Skip to main content
Normal View

JOINT COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS debate -
Thursday, 31 Jan 2008

Palestinian Development and Humanitarian Aid: Discussion with Irish NGOs and Irish Aid.

I draw attention to the fact that while members of the committee have absolute privilege, this privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. Therefore, caution should be exercised, particularly with regard to references of a personal nature.

We are joined by Mr. Justin Kilcullen, director of Trócaire; Mr. Eoin Murray, Trócaire's Palestinian programme officer; Ms Margaret Boden, chief executive, Christian Aid Ireland; Mr. William Bell, policy adviser on the Middle East, Christian Aid UK; and Mr. David McNair, Christian Aid. We are also joined by Mr. Brendan McMahon and Mr. Michael Gaffey of Irish Aid and the Department of Foreign Affairs. The ambassador of Palestine to Ireland, Dr. Hikmat Ajjuri, and Mr. Nadav Cohen, counsellor at the Israeli Embassy, join us in the Visitors Gallery.

During the years of my chairmanship and previously, the joint committee has taken a deep interest in the fate of the Palestinian people. This interest reflected the broader concern of the Irish people at the plight of the Palestinians. In the work programme of this new committee, we have once again given a high priority to the Palestinian question.

It is worth recalling that it is exactly three years this month since I led a delegation from this joint committee on a visit to Israel and Palestine. On that visit we met a wide range of representatives from both sides and saw the situation for ourselves. The new committee will closely follow developments in the Middle East and will support the efforts undertaken by the Israelis and the Palestinians towards the attainment of a two-state solution in the Middle East which will provide peace and security for the Israeli and Palestinian peoples.

In recent weeks, the Palestinian people have been faced once again with a humanitarian crisis of immense proportions. Today, we will hear of the specific assistance which Ireland, through NGOs and Irish Aid, provides for the Palestinians to help them meet their urgent humanitarian needs in the short term as well as addressing their developmental needs in the medium to longer term. It is important for this committee and for the Irish people to learn what specific assistance Ireland provides.

Our first speaker is Mr. Justin Kilcullen, the director of Trócaire, who has just returned from a visit to the region. I will ask him to give us his impressions of his visit and tell us who he met and what he saw. Mr. Kilcullen will also set out what Trócaire and Christian Aid do in Palestine.

Following Mr. Justin Kilcullen, Mr. Brendan McMahon from Irish Aid will tell us what the Irish Government does on the ground in Palestine to help meet the humanitarian and developmental needs of today and of the future. Following both of these presentations I will open the matter to questions from members.

Mr. Justin Kilcullen

I thank the Chairman and committee members. It is a pleasure and an honour to be asked to share our insights with the committee. I have just returned from being part of a delegation made up of senior figures from the Catholic church in Europe and North America led by cardinals from the United States and Ireland. This is an annual visit to show solidarity with the Christian people in the Holy Land and to broadly examine the situation and see what we as churches can do to help promote peace and reconciliation. We were reminded in our visit by the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, Patriarch Sabbah, that it is not the role of churches to be either pro-Palestinian or pro-Israeli but rather pro-peace and pro-reconciliation. It is in this spirit we were there and in which we speak today.

We arrived as President Bush departed and we caught the strange sense of optimism and scepticism about what he had stated. There were elements of surprise that he had used phrases in his closing statement on the need to end occupation, returning to 1967 borders, that refugees should be able to return and be compensated and that Jerusalem should be seen to be a capital of two states.

The statement was seen as a success because it was equally criticised by the Israelis and the Palestinians which indicated that perhaps the United States were beginning to engage. As we saw in our visits to the West Bank and around Jerusalem and heard in discussions with project and church partners, the rhetoric does not match what happens on the ground. There is divergence between what is stated and done in terms of the peace process and the ongoing construction of infrastructure which divides rather than unites or creates a climate for peace.

In their closing statements, the bishops spoke about this time as being one of opportunity and danger for the Holy Land. They stated there is a distinct danger that unless progress is made this year, we will reach the point of no return where the divisions are such that building peace will become virtually impossible. They witnessed the infrastructure of partition, the wall which they stated was an affront to human dignity which impacts on the lives of 850,000 Palestinians, dividing families, separating people from their lands and strangling the economy. They stated it precludes the Palestinian people from establishing the stability they need to properly engage in peace.

This is accompanied by the continued expansion of settlements on the West Bank, where 500,000 settlers live, the continuing use of checkpoints, of which there are now 563 on the West Bank, which prevent freedom of movement of children going to school and people trading, building commercial life and going to holy places to pray.

The bishops also spoke about the humanitarian issue whereby 80% of the people of Gaza now rely on food aid for their survival. They stated the life of Palestinians is now characterised by violence and brutality. Despite all of this, the aid programme to Palestine is the largest per capita programme in the world but does not have an impact because the root causes of the injustice are not addressed.

One of the more interesting and concerning aspects were the encounters we had with young people. In a visit to Bethlehem University, we met Christian and Muslim students who have never met a young Israeli person in their lives. There is a perception among Palestinians that Israelis are soldiers only. We believe the perception among young Israelis is that Palestinians are terrorists. This is where the next generation finds itself. It is extraordinary that in Bethlehem one can look over the wall at Israel but these young people cannot meet. No discussions take place and no attempt is made to build a common future.

Committee members will be aware through the media of the humanitarian situation in Gaza in light of the siege. Many of the commentators we met stated it reinforces among Palestinians their sense of anger and frustration which will inevitably lead to violence as it does with the continuing rocket attacks on Israel which everyone recognises as an abuse of human rights and a war crime. Equally, the response from the Israeli side on the Palestinian population at large has been described as collective punishment and a crime. This is simply a descent into tit for tat and one side taking revenge on the other. The electricity cuts have made the situation unbearable to the extent that we saw the people of Gaza flee through the wall into Egypt when it was blown up.

Emotional language is used. A couple of years ago I referred to Gaza as an open-air prison. I was corrected by a number of Palestinians who pointed out that at least in prison people have their basic rights respected. They stated they are treated worse than animals. When one sees that people cannot even bury their dead it shows the level of the affront to human dignity of which the bishops spoke.

As agencies, it is not for us to engage in the political process in how these matters will be resolved. Our observations would lead us to state it is a moment of opportunity in that the Arab states are engaged through the Annapolis process. For the first time, they are willing to talk and there is an opportunity for Israel to make peace with its neighbours and with the Muslim world. However, there are a number of prerequisites. Economic stability in Palestine is absolutely essential and what is happening is preventing this.

A failure of leadership on both sides is recognised. The Prime Minister of Israel cannot move boldly because of the nature of his coalition. President Abbas is weak and the Palestinians are split. It also came across strongly that Hamas is now a political reality and cutting it out of the equation has been a mistake and that there is a need to promote a government of national unity.

