Category: Palestine briefing

Bedouin ‘clearances’ in the Negev

Sir Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) if he will make immediate representations to the government of Israel over its decision to set in motion the Prawer Plan for the removal of 40,000 Bedouin people from their ancestral homeland; [162732]
(2) if he will discuss with his EU counterparts making a co-ordinated approach to the government of Israel over its decision to set in motion the Prawer Plan for the removal of 40,000 Bedouin people from their ancestral homeland; [162733]
(3) if he will request that the US Government should make immediate representations to the Government of Israel over its decision to set in motion the Prawer Plan for the removal of 40,000 Bedouin people from their ancestral homeland. [162735]
Alistair Burt: We continue to follow closely Israeli Government plans with respect to Bedouin land claims and unrecognised villages in the Negev. We remain concerned by the possible relocation of thousands of Bedouin. I discussed the proposed legislation with Members of the Knesset when I visited Israel earlier this month.
Officials at the British embassy in Tel Aviv are in regular contact with Bedouin leaders and activists, and our ambassador has discussed the proposed legislation with relevant Ministers and parliamentarians. The embassy has also discussed this issue with EU and other partners in Tel Aviv.

Children in detention

Ian Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs pursuant to the answer of 18 June 2013 [OfficialReport, column 745] on Israel: children in detention, if he will make a statement on his discussions with the Israeli Attorney-General. [162177]
Alistair Burt: On 20 June, I met with Israeli Attorney-General Yehuda Weinstein at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. He was accompanied by a senior delegation, including Deputy Attorney-General Shai Nitzan and the Israeli ambassador to London. We discussed a range of issues including the treatment of children in detention, the use of live fire in the Gaza buffer zone and in dealing with non-violent protests and demolition of Palestinian property.
On the question of child detainees we discussed the recommendations in Baroness Scotland’s report. I welcomed steps that Israel has taken of late to reduce the gap between provisions for Israeli and Palestinian children including: raising the age of majority to 18; reducing the time period by which an arrested minor must be brought before a judge formalising the right of a parent/guardian to be present in court; and introducing a special court for minors.
We also discussed the need for further progress. In particular, building on the report’s recommendations, we believe it is important to ensure: systematic use of audio-visual recording when questioning children; an end to solitary confinement for children; and notification of arrest in Arabic to parents/guardians so that they can support children in the legal process.

Burt won’t answer boycott question

David Ward MP had question No 17 on the order paper which was not reached during the last FCO questions, but it has now been answered as a written question:

Mr Ward: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether the UK missions in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem purchase settlement goods. [160015]

Alistair Burt: Our overseas missions are obliged to follow UK and EU guidelines when purchasing goods and services from suppliers. These guidelines do not currently differentiate between products emanating from Israel or from the Occupied Palestinian Territories. However, we have ensured that UK procurement rules allow for human rights related matters to be reflected in the procurement of public goods and services.
Why is the Minister being so coy about his? Surely he could answer a simple ‘yes they do buy settlement goods’ or ‘no they don’t’?
Is he hinting that the UK missions are already operating a no-settlement-goods policy, but he doesn’t want to have to explain why he isn’t following their advice?
And how does his sit with his previous answer that FCO had not sought advice on the legality of banning settlement goods. He now says quite clearly that UK procurement rules “allow for human rights-related matters to be reflected in procurement”.

Only UK govt action will save talks

MPs now have a chance to quiz ministers on the last day of the session (DfID, July 17th) and on the second day of the September session (FCO, September 3rd).
With the chances of a renewed peace process now at an all-time low and with the US media ridiculing John Kerry’s claims to have made progress during his five visits to Jerusalem, the Kerry initiative appears to have run out of steam.
William Hague had so little to report from his visit to Jerusalem and Ramallah in June that he let Alistair Burt make it as a written statement (June 24th) which does little to discourage that view.
The Israelis could hardly have made their contempt more obvious. On the day before Kerry landed, they announced 69 new settlement houses at Har Homa. On his last day, as he was talking to President Abbas in Ramallah, they announced another 900, again at Har Homa.
They have done this before, most famously announcing plans for massive construction in the settlement of Ramat Shlomo to coincide with visit of Vice-President Joe Biden in March 2010.
 
