Examination of Witnesses (Questions 120-139)
BILL RAMMELL
MP AND DR
JOHN JENKINS
4 MARCH 2009
Q120 Mr Hamilton: Before I ask you
about the humanitarian situation in Gaza, I endorse everything
my colleague, Greg Pope, said about arms exports. In reviewing
those exports to Israel because of Operation Cast Lead and the
possible use against civilians, can we be consistent and look
at other parts of the world where British exports are used in
similar conflicts that do not get as much publicity? If we are
going to do it for one country, we must do it for all. I do not
need a response just this second.
Bill Rammell: No, you will get
a response. That is the case. We have a case-by-case, criterion-led
assessment process. In each case, we look at the most up-to-date
information. If there has been a conflict in the area, it is taken
into account when reaching an assessment.
Q121 Mr Hamilton: You will recall
the controversy a few weeks ago surrounding the BBC's refusal
to broadcast the Disasters Emergency Committee appeal. An argument
used at the time was that wherever a humanitarian crisis may be,
victims do not question whether it is war, earthquake or natural
disaster that caused their position. They are simply suffering
greatly and need our humanitarian help. What is your assessment
of the current humanitarian crisis in Gaza?
Bill Rammell: It is a genuine
crisis. To go through some of the aspects: nearly the whole population
is dependent on some form of humanitarian aid; there are scheduled
power cuts of six to eight hours each day; 50,000 people are without
running water; a further 100,000 receive running water in their
homes only once every seven to 10 days; 90% of people are partially
dependent on food aid compared to 76% before the conflict; during
the conflict 58 facilities were either destroyed or damaged; more
than 4,000 homes were destroyed and almost 12,000 partially destroyed.
In anybody's book, that is a crisis. That is why we have, first,
been one of the most substantial aid donors—and since the
conflict started we have committed almost £50 million on
top of the £243 million over three years that we already
commit to the Palestinian people—and, secondly, regularly
pressed for an opening of the crossings so that enough supplies,
medical equipment and humanitarian assistance can get in.
Q122 Mr Hamilton: Can I deal with
that issue of the crossings and the access to Gaza? There have
been pledges of major international financial assistance for the
reconstruction of Gaza and humanitarian relief but, unless there
is access to the territory, they amount to very little, do they
not? How reassured are you that the Israelis are going to open
the crossings and allow that aid in? How much is coming in through
Egypt?
Bill Rammell: I am not reassured
at the moment that enough aid is getting in. The aid agencies
estimate that about 500 lorries a day need to get in. The last
figures I saw suggested 130 to 140 lorries. That is clearly not
enough. That is why we have pressed the Israeli Government strongly.
The Prime Minister recently wrote to Prime Minister Olmert about
this issue, pressing for the crossings to be opened. The Foreign
Secretary and the International Development Secretary have discussed
the issue directly with Minister Herzog, who is responsible for
humanitarian access, and we will continue to press in that way.
But we must also have a comprehensive view. One thing that we
need to do to convince the Israelis to fully open up is to tackle
the serious issue of weapons smuggling; that is why we participated
in the conference in Copenhagen on tackling arms smuggling. We
will host a conference in London at the end of next week to support
international efforts to tackle that problem. Dialogue on that
issue, particularly between the Egyptians and the Israelis, is
so important.
Q123 Mr Hamilton: Have the Egyptians
opened their crossings or is the situation the same on both sides?
Dr Jenkins: Rafah is intermittent.
You have seen the crossings yourselves. They are highly specialised
individual crossings. Karni is a container crossing, so if you
want to get containers into Gaza they have to go through Karni.
If you want to get oil and diesel and so forth in they have to
go through Nahal Oz because that is where the pipeline is, and
cement goes through Sufa. Rafah is not set up for large-scale
supplies going through. There is also, of course, a political
point about Rafah. If Rafah became the point for containerisation
and oil and so forth that would be the only open crossing. The
Egyptians believe that would mean that they would be expected
to assume greater responsibility for Gaza, so there is that difficult
context as well.
Q124 Mr Hamilton: Are they not
prepared to improve the Rafah crossing?