In this spirit, we propose a number of recommendations. The siege of Gaza must end and the statements made by the EU and the Irish Government which recognise the illegality of the collective punishment of the population must be supported with action. It is not enough to denounce them. We need engagement with the Israelis and, if necessary, sanctions unless human rights are respected.

If relations between the EU and Israel continue in the mode of unconditional normalisation, the EU will lose its right to be seen as its a credible and impartial actor in the region in seeking peace. We must ensure there is a government of national unity on the Palestinian side and any attempts by Israel or others to undermine that should be resisted by the Irish Government and the EU. We must encourage the Palestinians to get together and form a government of national unity and in doing so, we will have leverage on the Hamas movement which will allow us to engage with them and take them to task on human rights violations and other aspects of their policies which we feel are not conducive to peace.

The problem of the Rafah crossing between Gaza and Israel must be resolved. We cannot have a situation where more than 1 million people have no access to the outside world. In no way can one say that the siege has been lifted when those people are dependent on the Israeli authorities for freedom of movement, trade and social intercourse with the wider world. We must have clear coherence between our aid and political objectives. We must ensure in terms of Ireland's efforts that we are engaging in that way. We urge that the newly established conflict resolution unit in the Department of Foreign Affairs engages actively in the peace process in the region. We believe that the Irish experience is one that can offer a clear precedent on how to resolve these issues.

Trócaire continues to operate to provide humanitarian relief for those who are deprived of the ability to earn their own living. We continue to work for peace, working with non-governmental organisations from Israel and Palestine, including Rabbis for Human Rights, Caritas Jerusalem, B'Tselem, which is the Israeli Information Center for Human Rights and the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights. The work is pretty much as it was when we were before the committee two years ago describing it to Oireachtas Members. The situation continues unchanged, from our perspective, and we continue to engage in the region in that way. I call on Ms Margaret Boden to complete our presentation.

Ms Margaret Boden

I thank the Chairman for allowing me to speak and for inviting Christian Aid Ireland to this forum. Christian Aid works with 15 Palestinian and ten Israeli partners in the region. Supported by Irish Aid's MAPS funding programme, we take a two-pronged approach to addressing the needs of the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank and supporting humanitarian and development work. Christian Aid's response to the humanitarian needs of the population of Gaza has included humanitarian assistance, drinking water and generator distribution. A recent UN report pointed out that approximately 40% of Palestinians are denied access to running water in that region.

We also support livelihoods through cash grants, food baskets and supporting farmers. We provide health and psycho-social support to children and marginalised women. We conduct strong advocacy work at the national level with both Israel and the Palestinian Authority and at an international level in co-ordination with partners.

One can only imagine the challenges of bringing up children in the Gaza Strip under present conditions. The psychological impact of living in a situation where movement is restricted, unemployment is rife and conflict is an every day normality cannot be underestimated. Christian Aid's partner, the Culture and Free Thought Association, works with young people to promote education, preserve the Palestinian identity and promote children's rights.

Christian Aid's development work in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories, which goes back more than 40 years, takes a rights-based approach to fighting poverty which focuses on monitoring and protecting human rights and uses international humanitarian and human rights law as a means to provide a strong foundation for a viable solution to the conflict. In particular, our partners support inclusive and transparent governance which includes both government and civil society. The programme also focuses on minority rights in Israel. The Irish Aid MAPS programme makes a considerable contribution to this work, amounting to more than €500,000.

Our Middle East regional programmes on secure livelihoods and economic justice also have strong engagements in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories. An important element of our programme work is to help the poor and marginalised to participate in decision making to ensure policies which favour the poor. In the case of IOPT, this requires influencing at local, national and international government levels. Specific projects include work on the following: human rights monitoring and protection; research on the implications of the two territories; agricultural development; women's income generation and access to employment; support to health services; and strong advocacy work at the national level with Israel and the Palestinian Authority and at the international level, in co-operation with our partners.

One example of this is the work of Christian Aid's partner in the Palestinian agricultural relief committees, colloquially known as PARC. This supports a co-operative in northern Gaza which assists in the production and marketing of goods and buys produce from small farmers which it distributes to the very poor. It runs a micro-credit scheme and helps with exporting goods outside Gaza. A member of PARC visited us a number of years ago and when I showed him a Christian Aid video that we had made called "Not Perfect Peace", he cried. Although the work they are doing is wonderful, it is done in very difficult circumstances.

While our programme work, supported by the Irish Government, is effective and successful, we seek to speak out against the root causes of poverty. We recognise the need for the Israelis and the Palestinians to have a secure future free from fear. However, Christian Aid's position on Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories is clear. Poverty among the Palestinians is caused fundamentally by the occupation. It is a political problem requiring a political solution.

As Mr. Kilcullen highlighted, we are increasingly concerned about the situation in Gaza which is resulting in a humanitarian crisis. Our partners have identified fuel shortages and long queues of people hoping to get their daily food supplies. As a result of electricity shortages, the much-needed refrigerators used in the three primary health care clinics in the Gaza Strip are in jeopardy. This also applies to hospitals and other health facilities across Gaza. Christian Aid condemns Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip which did not begin last week, as commonly thought, but in June 2007. Israel's action, which it claims is in response to Qassam rockets being fired from Gaza into southern Israel, is disproportionate, extreme and amounts to collective punishment, deemed illegal under the fourth Geneva Convention.

The breach of the border between Gaza and Egypt on Wednesday, 23 January, demonstrates the desperation of a people held hostage to a policy of collective punishment and an inadequate peace process. In the quest for a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the international community has produced a commitment to ensuring there is a viable Palestinian state living in peace and security with its neighbour, Israel. Christian Aid has outlined the details of this view in the report, Israel and Palestine — A Question of Viability, copies of which we have with us.

A peace process, if it is to be sustainable, must be founded on actions which are based on international humanitarian law, in particular, the fourth Geneva Convention which governs the conduct of an occupying power and the protection of civilians. Until such time as civilians are protected, human rights are respected and the rule of law is restored, the prospects for peace will continue to diminish. Viability must encompass the social, economic, political and territorial rights and responsibilities which a country needs to respect and have respected to function as an independent and prosperous territory. If Palestinians in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip are to enjoy the benefits of viable statehood, they must have control over natural resources and freedom of movement to stimulate economic growth and end aid dependency.

An e-mail I received yesterday from a theologian living in Jerusalem states that Palestinians, even law-abiding old grandmothers, cannot move freely within the West Bank or into Israel without a permit from the Israeli military authorities. These permits are difficult to obtain because they require lengthy and stringent security checks.