Aides close to Kerry have admitted that his initiative will be dead if the two sides have not agreed to talks by the start of the UN General Assembly in September.
This turns the spotlight on to ACTIONS that the UK Government can take to pressure the Israeli government to stop building settlements by imposing the “incentives” and “disincentives” that Hague has long been talking about.
Despite his frequent condemnations of settlements as “illegal” Hague has ruled out any “boycott” or “sanctions” against the £190 million-a-year trade with the EU that keeps the settlements in business. Last month he told Grahame Morris MP: “I do not believe that imposing a ban on settlement goods will promote peace.”
But if the US can’t promote peace talks, it’s up to the UK to take the lead.  And if the Israelis won’t respond to diplomatic pressure, the only alternative is economic pressure. 
Last week week the moral highground was unexpectedly taken by McDonald’s Israel who refused to open a franchise in Ariel, deep inside Palestinian territory, on the grounds that it was not their policy to operate in settlements.
In apparent revenge Jerusalem soccer fans broke into a McDonald’s and attacked some of their workers. This was the team whose fans demonstrated against the signing of three Muslim players and who descended on a Jerusalem mall chanting “Death to Arabs” in March 2012.
The Foreign Secretary has never claimed to be conducting an ethical foreign policy, but he must surely see the irony of being upstaged in concern for human rights by McDonald’s.
The consensus among charities and campaigning bodies who support justice for the Palestinians is overwhelming that the only step that will have any impact now is a Government declaration that trade with the settlement is illegal – or at least guidance to business that settlement trade is inadvisable.

Hague rules out action on settlements

Dummies on question about legality of trade ban
Calls on Abbas to join talks “without preconditions”
“Lamentable lack” of action on children
FCO questions Tuesday June 18th
William Hague again ruled out taking Government action against trade with illegal Israeli settlements and refused even to say whether he believed the Government had the powers (under EU and GATT trade rules) to ban trade with illegal settlements.
He also repeated his request to the Palestinians “to enter negotiations without pre-conditions” which would mean starting talks while the Israelis are still building illegal settlements on Palestinian-owned land.
His answers will harden the prognosis that there is virtually no chance of a breakthrough when US Secretary of State John Kerry pays his fifth visit to Jerusalem and Ramallah at the end of this week.
Hague said there would be EU action on labelling so consumers are better informed, but the only chance of any progress will be if EU governments exert economic pressure on Israel to reinstate the freeze on settlement building that was lifted in September 2010 – leading to the breakdown of talks.
The Foreign Secretary repeated his refusal to curb the £195 million-a-year EU imports that sustain Israel’s illegal settlements, telling Grahame Morris MP: “I do not believe that imposing a ban on settlement goods will promote peace”.
When he was asked explicitly by Richard Burden MP whether it would be within the law for the UK to ban settlement trade, he dummied: “The question before us is not so much about what would be within the law as about what best promotes peace”.
He then agreed with Conservative Friends of Israel vice-chair James Clappison MP that Palestinians should drop their insistence on a settlement freeze: “We encourage the Palestinians to enter negotiations without pre-conditions.”
Palestinians continue to refuse talks without a settlement freeze because:
  • Insisting that Israel stops building settlements is not a “precondition”. It’s the law.
  • The Israelis agreed to this before the last set of talks. Why sit down to talks with someone who isn’t even doing what they agreed to before the last set of talks?
  • In the 20 years since the Oslo peace talks started, the Israelis have taken Palestinian land with impunity, doubling the number of settlers to 550,000.
  • Talks without a settlement freeze are a trap. They allow the Israelis to win by doing nothing.
  • It’s inherent in the idea of negotiations that you can’t change the parameters in the middle of talks.
  • You can’t move goalposts in mid-football match, so why allow Israel to build settlements in mid-talks?  
  • Israel is building its own preconditions in bricks & mortar and calling them settlements.
  • Palestinians already dropped their claim to 78% of mandate Palestine in 1988. They can’t be expected to give up more.

Nia Griffith MP asked about progress on the treatment of Palestinian children in the Israeli prison system since the publication a year ago of the Foreign Office-funded report on “Children in Military Custody”.  Independent reports have shown that limited progress has been made on only two of the 40 recommendations in the report.

