild their
lives.
The noble Lord, Lord Collins, asked about the latest
negotiations. The United Kingdom is involved, at the highest
levels, in setting up a contact group with key partners. We are
in the key position of having friends across the region and being
a friend to the State of Israel We are working
closely with everyone. The Prime Minister has spoken to the
President of the United States at length and to a great many
other people. The Foreign Secretary is not here today because he
is travelling to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Oman and Lebanon,
as part of a continued list of engagements in the region which he
has been undertaking since he took his post. I am sure that the
House thinks that is right, because he clearly has to take that
role. I will come on to talk about concerns about recent
comments.
We have called for an immediate pause to get more aid in and
hostages out. We want this pause to turn into a sustainable,
permanent ceasefire, without a return to fighting. We have
identified five steps for this to happen, which answers one of
the crucial questions that both noble Lords asked. A political
horizon will provide a credible and irreversible pathway towards
a two-state solution. We can then form a new Palestinian
Government for the West Bank in Gaza, accompanied by an
international support package. Key to that is removing Hamas’s
capacity to launch attacks against Israel
the release of all Israeli hostages and Hamas leaders agreeing to
leave Gaza.
The noble Lords asked about the ICJ ruling. The United Kingdom is
a firm supporter of the rules-based order and has been for
decades. We respect the ICJ ruling in its entirety. One cannot
pick and mix on this. There is a question about whether it came
at a time when such sensitivities were manifest in the region,
but we absolutely accept this ruling.
My right honourable friend spoke to Philippe
Lazzarini, the head of UNRWA, the day before yesterday. The
inquiry that he announced goes much further than a normal UN
inquiry; it is independent and we must let it take its course. I
share everyone’s view that it is wrong to have people who are
alleged to have been perpetrators of the 7 October attacks in
this organisation. It is right to cease their employment and to
investigate further.
I give the House this clear commitment. First, our contributions
to UNRWA have been made for this financial year and our
commitment to trebling aid to Gaza still stands. The UK is
providing £60 million in humanitarian assistance to support other
partners, including the British Red Cross, UNICEF, the UN World
Food Programme and the Egyptian Red Crescent Society, in order to
respond to the critical food, fuel, water, health, shelter and
security needs in Gaza.
We will continue our support for the United Nations World Food
Programme to deliver a new humanitarian land corridor from Jordan
into Gaza. Some 750 tonnes of life-saving food aid arrived in the
first delivery in December. The second delivery of 315 tonnes was
made earlier this year. We will continue to support the Red
Crescent Society, with which we have a long-standing, trusted
relationship, to make sure that this happens. But for this to
happen, we need to see border crossings open on a more sustained
basis. We are calling for the Ashdod port to be opened as a route
for aid to reach Gaza, and to extend the opening hours and the
capacity of the Nitzana screening facility and the Kerem Shalom
checkpoint so that more trucks, aid and fuel can enter Gaza. This
requires the Kerem Shalom crossing to be open seven days a week.
My noble friend has raised this at the highest
levels in Israel
I cannot give the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, a complete answer
today to his question about data collection. There is a variety
of different sources—some open, and some requiring other forms of
data. We are monitoring what is going on, and we are concerned
about the scale of the tragic loss of life. We want to make sure
that we are encouraging Israel to defend its
borders, as it has the absolute right to do, but to do so
proportionately.
The US retaliation against the attack on its base in Jordan is
obviously an indication of the complexity of the problems right
across the region. We are in close touch with the United States
about this. We are deeply mindful of the 2,500 British personnel
in the region, and we want to make sure that they are safe and
that their families are assured that they are safe. Any response
must, first of all, give a clear indication to Iran and its
proxies that they cannot operate in this way. We are also mindful
that we need to move this whole region towards a more peaceful
and stable future.
4.47pm
(CB)
My Lords, does the Minister accept that there was a very warm
reaction to the reports of what the Foreign Secretary said to the
Conservative Middle East Council dinner? Does this not show that
the old approach to a two-state solution—whereby Palestine is
recognised as a state and Israel is fully
recognised by the Arabs at the end of the process—is not going to
work? This is a very difficult issue. What is probably needed is
a process which, from the start, makes it clear that Arab
participants should recognise Israel and that
all of us, including Israel should
recognise Palestine as a state. This is the only viable
outcome.