Any future Palestinian state must build a coherent political system and a government based on the protection and promotion of human rights and the rule of law. Promoting human rights and the rule of law will underwrite security and stability for Israelis and Palestinians alike. Ireland has consistently supported the rights of those affected by this conflict. We implore Deputies and Senators to note the plight of the Palestinian people — the elderly who are left without water, the sick and infirm who are denied appropriate health care and the children who are denied an education. We ask the committee to use its influence on diplomatic relations within the EU to play an active role in building a peace process involving all political parties, including Hamas. As long as the main Palestinian political parties are at odds, there can be no sustainable peace process. The EU must end the boycott on Hamas and engage in a serious dialogue which addresses the failure of Hamas to comply with the rules of international law and facilitates engagement of all parties in the political process. Ultimately, we ask that members use every possible opportunity to highlight the need for a meaningful political process that engages all Palestinians and has as its goal a viable solution which is impartial and guided by international law and which holds both sides to account so that an end can be brought to impunity.

Mr. Brendan McMahon

I am pleased to have the opportunity to discuss with the committee the levels and scope of Irish Aid's funding to Palestine and the Palestinian people. The gravity of the humanitarian situation in Palestine, and particularly in Gaza, is of deep concern to us all.

Palestine has the potential to be a prosperous state. However, its economy has been choked and its development stymied by the occupation and ongoing conflict. The poverty rate stands at 47%, while food insecurity affects 34% of the population. In Gaza, the statistics are even more shocking, with four fifths of the population dependent on aid for survival. The volatility of the humanitarian situation in Gaza has been all too tragically demonstrated in recent days. Following rocket attacks by Palestinian militants, Israel suspended fuel supplies to Gaza which in turn caused the shutdown of Gaza's power plant. As has happened all too often during the course of this immensely complex conflict, ordinary Palestinian civilians must bear the brunt of reprisals and counter reprisals. The demolition of barricades at the Rafah border crossing and the exodus into Egypt of as many as half of Gaza's population highlights the sheer desperation of a people who had effectively been shut off from the outside world.

It is clear that financial assistance alone cannot and will not form the basis for long-term development in Palestine. The roots of the suffering visited on the Palestinian people are fundamentally political and sustainable improvements in the humanitarian situation will ultimately require progress in political negotiations. We hope that the renewed political process launched in Annapolis last November will result in a successful outcome and a just and viable two-state solution. In the short term, an end to violence by all sides is imperative, as is the lifting of the restrictions on movement which have stifled the Palestinian economy and provoked unnecessary suffering and hardship among the Palestinian people.

As we monitor developments in the political sphere, Irish Aid will continue to provide financial support to meet the humanitarian and development needs of the Palestinian people. Our commitment is reflected in the considerable increases in Irish Aid funding to the Palestinian people over the past three years, from €4.39 million in 2005 to almost €7.5 million in 2007. This represents a total increase of 70% during that period. During the period 2005-07, Irish Aid's funding to Palestine was provided in the context of a comprehensive country strategy, the aims of which were to alleviate the material consequences of the conflict, to support the emergence of a prosperous and democratic Palestinian state by providing assistance for the delivery of basic services and to respond to the humanitarian consequences of the crisis. Concerns for peace, democracy and human rights underpinned the strategy, while a clear sectoral focus and multi-annual framework sought maximum possible impact for Irish Aid's assistance. Ireland's representative office in Ramallah, which was opened in 2000, has been centrally involved in the design, implementation and monitoring of all aspects of the programme.

Of the many victims of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the suffering of Palestinian refugee communities in Gaza, the West Bank, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan is most pronounced. In the absence of political agreement, their situation remains uncertain and the hardships they face increasingly severe. The United Nations Relief and Works Agency, UNRWA, is responsible for the provision of humanitarian assistance and basic services, including health and education, to more than 4.4 million Palestinian refugees. Ireland has been a long-term and active supporter of UNRWA. In early 2007, taking account of the increasingly challenging circumstances faced by the agency, it was decided to increase our funding for UNRWA's core activities to €3.8 million per year for the period 2007-09. Ireland's relationship with UNRWA was further consolidated during a visit to Dublin by the agency's commissioner general, Karen Koning AbuZayd, on 18 and 19 December 2007. The commissioner general's programme included consultations with the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, as well as the Minister of State, Deputy Tom Kitt, and members of this committee. During the visit, the contribution by Irish Aid of an additional €500,000 to the education sector in Gaza was announced.

Irish Aid has also contributed towards public service salaries in Palestine, including teachers' salaries. This amounted to €1 million last year and was channelled through a temporary mechanism managed by the European Commission. Given the fundamental importance of promoting human rights and democracy in the Israeli-Palestinian context, Irish Aid's country strategy has incorporated a human rights and democratisation programme. During the three year period of the strategy, we provided €1.325 million in support for both Israeli and Palestinian NGOs working in areas such as freedom of movement, rights of prisoners and women's rights.

A further important element of the country strategy has been support for rural development. Each year for the past three years, Irish Aid has provided the United Nations Development Programme with €500,000 for an initiative in the Jenin region to assist local authorities and the Ministry of Local Government in the improvement of infrastructure and services. In the health sector, Irish Aid is a longstanding supporter of Bethlehem University and provided direct funding of €225,000 during the period 2005-06 for health diploma courses, including occupational therapy, physiotherapy and community midwifery. We are continuing to support the university through our funding to the Order of Malta, with which Bethlehem University has an important partnership.

Cognisant of the importance of monitoring and effective donor co-ordination in the delivery of aid, Irish Aid has supported the UN's Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs in Palestine to the amount of €100,000 per year. A micro-projects fund administered by Ireland's representative office in Ramallah focused on social regeneration and totalled €620,000 during the period 2005-07.

The country strategy as outlined forms the core of Irish Aid's support to Palestine. However, Irish Aid has also provided support for the Palestinian people via a variety of civil society funding mechanisms, including Christian Aid and Trocaire through the multi-annual programme scheme, and the Irish Missionary Resource Service and the Order of Malta through the civil society fund. In total, more than €1.5 million has been allocated to Palestine through these mechanisms since 2005.

As the future of Palestine and its people remains uncertain, Irish Aid stands ready to provide financial assistance for as long as it is required. This commitment was demonstrated by the Minister of State, Deputy Tom Kitt, at the Paris donor's conference for the Palestinian state on 17 December 2007, when he pledged an additional €40 million in assistance for Palestinian recovery, reconstruction and development, including an initial pledge of €3 million to the Palestinian Authority.

The precise timing and focus of this assistance will depend to a significant extent on political developments. Due to the continued volatility of the political situation, long-term planning in Palestine poses particular difficulties. During 2008, Irish Aid will undertake a technical assessment mission to Palestine to assess the impact and results of the 2005-07 country strategy and to consider our future approach. While our funding this year will continue to be based on the principles and overarching objectives of the previous country strategy, we must be sufficiently flexible to respond to changing circumstances.

