Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Thursday, 24 May 2001

Vol. 166 No. 17

Middle East: Statements.

I thank the Seanad for giving me the opportunity to make a statement on the Middle East. The Government is acutely concerned by the crisis in Israeli-Palestinian relations. The resurgence of this conflict has already taken an appalling toll of life and put in jeopardy the peace process in which so much effort and hope have been invested. It poses a real threat to the stability of the entire Middle East region.

The confrontation in the Palestinian territories and Israel is fraught with dangers. This outburst of violence occurred during that crucial and tense stage when the parties were moving closer to agreement than they had ever been. Tragically, the essential pillars of peace, trust and confidence, have been seriously undermined. Rage and frustration, stemming from the failure of each side to respond adequately to the problems of the other, have boiled over, and the world community has witnessed the awful consequences.

We have made our position clear. We deplore all acts of violence and have called for a complete cessation of acts of hostility. I renew our call on both sides to exercise the utmost restraint and to do all in their power to prevent incidents and the escalation to which they give rise. Both sides need to move in the direction of an agreement on how to revive the peace process and to avert the dangers that this conflict could incite. The major objective is the achievement of a just, comprehensive and lasting peace in the region, which must necessarily recognise both the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people and Israel's right to live in peace and security.

I pay tribute to the very impressive work of the Sharm el-Sheik fact-finding commission headed by Senator George Mitchell. Javier Solana, the High Representative of the Common Foreign and Security Policy, also played a major role in the commission's work on behalf of the EU. Their intention was to save the peace process. We know from our experience of building peace in Northern Ireland that there is no other way forward.

The Government has welcomed the commission's report which was published on Monday. The report recommends that the Government of Israel and the Palestinian authority should reaffirm existing agreements and immediately cease violence, immediately resume security co-operation, establish a meaningful cooling off period and discourage incitement in all its forms. These recommendations are broadly similar to those made in the initiative undertaken recently by Egypt and Jordan. They are designed to bring a halt to the current violence and open a way towards the resumption of peace negotiations.

The measures also call for a freeze on all settlement activity, the lifting of the closures of Palestinian towns, the transfer to the Palestinian authority of all tax revenues owed, permission for Palestinians to return to their jobs in Israel and for Israeli security forces and settlers to refrain from the destruction of homes, roads, trees and agricultural property. These measures are similar to those contained in the draft resolution tabled by Ireland and three other European countries, France, the United Kingdom and Norway, at the United Nations Security Council in March.

The Government is convinced that such measures offer the only possible path out of the current violence and towards a peaceful solution of this tragic conflict in which so many lives have been lost. I have called on both sides to move to adopt the measures recommended by the Mitchell report and to act urgently to halt further acts of violence and, in particular, to do all in their power to de-escalate the level of violence.

In a live televised broadcast on Tuesday night, Prime Minister Sharon broadly welcomed the Mitchell report as a constructive and positive document and as a positive basis which may enable both sides to break the cycle of violence. It is noteworthy that it was after this broadcast that an aide to Prime Minister Sharon announced that the Government had ordered the Israeli military to cease all initiated actions against the Palestinians as a first step towards implementing the Mitchell commission's proposals for calming the violence.

Press analysis has overwhelmingly assessed the Mitchell report as offering the best hope of a path away from the abyss, a lifeline of which everyone must grab a firm hold. The parties no doubt have hard things to say to each other but it would be best if these were said in the most propitious framework in the present circumstances. The important thing is that they speak to each other, work to overcome their mutual mistrust and do their best, with outside help, to restore an atmosphere conducive to negotiation. There must be a political process. A vacuum will simply allow the extremists on either side to exploit the fears of ordinary Palestinians and Israelis alike, reinforcing the vicious circle of violence.

We are playing a part in the intensive diplomatic efforts being made to bring the crisis to an end, bilaterally with both sides, in the EU and as a member of the Security Council. In our bilateral contacts with Israel, we have encouraged them to join the Palestinian authority in seeking to rebuild trust and confidence, mutual respect, parity of esteem and a spirit of partnership. I outlined our experience on these islands in developing a win-win approach. I also reminded them of the concrete contribution Ireland has made to peace in the region through our participation in UN peacekeeping in Lebanon, where the safety of our troops is of ongoing concern.