Do the Government share the view of the US Secretary of State,
who said that UNRWA’s ability to provide and distribute various
forms of aid in Gaza was “absolutely indispensable”? This is
surely covered by the ruling of the International Court of
Justice that all must do their best to increase the flow of aid
into Gaza—including UNRWA, even though what some of its employees
have been accused of is quite horrible and must be punished
following an inquiry.
(Con)
The noble Lord understands more than any of us how sensitive this
time and the surrounding negotiations are. It is absolutely clear
that Gaza and the West Bank are occupied Palestinian territory
and will be part of a future Palestinian state. We support a
two-state solution that guarantees security and stability for
both the Israeli and the Palestinian people. Recently, I read a
most interesting quote from former Mossad director, Meir Dagan.
Commenting on the two-state solution, he said:
“We have no other way. Not because the Palestinians are my top
priority but because I am concerned about Israel’s well-being and
I want to do what I can to ensure Israel’s existence.”
That shows a real depth of understanding of the importance of
working towards that conclusion.
On the noble Lord’s point about UNRWA, we are not alone in having
paused our financial support for UNRWA. The United States,
Germany, Australia, Italy, Canada, Finland, Switzerland and the
Netherlands have all temporarily paused funding. I gave a list of
other organisations that we are using. The noble Lord is
absolutely right that UNRWA has the facilities on the ground and
many thousands of people working in and around Gaza who have the
ability to get food, fuel and all other humanitarian items to the
people of Gaza. We want to be back working with it when this
inquiry has worked out who precisely was involved in the attacks
to get back international confidence in it as an organisation to
deliver aid.
of Tredegar (Con)
My Lords, we have been having discussions about the process which
will lead to peace, but we need to start the process. In order to
start the process, do we not need to recognise two things? First,
the world of 8 October is a fundamentally different world from
the world of 6 October. Secondly, Israel is a
democracy, unlike Hamas in Gaza or the Palestinian Authority in
the West Bank. That means that if we are going to be realistic
about encouraging Israel to start that
process, we need to recognise that, even today, well over 100 of
its citizens are still being held hostage. I know the Minister
has personally made significant efforts to meet hostage families
and to work on that issue. If we are going to start a process to
peace in the Middle East, which I would welcome as I have worked
on it for as long as I can, we need to face basic political
realities. Unless and until those hostages are released, the
process will not begin. If we want to see peace in the Middle
East after that conflict, the first step must be to get the
hostages released. Does my noble friend agree?
(Con)
I certainly do. That is the first step in a road out of this
sorry saga that we all want to see achieved. I cannot
imagine—well, I can imagine what it is like for the families,
because on two occasions I have met them, and I am due to meet
some more this week. Noble Lords can understand the emotion. When
you meet them, it is absolutely a searing realisation of the true
brutality of those events and the continuous misery for those
families, including the parents of a child who is around one year
old. You can only imagine what they feel about that.
On my noble friend’s point about democracy, he is absolutely
right. As we can see daily in our newspapers, Israel is a vibrant
democracy. There are future changes perhaps—we do not know—but we
will support whoever is the legitimate Government
of Israel to help to find
a solution to this. My noble friend is also right that it has
been 18 years, I think, since free and fair elections, or
elections, have taken place in Gaza. The Hamas controlling body
has no democratic authority. We want to make sure that the future
of Gaza does not have Hamas anywhere in it.
(Lab)
My Lords, while welcoming much of what the Minister has said,
will he tell the House what steps the Government are taking to
ensure that the Israeli Government actually respond to the
request that the UK Government and the Foreign Secretary are now
making about an immediate cessation of hostilities to allow for
more aid to get in, for hostages to get out and above all for the
slaughter to stop with a view to turning this into a permanent
sustainable ceasefire, which is demanded by more and more
countries and by public opinion in this country? Has the time not
come for the UK to cease trading in arms with Israel while it
continues to kill thousands of civilians, as we have heard, 70%
of whom are women and children, which my noble friend Lord
Collins has described from the Front Bench as a humanitarian
disaster?
