Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade debate -
Wednesday, 19 Sep 2012

Situation in Palestine and Israel: Discussion with EAPPI

Chairman

I welcome the delegation from the Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel, EAPPI - Mr. Joe O'Brien, Mr. Emmet Sheerin and Mr. David Heap. Members may know Mr. Heap from his other role as an actor. Before I invite the representatives to make their presentation, I advise them that they are protected by absolute privilege in respect of utterances at this committee. However, if they are directed to cease making remarks on a particular matter and continue to do so, they are entitled thereafter only to qualified privilege in respect of their remarks. Witnesses are directed that only comments and evidence in regard to the subject matter of this meeting are to be given and are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they do not criticise or make charges against any Member of the Oireachtas, a person outside the Houses or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

The Middle East has been designated a high priority in the committee's work programme for 2012, as it was in previous years. We have naturally paid particular attention to the appalling situation in Syria. We have also engaged on the changes taking place in other parts of the Middle East and north Africa, particularly Egypt and Tunisia, in response to the public demonstrations and agitation for change which came to be known as the Arab spring. In my capacity as Chairman of the committee, I addressed the Doha Forum last May on the issue of the challenges arising from the Arab spring. I observed in the course of my presentation that, notwithstanding the pace of change in some parts of the Middle East and north Africa, the legitimate objective of the Palestinian people of establishing their own state has still not been achieved. In fact, the situation has deteriorated in recent times. Moreover, with the presidential election taking place in the United States in the coming months, not much will happen before the end of the year.

The pace of construction of illegal settlements by Israel is a serious obstacle to progress towards a solution under which the Israeli desire to protect the security of its borders and the Palestinian objective of statehood are mutually and equally respected. As part of its programme of work, the committee has already met this year with the Speaker of the Knesset, Mr. Reuven Rivlin, the Israeli Minister for Public Diplomacy and Diaspora Affairs, and the ambassador at the Palestinian mission in Ireland. Today's meeting gives us an opportunity to discuss with the EAPPI representatives how their organisation draws on volunteers' experience in the West Bank to promote its vision of bringing a just and peaceful resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, based on international laws and relevant United Nations resolutions. Many members of the committee have visited Israel and Palestine in the past, some as part of a delegation from the previous committee. I had the privilege of travelling to Israel and Gaza with the Taoiseach, when he was leader of the Opposition, in the immediate aftermath of Operation Cast Lead. There we saw at first hand the devastation caused by the Israeli raids in Palestine. We met with Mr. John Ging, our representative at the United Nations at that time and a person who has done trojan work for the people of Gaza. I hope the committee will be in a position to take up an invitation for a delegation to travel to Israel and Palestine some time in 2013 in order to see the situation there for ourselves.

I am sure members will have plenty of questions for the delegates. I invite Mr. O'Brien to make his opening contribution.

Mr. Joe O'Brien

I thank the Chairman and members for the opportunity to present to them today. The Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel is essentially a human rights observer programme established ten years ago by the World Council of Churches. Observers are recruited from various countries around the globe to live and work at seven locations across the West Bank for between three and four and a half months. Volunteers are recruited for this purpose from the United Kingdom and Ireland by Quaker Peace & Social Witness in London. To date, 20 Irish people have served in the field for EAPPI. I was placed in the Bethlehem area for three months in 2009, while my colleague, Mr. Emmet Sheerin, returned in July from a four and a half month stay at two different locations, where he was at the coalface of the problems caused by illegal settlements. The other colleague who has accompanied me today, Mr. David Heap, returned on Sunday after a three-month placement. Observers are deployed to offer protection through non-violent presence, monitor and report violations of human rights and international humanitarian law, support acts of non-violent resistance alongside local Palestinian and Israeli activists, and engage in public policy advocacy.

I will hand over now to Mr. Sheerin, who will speak about his experiences in the field.

Mr. Emmet Sheerin

As my colleague mentioned, I recently spent four and a half months in the West Bank. My time was divided between the South Hebron Hills, in the southernmost part of the West Bank, and the small village of Yanoun in the north of the West Bank, from where I visited the Jordan Valley on several occasions. These locations are in area C, which compromises more than 60% of the West Bank territory, meaning they are under the full control of Israel. There I witnessed at first hand the impact the Israeli settlement enterprise and related Israeli policies are having on vulnerable Palestinian communities. The challenges people face include the dispossession of land and water resources and the demolition of homes and other vital structures. Together with the rise in violence against Palestinians by extremist Israeli settlers, this situation places thousands of Palestinian men, women and children at serious risk of displacement.