Stressing the need for maximum restraint on all sides, we assured them of our support for all efforts to restore calm and to find a way forward to a peaceful solution. We have strongly put forward our views. I met the Palestinian Minister for Planning and International Co-operation, Dr. Nabil Sha'ath, in Dublin on Tuesday. He was also received by the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs. He was encouraged that the US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, had endorsed the Mitchell report and he said that the Palestinian authority will honour its part of the report's recommendations. He asked that both Ireland and our EU partners do all we can in dialogue with the United States to persuade them to embrace the report's recommendations and engage in rebuilding the peace process. He said that the Palestinians should have recourse to the Fourth Geneva Convention. He wanted the parties to the convention, as he put it, to signal international displeasure at the violation of international law and requested that the EU member states convey their agreement to reconvening a conference on this issue in Geneva. I cannot report that he was optimistic about the prospects for early progress towards a resumption of meaningful negotiations with the Israeli Government. Nevertheless, he called for Europe to play a full supportive role in the search for peace.

The EU General Affairs Council last week addressed the crisis. My EU colleagues and I had a thorough discussion with UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, about the difficulties posed by the current situation. The EU position is to impress on all parties the need to de-escalate the level of violence and adopt a package of concurrent, mutually supportive measures and not to insist on single measures which in isolation are incapable of being either accepted or implemented. Key points would be the implementation of existing agreements and an end to all further settlement activities. The EU position on Israel's settlement policy is clear. All settlement activities in Gaza, the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and on the Golan Heights are illegal under international law and constitute a major obstacle to peace. This includes what is known as the natural growth of settlements, which is a violation of international law that cannot be allowed to continue unabated.

Ireland is working actively as a member of the Security Council in the search for ways to overcome the breakdown in trust. Ireland and three other European countries, France, the United Kingdom and Norway, tabled a draft resolution in March. We had further discussions in the council this week and last week and these are to be taken further in the coming days. The use of lethal weapons and recourse to disproportionate and excessive retaliation have been widely condemned.

The Israeli Government has been criticised, particularly by the leading newspapers in Israel, for its use of F16 jet fighters to bomb Palestinian targets on Friday, 18 May in retaliation against the suicide bombing in Netanya on the same day which we absolutely condemn. This is further evidence that these newspapers have taken issue, not with the principle of retaliation, but with the means, arguing that by Israel's use of the F16s, the Palestinian authority gained the upper hand in the public relations battle and that European and US Sunday newspapers gave more emphasis to the Israeli high-tech warfare machine than the deed of the suicide bomber.

Another dimension is that at the same time the Palestinian Authority still faces enormous financial and institutional problems. The international donor meeting in Stockholm on 11 April was a concrete step towards a solution to the authority's budgetary crisis, particularly the commitments made by Arab countries. Following the Stockholm meeting, the European Commission and the authority have been discussing the basis for future assistance. This includes measures intended to enhance financial management and complete the process of institutional reform. Some of these measures, in particular those referring to institutional reform, constitute a clear confirmation of commitments announced in the past by the authority.

The Palestinian Authority is also working on other welcome reforms related to financial management, such as the consolidation of revenues. The IMF is monitoring this process. On this basis the European Union is to make monthly payments of 10 million to the authority during the next six months.

I assure the House that we will continue to work together with our partners and friends in Europe, Israel and the Arab world, to encourage a return to the only path which leads away from conflict and towards genuine peace, security and justice for all the peoples and countries of the Middle East. I will also make every effort to ensure that this House and the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs is kept fully informed and notified of the Government's activities to this end.

I welcome the Minister. He has given us a comprehensive overview of the current situation in the Middle East with particular reference to Israel and Palestine as well as a comprehensive view of the Government's policy and attitude. He will find that much of what I have to say reflects his views of the situation.

I join with him in welcoming the report of the international commission, chaired by George Mitchell, whom we know well, on the origins of the current upsurge of violence between Israel and Palestine. I also welcome the fact that both sides to the conflict have broadly welcomed the findings of the Mitchell commission. Let us hope that forms the basis for peace or the start of negotiations.