Dr Jenkins: No, they are not.
Q125 Mr Hamilton: What is urgently
needed is humanitarian aid. If the vehicles are not getting through
because the Israelis are not opening up, can we not put pressure
on Egypt to improve the Rafah crossing so that that one can be
used? It seems that we just have to get the aid in.
Bill Rammell: We have to do that,
but we need a comprehensive solution, which means that we need
both the Rafah crossing and the other crossings open. It is partly
about pressing and putting pressure on the Israelis and the Egyptians
to achieve that, but if we can effectively tackle the smuggling
issue we are much more likely to make progress.
Dr Jenkins: There is also the
issue of what is humanitarian and what is reconstruction. I understand
that there is enough medicine in Gaza and more or less enough
food for the moment. What are not there are the pipes and cement
and so forth, which are needed to reconstruct the houses and hospitals.
In a way, those are the critical supplies that need to get in
to Gaza at the moment, and they are not getting in. The Israelis
also have a list of 400, I think, banned items. In normal parlance
those pipes and so forth are not humanitarian supplies, they are
for reconstruction. But if you look at the situation in Gaza,
with people in tents because their houses have been bombed—last
week a lot of the tents were blown away by the high winds—they
are humanitarian supplies in a broader sense. We have to try to
get that stuff in on a sustainable basis, but because of how the
politics are working the only way in at the moment is through
Sufa and Karni. We have to get them in. The UN is working on the
humanitarian access mechanism and that is important. It is essentially
the same sort of thing that was agreed in November 2005 in the
access and movement agreement. That is a template, and everybody
is focused on getting the Israelis to agree with it.
Bill Rammell: Also, it is difficult
not to conclude that some of this is arbitrary. I think that I
said to you, Mr Hamilton, yesterday, that lentils are allowed
in but pasta is not.
Q126 Mr Hamilton: Yes, that is
bizarre. I was going to mention it. Finally, we are aware, I think,
of the obstacles to a longer-term solution, perhaps a ceasefire,
between Hamas and Israel. One of those obstacles is obviously
the lack of any recognition by Hamas that Israel has the right
to exist. What do you see as the other principal obstacles that
prevent a long-term ceasefire and negotiations between the two
parties?
Bill Rammell: Certainly there
is the recognition of Israel's right to exist. There is also,
to put it bluntly, the political reconciliation that needs to
take place to enable elections to proceed within the next year
for the Palestinian Authority. That is critical. There were some
helpful discussions in Cairo at the end of last week, during which
both sides voiced a commitment to try to establish some kind of
national reconciliation Government. The time scale for achieving
that is the end of March. We are certainly in favour of some kind
of interim, non-factional and technocratic Government, and if
Egypt and President Abbas can deliver that, we would strongly
support it.
Q127 Chairman: What are the British
Government doing to try to get the Israelis to end their embargo
on construction materials, such as cement and structural steel,
crossing into Gaza? Those materials are needed to rebuild the
huge number of homes that have been destroyed.
Bill Rammell: We are doing two
principal things. First, we raise that issue in virtually every
conversation that we have with the Israeli Government, and such
conversations predate the conflict that started at Christmas.
I visited Israel and the occupied territories just before Christmas
and talked to my Israeli counterpart about the importance of opening
the crossing. Secondly, we are trying to be practical and do what
we can to tackle the smuggling issue, because there is a clear
link, certainly in Israeli minds, between the two issues, so whatever
international support can be brought to bear in that regard can
only help.
Q128 Mr Horam: Looking back at
the immediate tragedy in Gaza and the events leading up to it,
and at the overall peace process, the Annapolis peace negotiations
between Israel and President Abbas were established by former
President Bush. Are those negotiations continuing—I presume
they are—or have they been completely derailed by events
in Gaza? The negotiations were certainly taking place when Condoleezza
Rice visited the region, but I do not know what has happened since
then.
Bill Rammell: Discussions have
certainly been continuing until relatively recently.
Q129 Mr Horam: They have?
Bill Rammell: Yes, and that is
welcome. Clearly, all sides are now awaiting the new Israeli Government.