The image on screen is of a woman from the village of Susiya in the South Hebron Hills. Members will notice the bruise under her eye. I took this photo in March after seven Israeli settlers had attacked the woman as she herded sheep on her family's land. The seven men approached from the nearby Israeli settlement, hit her in the face with a rock and beat her with iron bars. Not only do this woman and her entire community live with the constant threat of violence, but much of their land has been made inaccessible because of the settlement. The buffer zone that surrounds it is off-limits to Palestinians, even though it contains much of the villagers' agricultural land and water resources. In addition, almost the entire village of Susiya is at risk of imminent demolition by the Israeli authorities. In June the Israeli military issued demolition orders in respect of more than 50 structures in the village, including homes. There is also a pending demolition order against the village school. If carried out, these demolitions will directly affect more than 100 people.

The small village of Yanoun in the northern West Bank is surrounded on three sides by Israeli settlement outposts. In 2002 residents had to flee their homes following a sustained campaign of violence by Israeli settlers. They eventually returned, but only with the support of international and Israeli human rights activists. There is now a permanent international observer presence in Yanoun, in which I participated for a time. The settlers, with the support of the Israeli military, have taken over a vast amount of Yanoun's agricultural land. According to Rashed, the mayor of Yanoun, who is pictured on the screen, before the establishment of the settlements the villagers had nothing to fear. Now they live with the constant threat of violence and forced displacement.

Close to Yanoun is the Jordan Valley, where Israel's exploitation of Palestinian land and vital resources was most evident to me.

According to United Nations statistics, there are 37 Israeli settlements in the Jordan Valley and Dead Sea area. Between the settlements and the military, therefore, Israel controls a vast amount of land and a major proportion of the water resources in the area. The generous allocation of water to settlers - at the expense of local Palestinians - has enabled them to develop a major agricultural export industry. Human Rights Watch has pointed out that most of the agricultural exports from the northern part of the Jordan Valley go to Europe. At the same time, Israel is preventing the development of Palestinian communities through the systematic demolition of homes or imposing severe restrictions on freedom of movement. Furthermore, the human rights organisation B'Tselem points out some Palestinian communities in the Jordan Valley consume 40% less water than the minimum daily amount recommended by the WHO. The Israeli settlements are completely illegal under international law. There is no escaping the fact, however, that the import and sale of products from the settlement supports this illegal enterprise. There is also the related dispossession and displacement of Palestinian communities. Mr. O'Brien will speak in more detail on the subject of settlement products.

The picture shown in the final slide is of a man I met in the Jordan Valley who had just received a demolition order in respect of his home. Despite being immensely frustrated about his family's situation, he still expressed some hope that the international community - in particular, European states - would respond to their needs and put pressure on Israel to cease its violations of human rights and international law. It is time that we translated strong words into real deeds in respect of this matter.

Mr. Joe O'Brien

For over three years it has been one of our main advocacy aims to push for a ban on settlement products in Ireland. It is important to say that such products are available on the Irish market. This is the bottom line and unfortunately it shows that Ireland is indirectly supporting Israel's illegal settlements. The value of illegal settlement products on the Irish market is extremely difficult to assess, particularly in view of the volume and variety of goods imported into the jurisdiction. However, I will provide some examples. We had some slides in respect of this matter but I do not see a printed version of the picture of the produce of a company called Keter. The latter operates in the Barkan industrial estate, which is near the illegal settlement of Ariel in Occupied Palestinian Territory. If one visits Woodies, B&Q or Argos, one can buy some of Keter's plastic garden furniture and storage products.

SodaStream products are also available on the Irish market. We have provided a picture of such products in one of the hand-outs. This picture was taken in a DID Electrical store in Dublin. SodaStream is located in the Mishor Edomim industrial park, which is situated to the east of Jerusalem in occupied Palestinian territory. I draw members attention to a detailed report about SodaStream and its activities in the occupied territory, which was compiled by an Israeli-Palestinian research project called Who Profits. The latter has an online database which provides details on the companies that operate in illegal settlements and export to various countries internationally. In our short one-page written submission, we identify some of the companies that operate in illegal settlements and export to Ireland. In terms of imports to Ireland from Israel, the value is in the region of €70 to €80 million. We suspect, however, that imports of illegal settlement products would only constitute a very small percentage of this figure.

There is a growing legal opinion that it would be viable for member states of the EU to ban illegal settlement products unilaterally and without the need for EU approval. A renowned international law professor from Cambridge, James Crawford, published an opinion in that regard earlier this year via the Trade Union Council in the UK. This can be found in one of the documents we have circulated to members. We are faced with the reality of illegal settlement products being available in Ireland. In our opinion and that of an eminent legal expert, the Government has the necessary legal framework available to it to institute a ban. Why should we do this now?

As the Chairman stated, for many years Irish Governments have strongly supported the Palestinians' need for their own state. The Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade must be complimented on his efforts in this regard. In the context of Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the formation of foreign policy can be frustrating. It can often seem, for example, that as a distant third party we can have little influence on the situation. However, the extraordinarily positive thing we can say is that, despite this conflict being so far away, protracted and harmful and destructive in so many ways for many decades, the Irish Government and those who can influence it have the opportunity and the power to make a tangible contribution to laying the ground for a just and peaceful solution.