I welcomed the decision by Israel last year to withdraw its forces from Lebanon, which was a very positive step forward under the premiership of Mr. Barak. It is a great pity Syria cannot see its way to withdrawing its forces from Lebanon as it would be a huge step forward in creating a better sense of security for Israel if the Syrian Government found it no longer had a reason to keep so many divisions of its large army in Lebanon. Israel has issues with the "security" of its own continued existence and it will always feel it inimical to its security to have so many troops of another major power in the region, Syria, based in a neighbouring country. Of course Syria would gainsay much of what I am saying by referring to the Golan Heights, which it and the world sees as part of Syrian sovereign territory but which has been occupied since 1967 by Israel.

We must condemn the unreasoning violence and rhetoric of the recent upsurge. It all started when Ariel Sharon went to the Temple Mount, though that was preceded by the breakdown of the conference under then President Clinton; it had been hoped that that would bring about a solution last September.

One cannot understand the totally disproportionate use of force by the Israeli army and the unjustified and wanton destruction of Palestinian property by that army. There is also the use of collective punishment against the civilian population in the West Bank and Gaza. The Palestinian legislative council, the effective Palestinian Government, cannot meet because of these assaults on the civilian population and because of the encirclement of the many scattered areas which constitute the Palestinian territory on the West Bank. Many of them are under siege, which means that legislators representing and living in these areas cannot go to plenary sessions of the Palestinian legislative council. That is a great barrier to creating an environment in which the Palestinian Government can even agree an approach to reopening the peace process.

We must also be balanced and as neutral as possible and I will try to be but it is necessary for me to say harder things about the Israeli Government than the Palestinian Authority. I am expressing the facts as I believe them. However, the Palestinian Authority has not shown leadership in being determined to follow a policy of peaceful coexistence with Israel. Palestine must recognise Israel's special existence on its own security.

If the history of the Jewish State and people has taught us anything, it is that the Jewish people have suffered appallingly at the hands of the rest of the world. They have suffered genocide, persecution and open hatred and discrimination over centuries. The Jewish State was born in 1948 and on almost every day it was attacked by its neighbours with a view to its total destruction. One has to see that within the Israeli psyche there is this overriding need for security but it is something the Palestinians do not or cannot seem to understand. If an environment for a peaceful solution to the problem is to be created they will have to understand that, as must the rest of the world. Many people still remember the Holocaust or are children of its victims; there are still survivors of the Holocaust in Israel. All of them know their own history and know that no matter where they were in the world they were discriminated against as a minority.

The Government must encourage the efforts of the international commission and the joint EU effort, of which we are part. It must encourage in every possible way the restart of negotiations. When those negotiations recommence the same issues will confront the negotiators – the status of Jerusalem and the holy sites, the Jewish settlements, which are very important, and the refugee problem. These are often seen as intractable problems and they will remain to be confronted by both sides when they eventually sit down to work out a settlement, as they will have to do.

The Jewish settlement issue is one of the most problematic. The many international actors involved in the Palestinian-Israeli problem since it commenced, including the UN, have long acknowledged that the continued expansion of these settlements by Israel has had damaging effects on confidence building between the two sides. The policy of building new settlements in the West Bank and Gaza completely undermines a two state solution to the problem which would recognise continuous borders that would be defensible. The policy of building settlements flies in the face of the first principle of the Oslo peace process, which was land for peace. We should not forget that. The House and the Government must utterly condemn the Jewish settlement policy and I was glad to hear what the Minister had to say on this issue today. It is illegal. In the Israeli State budget this year US$300 million was earmarked for further settlement programmes in 2001 and that must be condemned.

The Israeli Government must also be called upon to control the activities of many people who have been settled in these areas. The settlers are often fanatical ultra-Orthodox Jews who have come from aboard. They have engaged in the most appalling provocative activity and propaganda. They have not been adverse to turning on the Israeli security forces, taking the law into their own hands and behaving in a lawless manner. We are not convinced that the Israeli Government, especially under Sharon, is in any mood to tackle these people.