In particular, Irish Aid will seek to strengthen its engagement with UNRWA. In the present extremely difficult circumstances in Gaza, where severe restrictions have been placed on the movement of people and goods, UNRWA is a lifeline to the poorest and most vulnerable sections of the population.

The increased level of funding I have previously indicated will allow Ireland to obtain a place on UNRWA's advisory commission in 2009, thus enabling us, along with other major donors, to advise on and assist with the design and implementation of UNRWA's programmes. We will also place considerable importance on funding to the Palestinian Authority. At the end of last year, the Palestinian Authority launched an impressive reform plan for the period 2008-10. The plan seeks to promote social and economic development and, ultimately, to create the institutional infrastructure of a Palestinian state. Education is the largest expenditure item in the reform plan, accounting for more than 30% of requested donor support for recurrent expenditure and approximately 20% of public investment. Importantly from a donor perspective, there is also a significant focus on governance and accountability. During an initial period at least, it is likely that Irish Aid's support to the Palestinian Authority will be channelled through a multi-donor trust fund mechanism.

I would like to draw the committee's attention to the significant level of funding being provided by the European Commission for Palestine. A total of €440 million has been pledged for 2008, of which €325 million will contribute to the implementation of the Palestinian reform and development plan and €115 million will be provided to UNRWA and humanitarian aid. Ultimately, the well-being of the Palestinian people depends on a successful outcome to political negotiations. Sustainable economic and social regeneration cannot be achieved without the lifting of restrictions on the movement of people and goods. Irish Aid will, therefore, continue to adopt a flexible approach to its funding, helping alleviate the immediate humanitarian consequences of the conflict, while preparing the ground for sustained development, and responding positively to the political progress which can make such development a reality.

I thank Mr. McMahon for that clear exposition of the situation as he sees it. I throw the floor open to questions.

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. The situation in Gaza and Palestine in general greatly concerns me. Many Irish people have a particular interest in it. I do not want to go over the points already made. Is the support for Hamas in Gaza as strong as it was since its election success? How is Hamas treating people on the ground in Gaza in particular? Both presentations mentioned that the Annapolis process is welcome but with Hamas outside the tent I cannot see how the process will work. Is there a desire on its behalf to get involved? All sides can do only so much.

I have some questions and I would like to speak again later if necessary. Could I ask Mr. McMahon how much Ireland has contributed directly in the past ten years? He detailed the programme from 2005 to 2007. To what extent have the projects to which contributions have been made been monitored? Do we know precisely for what Irish funding has been used? Can we identify the concrete results of Irish Aid? I am talking specifically about the Government's aid but I would like to put the same questions to the two other organisations here.

In the context of the overall situation, to what extent can the economic difficulties of the Palestinians be resolved while there are two separate entities, one on the West Bank and one in Gaza, and two political groupings, Hamas and the PLO, that appear to have diametrically opposite objectives? Hamas in particular refuses to recognise any preceding peace accords, is committed to the destruction of the Israeli state and will not end violence. What are the practicalities of any economic recovery as long as Hamas is committed to the destruction of the Israeli state, the continued rocket fire into a part of Israel which is making one Israeli town in particular, Sderot, almost uninhabitable and continues to threaten suicide bombings? Is there not a sine qua non?

Printed documentation should be furnished to members of the committee in advance of a meeting such as this. This is not a critique of anybody here but there is an interesting report by Christian Aid published last June and I would have thought since it was available the secretariat should have furnished it to members some days before this meeting to those of us who had not seen it. There is little point in distributing it in the middle of the talk by the third speaker.

I was interested in Mr. Kilcullen's presentation because it does not account for one or two of his conclusions. One conclusion in his written paper is that we should learn from the Irish peace process. The first lesson of the Irish peace process is that one has to end violence and take baby steps in the direction of building trust. To what extent would he accept that the firing of rockets into the Israeli state after Israel had ended its occupation of Gaza has created a major difficulty in taking the peace process forward?

I believe there should be two independent states, Palestine and Israel, living side by side in peace and security. The Israeli state is constantly criticised for constructing a wall and Ms Boden referred to the disproportionate response of the Israelis to the continuous rocket attacks being perpetrated on them. Do Mr. Kilcullen and Ms Boden recognise that the construction of the wall has to a great extent ended suicide bombings in Israel? In the context of Hamas and other groups being committed to a continuation of suicide bombings, what do they believe Israelis should have done to protect their own civilians against continuing suicide bombings? What do they believe Israelis should do about the rocket attacks? Do they give any recognition to the fact that the major security difficulties that confront ordinary Palestinians are created by the Israeli government's obligation to protect its citizens against those attacks? They are just questions. I may want to ask more later after other members have contributed.

I welcome the contributions from Mr. Kilcullen of Trócaire and Ms Boden and Mr. McMahon of Irish Aid. It is important we engage with the situation. I may speak later but I want to make some important points. I visited Gaza first in the 1980s and, as the Chairman mentioned at the outset, the committee visited Israel-Palestine in early spring of 2005. In September 2005, in the weeks immediately after the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, I visited Gaza with Mr. Andreas van Agt, a former Prime Minister of the Netherlands and four other former Ministers. One was able to make a contrast between the conditions in the 1980s in Gaza and September 2005. Everything had worsened and the only change which had taken place was that another two generations were in place. The United Nations Relief and Works Agency, UNRWA, was still there. If the international effort had been successful, the work of UNRWA would have been redundant.

In the absence of space in which to extend houses, new generations had gone up instead. Poverty had increased and unemployment had expanded. Opportunities were destroyed rather than created. It is a good indication of the non-ideological presentation of fact that when 1.5 million people have an opening created in Rafah, some 700,000 or 800,000 people will stream over the border, with half of them seen coming back with basic items such as pots and pans.

An issue then arises as to whether it can be said that because some people have crossed the border into Egypt, perhaps bringing back material used later for attacks, the entire population of Gaza can be penalised. This should not happen as it against humanitarian law, which is continuously ignored in some of the discussions on Gaza and Palestine.

I am on record in this committee and publicly as stating the firing of rockets at civilian villages — I am thinking of one particular location which has already been mentioned — should be condemned unequivocally and outright by everybody. We discussed southern Lebanon in a previous committee and if one asks for compliance with international law from one side, to have credibility one must ask for compliance with international law from all sides.

Although obligations fall on an occupying power that seem to me to be systematically breached, there are also obligations on the international community to speak unequivocally about those people who aim rockets at civilian populations in Israel. It is important to say this as the point may be misconstrued.

The committee should engage with this issue with regard to some of the points taken on by Mr. Kilcullen, for example. He made reference to checkpoints and comments have also been made by Margaret Boden on the wall. Figures put the number of checkpoints in the occupied territories at 563 and there are 29 checkpoints along the green line. These are distributed in such a way as to make the economic and social process in certain areas completely unviable. I remember having detailed talks with the mayors of Bethjala, Bethsaour and Bethlehem, and one could see how the wall was not providing any kind of shield but simply dividing land, which made things impossible for the populations of those villages.

