|
UNCORRECTED TRANSCRIPT OF ORAL EVIDENCE To be published as HC 522-iii House of COMMONS MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
THE
HUMANITARIAN IN THE OCCUPIED
RT HON TONY BLAIR Evidence heard in Public Questions 109 - 153
USE OF THE TRANSCRIPT
Oral Evidence Taken before the International Development Committee on Members present Malcolm Bruce, in the Chair John Battle John Bercow Richard Burden Hugh Bayley Mr Stephen Crabb Daniel Kawczynski Ann McKechin Jim Sheridan Mr Marsha Singh Sir Robert Smith ________________ Witness: Rt Hon Tony Blair, Middle East Quartet Representative, gave evidence. Q109 Chairman: Can I say to you, Mr Blair, thank you very much for coming to
give evidence. I know there have been
some problems with both our diary and your diary so we very much appreciate the
fact we have managed to find a slot that is mutually productive. I appreciate the fact you were able to
accommodate this slot as it became available.
As you know, we produced a report in January last year on the situation
in terms of development support in the Occupied Territories and we decided we
should do a follow-up because there have been substantial changes since then:
there was the creation and collapse of the Government of National Unity, there
was the Hamas takeover of Gaza and the subsequent blockade, there is an
increase in the number of roadblocks on the West Bank; on the positive side
there has been the Annapolis Conference, the Paris Donors Conference and the
Bethlehem Investment Conference. We took
the view this was an appropriate moment to update the situation, and also your
own appointment which is obviously what we are here to discuss today. Thank you for coming in to answer our
questions. I wonder if we could start
with the situation in Mr Blair: I do stand by
it. The situation in Q110 Chairman: We had very powerful evidence in John Ging by video link direct from
Mr Blair: The big
question is: what is the right attitude to have towards Hamas. I abide by the Quartet principles, and the
Quartet principles are very clear on this point. However, in the particular situation we are
dealing with in Gaza, it is important to realise that the issue is not that
Hamas are not being talked to, because they are being talked to by the
Norwegians, by the Egyptians and by others, the issue is at the moment how do
you get a situation where you have a ceasefire so that the rocket and terror
attacks stop coming out of Gaza and the retaliation stops coming into
Gaza. Without that happening I think it
is very difficult to see how we are going to ease the humanitarian
situation. Here is the essential
political problem. People in Gaza are
suffering in the most terrible way, that is absolutely true, but if you are an
Israeli politician sitting in Israel and there are 2,500 mortars and rockets
falling mostly on one town, Sderot, and where people are in constant danger,
where the people are suffering trauma, where just a few weeks back, when I was
on one of my visits, there was a massive demonstration outside the Israeli prime
minister's office from people from Sderot saying you have to get tougher on the
situation. Even though, as I will go on
to say, there is a lot more Israel could do, and has to do, not only in respect
of Gaza but in respect of the West Bank, it is important to realise that if
these rocket and mortar attacks stopped life would be easier. When, as I was, a few weeks back pressing the
Israelis to let in more fuel into Gaza and they then go and kill two innocent
Israeli civilians who were trying to get fuel into Gaza, it does not create a
very easy situation. The politics of
this, at the moment, are that until you get a period of calm in Q111 Mr Crabb: Moving on to the peace process, you described the recent Annapolis
Conference as the best chance that all sides in the Mr Blair: There is a
Hamas/Fatah complication but, in a sense, for the purposes of the negotiation,
it is very clear that President Abbas is charged with the political
negotiation. I think a more complicating
factor is what is happening in Israeli politics at the moment, which is
obviously more uncertain and that can create a difficulty. Here is my take on it, and I have a different
understanding of it than I did when I was Prime Minister even though I used to
spend a lot of time thinking about this and going out to the region. My view very clearly is that most people know
roughly what a final settlement looks like.