The Israelis use of force, ranging from bombings from helicopter gunships to extra-judicial killings of Palestinian figures, has been condemned by the international community. The closure of territories, the destruction of houses and private property and the collective punishments are seen by the Palestinians as forms of inadmissible violence. There are also allegations that Israel uses weapons containing depleted uranium and we know the concerns about people's health and the environment which that entails.

Israel has also used F16 bombers recently in raids over the Palestinian territories. These F16 bombers were sold by the United States to Israel on the basis that they would be used only for defensive purposes, not for the offensive purposes in these cases, and that must be condemned by the international community, including Ireland.

There has been great concern in the Palestinian territories regarding respect for human rights. There have been many reports of arbitrary arrests in the Palestinian territories and of detention without trial, torture and deaths while in custody, summary trials and executions. All these reports have been backed up by facts. These incidents have taken place in the Palestinian territories, perhaps with the consent of the Palestinian authority – we do not know. However, the EU has been forced to take up these matters strongly with the Palestinian authority and has not got satisfactory answers. Calls on the Palestinian authority by the EU rapporteur for a moratorium on the death penalty have also met deaf ears.

As regards the observance of human rights by Israel in situations of war or conflict, a recent statement on behalf of the EU regretted the failure of the Israeli Government to co-operate with the special rapporteur of the EU on the human rights situation in the occupied territories. At the same time the EU has had to remind Israel that the Geneva Convention relative to the protection of civilian persons in times of war "is fully applicable to the Palestinian occupied territories, including East Jerusalem, and constitutes binding international humanitarian law". It is somewhat shocking that a country such as Israel, which calls itself a modern democratic state, has had to receive that warning and reminder from the EU regarding its human rights practices and its role in upholding basic human rights, albeit in a conflict or war with its neighbour.

I am sorry my time has run out. There is much more to discuss. I would like to talk about the economic effects which this has on Israel and particularly on the Palestinian territories. These territories are now bankrupt. Israel is a modern economy in which the average per capita income per annum is about $19,000 or $20,000, whereas it is less than $2,000 in the Palestinian territories. Therefore one can see the great difference which exists in the capacity of the protagonists to withstand this terrible conflict.

I thank you, Chairman, for your indulgence in allowing me these few minutes to add those one or two additional thoughts. There was much more I hoped to say. We must take up with the Leader that we need a little more than ten minutes for contributions on issues as important as this.

I have been asking for a debate on the situation in the Middle East for some time and I thank the Leader for arranging it today. I equally thank the Minister for taking time off to come into the House, although it is not time off—

It is time well spent.

—because this is a matter of considerable urgency for Ireland and world politics. I have been speaking about the problems in the Middle East for many years. Unfortunately I have not seen movement which would provide a peaceful resolution of the problem and I am getting increasingly worried about what is happening there.

Ambassador Brendan Scannell in Tel Aviv has been a huge influence in the area and, luckily enough we appointed Ms Isolde Moylan-McNally as chargé d'affaires in Ramallah. She is probably living and working in one of the toughest post ings, but from seeing what she has done in other places, I suggest that her presence there is of considerable importance to the Minister, the Department and Ireland. That is recognised by the Palestinian Authority as well as by everybody else.

Trust and confidence-building is needed in the Middle East. I might be wrong but I think that Mauritania and Israel are the only two countries which were created by vote of the United Nations. It is very difficult to see trust and confidence being engendered when at all times Israel, a country created by the United Nations, has not adhered to the wishes of the United Nations and the international community.

Ireland is a member of the UN Security Council. I recognise that, because Ireland is only a temporary member, its influence must be more of a moral nature because the five permanent members possess a veto on decisions. While our moral influence must be put forward at all times, the unfortunate reality is that the problems in the Middle East will not be resolved because to date the United States has used its veto whenever there has been a tough resolution against Israel before the Security Council.

The Israelis have every right to enjoy the protection of the world and to protect themselves. They are entitled to be a nation and we accept that, but they should not pursue that at the expense of the Palestinians, the indigenous population of the area. Long before the Ashkenazim arrived, the Sephardim were resident there. As Senator Connor stated, the Ashkenazim arrived in Palestine as a result of genocidal problems in Europe. There was an attempt to eliminate the Jews in Europe from the face of the earth and no doubt they needed protection. However, that protection should not have been provided at the expense of the Palestinians.