There was mention of the church leaders who visited Bethlehem. Visiting that town is nearly impossible and if any members of the committee want to visit it currently, they would see the large horde of candles prepared for 2000, when there was supposed to be an opportunity for the small shops to sell them. The candles remain eight years after because access to Bethlehem was impeded.

I have a few points on a report. With regard to the viability of the Irish Aid projects in Gaza, my understanding is there was a report by experts on the operation not only by Irish Aid projects in Gaza and the occupied territories, but of those of the entire European Union. A concern was expressed by that expert group over the destruction of the infrastructure provided by the European Union in such a way that it had to be repeated many times, using resources. That report was discarded at a meeting of the European Council.

I am not asking aid organisations to answer political questions but my understanding is there was a monitoring process and a report submitted to the European Union, which was simply ignored at a political level. It is on the record of this committee that the decision taken by the scrutiny group of COREPER in adding Hamas to the list of proscribed organisations was taken without any accountability to any member parliament in the European Union, the European Parliament or the European Council. Although I could leave it for another day, it is important I say that to be consistent.

That first decision led, by the argument of consistency, to the failure to recognise the result of the elections, which were monitored by such bodies as the Carter Institute, and were seen as clean. That first unrepresentative decision created a significant matter of accountability deficit with regard to the European Union's decision making. It was taken by a small group appointed by COREPER without reference to the parliaments of the European Union.

I am not a spokesperson for Hamas and condemn any of its actions. For those drawing parallels with the peace process, that was a disastrous unaccountable decision, which was followed by a further decision to destroy trust by not recognising the results of the election.

I wish everyone could retain their optimism on this issue. It is necessary for us to invite the international community to structure its proposals for a future peace unequivocally within the context of international humanitarian law. In the context of international law, the burden falls on all sides. Nobody has the right to indicate that until there is an appropriate partner for the other side of the conversation, certain actions will continue, or that meaningful talks will not happen until Hamas is destroyed. If that parallel had been taken, where would the Northern Ireland process have been? I do not draw that parallel because there are significant differences.

I support those continuing with aid in the most difficult of circumstances. Reference has been made to access to water and it is clear that is a significant issue. I remember visiting the area widely in September 2005, approximately two or three weeks after the withdrawal. There was a contrast in access to water and UNRWA was buying water for settlements. People do not seem to realise the Gaza aquifer is salinated from the withdrawal of water. It cannot be used and would cost billions to restore.

I will not get involved in a blame game from here. It is important for us to realise the urgency of the position of people in Gaza, as well as the difficulty in producing press releases from any part of the world that simply speak about peace without having some practical steps towards progress. The new generation will ask what their fathers, mothers or grandparents achieved and I say that any action they take should be political. How convincing is that if the international community does not construct parallel strategies? An example is the Annapolis talks.

We should end with a practical suggestion. A long time ago it was suggested that if there was a permanent secretariat to the peace process in the Middle East, like that of Northern Ireland, there may have been some progress. There were many times in which the Northern Ireland process very nearly fell apart. The continuity of the secretariat in Northern Ireland enabled the inventiveness that helped in the negotiation of documents and so on and this allowed it to get past the hump in the talks. This has not happened in this case, where US-led strategies relating to what is frequently called the US roadmap have gone cold. The EU has failed to fill the vacuum with positive proposals of a political and practical kind.

I welcome this morning's meeting and the contributions that have been made. I have long supported the right of the state of Israel to exist and challenged the obscenity that is anti-Semitism whether it occurs here, in Europe or the Middle East. I must show my credentials because I am highly critical of the Israeli Government and its policies and the European Union.

Deputy Higgins clearly made his point on the significance of the Palestinian election; we may not like Hamas but, having heard of à la carte Catholicism, this matter has given an example of à la carte democracy. We have refused to recognise the perfectly legitimate and internationally validated election of a legitimate authority, simply because we do not like it. In my book that puts a very peculiar gloss on democracy. I understand Mr. McMahon’s difficulties but I find the following statement coy:

Irish Aid has also contributed towards public service salaries in Palestine, including teachers' salaries. This amounted to €1 million last year and was channelled through a temporary mechanism managed by the European Commission.

That was a squalid deal that was let out and the attitude of the European Union was utterly shameful. The international community, particularly the European Union and our Government, has signally failed to vindicate the bare, essential human rights of the Palestinian people. This is why I feel outraged about this situation.

The people in Gaza have had an appalling time and I know this because I have visited the area and know it reasonably well. The conditions there are shocking. I have condemned the rocket attacks emanating from the area but they are the responsibility of maverick mobile units that do not necessarily represent the local population. Members of these units disperse as soon as the rockets are fired and the Israelis then hit back at local civilians, resulting in terror.

There has been a deliberate, callous and continuous strangulation of Gaza. An Israeli Minister said those in Gaza will not die as a result but will only lose some weight and I find this comment shameful. That individual should have been severely chastised for making a joke of the suffering of others. Ireland is complicit in what I believe is a war crime because under Article 4 of the Geneva Convention collective punishment, which this is, is defined as such. The difference is that these mobile units are not an official organ of a Palestinian state; they are rogue elements that are condemned by the international community. My problem with the Israeli response to the situation in Gaza is that military actions and actions by civilian authorities, such as the closing of power stations, are carried out with the political sanction of the Israeli Government and are supported by that state's armed forces. In my book this is a distinction that should be recognised.

The need for action was mentioned and I have been criticised by people who strongly support the state of Israel for making certain recommendations in the past. For example, I suggested that the human rights protocols attached to the external association agreement between Israel and the European Union should be applied. An even milder suggestion is that we should establish a monitoring mechanism; what is the point of having human rights protocols if we ignore war crimes? Can we at least establish a mechanism to monitor the human rights situation in the light of events in Gaza? Is this too much to ask? Are we afraid of knowing what is going on?

The cutting of electricity supply to Gaza does not merely result in people sitting in the dark and missing their favourite television programmes; it results in infants dying in incubators, elderly people having respirators switched off and vaccines perishing because they are not properly refrigerated. It is not a question of discomfort and people losing a bit of weight, it is a question of people dying and we have a responsibility in this matter. It is tragic for the people of Palestine that Gaza has become for them the equivalent of the land of bondage. As Deputy Higgins and others asked, what sort of conditions must exist when half the population of a territory escapes through a breach in a wall?

My distinguished colleague, Deputy Shatter, asked whether the wall has affected suicide bombings. It appears that it has and I welcome every life that is saved. I used to get the bus home next door to the Sbarro pizzeria where an entire family was wiped out by a suicide bombing so I am not on the side of the bombers. However, the same result would have been achieved had the wall been built legally on Israeli territory, rather than being used in a massive illegal land grab. This is where I have problems with the wall. Had it been built legally the Israeli Government would not have been able to incorporate illegal settlements into Israeli territory. This is the answer to Deputy Shatter's question on the issue.