(Con)
We are very concerned with the immediate days—hours, even—of this
emerging saga. Whatever any Minister says at any Dispatch Box is
very often out of date by the time he or she sits down. First of
all, we absolutely accept that Israel has the
right to defend itself against the vile terrorism that it
suffered on 7 October. We have very strict rules in this country
and fantastic oversight, in this place and beyond, of our arms
trading arrangements. Any Government should apply those
oversights to it, and we do. But it is absolutely vital that we
concentrate on the immediate problem, which is getting those
hostages released. I pay tribute to the Government of Qatar for
their support and great expertise in achieving this. Those who
have been involved in the Northern Ireland issue over the years
know how galling it is when you see people that you know have
done terrible things being swapped for victims of terrorism who
have done no wrong. But it does require an enormous amount of
courage and determination to make sure that we can get these
hostages out and move forward to sustainable, lasting peace.
(LD)
My Lords, I thank the Minister for his remarks. I also pay
tribute to workers in Gaza, particularly, and in the West Bank,
many of whom are risking their own lives to provide support and
medical help for the victims of the bombardments. Does the
Minister appreciate that UNRWA apparently does not have enough
money to see it through February, to provide aid in Gaza and in
the West Bank? Will he look into, or have the Government looked
into, the fact that medical facilities for victims are being
denied and systematically destroyed, according to the reports
coming to us from Medical Aid for Palestinians? What are the
Government going to do to ensure that all the victims have access
to the medical support and the help that international law says
they should?
(Con)
It is crucial to get the right amount of medical aid and food,
and all the other types of sustenance the people of Gaza require.
That means more trucks, more ships and more material getting
across borders. That is our priority, and there are a great many
organisations that can assist with the delivery of that; I listed
them earlier. But the noble Baroness is right; UNRWA employs
13,000 people in Gaza and has provided essential basic
healthcare, education, protection and vital humanitarian
assistance for hundreds of thousands of people in Gaza. Some 1.7
million Palestinians in Gaza are eligible for UNRWA support. In
Gaza, it operates 183 schools and two primary healthcare
facilities. We want to make sure that we can use this agency as
quickly as possible, but that is not stopping the level of
compassionate support that the British people are giving to the
people of Gaza. We are getting that aid in as quickly as we can,
but we need those border crossings to be more functional.
(Con)
My Lords, I draw attention to my entry in the register,
particularly those relating to friendship with Israel Does my noble
friend remember that, when the International Court of Justice
announced its inquiry, Hamas pledged to honour those interim
judgments? The court has asked for the release of hostages. Is my
noble friend disappointed that that has not happened—that Hamas
has broken its word? If we are to recognise an independent
Palestinian state before there is a lasting peace and mutual
recognition of boundaries, what assurances does my noble friend
intend to put in to ensure the safety of Israel
Or would the British Government be content, for example, with a
sovereign Palestinian state entering into a defence arrangement
with Iran?
(Con)
I understand my noble friend’s concerns and hope that, through
the process we can now move towards, we can address the 30-year
failure of the international community to support a lasting
solution. In Israel we have seen
rising incomes and a state that is very advanced in its security,
trade and the living standards of its population, but one thing
that has not been delivered to the people of Israel and which
really matters to them and to Palestinians in the Occupied
Territories, is security. That is what we want to achieve. We
want a lasting security, and then Israel can
continue to be a real force, both economically and culturally,
around the world.
(Non-Afl)
My Lords, no democratic country should have the mandate to
mercilessly kill another nation. What advice have our Government
received since the ICJ interim ruling as to whether they will
also be dragged into complicity should the international court
determine that there have been war crimes and breaches of the
genocide convention?
(Con)
The British Government have never defined what genocide is; we
leave that for a court to do. However, we do not believe that
this qualifies as genocide. We accept, and are pleased by, the
ruling of the court in its calls for the release of the hostages
and for the necessity of getting aid into Gaza.
(Con)
My Lords, the Minister referred to the failure of the
international community for 30 years or more in this matter. That
implies that, if a two-state solution is to be brought about, as
the Foreign Secretary said last night—and I very much welcome his
remarks, and indeed the very balanced remarks of the Opposition,
if I may say so, this afternoon—that surely implies that simply
asking them to bring about a solution is not going to be enough.
It requires more than just persuasion, and possibly a degree of
international coercion on both sides, to bring about a solution
in the wider interest. That is difficult when the Israeli
Government, as at the moment, do not believe in and have rejected
a two-state solution. Does the Minister have any ideas how the
real problem of Hamas might be dealt with in this ongoing
discussion?