The MP said the lack of reform had been “lamentable” and called for deadlines on specific issues such as the use of audio-visual recordings in all interrogations. Middle East Minister Alistair Burt said he would “continue to press on the matter”.
David Ward MP said that if the Foreign Secretary could not support a Government ban on trade with illegal settlements, he could “provide some moral leadership by saying that he will personally agree to boycott such goods”.

Moral leadership was not, however, forthcoming: “I am not in close control of the fresh produce purchased in the Hague household, since certain of my other duties interfere with that. While I am Foreign Secretary, I do not expect to have that onerous responsibility placed on me.”

Minister to act on settlement goods?

Burt promises to ‘extend guidelines’ on false labelling of settlement goods as ‘Made in Israel’
Foreign & Commonwealth Questions on Palestine 
Middle East minister Alastair Burt promised at Foreign Office questions that he would extend guidelines that prevent goods from illegal settlements in the West Bank being sold in the UK under misleading “Made in Israel” labels. 

Answering questions from MPs Richard Burden and Lisa Nandy, he acknowledged the concerns about Ahava beauty products from the Palestinian part of the Dead Sea sold as “Made in Israel” and said it was important to have correct labelling.Incorrect labelling allows companies based in illegal settlements to defraud the British taxpayer by paying lower customs duty as well as avoiding the TUC-backed boycott of settlement products.Richard Burden reminded the Foreign Secretary – who is due to visit Israel and Palestine – that he and 16 European foreign ministers were pressing the EU to draw up guidelines to ensure goods produced in illegal settlements are not imported to the EU labelled “Made in Israel”.

The Foreign Secretary replied: “I have taken this up, along with other Foreign Ministers, with the EU High Representative. We look to the whole of the EU to do this in a co-ordinated and effective way.”

If there is no agreement between all 28 European foreign ministers it will be open to the UK – according to top legal advice published by the TUC – to put restrictions on the sale of illegal settlement products or to ban them completely.

The Foreign Secretary was also asked by MP Sir Bob Russell to withdraw support from the Union of European Football Associations’ Under-21 championships which are due to be played in Israel in June –  in spite of vigorous protests from the Palestinian Authority.

Mr Hague declined to take action, saying “I do not believe that sporting fixtures should be an obstacle to political progress of any form and I do not think they will be in this case.”

Mahmoud Sarsak, the Gazan footballer who went on hunger strike in an Israeli prison last year, is on a tour of European countries including the UK to campaign against the UEFA Under-21 finals being held in Israel.

The Foreign Secretary went on to describe President Obama’s recent visit to Israel and Palestine as “successful” and said the UK would make every effort to mobilise the European Union and Arab states behind “decisive US-led moves for peace”.

This was despite the widespread commentaries that the visit was a damp squib and, apart from a speech to students in Jerusalem, the US President made almost no reference to Israel’s refusal to stop building illegal settlements in the West Bank.

MP Jeremy Corbyn asked: “Does the Foreign Secretary not realise that any progress between Israel and Palestine is very unlikely to move on at all while the settlement building, the annexation of East Jerusalem and the siege of Gaza continue? Until Israel radically modifies its behaviour towards the Palestinian people, how can there be any progress?

For the last six months William Hague has been pinning all his hopes on this visit. In November it was “top of the agenda in all our discussions with the United States”. Then he pledged “we will do everything we can to support American efforts”. And when it became clear that Obama was going to play the visit low-key, he said “we need to allow time and space for this American effort to develop”.

This week at Foreign Office questions he conceded that “settlement activity means that within a foreseeable time, a two-state solution will no longer be practical”.

How long will he give it? Previously he has said 2013 was make-or-break year. Practically speaking there would have to be signs of movement before the United Nations General Assembly meets at the end of September. The Palestinians have agreed to hold off applying for membership of the International Criminal Court for eight weeks – till May 17th.

Last week Secretary Kerry tried to extend the deadline by saying: “I think we have some period of time – a year to year-and-a-half to two years, or it’s over.”