We propose that concerted political efforts be made to institute a national ban on illegal settlement products. This suggestion is not as radical as it might sound. Banning settlement products would merely be a dissociation from breaches of international law. Ireland is connected to the illegal settlement policies and realities and what we are proposing is a simple clearing of conscience. If we do not do this, then we will continue to support one of the biggest barriers to peace. We ask the committee to propose to the Tánaiste that cross-departmental measures be initiated in order to start the practical process towards discovering how such products can be banned. What is particularly strong about the proposal to ban settlement products is the fact that it is not an act against the state of Israel; it is very clearly an action against Israel's illegal actions and not the legitimate state of Israel, which we all recognise. On each occasion we advocate a ban of illegal settlement products, we must make it clear that such a ban is simply a dissociation from illegality.

Illegal settlements have increasingly become the focus of attention at US, EU and UN level. The Norwegian Foreign Affairs Minister recently indicated his country is considering such a ban. There is clearly an appetite on a variety of fronts internationally for taking action in respect of illegal settlements. However, the requisite leadership at international level does not appear to exist at present. We are of the view that Ireland should take the lead on this matter. While our international economic reputation has taken a huge hit, we still have an international reputation for the protection of human rights. We are of the view that the country must live up to the latter. If Ireland displays further leadership on this issue, others will follow and illegal settlements could be isolated - economically and politically - for what they are, namely, illegal, destructive and barriers to peace. In that context, we ask the committee to commit to pushing the agenda of banning the importation of settlement products at national level. We also ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade to initiate cross-departmental measures to start us off on the path towards getting illegal settlement products off the Irish market.

Chairman

I thank our guests for updating us on what is happening on the ground in the Middle East. I am aware that Mr. Heap is also just back from the region. I call on our new member, Deputy Smith, to make his contribution.

Deputy Brendan Smith

I thank the Chairman. I look forward to working with him and the other members of the committee. I am new to this area and in that context, I thank our guests for their presentations because they highlight the severe difficulties experienced in the region in great detail. As the Chairman indicated, the situation has not improved but rather has deteriorated.

Have our guests, their colleagues or other organisations working in this area raised the banning of imported products at European Union level? Has it been raised at the World Trade Organisation, WTO? Both the European Union and the WTO are extremely important with regard to the regulation of trade. From a national perspective, it is not that easy to ban the importation of products. It would be important to foster European Union co-operation in respect of this matter. In addition, it must be remembered that the European Union is an extremely important partner within the WTO framework.

Chairman

I will take questions from three members before reverting to our guests for replies.

Deputy Seán Crowe

I welcome our guests. They made a couple of points during their presentations, one of which is that their job relates to offering support in respect of acts of non-violent resistance. In that regard, I am conscious of the events involving Rachel Corrie. Ms Corrie, an innocent woman involved in a non-violent action, was wearing a high-visibility vest when she was run over by an IDF vehicle. What impact did Ms Corrie's death have in the context of our guests' experiences in Palestine and Israel? The judge who dealt with her case stated that she was in an area of conflict, that it is basically open season within such areas and that proceedings would not be taken in respect of individuals killed by members of the IDF.

What message does that send to people such as the witnesses who are involved in having a non-violent presence in the region? One of the witnesses expressed hope that the international community would intervene. Why would it intervene at this stage? We have seen what has happened in recent years. It amazes me how people in the depths of despair can still have the hope that someone's conscience will be pricked to do something about this. The Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade said that if matters got worse we would probably go down the path of banning the products. What could get worse in terms of the circumstances of people on the ground?

The witnesses talked about demolition. Why would people's homes be demolished? Is it because they did not have planning permission? One of the witnesses spoke about a village that will be demolished. Does that village predate the settlements? Is the lack of planning permission the reason for doing this? Reference was made to the skills that are being lost with the threat of demolition. Why are those schools being targeted?

Deputy Olivia Mitchell

I thank the Chairman for his kind words of welcome and I look forward to working with him and the committee. I hope I will be a fast learner and catch up with the considerable work the committee has already done.

I welcome the group, which has the difficult abbreviated name of EAPPI. I am familiar with its work; a friend of mine was in Palestine last year and another friend was there as part of a Christian church group, doing fairly similar work. The work the witnesses do is great because it has a dual approach in that it is a protective presence but is also reporting back. My friend reported back to me on the situation there and still keeps me in touch with issues as they arise, and I have used that information to raise the matter in the Dáil. It is very useful work.

