Israel-Palestine Conflict: Government Response

Foreign Affairs Committee

Emily Thornberry will speak for up to 10 minutes, during which time no interventions may be taken. At the conclusion of her statement, I will call Members to ask questions on the subject of the statement, and these should be brief questions, not full speeches. I emphasise that questions should be directed to the Select Committee Chair, not the relevant Government Minister. Front Benchers may take part in questioning.

I must confess that, in the 20 years I have been in Parliament, I have never done one of these before; it is all entirely new to me. If I am doing anything wrong, please, Madam Deputy Speaker—and I am sure you will—put me back on the straight and narrow.

The situation in Palestine is a humanitarian catastrophe, an injustice and great unfinished business. It has also been a huge diplomatic challenge for our country and indeed for the rest of the world. We as a country believe that we have some responsibility to try to find a way through—and rightly so, given our history in the region and the potential assistance that we can give.

For a long time, our policy on Israel and Palestine has been dictated by being close to the Americans, believing that they are the ones with the influence, but the Americans, until recently, were not really doing anything. In any event, the Israelis were certainly not listening to the Americans, and for sure they were not listening to us. The international community, I think, just stood and watched as hopes for a two-state solution ran into the sand.

Meanwhile, our long-standing alliances with countries such as the Arab countries were blemished by our continual refusal to recognise Palestine, so while we had willingness, we were not as influential as we should or could be. In the view of our Committee, Britain needed to have a stronger voice, and there is more that we could do. In the words of the former Member for North East Bedfordshire, the former Middle East Minister, we tended to do “too little, too late”.

Most of us thought that it was beyond time to recognise a Palestinian state. It was of immense importance as an expression of intent and good will, and to help reset the important relationships in the region. I was really pleased that, four days after our report was published, the Government committed to recognising a Palestinian state. I accept that it was not just our report that persuaded them. It was also the circumstances of the France-Saudi Arabia conference, and the campaigning of a great many people, not least Members of this House, particularly the Chair of the International Development Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Rotherham (Sarah Champion).

Our report also recommended that humanitarian aid must immediately flow in under the auspices of the UN, and called for the immediate dismantling of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. I am glad that we have seen the back of that organisation—good riddance—but I am keen to hear more from the Government about their contribution to the UN 60-day plan to deliver vital food, aid and sanitation.

The Committee’s report was not just about Gaza. We all agreed that everything has to be done to protect the west bank from an increasingly violent and organised settler movement with representation at the highest levels of the Israeli Government. We went on a visit, and saw evidence of settlers thinking they could act with impunity. We also met organisations established to monitor the settlements that are being undermined by Israeli legislation taking funding away from non-governmental organisations. We urge the Government to prepare a comprehensive ban on the import of settlement goods, because when we say that settlements are illegal, we must mean it, and we must follow through.

I congratulate the right hon. Lady on her Committee’s report. In response to the seventh recommendation about a Palestinian state, the Government state:

“Our message to the terrorists of Hamas is unchanged and unequivocal. They must immediately release all the hostages, sign up to a ceasefire, disarm and accept that they will play no part in the government of Gaza.”

Did the Foreign Affairs Committee give consideration to what should be done if Hamas refuse to disarm and give way to, for example, the Palestinian Authority?

At the moment we find ourselves in a vacuum where there is no plan for what is to happen to the strip now. In a lawless situation, it is extremely challenging. That is why we have to keep moving forward. The ceasefire is not the answer but only the first step. There is some work being done, but I would like to be reassured that we are playing a central role in that. I believe that we could be and we should be.

I thank the Chair of the Committee for her statement and her recognition of the Committee’s members. On recommendation 6 on the reconstruction of Gaza, Gaza is still the most dangerous place in the world to be a child. Over 64,000 children are reported to have been killed or injured, and nearly the same number have lost a parent. UNICEF, which is headquartered in my constituency, has raised urgent concerns about the devastating and long-term consequences that children are facing, including the trauma of mass displacement. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the long road to recovery must include specialist care for children, so many of whom have witnessed unimaginable horrors and whose survival, safety and dignity have been imperilled by war and humanitarian crisis for over two years?