A statement by former prime ministers and foreign ministers of 11 European countries this week said that  “European leaders cannot wait for ever for action from the United States”.  They warned that “the EU’s inactivity in the face of an increasingly dangerous stagnation is both unprincipled and unwise.Occupation is actually being entrenched by the present Western policy.”

Link to Parliamentary Hansard>

‘Palestine only needs aid because of Israeli restrictions’ Minister

MPs’ criticisms of UK aid rejected

 

Report on DfID Questions on Wed March 13th
Aid minister Alan Duncan told MPs this week it was “essential” that Israel eased its restrictions on the Palestinian economy and that the UK and other international donors continued to support the Palestinian Authority in a consistent manner.Movement and access restrictions, such as the Israeli wall, 540 roadblocks in the West Bank and the blockade of Gaza, were the only reason why the Palestinian Authority needed to be supported by international donors.Without the restrictions the Palestinian economy would be 78% larger, he said, citing a report from the International Monetary Fund.Removal of the Israeli restrictions would boost Palestine’s gross domestic product by £4,200 million a year ($6.3bn) and “that would remove its dependence on aid”, said the minister.

He urged Israel to remove its restrictions and to meet its legal obligations to transfer tax and customs revenues which it collects on behalf of the Palestinian Authority.

He rejected an accusation from Conservative MP Mike Freer that British aid were being “used to pay salaries of up to £2,000 a month to convicted Palestinian terrorists”.

“DfID’s support to the Palestinian Authority is used specifically to pay for the salaries of civil servants,” the minister said. “The list of approved recipients is subject both to vetting processes and to independent audit.”

He went on to reject a suggestion  from Conservative MP Gordon Henderson that British aid money had funded an anti-smoking puppet show at a community centre in East Jerusalem where “the children were urged to replace cigarettes with machine guns”.

The Minister replied that the puppet show “was performed not by an NGO, but by a visiting organisation. No UK or UN funds had anything whatever to do with sanctioning this performance, and the community centre itself was angered by the content and made its own disapproval very clear.”
As it appeared in Hansard ……