That is not to say there are not very tricky issues to resolve: Q112 Mr Crabb: Is it your view that a sustainable peace deal can be struck which does not include Hamas as a partner? Mr Blair: If you have a
political process going that started to result in real progress on the ground and
the shape of the political negotiation being clear, then I think Hamas would
have to face a choice. You can agree or
disagree about the Quartet principles, and I totally understand the point of
view of people who say you just talk to everyone. It is not the Quartet position but I can
understand it. However, let us be clear
that to cut a deal that has Hamas in it cannot be done unless Hamas accept the
existence of Q113 Mr Crabb: If I can ask you about the role that Hamas is playing on the ground,
specifically with regard to the humanitarian situation in Mr Blair: People argue
about this but I would say the one thing you cannot dispute is Hamas have a
military grip on Richard Burden: Before we leave
the Q114 Chairman: John Ging told us that people were actually dying waiting to get out for medical treatment because they were not getting timely exits. Mr Blair: This is
something that is important we raise with the Israelis and get changed. It is tragic when you get students who have
scholarships to come out here and study, or some coverage last week of students
who have scholarships to study in Q115 Jim Sheridan: There are some serious people who question whether or not you are the right man for the job. There is nothing new there. Mr Blair: I am fairly familiar with those type of questions. Q116 Jim Sheridan: Given your track record as Prime Minister of the UK and our
involvement in Iraq, Afghanistan and our lack of involvement in the Lebanon,
there is a serious question mark about your independence, about your neutrality
and whether or not the Arab world have the trust in you to deliver the
political and financial support that is needed to help the people in
Palestine. What tangible evidence do you
have that you are independent, neutral and that the people of the Mr Blair: The Paris
Conference in December was supposed to raise $5.4 billion in pledges and we
actually raised $7.7 billion so I do not think there is a problem with us
raising the money out there. Sometimes
when people talk about whether you are independent or not what they really mean
is you are too close to Q117 Jim Sheridan: In response to your question to Richard, you said that you have not had
an opportunity to visit Mr Blair: It is more to
do with the fact that in a situation that is immensely tense and sensitive, at
the moment where these negotiations are going on, frankly it is better to wait
and see how they go before you create a situation which may make it more
difficult for the people trying to do good down there rather than harm. I see people out of Q118 Sir Robert Smith: On a practical point about your role, how exactly do you report back to the Quartet and how do they relate back to you? Mr Blair: It is not a
desperately formal reporting mechanism I have to say fortunately. I speak to the UN Secretary General
regularly, to the President of the Q119 Sir Robert Smith: A lot of what we have talked about so far has been about the peace process. I think you would accept that the peace process and trying to bring prosperity are inextricably linked strongly, the one does not come without the other that easily, yet your own remit that you have been given by the Quartet does not include the peace process. How do you really get international aid and development on the ground effectively if you are not integrated into the peace process? Mr Blair: I would say it is pretty integrated. It is true that in the terms of my reference I do not handle the political negotiation. Again, to be blunt, when you are out there I am talking to everyone all the time about all the issues. The particular part that I am focused on, and that is within my remit, is, in my view, central to this for the reasons I have given. One of the things, for example, that we have agreed with the Israelis in this package which will be, in my view, of really quite profound significance in whether we can move this process forward is for a new way of working around the Jenin area up in the north of the Palestinian Territory. Without going into the detail now, the point is that when you then come to look at a negotiation like that everything comes into it: the politics, the economics, the security. The central thing is if we cannot build Palestinian security capability then the reality is we will not get the Israelis to lift the weight of the occupation. You have to do both of those things simultaneously. Those are the things that, if you can get them done, support this political negotiation. Q120 Sir Robert Smith: Although the peace process is not part of your remit you have links to those involved in the peace process. Mr Blair: Yes, and I discuss it with them the whole time. That is not to say I am handling it because I am not; do not misunderstand me. Obviously if I am seeing the Israeli Prime Minister and Foreign Minister and Defence Minister and the Palestinian President and Prime Minister and so on, you do not have a conversation where some things are excluded from it. In any event, as I think I said to people right at outset when I was appointed, if I have to start going through the terms of my reference like a contract and say I can do this and I cannot do that, it probably means that something has gone amiss. Q121 Mr Singh: A couple of weeks ago you co-hosted the Palestinian Investment Conference which I believe was very well attended by over 2,000 people. Given that attendance, what were the actual outcomes of that conference? Mr Blair: There were a
series of investment projects announced: housing and others as well. It led on from the package that we agreed
with the Israelis which include things like a new mobile telephony licence,
industrial parks and so on. The most
important thing about the Palestinian Investment Conference was that it
happened, that people came to it and that the Israelis facilitated it. What I have been trying to say is how we
worked, because we were intimately connected with that conference, in setting
that up and implementing it is not a bad lesson in how the thing could work if
people had the right attitude and goodwill.