There is no question or doubt that civil rights abuses are being committed on the Palestinians. It is difficult in an occupied territory for the leadership of the Palestinians to gather all their people together as an entity and expect that there will not be abuses of power in the area.

Recently I attended a conference of the Islamic states in Tehran in support of the Palestinian Intifada at which I heard the most radical people in the world talking about support for the Palestinians. It frightened me very much because Hizbollah and Hamas and the leaders of every radical group in the Islamic community were talking about what they would do to support the Palestinians. The rhetoric was not so much in support of the Palestinians but rather in support of a huge Islamic coup in the Middle East. That is very frightening. If these people become involved, the Palestinians will not be the ones to gain, and we will all be the losers. It was very frightening to listen to the rhetoric of violence being cheered by up to 5,000 people. We must be cognisant of the fact that the Palestinians are victims, not alone of what is happening in Israel, but also of the support they receive from extreme radical groups around the world.

I ask the Minister to ensure that at United Nations level, everything possible is done to bring about a peaceful resolution, to persuade the Government of Israel that it is in its interests to support Yasser Arafat and the PLO. Otherwise, the conflagration that could happen in the Middle East will affect all of us. It is a frightening prospect.

I saw the American reaction to the conference in Tehran. They regarded it as a meeting of terrorists about terrorism. The rhetoric at that meeting was terrorist rhetoric. The Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon is nonsense. They withdrew from Lebanon because their people were being killed in south Lebanon. F16s and helicopters can be used in Lebanon without the need for Israeli soldiers on the ground.

The symbolism was important at the same time.

I do not wish to react to the Senator's remark. The Israelis were protecting themselves by withdrawing from Lebanon. The Syrians were invited into Lebanon but the Israelis were not.

The state of Israel was created in 1948 by the United Nations. There is now huge discrimination against the minority in Israel. I will give an example in an Irish context. Five years ago, a farm was being divided in Ballingarry, County Tipperary. The farm had been owned by the same person who owned the mines in Ballingarry. People from the area showed me maps of where their ancestors had lived in the Ballingarry area in the 18th and 19th centuries. Palestinians were evicted out of their homes in 1948 and have been displaced ever since. Like the people in Ballingarry, the Palestinians do not forget where they came from. They know the placement of each vine in the vineyards in their home place. They have been eliminated from the face of the earth. People then urge them to remain calm in the face of the violence of the Israeli state. It is a nonsense to think that they would forget in one generation what has happened to them.

I ask the Minister and, through the Minister, the UN Security Council to make every effort to bring about a peaceful resolution. If peace is not achieved within the next year, there will be a conflagration. Radicalism throughout the world will be part of that. The Middle East is as close to Ireland as Norway, it is on our doorstep. A conflagration could happen overnight and we will all suffer. I thank the Minister for coming to the House today because this is a matter of extreme importance. The Middle East is very near to us, like friends and relations. I ask the Minister to continue his efforts for peace in the Middle East on behalf of the Israelis who are genuinely looking for peace and on behalf of the Palestinians who must have peace.

I am very glad to see the Minister back in the House and back in action, although a little wounded and carrying the scars and the bandages. I hope it was not the vigorous exchange of views in this House on the afternoon of the Minister's accident that contributed to that rather unfortunate event. I am very glad he is still very much on form, as was evidenced by his speech.

This is a question of competing rights. It is a very complex situation. Anyone who imagines or suggests it is possible to view this simply from one angle and to characterise one side as completely wrong and the other completely right makes no valuable contribution, simply muddies the water and only adds extra confusion to the whole issue.

I listened with interest and care to Senator Lanigan's contribution. I am glad I saw certain movement in what he said. He has obviously been in a situation recently where he was exposed to violent rhetoric, and one can make excuses for that, but it is indeed very frightening and he is right to be concerned. We should all be concerned. Although I intend to be critical of Israel, I also intend to be critical of the Palestinians. Having been in Israel on many occasions, I have noticed recently an extraordinary escalation in the degree of incitement that is permitted on the official television channels of the Palestinian Authority. Regrettably, in the past week or so, this has included material directly calling for and endorsing the use of suicide bombing. I suppose this is a response of despair on the part of those people, but it is very unfortunate. I hope this incitement will be put to one side.