Oral Answers to Questions

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

The Secretary of State was asked—

March 13th 2013  

 
Palestinian Authority
Question 3. Mike Freer (Finchley and Golders Green) (Con): What recent assessment she has made of the financial stability of the Palestinian Authority.
Minister of State Mr Alan Duncan: We estimate that the Palestinian Authority’s funding gap in 2013 is likely to be at least $500 million, which will continue to make it hard for it to pay salaries and deliver essential public services. The PA must of course show financial discipline itself, but for it to become stable it is essential that international donors support it in a consistent manner and that Israel eases its restrictions and meets its legal obligations to transfer tax revenues.
Mike Freer: I thank the Minister for that answer, but is he aware that British aid donations to the Palestinian Authority general budget are being used to pay salaries of up to £2,000 a month to convicted Palestinian terrorists, many of whom have been properly convicted? What assurances can the Government provide that no further UK aid donations will be spent in that way?
Mr Duncan: I can assure him that we have a system in place under which DFID’s support to the Palestinian Authority is used specifically to pay for the salaries of civil servants. The list of approved recipients is subject both to vetting processes and to independent audit.
Mr Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith) (Lab): Does the Minister agree that the best way to improve the financial stability of the Palestinian Authority would be to lift the blockade of Gaza and movement and access restrictions on the West Bank? Does he also think that the EU should be trading with the Palestinians and not with the illegal Israeli settlements?
Mr Duncan: A 2011 International Monetary Fund report estimated that without movement and access restrictions the Palestinian economy would be 78% larger in terms of GDP a year, amounting to about $6.3 billion. That would remove its dependence on aid.
John Howell (Henley) (Con): Is there not a more general question about international donor money being used to support Palestinian institutions that have taken violence against Israel? What steps are the Government taking to ensure that that money genuinely contributes to financial stability and is not used in a way that undermines the peace process?
Mr Duncan: We rigorously monitor any danger there might be that the Palestinian Authority in any way incites violence, but it is committed to do exactly the opposite, and it is right that we support it, the potential Government of a Palestinian state. We wish to see further progress towards the peace process over the months ahead.
Anas Sarwar (Glasgow Central) (Lab): We all support the creation of a viable two-state solution in the Middle East, but that will come about only if the Palestinians are able to run an effective country. What assessment have the Government made of the structures available in the Palestinian Authority to make that happen?
Mr Duncan: The structures are sorely stretched, which is why we continue to support the Palestinian Authority, and of course we also urge other donors, particularly the Arab states, to carry their fair share of commitment, because if the Palestinian Authority were to collapse there is a serious danger that all prospects of proper peace negotiations would collapse as well.
Question 7. Gordon Henderson (Sittingbourne and Sheppey) (Con): What processes are in place to ensure that non-governmental organisations in the Palestinian Authority that are funded by the UK, the EU and the UN do not promote incitement of hate.
Minister of State Mr Alan Duncan: We deplore incitement on either side of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, including any comments that could stir up hatred and prejudice. UK, EU and UN-funded NGOs in the Occupied Palestinian Territories are subject to rigorous due diligence assessments designed to ensure that funds are used only for legitimate development purposes.
Gordon Henderson: I welcome the Minister’s answer, but in east Jerusalem last year a UN-funded Palestinian NGO performed a puppet show promoting non-smoking. This well intentioned educational message was corrupted somewhat when the children were urged to replace cigarettes with machine guns. Will the Minister assure me that no British financial aid donations, direct or indirect, are being used to fund such propaganda?
Mr Duncan: I am aware of that puppet show, put on in a funded community centre, and I am grateful to my Friend for raising it. It was an utterly stupid and irresponsible way of corrupting an otherwise sensible no-smoking message. It was performed not by an NGO, but by a visiting organisation. No UK or UN funds had anything whatever to do with sanctioning this performance, and the community centre itself was angered by the content and made its own disapproval very clear.
Richard Burden (Birmingham, Northfield) (Lab): I agree with the Minister that it is very important that we oppose all those who promote hate in the Middle East. May I invite him to say that we must also stand with those human rights organisations in Israel and in Palestine that stand out against hate crimes such as the so-called price tag attacks?
Mr Duncan: It is essential that we make a stand against the incitement of hate from either side in any way. I share the Gentleman’s commitment to doing so in his great understanding of this issue.

Record number of Questions on Palestine

Pressure builds for a total stop on settlement trade 
Will the Government put any economic pressure on the Israelis to stop expanding their illegal settlements in the West Bank so that negotiations on a settlement with the Palestinians can resume?
In Tuesday’s Foreign Office questions there were a record number of questions – 7 out of 15 – focused on the Israel-Palestine conflict and all but one of them critical of the Israeli government – a sign of how opinion is shifting within the House of Commons.
But the answers brought no more clarity about the Government’s intentions.  The Foreign Secretary, William Hague, placed all his hopes on an American effort to revive the peace process when President Obama visits Israel and Palestine later this month.
He also repeated his promise to “incentivise” and if need be “disincentivise” either side from actions, such as building illegal settlements, which were an obstacle to the resumption of negotiations.
Middle East minister Alistair Burt repeated his mantra that “we do not believe in a boycott”, but MPs were left guessing what the difference might be between a boycott or sanctions and “disincentivisation”.
Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith) (Lab) urged the minister to focus on areas where he could do something that would make a difference:
“What he can do something about is the import of illegal goods from settlements, which are running at eight times the level of imports from all Palestinians. Will he now take steps to prevent the import of goods from illegal settlements to the UK?”
 
But the minister would only say that he would work with European partners on the possibility of extending voluntary labelling of Israeli settlement goods brought in by the last government.
Nia Griffith (Llanelli) (Lab) asked the Foreign Secretary to agree that the starting point for negotiations should be the legal status quo—that the whole of the West Bank and east Jerusalem is Palestinian land, as agreed unanimously by the UN Security Council – and not “facts on the ground” created by illegal settlement building.
 