People came and it was a very well attended conference. Take Q122 Mr Singh: The proof of the pudding is in the eating. What percentage of the projects which were on the table received a firm financial commitment? Mr Blair: For those projects that were announced at the conference, there was firm money put there. For example, one of the things I was involved in just a few weeks back was putting together the mortgage facility for this housing finance idea which is to offer support for mortgages so that there can be low cost and affordable housing for Palestinians. Our Department of International Development played a very helpful role in that and were a major part of putting that together. That is a $500 million facility which is now there and will probably bring in about $1.5 billion worth of housing investment. Q123 Mr Singh: On mortgages, could you do the same for the Mr Blair: That is definitely not my remit! Q124 Mr Singh: You mentioned a number of projects which received firm financial
commitments. Were any of those
commitments for the reason of Mr Blair: In respect of
the package we put together with the Israelis, some were infrastructure
projects. There is the North Gaza Sewage
Treatment Works which we have clearance for now. The first phase of that will be
completed and the second phase we can put under way now, but it has been
incredibly difficult. There is no point
disputing the fact that it is very difficult to get things into Q125 Mr Singh: Do not Hamas see the need for development in Mr Blair: They do but it is at one level. They have a strong ideology, there is no point in getting away from it, and it is one of the complicating factors. Q126 Mr Singh: Prospects in Mr Blair: They are
dismal until you get a ceasefire and some normality and calm. If you get some normality and calm,
everything becomes possible. For
example, if you go back to the Irish situation for a moment, and there are real
parallels there, if there had not been a ceasefire and there had not been an
agreement that this thing was to be pursued essentially through peaceful means,
even with the fact there were still acts of violence, if you had not that basic
agreement there and created the space within which the politics, the economics
and the social development can work you would never have got a peace deal. That is the problem: whatever criticisms can
be made of Israeli policy, and I share the criticism in terms of getting more
things in, humanitarian aid, the students, things that Richard was talking
about, nonetheless the fact is Hamas are using the situation in Q127 Chairman: Can I put a comment we had from John Ging about Hamas's involvement
in Mr Blair: Again, if you
ended up in a situation where there was a ceasefire there would be absolutely
no reason why you should not then be reopening the crossings and allowing the
goods and services to come in, and indeed the people and goods to come
out. As I say, at the moment some of
those attacks are happening on Israelis at the crossings. I have discussed this at length with John as
well, as I was indicating earlier, and people like him feel the same
frustration. You cannot agree with the
effect the blockade has on the people of Q128 John Bercow: You are keen to combine large-scale investment and enhanced security with the proposed industrial park in Jenin, potentially, I suppose, acting as a trail-blazer for this purpose. Can you tell us, what is the timescale envisaged for that particular industrial park? Mr Blair: In Jenin there are a whole series of small-scale projects that we are getting underway now and then there is one large-scale project, which is the industrial park around the Jalame crossing. There is basically an agreement for this now. The German Government is providing the money for the infrastructure. I was up at the crossing just a few weeks back. I think they think this can be got underway very quickly, within months, and the interesting thing in this - it gives you a slightly different picture of the situation and what is possible - is that when I then crossed into the village on the Israeli side, where you have got Israelis and Arabs living in the same village, you have got an Israeli mayor, an Arab deputy mayor, and I conducted the conversation with the Israeli mayor with the interpretation being done in Hebrew by the Arab deputy. Here is a situation where, basically, they live completely peacefully with each other. They both support this industrial park at Jalame. The actual border has been open more so that Arab Israelis can go into Jenin, and this is going to