There is also a question of disproportionality. There are remarkable people in Israel of whom I have spoken previously in this committee. Physicians for Human Rights includes the most distinguished doctors in Israel who queue in rain and mud to treat their fellow human beings in these camps. These doctors are mocked by mere squirts of soldiers of 18 years of age. I ask those present today to consider what their feelings would be if confronted by the kinds of incidents recounted by Richard Crowley in his splendid recent book on this situation. He tells of a Palestinian farmer, who was not politically active and whose family had inhabited the area for many generations, who was stopped and arbitrarily refused permission to visit the next village by two people, a Russian and an American. He was a human being in his own land.

I suggest to the Chairman that a group from this committee could visit the area as one did previously.

I will come to that matter.

As the Chairman may know, I have been involved in two illegally settled occupied villages, Susya and At-Tuwani in south Hebron, through my former partner, Ezra Yitzhak Nawi. The people there are deprived of precisely what we have spoken of — clean water, electricity and basic medical services. A programme has been established to change this. I held a fundraising event and, thanks to the generosity of the Irish people, I am delighted to say €55,000 was raised to help the villages, some of which was channelled through Trócaire. I have received pictures of the wind-based electricity generators and solar panels that are now there and clean water is accessible but I am afraid the Israelis will demolish all this. Deputy Shatter has asked what has happened to these projects and the money involved but this is a question he could legitimately direct at the Israeli Embassy. Many projects have been destroyed and I would like this committee to extend its protection to the villages of Susya and At-Tuwani to ensure basic resources there for ordinary, non-political people are safeguarded. I do not feel this destruction should go without strong criticism from this committee. We should be vigilant of developments in these villages as they are representative of the bigger issue.

It is a tragic situation and I sympathise with both sides; I know the town of Stirot and so on. We must ensure that there is proportionality. We have absolutely failed to vindicate the human rights of Palestinians at the most basic level. Only through their vindication will we be able to move towards peace for both peoples of that troubled land.

I will direct my question to Mr. McMahon. The Chairman recently met the Israeli ambassador and circulated a note to us about the meeting. The note stated "The Ambassador said he was aware that Ireland provided funding to the Palestinians, adding that he was not 100% sure that some of the money was going where it was intended". That seems to be a diplomatic allegation of either misappropriation or misdirection of Irish Aid funding. Could Mr. McMahon inform us of whether there is any basis to this and what it is?

I am new to the committee, so the witnesses will excuse me if I do not know as much about the situation as some of the members who have already spoken. It appears that it would be in the interests of Israel to have the economic circumstances of the Palestinian people dramatically improved. As we have seen in other parts of the world, when economic circumstances improve people's desire to pick up arms decreases dramatically. In this regard, free movement between Gaza and the West Bank and access to the markets of the outside world would significantly enhance the economic viability of Palestine. My question relates, to return to what Senator Norris said, to the proportionality of Israel's response in not allowing free movement or access to outside markets. Is that level of response proportionate in comparison to the responses of other countries in difficult circumstances? I know one cannot be matched with the other, but I am sure there are institutes and think-tanks around the world which have examined this in detail. Is the response proportionate or is it way out of line?

I am deeply disturbed by what Deputy Noonan said. I was not aware of the allegation by the Israeli ambassador, Dr. Zion Evrony, that Irish aid was not going to where we had intended. I understand that it is going where it is intended. I suggest that we write to the ambassador and ask him whether he has evidence for this.

It was not an allegation. It was just a question.

It was as good as an allegation. If one said that in Kerry it would be an allegation.

Kerry is full of allegations.

And I know all the alligators.

If the Israeli ambassador has any evidence of our taxpayers' money going where it is not intended he should provide it and if he cannot provide it he should write us an apology.

I congratulate the agencies on the work they are undertaking and encourage them to keep it up. It is much appreciated. We all understand that the political and humanitarian situation continues to worsen, as has been outlined. It is regrettable to see the continuation of poverty, violence and human rights abuses, particularly because of the length of time it has been going on. We are talking about 60 years of this. As a child I can remember hearing about the West Bank, Gaza, the Palestinians and the Israelis but not quite understanding it. It is regrettable that although so much is being poured into the area by so many different authorities, no great progress is being made. If, as we all agree is likely, the conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians deepens, all that will happen is a worsening of the humanitarian crisis, particularly inside the Gaza Strip.

While I appreciate and welcome the call by Christian Aid and Trócaire for the committee to respond — maybe some day we will deal with this in detail — the international community has failed to respond. With the fund of expertise and energy that is out there and available to help, is there any extra mile we can go towards coming up with a mechanism? I have noted some of the suggestions for a monitoring body and, as mentioned by Deputy Michael D. Higgins, a secretariat. What other issues have been mentioned in the various international discussions on this issue?

I wish to pay tribute to Mr. Brendan McMahon, the director of the emergency and recovery section of Irish Aid. He has done tremendous work over the last 18 months and I wish him continued success in his endeavours, as I do to Trócaire and Christian Aid.

I thank the panel for a very good presentation. We have talked a lot about the humanitarian situation. The obvious solution to that is to find a political end to the conflict. Do the panel members have any views on where we should be going from here? I agree with the point made by Deputy Shatter that when there is an atrocity it tends to delay progress between the protagonists. What we saw in Northern Ireland was that it was only when we got beyond the politics of the last atrocity — when we had politicians of vision who were able to rise above that — that we saw any progress. What are the views of the panel members on where the political solution is going or whether there is anything we can do?

We have all had an opportunity to speak, so we will take the replies. Would Mr. Kilcullen, Mr. Bell, Ms Boden or Mr. McMahon like to reply?

Mr. Brendan McMahon

I will go first.

We do not expect you to resolve everything.

Mr. Brendan McMahon

I will deal with the issue raised by Deputies Noonan and Shatter about where the aid money is going. I can assure the members that Irish Aid is very careful about monitoring and evaluating everything it does, which includes our programme in Palestine. Mechanisms for this are built into the programme and the role of our representative office in Ramallah is crucial in this regard. We are aware of these allegations from the publication NGO Monitor. The Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Deputy Michael Kitt, met with the Israeli ambassador and provided the necessary assurances that our money is going exactly where it is intended and that everything is above board. Those assurances were accepted by the Israeli ambassador. I would like to set this matter to rest.

I asked Mr. McMahon to explain to what extent we could detail the concrete results of the aid we send to the area, and I asked about the total amount of aid in the past ten years.