My question is similar to Deputy Smith's. On the issue of settlements, apart from the human misery the witnesses have seen them cause to families every day, they are also rapidly lessening by attrition the chances of there ever being a two-state solution, because the amount of land left is rapidly becoming unsustainable as a state.

I agree with the witnesses that something needs to happen, and they recommend a ban on importing produce from the settlements. The European Foreign Affairs Council has recommended a Europe-wide ban as one possible solution. Is there value in our moving unilaterally to do that? Would it have an impact? Would it be better for us to work as part of the European Union? What are the witnesses' thoughts on that? Would Ireland's banning of products from the settlements really make a difference or would it simply be symbolic, something that is worth doing just because it is the right thing to do?

Chairman

All the members want to get involved. Mr. O'Brien might answer those questions briefly and the other members might also have time to contribute.

Mr. Joe O'Brien

Okay.

Chairman

I also have a question. Does the group know the value of products from the illegal settlements that are being brought into Ireland?

Mr. Joe O'Brien

No. The total value of Israeli imports is around the €70 million to €80 million mark but the European Commission indicates that imports from illegal settlements to the EU are a very small percentage of that. We do not know their value, but they are a small percentage of what is coming in.

On the question of whether this has been raised at EU level, it has, and we would also support that line of approach. For us, the downside of the EU approach is that all it needs is one veto and it would not work. There is more than one country which I believe would veto it, but perhaps I am being pessimistic. The value in moving unilaterally is due to the political symbolism. It will not be that it will have a direct economic impact because there is not that large a volume of settlement produce in terms of euros. However, we believe there is a willingness and an openness among the international community to do something about it. It is just waiting for some state player to act. There appear to be indications that, for example, the UK, Denmark and France would be that way inclined as well, but it needs someone to make the first move, which is why we favoured the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade focusing on a national ban rather than just an EU ban. We believe there are too many variables and it is too big to get an EU ban put through, whereas the symbolism of a national ban could be very powerful.

On the impact of the Rachel Corrie case, I would stress how well we are prepared and how well we are managed on the ground. We get rigorous training and the recruitment process is also quite rigorous. When we are on the ground we are carefully managed. We would have a good deal of local information about where the dangerous places are. We put ourselves in areas where there is a risk of some kind of conflict but generally our presence prevents that. We are carefully trained in how to manage ourselves if conflict does happen. After the Rachel Corrie incident it is always in the back of our minds that this is something that could happen to us in the field, but we are very well prepared.

Some of Deputy Crowe's questions might have been somewhat rhetorical. He asked what could get worse and could it get worse. I am not even going to think about that. I will pass over to Mr. Emmet Sheerin to deal with the reasons for demolishing the structures.

Mr. Emmet Sheerin

From my experience, the reason for the demolitions I saw when I was there or that were reported to me was that the structures were built without permits. For Palestinians it is almost impossible to get permits. These structures are in area C of the West Bank and Israel has full control over civil as well as security affairs. The Palestinians have to apply to the Israeli authorities for planning permission and nine times out of ten it will be denied. It is also a lengthy and expensive process. The Palestinian communities are forced to build for their needs. Instead of changing the policy of mass demolition and making it a more fair and transparent process, Israel enforces the policy of mass demolition. Incidentally, the committee should be aware that European-funded structures have been demolished in the West Bank and, consequently, there has been a loss of European money.

In regard to the hope that the man to whom I referred raised with me - one might ask why, at present, one would have hope at all - the answer is that he and many people in his community had in the past looked towards America to see what it had been doing. However, they have lost all hope in America and now they are turning their attention towards another power, Europe, to see if it can respond. I was in the West Bank when the Tánaiste made his remarks about settlement produce. I asked this man what he thought about that and he thought it was an important thing to do; he wondered why it not been done before. That was giving him the hope of something tangible that could be done and the hope lies in these things, in what we can do.

Mr. Joe O'Brien

My colleague, Mr. David Heap, wants to add a comment.

Chairman

That is fine.

Mr. David Heap

I want to make two brief points. When the judgment was made in the Rachel Corrie case and the Israeli court found that it was a tragic accident and that no one was to blame, by a curious coincidence, on that same day, there were 16 demolitions of Palestinian homes throughout the West Bank. There had been none in the three or four weeks before that and there were none for a couple of weeks afterwards. It is the kind of Kafkaesque situation one comes across there quite often.

Deputy Crowe asked how people there still have hope. One of the jobs we did was to monitor agricultural gates where farmers have to get permits to access their own land and have to go through a military checkpoint. This is where the barrier has come inside the Green Line, the so-called seam zone. One farmer came to me and said, "We are very grateful when you are here; things go much more smoothly." I asked him the same kind of question the Deputy asked.

His reaction was to say frankly that all we have is hope, so all that we can do is hope.

