Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 6 December 2012
1. Deputy Brendan Smith asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade if he has raised concerns regarding the proposed Israeli plans for an additional 3,000 settlement homes in East Jerusalem with his EU colleagues; if the EU has any plans to confront this issue; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [55001/12]
View answer2. Deputy Brendan Smith asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade if he has raised concerns regarding Israeli plans for an additional 3,000 settlement homes in East Jerusalem with the Israeli Government; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [55002/12]
View answer3. Deputy Brendan Smith asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade in view of accelerated illegal settlement development by Israel in the East Jerusalem area if he will once again raise the issue of banning imports from illegal Israeli settlements with his EU colleagues; if he will consider the issue on a unilateral level; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [55003/12]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, together.
In my statement of 3 December I made clear the Government’s concern and strong criticism of the announcement by Israel of 3,000 additional settlement units in East Jerusalem, as well as plans to proceed with settlement expansion in the critical E1 area, which would complete the isolation of arab East Jerusalem from the rest of the West Bank. High Representative Ashton, on behalf of the EU, has also expressed her deep concern at the Israeli government’s announcement in a statement issued on 2 December. It is negative and highly damaging to any prospect of peace for Israel to announce this measure in response to an action at the United Nations which, while unwelcome to Israel, was an entirely legitimate political move, and one which was supported by the overwhelming majority of the nations of the world. The acceleration in the overall pace of settlement expansion is also deeply troubling with these settlement measures only the latest in a succession of major settlement announcements which have clearly been in planning for some time.
It is also deeply troubling that, at a moment when the Palestinians were signalling that their success at the UN would permit them to re-enter direct negotiations with Israel, that the response of the Israeli Government should be such an action which directly threatens that prospect. It must be reiterated that not only is the entire settlement enterprise contrary to international law, but that the continued expansion of settlements is simply incompatible with the achievement of a comprehensive peace. It is very difficult therefore to do other than conclude that the Israeli Government is not genuinely committed to a negotiated peace deal, unless it moves at once to rescind these decisions.
Following agreement on a concerted response at EU level, the Israeli Ambassador was invited in to my Department on 4 December and asked to convey to his Government our deep concern and disappointment at these decisions, and our view that they must be reversed. I understand that a number of EU partners have acted similarly. I expect to be further discussing this matter, and other recent developments, with my colleagues at the Foreign Affairs Council on Monday, 10 December. In relation to settlement products, I have recently written to the Deputy and to all Deputies setting out in detail my views on this issue.