Ian Mearns (Gateshead) (Lab) said he seemed to expect Palestinians to have the patience of Job as they were facing “the single largest proposed demolition of Palestinian homes since 1967” in the Silwan areas close to the old city of Jerusalem.
“What will he do to try to instil a sense of reality among the Israeli authorities to stop this unlawful theft of Palestinian land, which can only hinder the search for a two-state solution?”
Chris Williamson (Derby North) (Lab) asked the Foreign Secretary to accept that a freeze on settlement building is a requirement imposed by international law, not a precondition imposed by the Palestinians.
Sir Bob Russell (Colchester) (LD)  raised the segregation of public transport in Israel with “settler-only” buses and “Palestinian” buses, introduced this week with echoes of apartheid South Africa 25 years ago and of the southern states of the USA 50 years ago.
“Appeasing the racist regime in Israel must stop. Will the Minister, with his European Union colleagues, end our cosy relationship in view of such behaviour?” 
 
David Winnick (Walsall North) (Lab) said that the crux of the matter was that Israeli governments did not believe there would be any serious consequences as a result of what they did.
“Can one understand the sheer anger, resentment and frustration of the Palestinians who see no political progress at all? What would we do if we were in the same position as the Palestinians in the occupied territories?”
Andrew Turner (Isle of Wight) (Con) said no other country would allow large numbers of migrants to occupy its land, denying the land to local people?
“Why is so much energy put into the likes of Syria after two years, when nothing appears to be done about Palestine’s West Bank, and in particular East Jerusalem, after 40 years?”
Middle East minister Alistair Burt agreed that the barrier between Israelis and Palestinians was getting more and more severe and the opportunities for people to live together in the future were getting more and more remote.
 
Sir Menzies Campbell (North East Fife) (LD) said many well-informed commentators and analysts believe that that time for a two-state solution “has now gone”.
The Foreign Secretary said that while he thought that the time for it was “slipping away” and that 2013 might be the last chance, he did not think that the time had yet gone.
 
Crispin Blunt (Reigate) (Con) asked the Foreign Secretary what he would do if the American peace effort failed “as all the others have”? Was it not time to make it clear to the Israeli authorities that their flagrant breach of international law would finally have to be met by some serious consequences?
 
The Foreign Secretary argued that “we need to allow time and space for this American effort to develop as President Obama visits the region later in the month.
“But I believe that it will important for us to be able to say … what we will do to support the process and to incentivise the parties involved. Of course, it may also be open to us to disincentivise—if I may use that word—those parties at crucial moments.”
Mr Hague first used these words in December when he told the Commons that he had been talking to the French and German Foreign Ministers “about how we can more actively support a US initiative .. with European states contributing to incentives and disincentives for both sides to return to negotiations”.
He repeated the same formula in January when Labour front bencher Ian Lucas asked if he would “use the wish for Israeli to develop stronger trading relations with the European Union as a means of achieving progress in the Middle East”.
 
MPs returning from visits to Palestine
Pleas for hunger-strikers and Gaza fishermen
 
Sir Gerald Kaufman (Manchester, Gorton) (Lab): The Foreign Secretary may not be aware that last Saturday, in Palestine, I visited the mothers and surviving family members—of Ayman Ismail, who is being held in administrative detention and has been on hunger strike for 246 days, and of Samer Issawi, who is being held on trumped-up charges after being tried twice, once by a civil court which said that he should be released tomorrow and once by a military court which is holding him for 20 years, He has been on hunger strike for 223 days, and is in a critical condition. Will the Foreign Secretary make clear to Netanyahu that if these men die, their blood will be on his hands?
 
Sarah Teather (Brent Central) (LD): I recently visited Gaza as part of a cross-party delegation with Interpal. While there I was alarmed to witness, on three different occasions, the shooting at and intimidation of Palestinian fishing boats that appeared to be clearly inside the six-mile limit agreed by the ceasefire. Earlier, the Foreign Secretary roundly condemned, as is right and proper, the firing of rockets into Israel, but does he agree that peace depends on both sides sticking to the terms of the ceasefire, including Israeli naval ships?
Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Lab): Like the hon. Members for Brent Central (Sarah Teather) and for Kettering (Mr Hollobone), I was on an Interpal delegation to Gaza last week. I would be grateful if the Minister could tell us what is being done to lift the blockade on Gaza so that the terrible water situation can be addressed. Sewage cannot be processed, fresh water is unobtainable because of the pollution of the aquifer, and the material to set up a desalination plant or something like it cannot be brought in to provide a decent standard of living for the people of Gaza.
 