Deputy Gerald Nash

As chair of the Oireachtas Friends of Palestine Group I welcome the witnesses today and thank them for their engagement with the group and with the committee over a long period. I also wish to put on record the contribution made by Trócaire, Sadaka and other organisations as well. I thank Mr. Heap for the regular updates he provided to me on his underground experience in recent months. I have dispersed the accounts to some committee members. I found reading them compelling but difficult. I recall the incident he related to us about farmers who are essentially penned into the structure he described to access their own land. That was an emotive and striking picture. I thank Mr. Sheerin as well for his deep insights into the situation. We have heard strong words from the EU Council on a variety of potential actions that could be taken on this extremely complex area. However, it is correct to say that the time for words has passed and the time for action - whatever that might be - has come.

People often feel powerless about making a contribution to the resolution of this intractable problem but we have identified a feasible one in terms of the ban on produce from illegal settlements. Individual citizens feel powerless and we as parliamentarians sometimes feel powerless to change the situation. The Tánaiste has set out his position clearly. The European Union must act in a much more vigorous way. I met recently with Pierre Vimont, the head of the External Action Service in the European Union. I sensed his frustration and that of officials about the glacial pace of the European Union's response to issues relating to the Palestinian-Israeli situation. Far be it from me to directly quote such an eminent figure as Pierre Vimont but that was the thrust of his contribution to the meeting, among other contributions he made.

It is important for us to put on record our support, if the committee can reach agreement, for a national ban on imports of products from illegal settlements. We should put it at the centre of our Presidency of the European Union. We must convince our European colleagues that it is not just a symbolic way to make a stand but is also a practical way to convince Israeli public opinion that this is not acceptable any longer, that we cannot tolerate this and that the international community will not tolerate it. The Palestinian people need an ally in the European Union because they have been let down by the United States. They are at the mercy of each and every electoral cycle. That is not acceptable. For a variety of reasons the European Union should stand four-square behind the Palestinian people to do what it can to resolve matters.

It will come as a surprise to many citizens of this country and the European Union to find that SodaStream is made in one of the illegal settlements. It is yet another reason not to drink SodaStream products. I am not being facetious. Do the witnesses intend to campaign on the issue and to inform the public about the type of products that are created in the illegal settlements? If one were to ask someone on O'Connell Street this afternoon to name a product they would find it difficult to pinpoint one. It is important from the point of view of the public consciousness to have those discussions. Do the witnesses have any intention of raising awareness of the issue?

Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan

There is no doubt that the Palestinian question has gone off the agenda. There does not seem to be much will to put it back on the agenda. There is a bigger issue at stake also in terms of how to do that. Reference was made to the role of America. To put it mildly, it is disappointing that the regime has not been more proactive on the matter. I am involved in other human rights issues and great things are expected if President Obama is re-elected. Perhaps this is another item to put onto the list. Many American shops are selling those goods. We must put pressure on them so that they know what they are selling and what they are selling is at the cost of people's homes being destroyed.

Mr. O'Brien said in his introduction that America recognises that the illegal settlements are one of the main barriers to peace but that is rhetoric, as it is not being translated into action. I note that the WhoProfits group is a combined Israeli-Palestinian project. I would like to hear about the role of Israeli people in that because not all Israelis agree with what their Government is doing.

My last question relates to the witnesses, the effect of their presence and that of people like them in Palestine. The witnesses have spoken about their experience there but I wish to know whether they are getting a sense that their presence is welcome and is of value.

Chairman

I will give each member an opportunity to speak. We might have time for an exchange of questions again later.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan

Like others, I thank the delegation for visiting us and giving us their opinions. As Deputy O'Sullivan said, the issue has gone off the agenda. There are a number of reasons for that. The American presidential election is taking place and it is not a major issue of focus such as during Bill Clinton's time. He spent a long time trying to do something about it, unsuccessfully, as he did with situations in other countries, including in this part of the world. A former member of the committee, now President Michael D. Higgins, was of the opinion - I am sure remains so - that the real cause of problems was the lack of a particular area to lodge complaints, a secretariat or permanent structure to which complaints of the nature outlined could be lodged and addressed. That still has not happened. It was one of the things that did happen in this country. There was a secretariat in Hillsborough where contentious issues were put on the table and both sides had to respond in some way, whether to their own embarrassment or otherwise, but issues were aired in that fashion. I do not know what we can do to further that approach other than to do what we can as members of the European Union and to try to bring the influence of fellow members of the Union to focus on the issue.

We must also examine the extent to which we can be of benefit through the United Nations. That is highly questionable due to the attitude of countries in terms of allowing the UN to interfere in what is perceived to be an internal issue. However, we must be seen to do something that will focus on the issues and enable people who have grievances to air them in public and address them. We can have all the reports in the world and the efforts which have been outlined by the witnesses, in addition to the visits we have made in the past - it is a long time since I was first in the region and my hair was a different colour then - but it is sad that nothing has changed since. That is one of the problems. If there was a permanent secretariat to address grievances there would at least be a recognition - perhaps it would take a long time - of the existence of the other persons and their right to an existence as well.