make a difference in Jenin. The Jalame industrial park could be underway within months. Q129 John Bercow: I think we all want to be optimistic about it, and it might well be justified to be, and what you have just said is potentially quite encouraging, but I think we could not allow a discussion on this point to conclude without some reference to the fact there are sceptics, and there are sceptics numbered amongst those who have already given evidence to us, to whose scepticism and doubts I would be pleased to hear your response. Specifically, the Portland Trust has said these projects of themselves, though potentially valuable, are not novel; there is some track record of such initiatives being tried and they have tended to founder on precisely the issue of strategic checkpoints, roadblocks, et cetera. I note what you have just said about the border, but with reference to the four strategic checkpoints in particular, do you detect, and can you report to us, progress in removing them on a permanent basis? Mr Blair: First of all, the sceptics
outnumber the optimists very considerably in this situation, as I
discovered. On the other hand, to be
blunt about it, there is not much point in just sitting and moaning about the
situation; we have got to try and change it.
We have actually chosen the industrial parks carefully in order to
minimise the potential problems around either checkpoints or security. So at Jalame there is not really a problem,
at Tarqumiya, down in the south near Hebron, where we are still debating the
precise site, but that will be situated in or around the border there, the
Jericho agro-industrial park, I think, once the feasibility study is completed,
should go ahead and actually some of the housing projects that Portland Trust
and others are working on, there is now no reason why they should not go ahead
and they can go ahead. The four check points
that we have asked the Israelis to remove, one of them has been removed -
that is the Kvasim one which is down in the south near Q130 John Bercow: Are guarantees being offered to reassure investors specifically on the subject of the security and speed of access to, and egress from, those industrial parks for the purposes of delivering supplies? Mr Blair: Yes, absolutely, and that is
the critical thing. For example, up in
Jalame, there is no real security problem in and around where the industrial
site is. Obviously they can go straight
into Q131 Richard Burden: You have emphasised, on a number of occasions, the importance of maintaining and building on relations with both sides - that if both sides do not trust you it is difficult to move forward - but if I have understood you right, you have also indicated that there are some bottom lines that are important. A bottom line that you have particularly emphasised to the Palestinians has been the importance of maintaining, in practice, the rule of law. Would that be reasonable? Mr Blair: Yes, absolutely. Q132 Richard Burden: Does it apply to both sides as a bottom line? Mr Blair: Yes, it does. I have agreed a package with the Palestinians and with the Israelis. The one on security, we will probably go through a lot of the detail of that and how it is going to be properly funded over the timetable at the Berlin Conference the end of this month, but the Israelis and I have agreed package of measures. If that package is implemented over the next few months, that will make a significant difference on the ground. If it is not implemented, then that will be a breach of the undertakings that were given. Q133 Richard Burden: Perhaps we can come on in a minute to talk about the package, but I am just trying to establish the bottom lines on which the packages are built. As far as the Palestinians are concerned, you said that the rule of law, both domestic and, I guess, international, as applied to Hamas - not, "You should not fire rockets over the border at someone else's people" - is a bottom line. In relation to Hamas it even stops a discussion with them, let alone an agreement with them, unless they abide by international law. My question is, does that apply as a bottom line to the Israelis as well as to the Palestinians? Mr Blair: The Israelis should abide by the law too, of course. Q134 Richard Burden: Is the occupation legal or illegal? Mr Blair: The problem with looking at
it in that way is here is the difficulty the Israelis have, and it is important
to realise this. We can talk about the
illegality of the occupation, and so on and so forth, but we do not actually
get to where the hard politics of this is.