Mr. Brendan McMahon

I do not have the figure for the past ten years. I will have to write to the Deputy about that. I will also write to the Deputy with regard to the evaluations carried out on the programmes we have funded.

These programmes are very important and I do not want to give the impression that I disapprove of them. I agree with what was said by another speaker, namely, improving the economy of both the West Bank and Gaza is very important. There is also a major importance in bringing the violence to an end. Until that happens there will not be a viable peace process. It is important that we know we are spending our money and that we think it is working satisfactorily but also what the concrete outcomes are.

Over a ten-year continuum a huge amount of money has been spent in the area, not just from Ireland but across Europe and other parts of the world. I do not say this to undermine Irish Aid or the work of Mr. McMahon but there was a major problem of corruption in that area. It is part of the reason Hamas was successful in the election. There was a reaction against the corruption endemic in an earlier Palestinian administration. It is of major importance that it is no longer taking place and that we know that money is being used in projects that have come to fruition. It would be of interest to the committee to know that.

We have committed ourselves to contributing €40 million arising from the donor conference towards the end of last year. It is important that the public believes what we are doing is credible and that funds are not being siphoned off for other purposes. What are the concrete outcomes of our expenditure over the past decade? It is an important issue. I wish the delegation well in its work this year.

I expected Senator Norris to say what he said and it is becoming repetitive. The problem is that one cannot criticise the Israelis if some infrastructure is the subject of destruction when there is a war zone and they seek to defend themselves against rocket attacks. We must end the violence. The problem we all have with Hamas is that it is not interested in the peace process. It will not end the violence and will not recognise the Israeli state. It has used Gaza as a launching pad for rockets. The arguments about proportionate or disproportionate retaliation are extraordinarily spurious. I do not know what Senator Norris is suggesting. On 16 January 2008, it was estimated that 100 rockets were fired from the Gaza Strip into Israel. Is Senator Norris suggesting that an appropriate and proportionate response would be to send 100 rockets back into the Gaza Strip? I disagree with this.

Is Deputy Shatter suggesting the British Army should have bombed Dundalk during the Provo campaign? It is the same argument.

Deputies asked a number of questions of the delegation.

The Senator knows the stupidity of that response.

I do not need to be lectured on my boringness, repetitiveness and stupidity by someone who exhibits those same qualities in the same measure.

Economically, we will not solve the problem and reap the benefits of Irish aid until the violence ends. Unfortunately, we will dissipate some resources in the context of the ongoing violence.

Deputy Shatter must appreciate that everyone at this meeting appreciates these difficulties. There is no difference between us on that matter.

There is substantial difference of emphasis, based on the contributions made by some people.

It is a question of how to get a lasting solution.

Is it possible to hear some of our guests because we are being called to vote?

We took the trouble to examine Irish aid and what is happening. We will discuss it later but everything we saw was going directly to the people intended. There is also the question of other moneys.

Mr. William Bell

I thank the committee for the opportunity to appear before it on behalf of Christian Aid and Trócaire. The debate that this meeting is turning into demonstrates the level of polarisation and passion on both sides. We could take this as a microcosm of the situation in the Middle East, demonstrating why we are in the current stalemate.

We are called to the Dáil for a vote, so I must suspend the sitting.

Sitting suspended at 12.25 p.m. and resumed at 12.55 p.m.

I call the meeting to order. Mr. Bell was speaking when he was so rudely interrupted.

Mr. William Bell

I hope it went the right way for whoever voted.

I will try to pick up where I left off which was demonstrating the level of polarisation prior to addressing the specific points made and questions put. We could be in London, Paris or in Washington but this argument, this debate and these positions would be articulated again and again. The situation for both sides becomes more precarious, difficult and demeaning. It is our responsibility to pick through the facts and opinions and deal with the issues we can deal with which will make a difference. With this in mind, I will try to address at least some of the points directed towards us and then hand back to Mr. Kilcullen to answer other specific questions.

The first question came from Deputy O'Brien who discussed the level of support for Hamas and asked whether it has changed. My answer is not scientific but it is based on many conversations I have had with Palestinians and Israelis and academics and politicians on all sides. The vote for Hamas was not a reflection of a massive ideological shift among the Palestinian people to embrace what some describe as a fundamentalist version of Islam. While it was a frustration with the previous Administration, which was identified here and often characterised by corruption, it was much more a frustration with the peace process which was not a process but a stagnation.

People often refer to the isolation of Gaza and the non-engagement with Hamas as an actor as though it were a new phenomenon. It is not a new phenomenon. It is more acute now but there was not any engagement for a long time with the previous incumbent, the late Yasser Arafat. He was not a partner for peace, as far as the Israelis were concerned. I am not commenting on that or making a judgment about it. I am merely stating a fact. There were no negotiations taking place so for the Palestinian electorate, Hamas did not represent a statement that violence was the way they wanted deal with their problem with Israel. The election of Hamas represented a set of frustrations. Hamas has embraced the democratic process to a degree, although I am sure everyone here would agree that embracing democratic principles does not begin and end at the ballot box. It requires parties to renounce the use of violence in furthering political objectives. That is incredibly important. However, it should also be recognised that we are not dealing with perfect situations where we can at any stage satisfy our every need. Hamas should be recognised as not being an homogenous body. It is not even simply a bilateral body of political and military, which it can easily be characterised as. It is different on many levels and there clearly are different opinions within Hamas regarding how best to respond to the situation. The decision to participate in the elections represented a victory for some moderate elements within Hamas, although I use that phrase carefully.

Clearly things have gone very wrong. Again, I will not make any judgment or excuses for Palestinian political parties because that is not my job nor my right. What is clear — and this would be as true for the citizens of Siderot as it is for the Palestinians in Gaza, if not for Palestinians and Israelis throughout the region, who desperately want to have peace — is that the current approach, backed by the international community, that Israel is adopting, vis-à-vis the rocket attacks and violence emanating from Gaza on a daily basis, is not working. It has not worked to date and it will not work. In the words of Karen Abu Zayd, whose name was evoked earlier and who works for the UN Relief and Works Agency, “hungry and angry neighbours do not make good neighbours”. Ultimately Palestinians and Israelis have to become good neighbours.

What the international community, whether from Dublin, London, Brussels, Washington, Damascus, Cairo and so on, can do is to help Palestinians and Israelis to become good neighbours and ultimately to have a viable future, living together. Currently, we are in political stalemate and there does not seem to be a political player willing to tackle the issues head on. Deputy Shatter presented several issues and gave us the opportunity to say why things have gone wrong. Senator Norris answered one of his questions regarding the issue of the wall or the barrier. Clearly it is not a wall in its entirety. Some of it is a fence, the rest is a wall. I hesitate to quote this because I cannot remember who said it, but in a Knesset debate regarding the specific issue of the wall in Jerusalem, it was acknowledged that the wall within Jerusalem itself was not about security. Anybody who has visited the wall in Jerusalem would be very hard pressed to find a security angle for the wall, for example, in Abu Dis. On both sides of that wall, as far as the eye can see, are Palestinian communities. There are no Israeli communities within that area.

