I will take us through the two issues. Khan al-Ahmar is a village in the occupied West Bank, just east of Jerusalem. It is near two large Israeli settlements, Ma’ale Adumim and Kfar Adumim, and close to an Israeli industrial zone. The villagers living there are the descendants of Bedouins who had been living in the Negev but who were expelled from there by the Israeli Government in the 1950s. On 5 September last, Israel’s highest court upheld an order to demolish the entire village. This has been in the offing for some time and there have been many legal challenges. Unfortunately, this ruling means the village can be demolished and its residents forcibly transferred at any time from 12 September.
I am sure the committee is aware of the frequent demolition of Palestinian homes, schools and agricultural structures across the West Bank. Our observers have frequently witnessed either demolitions or their aftermath. Like those demolitions, the demolition of Khan al-Ahmar and the resulting forced transfer of its 200 residents, including nearly 100 children, will be a grave breach of the Geneva conventions and a war crime under the Rome Statute. However, as we said at the beginning, this is a new crisis and marks a turning point, in a way. The Tánaiste, Deputy Coveney, stated:
The communities are located in a particularly sensitive part of Area C in the West Bank, an area which is critical for the viability of a future Palestinian state. Any attempt to develop the land for illegal settlements is therefore a threat to the Two State solution.
Building settlements in this area would encircle East Jerusalem, cutting it off from the rest of Palestine. It would also, essentially, cut the West Bank in two, north and south, again threatening any future Palestinian state and making any contiguous Palestinian state impossible to build. Due to the sensitive nature of this area, much of the international community has spoken out frequently, calling on Israeli authorities not to demolish the village and stating there would be serious consequences. Our position if that if we are serious about peace and justice in the region, we cannot allow this demolition to happen or, at least, to happen without consequences. There was a joint statement by France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom on 10 September condemning the decision but it contained little on meaningful action. When it talked of consequences, it talked only of the negative consequences for the Bedouin community who would lose their homes. What is needed now is action.
Since I sent in the briefing which members may have seen, there has been a call from community leaders for a greater international presence. Many of our eyewitnesses and EAs are there and call for a constant, overnight international presence to provide that protective presence to the villagers. I want to read a quote from one of the EAs who is currently in the village. She said:
One woman told us that the perpetual uncertainty means we are just cooking, cleaning and eating, rather than making long-term plans or improvements to homes. In the approach to the wedding season the lack of such plans is really notable. Meanwhile the people are watched by drones. The schoolteachers reported a dramatic fall in school results. Mothers tell us their children wet the bed and jump every time a new vehicle arrives.
With regard to UNRWA funding, 95% of the residents of Khan al-Ahmar are already refugees from the Negev. Should the demolitions go ahead, they will end up relying on the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, which, thankfully, is known by the shorter moniker of UNRWA. As the committee is probably aware, the United States recently ended all funding to UNRWA, cuts which the organisation's Commissioner-General has described as an “existential threat”. In fact, since sending this presentation to the committee last week, further cuts have been announced by the American regime, including €25 million in cuts to Palestinian hospitals in East Jerusalem and €10 million in cuts to NGOs supporting peace building work on the ground. There has been a general de-funding of any work in the region to try to promote peace and justice and to try to alleviate the suffering that exists.
During my time in Bethlehem I was close to Aida refugee camp and spent a lot of time there. Aida is one of several refugee camps in the Bethlehem area and is home to approximately 3,150 refugees who live in dense, cramped and poor conditions, and where poverty and unemployment are high. It is right next to the separation barrier and a military base, and there are frequent clashes. When one walks around in the morning, the smell of tear gas and the lingering smell of "Skunk" water are never far away because the camp is regularly choked with tear gas or "Skunk" water. Against this difficult background, UNRWA provides education and psycho-social support for children in the camp, food support for families and health services. Access to education is a difficulty for Palestinian children at the best of times and is something that is worked on by EAPPI and UNICEF. To lose the funding for schools will have a huge impact. Alongside this, some 30,000 Palestinian doctors, nurses, teachers and other staff are employed by UNRWA but now face unemployment and, therefore, the prospect of poverty. In Gaza, the unemployment rate is close to 44% and this will increase further should UNRWA collapse.
The US cuts represent an attempt to undermine the international legal consensus on the protected status of Palestine refugees and, so, are ultimately an attempt to undermine international law. These cuts threaten what stability currently exists in the region. There is a growing sense of despair and nihilism among Palestinians that will only fuel the frustration and desperation they feel, and potentially feed into violence and extremism.
The UNRWA Commissioner-General stated in an open letter to Palestine refugees and UNRWA staff published on 1 September:
The responsibility for the protracted nature of the Palestine refugee-hood, the growing number of refugees and the growth in needs, lies squarely with the parties and in the international community’s lack of will or utter inability to bring about a negotiated and peaceful resolution of the conflict between Israel and Palestine. The attempt to make UNRWA somehow responsible for perpetuating the crisis is disingenuous at best.