Everybody wants to see the occupation lifted. It has got to happen. However, and this is the brutal reality from
the Israeli point of view, no Israeli politician is going to depart from this
view whoever, in any subsequent election, is elected Israeli Prime Minister
unless it is clear that on the West Bank there will be the rule of law by a
Palestinian authority with whom they have got an agreement for peace. One of the things about this situation which
if we are going to solve it we have got to do, is to recognise this
problem. Again, as I say, I do not sit
here as the person speaking for the Israelis, but it is important to recognise
it from their point of view. They think
they got out of Q135 Richard Burden: I put that question to you not to make an academic or debating point but to lead on to some issues of practicality, the first of which would be that, if there is going to be trust, then do you not feel that sometimes on the Palestinian side there may be a perception of double standards. It is not that practicality is not important on both sides, but international law is a bottom line for the Palestinians, with the Israelis it is a bottom line but it depends on the political situation at the time, but that might actually undermine the degree of confidence. I suppose the second thing is, if actually there are certain things going on in the West Bank that are illegal under international law - settlement building, the wall where it is built on Palestinian territory rather than down the green line - and you are intending to negotiate ways often around those problems, it could be said that in some circumstances there is a balance to be drawn about at what point you are actually easing restrictions on the ground to enable economic development, furthering the peace process and lifting the weight of occupation on the Palestinians and at what point that transfers through to saying, actually you get to a situation where the Palestinians are there in Annapolis, they have got a road that can get down to Ramallah, you can have some trade going on there, you have got the transport continuity between areas, but you have still got the settlements, you have still got the West Bank divided up into different cantons and you move away from the idea of a contiguous Palestinian state to a continuous transportation one. Is that a problem? Is it a problem for a villager who does not live on an arterial route who has to get through one of those little checkpoints in order to get there? Mr Blair: Yes. Q136 Richard Burden: And if it is a problem, what mechanism have you got for dealing with that and assessing what you are doing? Mr Blair: Yes, it is a problem. Since I have tried to be fair to the Israeli
side, let me be fair to the Palestinian side.
If Prime Minister Fayyad was sitting here, and he is a totally good guy,
a really sound person, someone who wants a two-state solution, is as tough on
terrorism as any of us, he would say to you, "Look, the fact is the Israelis
could and should be doing much more", and I think it is necessary for Israel to
do more and to go further; and the answer to your point is, yes, if all you do
is some economic and social development and it is not put alongside lifting the
occupation and making a political final settlement, the deals, with also the
settlements issue and the outposts, some of which are illegal under Israeli
law, never mind international law, of course, that will not work. That is why I say you have got to integrate
these things together. You have got to
have the politics, the security capability of the Palestinians and what happens
on the ground in an economic and social moving in the same direction. But, no, of course, what Palestinians feel is
that there is a genuine double standard on the part of the West. They feel that - there is no doubt about that
- but what I am trying to do is to say: how do we work our way out of it, and
where I think it is important to try and change the reality on the ground is
that that is the only way you are going to get a political deal in the
end. It is quite a hard thing to say
this, but I think it is my sense of the political reality. Unless Q137 Richard Burden: It has been suggested that there should be a mechanism on a project-by-project basis for just determining whether a project is taking things forward or whether it is getting round international law. Some kind of mechanism for assessment should be in place. Is there one, would you consider one and, if so, who would do it? Mr Blair: To be honest, I do not really
think that is where it is. I think the
single thing that people would ask me if I was in Q138 Daniel Kawczynski: Mr Blair, could I ask you about the Quartet's
