Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Middle East Peace Process

Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 22 May 2012

Tuesday, 22 May 2012

Ceisteanna (2, 3)

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn

Ceist:

101Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade is he in favour of the EU introducing a ban on settlement goods if Israel refuses to cease settlement building in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25589/12]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Seán Ó Fearghaíl

Ceist:

103Deputy Seán Ó Fearghaíl asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade his proposals in response to continued Israeli settlements in Palestine in view of the recent European Union communiqué on this matter; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25422/12]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí ó Béal (8 píosaí cainte)

I propose to answer Questions Nos. 101 and 103 together.

Ireland and its EU partners have on many occasions expressed firm support for a negotiated settlement between Israel and the Palestinians and the wider Arab world, on the basis of the two-state solution. Although the talks process is at present stalled, we continue to do what we can to encourage the parties to engage and to work towards that end.

There is increasing concern in the EU, which I have highlighted, that the relentless progress of Israeli policies in the Occupied Palestinian Territories is undermining the possibility of constructing a viable Palestinian state. These policies pose a threat to the prospect of a negotiated political settlement and run directly counter to the two-state solution which has been the central objective of the EU for many years.

At the urging of Ireland and other member states, the Foreign Affairs Council last Monday focused its discussion not on the overall peace process but on these specific viability issues, notably issues around Israeli settlement expansion and the pressure on Palestinians in East Jerusalem and area C, which is that part of the Occupied Palestinian Territory in the West Bank still fully under Israeli military control and occupation.

The Council conclusions adopted last week send out a strong and united EU message on these critical and urgent issues. Ireland was heavily involved in the preparation of these important conclusions and fully supports them. The EU has set out in some detail the issues which threaten a two-state solution, the EU's position in respect of these issues and the remedial action it wishes to see, primarily, of course, from Israel. I very much welcome and support these strong Council conclusions, which restate and in many respects advance EU positions on these key points.

I suggested at the Council that in view of the urgency of these issues on the ground, Ministers should look at them again in the autumn to see if the situation had improved or was continuing to worsen. I suggested that if matters continued to worsen and our existing actions had not improved them, we would clearly need to consider stronger actions. The exclusion from the EU of settlement products and of individual settlers engaged in violence, should, in that case, be considered.

I have previously stated that Ireland would support a ban on settlement products. We do not support bans or boycotts on Israel, and this is not in question, but the products of illegal settlements constitute a separate and specific matter. However, this is in the future and the Council as a whole will need to decide on any actions. I would emphasise that with sustained work and the co-operation of partners, we have achieved a strong set of EU conclusions which all 27 member states have supported and which now places High Representative, Baroness Ashton, and the EU in a stronger position to argue for the continuing viability of the two-state solution, both within the framework of the international quartet and more generally throughout the region.

I welcome the conclusions of the EU Council meeting and I congratulate the Tánaiste and the departmental officials for their work in bringing about the conclusions. This is my second opportunity to congratulate the Tánaiste and it is very important that our State continues to seek for justice and peace between the Palestinian people and the Israeli people but in the interim to defend the rights of the Palestinian people who are being so grievously offended in the West Bank.

I refer to the reports on area C which currently has a population of 150,000 Palestinians and 300,000 of a growing Jewish population. The Oslo Accord was to have resolved this question but it is clear there is now a focused ongoing initiative by the Israeli Government to continue to build in that area.

It has been stated by a UN rapporteur that ethnic cleansing is happening by stealth. Does the Tánaiste agree with this assertion?

I thank Deputy Mac Lochlainn for welcoming the statement from the EU Foreign Affairs Council. This strong and significant statement addresses the conditions on the ground. We all want to see meaningful talks resuming between Israel and Palestine, with a view to putting in place the two-state solution. It is not realistic to have that, however, in circumstances where settlement activity is taking place. As President Abbas said, one cannot talk about a state for Palestine if one continues to build on it.