 

 

Hague: two-state solution is ‘slipping away’

Mark Twain rose from his sick-bed to say that reports of his death were “premature”, but reports that the two-state solution is sick or dying are surely verging on the posthumous.
Having warned of its imminent demise several times already, William Hague said at Foreign Office questions (Tuesday January 22nd) that the two-state solution is “slipping away”.
“The chances of bringing it about are not yet at an end, but it is very urgent…We are approaching the last chance of bringing about such a solution,” he told Ming Campbell.
Speaking on the day of the Israeli election, he put the blame squarely on Israel’s leaders. “I condemn recent Israeli decisions to expand settlements. I speak regularly to Israeli leaders, stressing our profound concern that Israel’s settlement policy is losing it the support of the international community and will make a two-state solution impossible”, he told Gregg McClymont.
In response to questions from Shadow Foreign Secretary Douglas Alexander, he said it was “top of my agenda” for talks in Washington next week when he would try to persuade the new US Secretary of State that it would be “the single highest priority in American foreign policy, even with all the other challenges we face in the world today”.
Mr Hague made it clear he believes 2013 is the make-lor-break year for the peace process, but added that “it requires the United States to take the lead. That is not because other countries like us are not willing to play our own active part, but because the United States is in a unique position in the world to help bring Israel into a two-state solution.”
But three Labour MPs suggested an “active part” that the UK could and should be willing to play by joining with others to put economic pressure on Israel to stop settlement building.
Shadow Middle East Minister Ian Lucas said he should discuss with our European partners how to “use the wish for Israeli to develop stronger trading relations with the European Union as a means of achieving progress in the Middle East”.
Co-chairman of the Council for Arab-British Understanding CAABU and Labour MP for Edmonton Andy Love urged him to keep his promise to discuss “incentives” for a return to negotiations with his EU partners.
And Sir Gerald Kaufman, MP for Manchester Gorton, asked “what specific action the Government will take to get the Israelis to see that their future survival depends on a two-state solution?”
Duncan Hames, Liberal Democrat MP for Chippenham, asked the Foreign Secretary about the consequences for the peace process of an Israeli announcement last week that it would extend the 10-metre concrete separation wall to surround planning area E1 in the West Bank, scene of  Palestinian tent “settlement” in protest at plans to build a new illegal settlement.
“Any prospect of building in the E1 area, would be extremely damaging to the prospect for a successful peace proces,” he said.
“That is why it is so urgent. Now that the planning process for the E1 area has been unfrozen, a clock is ticking, with potentially disastrous consequences for the peace process.”

Hague urged to ban all settlement trade

Israel “impervious to protests” – MPs from all three main parties urge him to move from words to action

Conservative joins calls for sanctions

MPs from all three main parties urged the Foreign Secretary to impose economic sanctions on the Israeli government if they went ahead with a new settlement in the E1 area that would split the West Bank in two.

In a Question Time dominated by the Palestinian issue William Hague told the Commons that the Israeli ambassador had been summoned to the Foreign Office to see the Middle East Minister Alistair Burt.

He had “strongly advised” the Israeli government to reverse the decision announced on Friday in reprisal for the UN vote on Palestine.

But backbenchers across both sides of the House agreed that the time had passed for diplomatic representations and it was now time for “actions not words”.

Ben Bradshaw (Exeter) (Lab) said: “Is it not clear that the Netanyahu Government are completely impervious to words of condemnation or even the summoning of ambassadors, and that the time has come for action?”

“Will he now take the lead in Europe by implementing a ban on all trade with the settlements, which, as he himself has repeated again in this House, are illegal?”

This was backed up by Nicholas Soames (Mid Sussex) (Con) who asked: “What steps would need to be taken to introduce a sanctions regime?”

And by David Ward (Bradford East) (LD) who asked what difference it made to the Israelis whether their actions were lawful or unlawful if the law was never enforced by the international community.

The Foreign Secretary admitted that, if implemented, the plans announced by the Israelis would make the two-state solution “almost inconceivable”.