Deputy Eric Byrne

I thank the delegation for attending the meeting. The Quaker organisation and other Christian groups are doing tremendous work. I am very impressed with the Keep Hope Alive campaign which centres on the planting of olive trees in the Palestinian areas. Like other speakers I thank the witnesses for their observations and reporting back because it is ultimately a political issue that must be resolved. It is a tragedy that we are becoming more and more desperate and frustrated in the face of the outbursts and racism of the Israeli settlers. A response is not forthcoming on an internationally agreed platform to the human rights issues and the illegality of what is going on in the Occupied Territories.

The Palestinian ambassador, whom we meet on a regular basis, is frustrated that the two state solution is rapidly becoming more difficult to achieve, essentially because of the unaccountability of the Israelis and the settlers in particular. The speaker of the Knesset and a delegation of parliamentarians from Israel came before this committee. It was remarkable that the speaker was a fifth generation Israeli who had an understanding of the culture of the Arab people. His bright, young Russian emigrant minister was the opposite.

I presume these settlements are being driven by Israel's immigration policy. These people are new arrivals in an ancient land and they have nothing but contempt for the indigenous people. It was interesting, however, that even the speaker of the Knesset is on public record as being outraged at the increasing ferocity of the settlers' racist approach and attitudes to the indigenous Arab-Palestinian population. We should at least recognise that as something progressive that is being debated in the Israeli parliament.

We had a presentation by the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade and his understanding and empathy in terms of the issues pertaining in the Occupied Territories was interesting. He said that if there was no response to the illegality we may have to consider banning produce or demanding the labelling of produce from the Occupied Territories. Next year will be interesting as we will hold the Presidency of the European Union and I hope we can continue that degree of lobbying of the Tánaiste.

It is frightening that Prime Minister Netanyahu can attempt to intimidate President Obama, in the middle of the presidential election in America, by demanding his response to the Iranian nuclear issue. We have a major international power, a powerful and wealthy country, and a dispossessed and disparate Palestinian population. The delegation has given the committee the report of the gentleman who said that despite being immensely frustrated by his family situation he still had some hope that the international community, particularly European states, would respond to their needs and apply real pressure. The question was asked whether the European Union was doing anything. I understand that the European Parliament's international trade committee has met and is reviewing what it calls the protocol in the association agreement between the EU and Israel, in this context regarding pharmaceutical products. A political debate is taking place in Europe on the protocol and there are some who will argue that unless there is compliance by the Israelis with international law we should seek a deferment of that international agreement for at least two years to allow the Israelis address the illegalities taking place. I urge the committee to engage with our MEPs, on behalf of this country, speaking in the Parliament. This is not a party political broadcast. We should use the services of all our elected MEPs to engage thoroughly in that debate. It will be a brave and difficult move but we should also call the Tánaiste to account for his initial suggestion that we may consider banning products and perhaps ask him to take that action in the future.

Senator Jim Walsh

I welcome the members of the delegation. We met previously. I compliment them on the work they are doing. It is not without some personal risk and it is valuable work.

I feel a sense of frustration because people have raised the issue of the two state solution. I note from the notes we get from the Government that it is concerned that is now at considerable risk because of the settlements. There is a stage at which the two state solution may no longer be viable. In the West Bank area mentioned earlier there are now more Israelis than Palestinians. The continuation of that would look like a policy deliberately engineered to thwart the two state solution. I do not know what to say in regard to that.

The witnesses have taken a measured and minimalist approach in seeking the ban on foods coming from the settlements and are asking this committee to get our Government to institute that country-wide. I concur with that approach. We should put that proposal to the meeting to see if the committee will agree with it because it is important that the Government would take two steps, one of which I picked up from the Trades Union Congress letter. The first one would be what the delegation is asking for and the second would be that it would conduct due diligence across all Government services to identify where they might inadvertently be aiding and abetting the illegal settlements. The TUC is putting such a proposal to the British Government. The delegation might let us know if there is a response from the British Government to that because it would be welcome. That would give us credibility going into the European Presidency in that we could seek the labelling of such produce as a first step. We should do it step by step. Politicians generally kick to touch and we need to make difficult decisions in this regard.

I have a number of questions for the delegation. First, have its members had any discussions with retailers here? The letter from the TUC states that in Britain most of the multiples now have very little, if any, offending products on their shelves. Has there been any campaign here, and what has been the response of the multiples here?