The wall or the barrier evokes such passion among people in terms of justice, as Senator Norris put it, not because of its physical presence as a means of preventing violence, which it clearly does, but because of its route. To take in the large settlement blocks around Ariel, parts of Jerusalem, the Gush Etzion block to the south of Jerusalem and around Bethlehem, the wall has damaged the local communities. It represents to the Palestinians what they fear will end up being their permanent border, that is, what they will be forced to accept. They feel abandoned by international law and by an international community that recognises the settlements as not just being illegal, but also the infrastructure that supports them being one of the primary causes of Palestinian poverty. There are other causes, which we have already mentioned, including the corruption of the Palestinian Authority.

On the issue of aid—

May I ask if Mr. Bell believes the intifada was damaging to the Palestinian economy? Was that not a major problem that has contributed to the disaster we now have?

Mr. William Bell

I would rather not answer the question—

No one has mentioned that. I am asking this quite genuinely. There is a whole range of issues—

Mr. William Bell

I will come to that. Yes, clearly, the violence of the last eight years in the second intifada has been extremely damaging. However, I would like to take this back further. It is wrong, in this situation, to pick a particular date when this conflict started or when things began to go wrong. Everybody will pick a different date, but that is to miss part of the picture. If we really are to be true to ourselves in seeking a solution that will work for both peoples on this piece of land, then we must examine all the facts. We must understand and appreciate everybody's narratives.

If one goes back to the really earnest period at the beginning of attempts to find peace, that is, the beginning of the Oslo process, around 1993, approximately $10 billion of aid from the international community went into supporting that peace process or supporting projects that would help the Palestinian economy to develop and become viable for the future. However, in that time, long before the second intifada started in 2001, something clearly went wrong. It is not just the beginning of violence in 2001 that is the cause of the problem. There are a number of other reasons. One reason is the expansion, during the period of the Oslo process, of the settlements, with a doubling of the number of settlers within the West Bank and Gaza and the infrastructure that was built to support them.

Within months of the Oslo accord there were suicide bombings in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.

I must ask the Deputy not to interrupt the speaker.

I am not trying to interrupt the speaker. I am just saying there is a whole series of problems and the blame always attaches to the Israeli side.

Mr. William Bell

If Deputy Shatter listens to what I am saying, I was—

There is a multiplicity of difficulties—

With all due respect, the meeting is being taken over. Deputy Shatter has spoken a number of times. There are several questions—

I am just factually correcting.

I would not agree with the Deputy. That is his point of view. We all have our own points of view.

It is not a point of view, it is a fact.

There are many elements to it. There are a number of questions that need to be answered—

It is a fact that some months after the Oslo accord, there were suicide bombings in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, which undermined that peace process.

It is also a fact that the wall was a land grab.

That is not what happened.

Deputy O'Brien, please. Leave it for the moment.

Mr. William Bell

My intention was not to stimulate and provoke another debate.

We cannot have another debate now. Let us deal with some of the questions raised. We do not have the time to go into everything. That would require an enormous amount of time and different circumstances, where issues could be teased out, argued over and so forth, in an attempt to find a solution. Everyone here wants a solution and wants to see an end to violence. Everyone here also recognises that security for both sides is essential and that there must be a practical, political solution.

Mr. William Bell

I agree.

We are grateful for Mr. Bell's report on how things are on the ground at present, which can only be described as disastrous. That has been noted and recorded. We have been invited to Israel and the Palestinian territories and will discuss that invitation shortly. We will obviously have to have further discussions among ourselves before we go there, to tease things out as to what we can usefully do. We do not want to keep following the parade in which people say the same things in every place. We have had people from both sides meet us in order to put across their points of view and work with us to find a solution. We have worked with the Glencree Centre for Peace and Reconciliation on the same basis. They want to continue that work. A conflict resolution unit has also been recently established, although it is only now getting down to its work. We will be devoting a lot of time to this issue. We appreciate the viewpoints of both sides. Perhaps the representatives will wind up by addressing the questions that have been asked.

Mr. William Bell

The EU has been mentioned as a tool that might be used to progress the situation. The association agreement with Israel and the provisional association developed with the Palestinian Authority should in theory apply for both sides and they provide opportunities for leverage. However, the most that anybody in this room can do is encourage engagement with all parties, however difficult that may be. That includes enabling and helping the two parties within the Palestinian sphere to reconcile and develop a nationally representative Palestinian Government that can act as a proper partner in any peace negotiations with Israel. Until that happens, it is difficult to see how anything can be progressed.

I ask Mr. Kilcullen to be reasonably brief.

Mr. Justin Kilcullen

Deputy Shatter put a number of questions to me, all of which have been touched upon. I wish to speak from my personal experience of visiting Palestine and Israel. The economic stagnation and the de-development of Palestine began long before Hamas appeared on the scene as a political reality. The implication of Deputy Shatter's questions was that Hamas was somehow the cause of all this. I was in Kalkilya and Bethlehem three years ago. These two towns have been reduced to the level of ghost towns. Their populations have been driven out and no economic life is left. I refer members to the map of the West Bank on the back cover of the report circulated by Christian Aid, which is reminiscent of the bantustans of South Africa. These were entities created to prevent economic activity and keep people in economic bondage. One must ask why that has been done.

It is not for us as aid agencies to produce the political solutions. You are the politicians. We are here to give testimony on what we see. I have said previously to this committee and am distressed to say again that, in 30 years work in development and dealing with poverty across the world, I have been personally shocked by what I encountered on my visits to Palestine. That is an emotional response and I will not try to defend it from any political theory. It is my human response. As church agencies, we are committed to an agenda of peace and reconciliation. We recognise Israel's right to defend itself but, as Senator Norris has said, if the Israelis chose to build a security wall, they could have built it on their own territory. They have built it in a way that has led to the de-development of Palestine and the economic stagnation of that territory.

I attended the National Forum on Europe meeting this morning, so could not attend the committee until now.

We have had a stimulating and interesting discussion on this subject. We will hold further discussions on it because it is a priority for us. We will take into consideration the information provided by representatives. Ireland has a long and honourable record of helping the Palestinian people and it is important that the committee has a detailed account of the assistance Ireland is giving and the plans in place to help the Palestinians develop and progress. I thank the representatives for their assistance in providing reports.

We received invitations from both the Israeli and Palestinian authorities for a delegation from the committee to visit the region in the near future. We will discuss these invitations in private session. We will of course be very happy to accept the invitations and have some ideas about the issues to be further considered before we go.

The joint committee went into private session at 1.20 p.m. and adjourned at 1.35 p.m. sine die.
Top
Share