There are, however, hopeful signs. We had a meeting yesterday with Dr. Nabil Sha'ath, a Palestinian Minister. I was extremely impressed – perhaps it was because the meeting was in private – that reasonably moderate views were expressed in a very urbane way. It seemed he is the kind of person with whom business can be done. I do not think I am breaching confidentiality when I say that it was clear from what he said that contacts are being continued between himself and his office at a high level in the Israeli Government. These contacts must be endorsed because people must continue to talk.

He introduced his talk to us by drawing comparisons with the Irish relationship to our neighbouring island. I was amused by that because the Israelis used to do the same. They would talk about their freedom fighters and our freedom fighters. I indicated to Dr. Sha'ath that a slightly anti-British tinge was no longer the key to unlocking the Irish heart, as we now get on reasonably well with our larger neighbour. He indicated to us that talks were continuing at a fairly high level and we must encourage that. He did not ask if there were parallels with the Northern situation. I thought of the notion of parity of esteem which was developed here, giving equal respect to two traditions. Tragically, this has not happened within the state of Israel as far as the Arab citizens are concerned and certainly with regard to the treatment of the Palestinians. I think we ought to emphasise that. It is a long-term approach but in these complicated situations one has to take such an approach. I am glad Senator Mitchell and his colleagues have become involved. It is very encouraging that Foreign Minister Peres issued a perhaps slightly qualified endorsement but still an endorsement and a welcome for the Mitchell principles. They include the fact that there should be a reaffirmation of existing agreements and an immediate cessation of violence – I do not think anybody from the outside could withdraw from that – the immediate resumption of security co-operation, a meaningful cooling off period to be established and the discouragement of incitement in all its forms. That was the principal element endorsed by Foreign Minister Peres.

However, the government of Mr. Sharon rapidly made it clear that it held back from certain other elements and, in particular, the call for a freeze on all settlement activity, the lifting of controls on Palestinian towns, the transfer to Palestinian authorities of all tax revenues owed and permission for Palestinians to return to jobs in Israel and so on. That is the difficult element on which we need to call on the Israeli Government to co-operate with the international community. As a friend of Israel I have no difficulty with that whatever. That is one of the keys.

It is a tragedy that the opportunity presented to us at the Sharm-el-Sheik meeting last year was not grasped. It was interrupted by the visit of Mr. Sharon to the Temple Mount. How sad it is that the Palestinians at that time did not have the wisdom, the patience, the foresight and the political imagination to ride out that particular storm without endorsing intifada. If they had commanded the moral authority to live through what was seen by them undoubtedly as a calculated insult by Sharon they would have achieved a far greater moral authority and they could have accepted what was being offered to them.

Senator Lanigan said he has seen no movement in all the period in which he has witnessed events in the Middle East. I do not know where he has been looking, because I have certainly seen movement. Fifteen years ago it was a criminal offence in Israel for Israeli citizens to have any kind of meetings, discussions or negotiations with members of the PLO and now a Government is sitting down with the PLO. What was on offer a year ago was virtually a return to 1967 boundaries, freezing of settlements and Barak even went so far as to say they would negotiate on the status of Jerusalem. That is everything. It was a tragedy that both sides were at fault. If they could just have reached out to each other in these last moments before the Israeli election I think the situation could have been transformed. It is a great pity that opportunity was not taken.

May I say, because I visit that region a great deal and I am consistently critical of the Israeli situation and I write back to the Foreign Minister in Israel in highly critical terms on various aspects of the policy, I think I also understand certain things that are not understood very well over here and that are coded. I am perfectly certain the Minister is aware of them. For example, Mr. Arafat's government calls for an unqualified right of return for Palestinian refugees, whose plight is pitiable. There is no question about that, neither is there any question about the fact that that is coded language for the destruction of the state of Israel. Nobody is under any illusion that the territory of Israel could support the mass influx of 5 million or 6 million refugees, many of whom are the grandchildren of people who have lived there. They have no homes to go to. How could any state support that? The right of return is emotionally appealing, particularly as a parallel to the right of Jews to return, but it is coded language for the destruction of the state of Israel and we must be careful to understand this kind of thing.