Second, to where are the settlement products mainly exported? Ireland would account for an infinitesimal amount of the overall number but as the witnesses said, from the point of view of making a statement and giving leadership, it would be important but to where does the majority of it go? I have asked that question previously and I understand from the witnesses' answer that they believe there is not support for that but the illegal settlements are in place at the direction of the Israeli Government. They would not be there otherwise. Why is it not broadened to include all Israeli goods? I am inclined to agree with the witnesses' argument that we should go with this to determine how effective it is but in the background we should not rule out extending it if the Israeli Government, as it clearly appears, is acting illegally and against international law in this area.

We must be balanced in this regard also. Representatives of the Bahá'í faith were here recently and they spoke specifically about Iran. The committee made a case to the Iranian ambassador about Padre Youcef Nadarkhani who was sentenced to death for apostasy. I understand that apostasy is a capital offence in Palestine. Is that correct? I have been approached by people who take a different view than me on these matters. Arguments are being put to us which, if they are true, weaken the case that we can make and it is important that this is addressed to some extent because all the rights and wrongs do not come down on one individual side. As is the case in most disputes, there is varying degrees of culpability.

Chairman

I travelled with the Taoiseach to the West Bank to see the illegal settlements and the difficulties faced by the Palestinian people, even to cross the road. I attended a function in Dublin last week at which Robert Fisk was the guest speaker. He said that we all talk about a two state solution but he could never see a two state solution and land exchange in the short term. He said the land exchange issue would be very difficult because the best fertile land has been taken over. He said the issue of land exchange and the two state solution was far down the road, so to speak.

Mr. Joe O'Brien

I will try to address most of the questions asked and my colleagues might pick up on responses I may have omitted.

On whether we have a campaign planned, one answer would be that this is part of it but we bounce the ball back in that regard because I am not sure how many resources it would take to make every citizen in Ireland aware of the various products on the shelves. It would take a lot.

We do not advocate that approach either because, while I know where the members are coming from, it reduces it to a consumer issue. This is not really a consumer issue but one of international humanitarian and human rights law. We really feel it is the Government’s responsibility to address it rather than depict it as a matter of which consumers should be aware. That said, I draw attention to our colleagues in Trócaire who are to launch a campaign soon on settlement products.

It is not our policy to advocate a boycott of all Israeli products. That would be detrimental to a settlement in the longer term and, at a practical level, we do not believe there would be support for it, certainly at EU level. I do not have the percentage to hand but the European Union is by far the largest trading partner with Israel and the illegal settlements.

We certainly acknowledge that addressing human rights abuses and human rights law across the board is not the sole responsibility of Israel. However, Israel is an established and well-resourced state so there is, therefore, some responsibility.

Mr. Emmet Sheerin

Deputy O'Sullivan asked a question about the value of international organisations and our role on the ground. Let me refer again to the village of Yanoun, which is a good example. The villagers tell us constantly that if we were not present – EAPPI has a permanent international presence all year round in the village - they would leave. This is a clear example of the real impact we have. In the south Hebron hills, there was an instance in which international bodies were able to bring media attention to the threatened demolition of solar panels in a village called Imneizil. They were EU funded, possibly through Spain. The international presence resulted in media attention and there was a freeze on the demolition of the vital solar panels.

Deputy O'Sullivan also asked about people in Israel who do not agree with the occupation of Palestinian territory and who are actively campaigning against it. We work quite closely with Israeli peace activists. There are many groups, including Rabbis for Human Rights and B'Tselem, a well-regarded human rights organisation. It is very important that we stand in solidarity with these people because they work in a very difficult environment. There are certain Israelis who are campaigning actively against what is happening. It is a question of supporting them also because they will have an effect.

Mr. Joe O'Brien

To recap, we genuinely believe this is a very practical measure that could make a real difference. While we acknowledge that the actual implementation may be difficult and that there will be a bit of work involved at various levels, including cross-departmentally, it really could have a very significant impact on the future of settlements and the chances for a just peace in the area. We urge all the members to use whatever efforts and influence they have to push for an international ban on illegal settlement produce.

Chairman

Do members have any supplementary questions?

Deputy Seán Crowe

The delegation mentioned EU property. A Liberal Democrats Member of Parliament put a question to the Commission and it was said in response that from May 2001 to October 2011, €30 million worth of infrastructure invested in by the European Union was destroyed. It has been said that €50 million worth of infrastructure has been destroyed. It seems that much of the infrastructure invested in by the European Union is targeted specifically. This, in itself, is a reason the European Union should respond.

It was stated today that nothing has changed. This would be the wrong message to send out because, if anything, circumstances are getting worse. The delegates referred to the change in area C. What is occurring is ethnic cleansing. People are being forced off their land and not allowed water, jobs or homes. In the area in question, Palestinians were in the majority but now settlers comprise the majority. We are old enough to remember what happened in parts of Derry, where people were discriminated against in respect of housing and jobs. There is a similar pattern, only worse, in the area in question. Somebody must say stop.