E1 is a planning zone east of Jerusalem that the Israelis have earmarked for settlement expansion since 1999 but where they have been forced to freeze development as a result of intense American pressure.

Geographically E1 is on the narrow waist where the West Bank is only 18 miles wide. A settlement on this land would cut the south off from the north and the capital from the rest of the West Bank and would be the last nail in the coffin for a viable Palestinian state.

Cocking a snook at the US-imposed freeze of building houses on E1, the Israelis have built infrastructure for a large town, including a police station and street lights on a barren hill where the only residents are goats and sheep belonging to local Bedouins.

Labour MP for Preston, Mark Hendrick, has tabled Early Day Motion 817 which expresses grave concern at Israel’s plans to build on E1 in retaliation for the UN General Assembly vote to recognise Palestine as a state.

He moves the adjournment on Tuesday December 11th on the issue Israel’s plans to build 3,000 houses in the E1 block in reprisal for the UN vote on Palestine.

Sir Gerald Kaufman (Manchester, Gorton) (Lab) asked the Foreign Secretary: “Is not the building of additional illegal settlements, in addition to settlements that already house 500,000 people, a blatant breach of international law, together with the theft by the Israeli Government of huge sums of tax revenues belonging to the Palestinians?

“When will we take action such as economic sanctions or an arms embargo against this rogue state that is committing criminal acts?”

William Hague admitted that the E1 announcement “creates doubts” about Israel’s stated commitment to achieving peace with the Palestinians.

Martin Horwood (Cheltenham) (LD) also hinted strongly at the need for sanctions by asking what discussions the Foreign Secretary had had with European partners “bearing in mind that the EU is Israel’s most important trading partner”.

Labour’s Stephen Timms asked, since the Foreign Secretary had said settlement building in the E1 area would be unlawful, “what prospect is there of prevailing on Israel to comply with the requirements of international law?”

Liberal Democrat Duncan Hames said the Foreign Secretary “must grow weary of repeating to the Israeli Government his condemnation of illegal settlements” and asked for an assurance that he would not “shy away from putting economic muscle behind our protestations”.

Jenny Chapman (Darlington) (Lab) asked: “What discussions have been held with the European Commission on the labelling of settlement goods?

Labour’s Richard Burden asked about the “growing legal opinion internationally that anyone who trades with an illegal settlement is themselves complicit in an illegal act”.

But the Foreign Secretary ruled out economic action on the grounds that there was no “enthusiasm” and there wasn’t a “consensus” in the EU. “Nor is it our approach.”

He would add only that “if there is no reversal of the decision that has been announced, we will want to consider what further steps European countries can take and I will discuss that with my counterparts in other EU nations”.

The Foreign Secretary also came under fire for abstaining at the United Nations in the 138-6 vote to recognise Palestine as a state. Labour’s Shadow Foreign Secretary Douglas Alexander asked him to “explain how abstaining enhanced the UK’s influence with either Israel or the Palestinians?”

Anas Sarwar (Glasgow Central) (Lab) said “the UK’s failure to back the Palestinian resolution has severely undermined our credibility in the Middle East”.

Sir Menzies Campbell (North East Fife) (LD) said Israel’s reprisals against the Palestinians “serve only to undermine the authority of Mahmoud Abbas and of the Palestinian National Authority, which he leads and in addition encourages those Palestinians, particularly in Gaza, who wrongly believe that violence is justified”.

The Foreign Secretary conceded that the Israeli moves “undermine the Palestinian Authority and could therefore embolden more extreme elements”.

MPs also raised the high civilian death toll in Gaza where 103 Gazan civilians and four Israeli civilians were killed during the recent outbreak.

Labour’s Chi Onwurah said she had been “overwhelmed by messages from constituents asking me to express their horror and despair at the violence and the casualties in Gaza”.

Ann McKechin (Glasgow North) (Lab) asked “what steps he is taking to encourage Israel to avoid civilian casualties in Gaza”. She pointed out that since 2003 as many Gazans had died during periods of calm as during periods of conflict.

“That appears to show that there has been systemic failure by the Israelis in protecting civilians in Gaza. What he is going to do about that?”

The Foreign Secretary said he “underlined” to Israel the need to abide by international humanitarian law and avoid civilian casualties.