On the other hand, I have communicated to my Israeli friends that I regard as unacceptable the use of assassination as a political weapon. They have been quite open in saying they have been doing this. The use of murder as an instrument of foreign policy is not acceptable in any democracy. The response, physically, in terms of force is disproportionate. The use of F16 fighters is disproportionate, as is the mass levelling of houses, but this is happening under Sharon. I remember his slogan as I was there during the election. His slogan was ain shalom bli bitacon, no peace without security, but it could be turned around, ain bitacon bli shalom, no security without peace. If you are as cynical as I am about the situation and about his background you might have said ain shalom mi Sharon, no peace with Sharon, because I think in his personality he is a serious obstacle to peace.

I should like to say also, and I hope this gets back to my friends in Israel, Mr. Sharon came in promising peace. The Barak government was not able to deliver it. One almost got the impression that he would be able to prevent suicide bombing. We had just had the Netanya bomb. It is tragic that civilians are being killed there. Nobody can deliver that kind of security against suicide bombers and the Israelis have got to be made aware of this.

There must be investigations into all deaths of unarmed people, whether they are five policemen in a security hut. That has got to be explored by the Israeli authorities. I also believe the European Union has a strong responsibility. At one level, at least, the European countries solved their problem after the Second World War at the expense of the Arabs and also intrinsically at the expense of the Jewish people who were uprooted and stuck into this strange country of which they had only a vague ancestral memory. Because we did that we are morally responsible. The European Union should be prepared to put substantial funds into the reconstruction of Palestine when this tragic situation is resolved.

I am glad that a first step has been taken. Yesterday's newspaper carried headlines indicating that the Israeli troops were being put on a kind of qualified ceasefire. They will not initiate action – that at least is good. We have to build on this incrementally and encourage the Palestinians if they can, if their situation is not totally out of control, to make some parallel judgment. We have to be very careful and advise our Israeli friends that the idea of ongoing needs of settlement is not satisfactory. There are dangerous echoes of Lebensraum in this notion of expanding settlements all the time.

There are positive signs. The fact that both Mr. Peres, the Foreign Minister, and Benyamin Elizer—

Will Senator Norris conclude? There are a few other speakers.

—are endorsing the Mitchell report, and even calling internally for a freeze on settlements, is almost splitting the government. It will be interesting to see if Mr. Peres and Mr. Benyamin Elizer are able to stay inside the present Israeli Government.

I commend the Minister for his attempts. We have to be as balanced as possible. It is important that we do not come out as friends of one side or the other. We have to be friends of both sides. Each of them, when they come into a foreign affairs meeting, may say, "I will speak to you because I know you are friends of Israel or Palestine." We must be neutral and balanced.

I thank the Minister, Deputy Cowen, for his attendance for the duration of statements today and wish him well in his recovery from his injuries. There is not much to add to the Minister's statement. I warmly endorse it. It accurately summarises my own personal position on this matter and I commend the Minister and the Government on their efforts to contribute to the peace process in the Middle East and to resolve the difficulties between the Palestinians and the Israelis. It has been a balanced response by the Government. The Government's and the Seanad's record is good in terms of its contribution to the issues that have bedevilled the relationship between the Palestinians and the Israelis for such a long period.

The genesis of the present downward spiral of violence began when Mr. Sharon visited the Temple Mount. It is difficult for us to appreciate the significance in the Muslim and Palestinian psyche of the Temple Mount and the fact that it is almost in certain respects an enclave surrounded by another tradition. To draw a comparison, it would be as if Knock were invaded by armed forces and we responded. This lets us know the depth of feeling among Palestinians. Obviously, there were more fundamental factors involved in the subsequent downward spiral of violence but that was the spark that lit the fuse. We had been hopeful about the Oslo accord and those of us who visited the Holy Land were encouraged by the statements we heard from Palestinian and Israeli leaders at that time. We have come a long way from that and the task facing the international community, as well as the Government, is to put the pieces back together. The Minister's statement today is part of that whole process.