Once that Government are established, whichever one they are,
our clear view, and the helpful and constructive view of the US
Government, is that there needs to be momentum. In part, that
means embracing the Arab peace initiative. We were certainly vocal
in pushing for its rearticulation before Christmas, and the Arab
League's letter to the then President-elect Obama was very helpful
and constructive. We then need to see a response in kind from
the new Israeli Government, which will certainly have to include
something on the issue of settlements.
Q130 Mr Horam: So what you are
saying is that you hope that will happen when the new Government
are in place, and that it has not been happening during the election
and so forth?
Bill Rammell: No, the Annapolis
discussions have not continued while the new Government are being
formed.
Dr Jenkins: President Abbas froze
the discussions because of Gaza. They are now waiting to see where
the new Israeli Government position themselves on the issue, so
the discussions are frozen but not finished.
Q131 Mr Horam: And they will restart
when that is settled?
Bill Rammell: That is our hope
and expectation. One of our frustrations is that we can do everything
in our power politically and diplomatically, but we do not have
the power to mandate.
Q132 Mr Horam: Sure. An issue
there, from what you say, is the settlements.
Bill Rammell: I find it inconceivable
that you can make progress without movement on the issue of settlements.
Q133 Mr Pope: I would like to
ask about Quartet policy and the prospect of the establishment,
at some point, of a viable Palestinian state. It is sometimes
said that the darkest hour is before dawn, and at the moment things
look incredibly bleak, but is there a moment of opportunity opening
up with the new Israeli Government, the American Administration
and former Senator Mitchell?
Bill Rammell: I think there is.
Over the last seven or eight weeks, it has been very easy to get
depressed about what is happening. Nevertheless, a number of things
have come together—the new US Administration, for example.
If I am honest, two months ago, privately I was questioning the
degree to which the Obama Administration would make this a priority,
given all the other colossal challenges that they face. The early
indications about the degree of priority are very positive. George
Mitchell's appointment as a special envoy, particularly given
his extraordinary experience in the Northern Ireland peace process,
is a very good move. I and the Foreign Secretary met him last
week. I am encouraged by his dedication and his thinking. We have
a new Israeli Government and, whatever form that that Government
take, I think that this process has got to be reinvigorated. I
made the point earlier that at one level the past two months have
been so disastrous, it actually reinforces the need for urgency
and momentum. I think there are some grounds for optimism.
Q134 Mr Pope: Everybody—certainly
the Quartet, the British Government and President Abbas—seems
to be developing a consensus that there ought to be a Government
of Palestinian unity, and there is a lot of pressure to create
that. It seems the one group that is resisting this is Hamas.
What are the carrots on offer for Hamas to come into the fold
in a Government of Palestinian unity? Specifically, it seems to
me that our policy of isolating Gaza and Hamas, whatever else
we may feel about their views and their actions, has not worked
and we need to try a new tack. If Hamas came into a Palestinian
national unity Government, their taking part in talks with the
Quartet would be a way forward.
Bill Rammell: First, it is not
our policy to isolate Gaza, and if you look at our track record
in terms of engagement, aid and support, I think that is very
clear. It is also the case, as I said earlier, that I would like
to be in a position where we can deal and engage directly with
Hamas, but that means that there has to be movement towards the
Quartet principles. If that happens, particularly given the kind
of momentum internationally and politically that has been established,
I think there are all sorts of benefits that will come the way
of the people of Gaza, whom Hamas claim to represent. If you look
at the discussions this week in Sharm el Sheikh, very substantial
aid is on offer in terms of aid and reconstruction, and there
is a real opportunity there if Hamas is prepared to take it and
if it is prepared to move towards those Quartet principles.
Q135 Mr Pope: The Quartet principles
are: recognise Israel, renounce violence, accept the previous
agreements made by the representatives of the Palestinian people.
What is your estimation of whether Hamas is moving closer to or
further away from those principles?
Bill Rammell: I think the jury
is still out at the moment. I get reports on a daily and weekly
basis of the discussions taking place, facilitated by Egypt. At
one moment there is a sense of optimism and then there is a further
delay, so I think the jury is out. However, all of us need to
recall that there was a previous national unity Government where,
albeit not perfectly, Hamas went some way towards committing to
the principles that are enshrined within the Quartet principles.