I saw the reality for myself when I visited area C when I was in the region in January. In effect, as these settlements continue, they are making it physically impossible for a two-state solution to materialise. We are seeing a settlement right around the eastern part of Jerusalem, which in many ways is sealing off the Palestinian population within Jerusalem. In addition, we are seeing settlement activity whose effect, if it continues, will be to cut in half the northern part of the West Bank from the southern part, thus making things very difficult on the ground.

The statement by the EU Foreign Affairs Council has nailed that matter by clearly identifying it. That is why, at the Council meeting, I argued that we need to return to this topic in the autumn to see what has happened in the meantime and then examine what further steps may be appropriate.

I concur with much of what has been said by Deputy Mac Lochlainn. I commend the Tánaiste and his EU counterparts on the mid-May communiqué, as well as for highlighting the issue of goods emanating from the settlements. Talking to Israeli representatives in this country, one gets the sense of a willingness to negotiate and move forward. What one sees happening on the ground, however, is very much at variance with what we hear.

I am struck by the Tánaiste's unique position as chair of the OSCE. He recently convened a conference on Ireland's role in conflict resolution, which is a point I have been repeatedly highlighting. Notwithstanding the merits of EU involvement and being conscious of the efforts of Mr. Tony Blair in this particular region, does the Tánaiste see any opportunity for Ireland to play a role, given our unique history? Some 30 years ago our problems seemed to be as intractable as the Middle East appears today. For example, could the Tánaiste see us taking some unilateral action? Can he envisage a situation in which he might dispatch a troika from Ireland, perhaps comprising Mr. David Trimble, Mr. Martin McGuinness and Mr. Bertie Ahern, who have practical, hands-on experience of conflict resolution? Could the Tánaiste see a situation like that being initiated?

We have invested a lot of effort in getting an agreed EU position and statement. That was not easy. As I am sure the Deputy is aware, there have been differing views within the EU and the Foreign Affairs Council concerning the Middle East peace process. It was a significant step forward to arrive at a conclusion last Monday upon which all 27 EU foreign Ministers were able to agree. I would like to see that momentum being maintained and therefore we need to continue to have a united EU position on where we are moving things. There are a number of matters we have to advance, the first of which is maintaining the pressure for talks to be resumed. The Quartet statement, which was issued in September 2011, sets out the framework for that. The timetable is being missed but, nevertheless, the framework is there for that.

Second, we must be clear about what is happening on the ground and make a clear statement about it. That was the thrust of the recent statement. It is not really something that comes within my remit as chair-in-office of the OSCE. The approach we are taking on this particular issue is within the context of the EU Council.

Under the roadmap it was agreed - Israel signed up to this - that at the outset of negotiations there would be a freeze on all settlements and that the settler outposts would be dismantled. The EU Foreign Ministers obviously reiterated in their statement that the roadmap is the path to a peaceful resolution of the conflict there. Does the Tánaiste agree that President Abbas is entitled to see a freeze on settlements in place prior to negotiations commencing?

In terms of the new government arrangements in Israel and the coming together of Likud and Kadima, does the Tánaiste envisage there being any opportunity for progress arising out of that in so far as Prime Minister Netanyahu is no longer dependent on the more extreme elements in parliament?

President Abbas is entitled to see an end to and a freeze on the settlements. They are illegal and should not be allowed to continue.

The coming together of the new government in Israel provides an opportunity for Prime Minister Netanyahu to move into meaningful talks with the Palestinian side. However, there has to be a willingness both on the part of the Israeli side and the Palestinian side to engage in meaningful discussions. While I was in the region in January I met with both Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Abbas. I strongly advocated that there needs to be an engagement and that this issue ultimately has to be settled by negotiation but I understand President Abbas's position is undermined by settlement activity taking place. To be fair, the position of Prime Minister Netanyahu and the Israel Government is also compromised by any terrorist activity that takes place which threatens the security of the people of Israel.

Barr
Roinn