I commend Senator Mitchell on the report he produced and I am glad there is widespread acceptance of it in the international community. The point was made that there are not strict parallels with the Irish experience. However, I believe that there are lessons that could be learnt by the Israelis and Palestinians, and one of our tasks is to make them aware of how the resolution of conflict was achieved here with the involvement of Senator Mitchell, the Minister and others.

The sine qua non is that progress can only be made when the violence stops. The cessation of violence is the basic building block on which confidence is restored. The Minister is correct in saying that the central difficulty is that confidence and trust has been totally eroded by what has happened in recent months. The other difficulty relates to the level of response. The firepower on the Israeli side is considerably greater than that on the Palestinian side. I do not defend suicide bombings or other atrocities that have emanated from the Palestinian side, but the Israeli level of response has been totally disproportionate, particularly in the use of F16s. This reiterates the point that the violence must be subdued before the other elements can come into effect.

It is only necessary to visit the Gaza crossing to understand the depth of humiliation the Palestinians have experienced. People arrive there by bus in their thousands and walk through corrals, several hundred metres away from where those of us who are privileged to be able drive through may cross. They then get on buses to work, if they can find the work in Israel. Having seen that, I can understand how it could foster such a sense of frustration and grievance. That is also something that is relevant to our experience. That type of conduct creates an atmosphere that fosters terrorism. The Minister is correct in pointing out the central significance of the political process and that a vacuum will allow extremists to come to the fore. His statement is to be applauded.

Many Senators spoke about the importance of the settlements. I endorse what Senator Lanigan said and those of us from rural areas understand it very well. How can a family be on land for several generations going back to biblical times and then be removed without compensation or notice? It is no surprise that terrorism emanates from that type of activity. Few Irish people are very far removed from the land and it is something that we understand very well. It is part of our national experience and psyche.

The US is a key player and some encouraging noises have come from there. I hope the Minister will use his influence to ensure that the Mitchell report develops to the extent that it should. There is also the question of the Government and the EU supporting the Palestinian Authority, which is the central bulwark that is stopping everything descending into utter chaos. It has extremists on its own side pushing it in one direction and Israelis pushing it in the other direction. The Minister is aware of that, as are Senator Lanigan and the members of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs from their meetings with Nabil Sha'ath and others recently. There needs to be budgetary and political support for the Palestinian Authority, because without them, I cannot see a resolution. I hope the Minister will continue his efforts at EU level and elsewhere to try to bring a resolution to these problems. On these occasions we remember our friend Youssef Allan and the contribution he made when he was here.

My sympathies in this conflict lie largely with the Palestinians. I have been to Bethlehem, Hebron and Jericho and have seen places where people had land confiscated after living there for a long time. I saw the appalling conditions under which people live. It is as if an Irish family, when sitting at home, heard a knock on the door and on going outside saw uniformed people with tanks and guns claiming to be from Tuatha de Danann and asking for the return of the land God gave them 2,000 years ago.

In many conflicts throughout the world, if we dwell too much on the de jure situation we will get no resolution. It is better to look at the de facto situation and determine what can be done. As the Minister said, the Mitchell commission has come up with a number of resolutions, essentially recommending a halt to violence followed by discussions. This is not easy, but I believe it can be done. The European Union says that all settlement activity in Gaza and the West Bank, including east Jerusalem, is illegal under international law and constitutes a major obstacle to peace. I cannot see Israel giving up the Golan Heights until many years after this is resolved. It overlooks Jerusalem and is an ideal base to stop any potential invasion from Syria. I do not agree with putting many settlements there, but they are there and I cannot see them leaving for a long time. However, I hope they will pull out of the other ones.

We must support all peace initiatives and should help the Palestinians financially as they do not get enough support. The Israelis get large handouts from the United States. I am sure the Minister will continue his good work to foster peace in the area.

Sitting suspended at 1.30 p.m. and resumed at 2.30 p.m.
Top
Share