Therefore I think, and I hope, that that can be a basis from which
Hamas can go further.
Q136 Mr Pope: You will be aware
that Senator Kerry, the chair of the Senate Committee on Foreign
Relations, visited Gaza a couple of weeks ago. I understand that
a letter was passed to him, via an intermediary from Hamas, for
him to pass on to President Obama. Senator Kerry received that
letter, and I know he has met the British Foreign Secretary. As
there are only a few of us here, can you enlighten us as to what
was in the letter?
Bill Rammell: I cannot. The Foreign
Secretary met Senator Kerry the weekend before last as part of
a wide range of discussions that we are having with a number of
players to try to help the process forward.
Sir Menzies Campbell: There was a letter.
Mr Pope: There was a letter. That was
a great non-answer. Thank you.
Q137 Mr Illsley: A moment ago,
you mentioned the conference on Monday and said that this meant
that the money is available for Hamas if it is willing to take
it. You can see the Financial Times headline, "Donors
pledge $4.5 billion for Palestinians", but the article states
that none of that funding must go to Hamas. The report says: "At
least $1.33bn of the assistance is expected to be spent on rebuilding
Gaza but officials made it clear that this aid would not be disbursed
until Hamas was no longer in control of territory." Given
that this Committee has taken evidence over the past few weeks
that support for Hamas is increasing, that money is going nowhere
because Hamas is still going to be in control of the territory
for some time to come.
Bill Rammell: I talked about the
benefit that is available to Hamas if it moves towards the Quartet
principles and there is no indication that it is willing to do
that at the moment. Nevertheless, there are means and mechanisms
in place to ensure that we can get the resources and the aid into
Gaza, if Hamas does not move, without that reinforcing the position
of Hamas. That is the right thing to do in the current circumstances.
Dr Jenkins: We saw the Saudis,
and others on Monday in Sharm. They say that they do not want
this money to go to Hamas. They also say that they have mechanisms
for building houses, hospitals and other types of construction
in Gaza. It will not go to any faction—not Fatah, or Hamas.
Their intention is to have a sort of GCC thing, which sits in
Gaza, that the money goes into, so that the stuff can be built.
We were getting loads of contractors to do that, and no one is
going to ask loads of contractors what their political allegiance
is—they are just contractors. There are ways of doing this.
Q138 Mr Illsley: But will the
average Palestinian in Gaza not think, "Well, Hamas has fired
the rockets. We have stood up to Israel, we have got the donors'
conference and `shazam', they will build more hospitals and buildings"?
Any Hamas supporter is going to think "My Hamas Government
have the buildings back up, so we have a win-win situation from
the conference." The west is trying to say to Hamas, "There
is aid on offer for you if you accept the Quartet principles."
Even without accepting the Quartet principles, the man on the
street in Gaza is going to see the buildings rebuilt. So they
are getting the result without doing anything. They are never
going to accept the principles while the result is there.
Bill Rammell: I think that the
man and woman on the street in Gaza are going to reflect on how
they got into this situation and where responsibility for that
lies. I do not think that it is as clear cut as you are suggesting.
But one of the reasons that we urged against this kind of military
action, among a whole series of reasons, was that it risked reinforcing
extremism within the region. There was, and there is, a risk of
that.
Q139 Sir Menzies Campbell: Given
the legacy of corruption which Yasser Arafat left, how far are
the British Government content that funds—perhaps those
that were being discussed earlier this week—would be properly
spent if they were dispersed in favour of the administration led
by Abu Mazen?
Bill Rammell: The basis on which
we are committing aid is under the auspices of the UN guidelines
and principles. The vast bulk of our expenditure goes through
the internationally recognised aid agencies that have checks,
balances and procedures in place to ensure that it does not end
up in the pockets of people that it should not.
Dr Jenkins: I was Consul General
in Jerusalem when Salaam Fayad got something like $1.2 billion
back from various sources and put it into the Palestinian Investment
Fund. That was the money it was alleged that Arafat had stolen
and put into those accounts.
| 