development proposals for the Mr Blair: In what sense exactly? Q139 Daniel Kawczynski: In the sense that obviously this is a disputed area, a disputed territory, and you are allowing Israeli firms to set up there. It could be perceived that this is a way in which the Israelis are getting a strangle-hold on the area and legitimising their presence there by creating these industrial zones. Mr Blair: The idea of an agro-industrial
corridor around Q140 Daniel Kawczynski: So you envisage that these industrial zones will be primarily populated with Palestinian businesses? Mr Blair: I think around the Q141 Chairman: Should it not be exclusively Palestinian business, in the sense that if these are filled up with Israeli companies that actually will be at the expense of Palestinian business opportunity? Mr Blair: I do not think that is the anticipation at all. What I would say to you about that is it is probably for the Palestinians to decide themselves, because sometimes they may want to do some joint ventures, but my understanding is, basically, for the vast bulk of these industrial projects there will be international investors, there will be Palestinian investors. There may from time to time be Israeli investment as well, but that will be on the basis that the Palestinians want it and agree, and sometimes you will get a situation where they do genuinely want it. The other thing that is quite interesting is that there are Israeli business people who are very much on the same line as we would be talking about and who themselves want greater access of movement in order to be able to do business. Q142 John Battle: Our committee is International Development, as
different from Foreign Affairs, and I mention that because the first reason
that this committee took an interest in Mr Blair: No, and this is where you get
into the short-term versus long-term that Richard was talking about
earlier. We have now agreed with the
Israelis for provision for about 12 of these infrastructure projects to go on -
water and sanitation projects - and the Palestinian Water Authority are now
taking those forward, but there is a longer-term question, which is what is
going to be the agreement about the use of water, particularly along the Jordan
Valley, and that is in this Area C territory which is part of the final status
negotiation. In the meantime, again,
there is much more that could be done there.
That is why I would say that Q143 Ann
McKechin: You spoke a great deal this morning about
changing the reality on the ground.
About 18 months ago when the committee visited the West Bank we attended
a border cross point at Hawarrah, which was, frankly, a chaotic crossing for
Palestinian goods vehicles, was highly inefficient and was actually, frankly, insecure
for the Israeli soldiers who were trying to man it. Yet Mr Blair: In respect of those checkpoints that we agree the Israelis should upgrade significantly, Hawarrah was one of those checkpoints. You are absolutely right, there is a lot more that could be done, and that is what should happen. There is a package that has now been agreed with the Israeli Finance Minister as well in order to fund proper equipment. When you visit some of those checkpoints, it is a small but significant investment and it could make a huge difference. I know people say that is not really what should be happening, they should be lifted, but I think the reality is that with some of them they are going to stay for a time, at least, and what is important is that they are significantly improved; but, yes, we could do that, and that is precisely one of the things that was in our package. Q144 Ann McKechin: You mentioned earlier improvements in the tourist
industry in Mr Blair: Again, that is a good point. Why should it be different? The reality is that at the moment when the wall is there and you have got a situation where there are long queues of people to get in and out, it actually matters to have a fast-track for tourists, so that is what we are doing, because it helps, but in time to come, obviously, we want that apply to ordinary Palestinians too. Q145 Ann McKechin: Should you not be applying humanitarian standards that if you are sick, if you are ill and disabled or elderly, you should have first access rather than someone who is fit or healthy and cannot stand for two or three hours in the sunshine when it is 95 degrees? Mr Blair: Of course. Again, one of the things that we are in
discussion with the Israelis about (and this is part of how we change the
situation) is to start discriminating and differentiating between your ordinary
person and the person who is in chronic need.