I thank my hon. Friend for all her work on this report; her contribution has been so important. She is right: what we are trying to do when finding peace is to bring hope and a future, not just for Palestinian children but for Israeli children too, so that they can live in peace together and have a decent future.

I am grateful to the Chair of the Committee for her statement. In this place, we use the phrase “two-state solution” very readily and often, so much so that it becomes a cliché. Our visit as a Committee to the Knesset revealed just how limited support for a two-state solution is there.

I was pleased that the Government announced their intention to recognise a Palestinian state on 29 July, just four days after the Committee published its report, but I draw the House’s attention to the September two-state solution conference convened by France and Saudi Arabia. In responding to the Committee’s report, the Government said that they played a full part in that conference and did so by co-chairing the working group on humanitarian action and reconstruction. Does the right hon. Member share my view that the UK’s contribution needs to go beyond humanitarian action and that the UK must continue its engagement on how we can make a two-state solution a reality?

I thank the hon. Member for his contribution to the report and all his work. It has been a great deal of work, and he certainly played his part it in, so I thank him.

Yes, Britain can do so much. We have experience in the region, and we have really good friends. We also have the experience of Northern Ireland. People said there was no chance of getting peace and a long-term solution in Northern Ireland, until suddenly there it was. We need to bring a hopeful and positive attitude to this. I believe there is an important contribution that we can make.

I welcome the statement of the Chair of the Committee. I think all of us on the Committee are relieved that since our report was published, we have now reached a ceasefire. The UN has been able to re-enter Gaza and the situation it has seen on the ground is devastating. The UN’s humanitarian chief described it as like going through the ruins of Hiroshima. While it is welcome that the UN is able to restart its humanitarian deliveries, this is only a first step towards the lasting peace that is needed. Does the Chair agree that the UK must play its part, with international partners, on security and governance as we move towards a two-state-solution? We need to enable Palestinians to rebuild the place where they live in a way that is fair for them.

My hon. Friend is another Member of the Committee who worked very hard on this report. His focus and commitment really made a difference to the report, so I thank him for that.

We on the Committee are concerned about the funding and assistance that can be given for governance, defending democracy and creating states, not just in Gaza but in other countries. We are very concerned about the budget and exactly how much will be available to do the vital work that Britain is really good at. We do not want to withdraw from the field.

I thank the Chair for her Committee’s report. She mentioned the possible determination of genocide and said that, in her personal view, that is what has taken place. Of course, a UN report has reached that conclusion as well. I am fairly certain that that should place certain obligations on the UK, so will the Committee commit to investigating exactly what the UK’s obligations are to any kind of international accountability process?

Just as I do not think Britain as a country can look away from what is happening, I do not think our Committee can look away either. We have asked the Government for their response to that particular court case, and we are still awaiting a proper response. There may well be some obligations that are attached to it, and we do think that it has taken too long for the Government to respond.

I thank the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee and the Committee itself for the report, which I thought was very helpful and insightful. I share the concern that the Chair outlines about the gathering of evidence. I want to ask about media access into the Gaza strip. Is that an area that the Committee could look at in future, and does the Chair have a view on how it might help or hinder evidence gathering?

In our report we called for the media to have free and full access to Gaza. The question has to be, “What have people got to hide?” Not allowing the media in is a breach of established norms. The media is allowed in no matter how difficult the circumstances. It is for the media to decide whether or not it should take the risk of going into a particular area, but the world does need to know what happened. There has to be some form of accountability. There has been limited accountability but nothing like the accountability there ought to have been had there been free access for the media.

I thank the Chair and the Committee very much for their report, and I think what they are saying is positive. The United States of America, the United Kingdom, the EU and many Arab states have all pushed for peace. They state collectively that Hamas cannot have any part in the future of Palestine, that Hamas is the obstacle, and that Hamas must be disarmed and can never ever be allowed to exist. For a lasting peace to mean something, Hamas has to go. Does the right hon. Lady agree with that?