(Con)
None of these solutions is entirely in our gift. We do not have
the ability to wave a wand or send a gunboat or do all the things
that Foreign Ministers might have done in centuries past. It
comes down to really hard work and old-fashioned diplomacy. That
is what my noble friend the Foreign Secretary, the Prime
Minister, other Ministers, my noble friend Lord Ahmad—who has
been ceaselessly working on this—and the Diplomatic Service have
been trying to draw together. We think we have a thread which can
lead towards a solution. We have to be positive about this. If
you just think of the world as it exists—my noble friend referred
to 8 October, the day after the attack—it is so bleak and
depressing that you can hardly see a way forward. But there is a
solution and we know it can work. It comes down to working with
our partners, and, most of all, working with the Government
of Israel and with
sensible people in the Occupied Territories, to make sure that we
can have a solution which is free of Hamas and gives lasting
security to the Palestinian people and Israeli citizens.
(Lab)
My Lords, do the Government assume that alternative sources of
finance for humanitarian aid, which the Minister mentioned, will
make up for the loss of financial aid currently going to UNRWA?
Clearly, the Government are radically revising their policy at
the moment and have set out these five important conditions. So
far as the two-state solution is concerned, are the Government
going to wait for the slowest? Will they wait for a consensus
among their allies? What will they deem to be necessary before
they accept a two-state solution? On the other matter, is the
Minister confident that the Palestinian Authority is ready to
assume responsibility for the West Bank and Gaza?
(Con)
My noble friend the Foreign Secretary met the President of the
Occupied West Bank Territories, Mahmoud Abbas, and will continue
to talk to him to find, I hope, precisely that solution. On the
noble Lord’s first point, on UNRWA, as I said, we have given to
UNRWA what we were going to give this financial year, and the
additional sums that we are promising will still get, in aid, to
the people of Gaza through a variety of sources that I listed
earlier.
(Con)
My Lords, can my noble friend the Minister clarify his last
remarks? When he said that my noble friend has had discussions with the
Prime Minister of Palestine, can we be crystal-clear that the
United Kingdom will not recognise a state of Palestine that is
led by the current Palestinian Authority and the Fatah
organisation, which has been so involved in terror, and will not
recognise a Gaza-led Government where Hamas has either control or
power?
(Con)
I am grateful to my noble friend, and allow me to clarify. We
will recognise a Palestinian state as part of a two-state
solution at the time that is right and with the leadership in
place. We have already talked about needing a technocratic
Government who will resolve the issues that exist within Gaza in
particular, and we want to make sure that that Government do not
have Hamas anywhere near them, or as part of them, and that they
are trusted in those territories but also by the people
of Israel who want to
live in peace with their neighbours.
(Lab)
My Lords, for as long as most of us can remember, Ministers at
the Dispatch Box, of both parties, have reiterated the commitment
to a two-state solution, although I have to say—and a Select
Committee of this House made this position explicit not so long
ago—that the possibility of that being achieved as long as the
Government in Israel pursue their
expansion of settlements on the West Bank is diminishing. It is
only at times of awful violence, such as we have seen in the last
few months, that the attention of the international community is
focused on what the two-state solution actually means and whether
we will work for it as soon as the violence ceases. What is new
is not just that Israel has been moving
towards making a two-state solution more difficult but that the
Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin
Netanyahu, has made it quite clear that he simply will not accept
a Palestinian state. I should like to know what steps the
Government are taking to try to impress on him that there can be
no long-term chance of peace in the Middle East until the
Palestinians, like the Israelis, have a state of their own.
(Con)
The noble Lord raises the fundamental issue here. There are
different voices in Israel and we will
work with whoever is in government to achieve what we, with our
partners in the region and with countries such as the United
States, think is the best way forward for the people
of Israel and those living
in the Occupied Territories. The noble Lord is right: that is
very difficult to achieve, particularly when people at the top of
the Government are saying that our policy is not right for them.
However, there are plenty of people who believe—I earlier quoted
somebody deeply involved with the security of the State of
Israel—that it is fundamentally important not just for the
Palestinians but for the future of Israel
It is that which we want to secure. Israel is
our friend; we can speak frankly with friends, and that is what
we do in diplomatic terms. We do not cut ourselves off from it
just because there might be some side to an argument that we
disagree with. We will work with Israel to try to
achieve what we think is best for the long-term security of the
region, which affects us all.