Again, the reality is that for the moment you will not stop there being
a checkpoint on that part of Bethlehem going into Jerusalem - that is not
going to happen - but certainly people should be allowed swifter access
for humanitarian reasons and, in any event, it is important for the tourist
industry because, as a result, as I say, of what has happened in Bethlehem over
the last few months, the tourist industry is significantly revived there and
that is important. Overall, what is
happening to the West Bank economy (and, again, I say all this against the
background of the fact that Gaza is in an extremely difficult situation for all
the reasons we have just been through and not enough is being done to help the
West Bank economy), it has gone from a contraction but it is now growing. In fact, the overall World Bank projection
for Q146 Chairman: We are close to the end of our session, but I hope it is acceptable to you if we take a quick supplementary from Stephen Crabb and some questions from Hugh Bayley. Mr Blair: Yes. Q147 Mr Crabb: It concerns an issue we have not touched on this
morning. The Israeli Government, I
understand, recently announced they would increase by 40 per cent the number of
Palestinian workers allowed to come and work back in Mr Blair: One, it is important, because it helps the Palestinian people; two, I think it is important and, again, this is part of our agreement with them) that some of those people should be able to overnight there, and so on, because it is important for their work, and three, yes, in time, I hope that then improves and increases. That is where, again, Jenin is important, because there are now people coming across the border and into Jenin for the first time in several years. So that is important to do for sure. Q148 Hugh Bayley: What security outcomes would you expect to see from the Berlin Conference later this month? Mr Blair: I think Q149 Hugh Bayley: What particularly would you expect the Palestinian authority to agree to in order to create the sort of situation which, as you described earlier, would enable Israel to lift the occupation or take steps in that direction? Mr Blair: They need, and I think they will, to be fair, to agree to the reform of those security forces as well as their proper funding and equipping and training, and they need to be in a position where in a few months time, building out from what is happening in Jenin now, we can then take another area and start to do the same, and this is the purpose of the strategy we have outlined. This is very difficult for the Palestinians, because sometimes they are taking on people that they have been alongside in previous times, but the fact is a state is not just a geographical territory, you have to have one rule of law, you have got to have one authority, you have got to have one proper system of law enforcement, and for the Palestinians this is where the work that President Abbas, who is also very committed to this, and Prime Minister Fayyad are doing is so important. It has got to happen. This has really got to happen. Q150 Hugh Bayley: In any negotiation (and you know this from Mr Blair: I think that they can be
persuaded to do that because I believe that, as I say, the majority of sensible
Israelis know that there is no alternative to a two-state solution but a big
fight continuing over a long period of time and throughout the whole
region. So I think that most sensible
Israelis know that a two-state solution is there. Again, the impact of the Intifada and the
breakdown of the negotiations between President Clinton, Prime Minister Barak
and President Arafat a few years back has been to leave the peace camp in Q151 Hugh Bayley: I agree, from my visits to the region, that a majority
on both sides want peace, and the only prospect for that is to have a two-state
solution, but the majority who want peace are marginalised time and again by
acts of violence, whether it is a missile being fired over the border into
Israel or the use of violence by the Israeli security forces. You can take the parallels with Mr Blair: I think it is a very worthwhile exercise for them to work on. If you take an organisation, for example, like One Voice, which is for the young people, who are lovely young people, if that is the future on both sides it would be bright. I think it is very important to encourage a sort of civil society exchange at the same time, and I think that those are things that are easy to do and very worthwhile. Q152 Chairman:
Thank
you. Can I perhaps draw two threads
together and conclude this session. I
think as far as Mr Blair: In that hotel
where I was two or three weeks ago, the hotel occupancy is now over 40 per cent
so it has changed. There are changes
that are there. You know this issue
about legitimising the occupation, to be absolutely frank nobody on the
Palestinian side has ever put this to me as a serious point because I think
they understand very well. Yes, of
course, in the end they want the settlements out and the outposts away, and so
on and so forth, but they do not ignore the fact that if you can get economic projects
going and open up some of the access within the Palestinian side that is
obviously of enormous importance and help to Palestinians. I would go back to the central point about
all this. A strategy for resolving this
has all the different bits of it operating in an integrated way. In other words, if you take the politics but
do not take the security, it will not work.
If you take the politics and the security but there is nothing happening
to give the Palestinians hope on the ground, it will not work. If you leave Q153 Chairman: As an International Development Committee rather than a Foreign
Affairs Committee, our concerns are for the plight of the people and their
potential. Our frustration is frankly if
there were peace there would be no need for any International Development
support for the people of Mr Blair: That is what the Palestinians would want too. Chairman:
If you have any reflections on the exchanges
we have had, we will be producing the report before the summer recess so I hope
you will feel free to comment because sometimes things occur afterwards. Thank you again for enabling us to have this
session, and particularly for accommodating this particular date given that the
Committee were due to be in |