I am old enough to remember the anti-apartheid picket outside Dunnes Stores years ago. We all had very strong positions on apartheid. A couple of women and one young man decided they were not going to handle the goods from South Africa. This sent a message around the world. Perhaps such small beginnings matter. I do not know whether workers will take up the baton. We, as parliamentarians, have a responsibility to encourage our leaders to step up to the plate on this matter.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan

We will be taking it up with the Minister as we have done in the past. The Tánaiste will obviously pursue the matter to the best of his ability within the structures that are available to him. It is best left to him in the first instance to determine what is most feasible and what is likely to have the most impact.

Deputy Eric Byrne

We should not have to rely on some brave worker to refuse to handle the produce or take the political route. We should inform our MEPs that when they must make a definitive decision of the European Parliament's international trade committee protocol, they should take on board what we have to say to them as a result of today's meeting.

Chairman

Are we proposing that we write to our MEPs and the Tánaiste? The Tánaiste has stated he would pursue the issue at EU level. Obviously, nothing has been agreed yet, but it is up to this committee to write to the Tánaiste following today’s meeting with the delegation to ask him to pursue this matter at EU level. To achieve agreement at EU level will always be difficult when there are 27 member states, but we must ask ourselves where plan B is if an agreement is not reached. Have members any thoughts on that?

Deputy Eric Byrne

A vote will be taken in the European Parliament on that matter at the plenary meeting in October. It is important for us to convey to the MEPs the views expressed today by members and the Minister for Foreign Affairs, who was made public statements on this matter, such that the MEPs will be familiar with this committee's opinion when debating the matter.

Chairman

We will have the Tánaiste before us very shortly and can raise the issue with him once again. The committee should probably write to him on this matter and ask him to pursue the issue.

Senator Jim Walsh

I agree with the Chairman's proposition. I propose, in addition, that we ask the Tánaiste to consider taking steps to institute a national ban on settlement goods in Ireland. That is a matter on which the Government can decide. It would strengthen the Tánaiste’s hand in Europe if he did so.

Chairman

Is Deputy Nash seconding Senator Walsh's proposal?

Deputy Gerald Nash

Yes. To enhance the issue relating to the European Council, we should consider this matter in the context of the forthcoming EU Presidency. We should also request that the Tánaiste examine it from that perspective.

Chairman

That is fine. Is the proposal agreed? Agreed. Does Mr. O'Brien wish to comment further?

Mr. Joe O'Brien

We would be somewhat concerned that if energy is diverted at EU level, it will then dissipate and action may not be taken. We wish to be clear that we are also seeking a national ban. Obviously, the EU channels must be pursued. This idea is well thought out and a great opportunity exists. What is proposed has the potential to be very powerful as well. Again, I reiterate that we wish to push matters in the context of the national channel. That channel could work well as an example during our EU Presidency. In other words, it would be good for people to see that the country holding the Presidency is engaging in this kind of leadership at national as well as international level.

Senator Jim Walsh

Will Mr. O'Brien comment further on whether apostasy is a capital offence?

Mr. Joe O'Brien

The short answer is that I do not know.

Senator Jim Walsh

Would it be possible to check the position in that regard?

Mr. Joe O'Brien

Yes.

Chairman

If Mr. O'Brien obtains the relevant information, he can send it to the committee secretariat and it will be disseminated to members.

I wish to inform the committee that I attended the EU Presidency meeting which took place in Cyprus last week. Ms Catherine Ashton, Vice-President of the European Commission and High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, was asked a similar question in respect of the settlements. She indicated that she was very disappointed with the continued extension of the settlement programme and with the lack of progress in this area. She is extremely concerned about the fact that settlements continue to be built and indicated that there does not appear to be any willingness to change the existing policy. This is an issue that we will pursue at EU level. It will remain at the top of our agenda, not just during this session but also during 2013.

I thank Mr. O'Brien, Mr. Sheerin and Mr. Heap for coming before the committee and outlining their experiences of and offering their ideas on what is happening in Palestine at present. This has been a very useful discussion. It is important for the committee to be informed about the human consequences of what is taking place and also about the political stalemate that is impeding progress towards a solution. If this were a simple matter, a solution would have been found long ago. It is, however, an extremely complex and difficult one with which to grapple. There must be political will to make progress. In that context, economic pressure is required in order to encourage a more constructive approach on the part of the Israeli Government. The EU - in the form of its External Action Service - has become far more active in respect of the Middle East peace process than was the case in the past and we are now in a position to help to move matters forward. The committee will continue to monitor the situation and will have the opportunity to review developments at EU level when the Minister comes before us to discuss the work of the Foreign Affairs Council later in the year. I again thank our guests for attending and I invite them to keep us updated on developments. We will now go into private session.

The joint committee went into private session at 3.45 p.m. and adjourned at 4.45 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 26 September 2012.