GSME 23: Letter to the Chair of the Committee from the Rt Hon David Miliband MP, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs

Thank you for your letter of 3 March following the Committee’s visit to Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPTs). You asked about seven points, and I enclose the relevant information.

FAC Visit to Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories

1. During the visit, we had an opportunity to visit several communities in the West Bank, including the town of Hebron and smaller villages in the south Hebron hills. We witnessed the very difficult conditions faced by many Palestinians on a day to day basis, and were concerned that in many instances, basic human rights were not being respected. The lack of provision of basic human rights included:

i) An absence of due process and basic legal protections for Palestinians detained by the Israeli Defence Force who appear in some instances to have been arbitrarily detained.

ii) The illegal occupation of land and the lack of due appeal process which has resulted in a lack of access to valuable agricultural land on which many of those affected rely for their livelihoods.

iii) In Hebron we witnessed the forced segregation of Palestinians which had effectively resulted in the closure of part of the city. Not only did this mean that some residents were almost imprisoned in their own homes, but the forced closure of shops and other businesses had resulted in loss of income and livelihoods.

iv) While some checkpoints had been removed since our previous visit, we witnessed considerable restrictions on the Palestinians in terms of movement and access, including the imposition of curfews by the IDF.

What steps are being taken by the Government in its bilateral relations with Israel to address the situations outlined above and to protect the human rights of the residents of the Occupied Palestinian Territories?

We share the Committee’s concern at the very difficult conditions that many Palestinians contend with on a day-to-day basis. In line with the UK’s consistent position we, along with our EU partners, continue to urge the Israeli authorities to live up to their obligations under international law. Ivan Lewis raised these issues with the Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister on 9 February. The Committee may also be aware that the 2010 FCO Annual Report on Human Rights (published on 17 March) reiterates the UK position on these issues.

The Committee raised the treatment of Palestinian detainees, including many juveniles, in detention without trial. Following a number of arrests of human rights activists in the West Bank, diplomats from our Consulate-General in Jerusalem began attending military court hearings including the cases of the "anti-wall" activists Mohamed Othman, Jamal Juma’ and Abdullah Abu Rahma. The first two of these have now been released, as the Committee knows having met them in the West Bank during their visit. Other EU missions have followed our lead and have now also set up a rota system of court attendance at the trials of the "anti-wall" activists. The UK is also concerned by a wide-ranging crackdown. In the West Bank this is clearly highlighted by Israel’s recent decision to declare Bilin and Nilin closed military zones. We shall continue to participate in this EU Presidency-organised initiative and monitor the situation. We call on the Israeli Government to take immediate action to ensure that all cases are reviewed by a court in accordance with fair procedures, and that detainees’ rights are upheld.

The Government will also continue financial assistance for projects in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, that help Palestinians to understand and use the Israeli planning law more effectively. These projects have helped save some 300 homes from demolition and helped Palestinians access their land.

As the Committee note, despite a reduction in the number of checkpoints particularly in the north of the West Bank, many restrictions remain. It is increasingly difficult, in particular, for Palestinians to move freely between East Jerusalem and the rest of the West Bank. The UK continues to call for further and sustained improvements of movement and access, noting that many check points and road blocks remain in place.

2. On 25 November 2009, Prime Minister Netanyahu announced a ten month partial freeze on settlement construction, however, this did not include settlement activity in East Jerusalem. Many interlocutors identified that despite the freeze, settlement activity was ongoing and the freeze was having no visible impact. What is your assessment of the impact of the settlement freeze? What steps are being taken to prevent further construction of settlements?

As set out in our previous response, our hope has been that Israel’s partial settlement moratorium would be a step that could help towards resuming negotiation between both parties. However, we are clear about the limitations of that moratorium including the exceptions for ongoing building and for certain types of public and minor works. As the Committee notes, the moratorium did not include East Jerusalem. The Foreign Secretary has condemned the Israeli decision on 9 March to advance the approval process for 1600 housing units in the East Jerusalem settlement of Ramat Shlomo. The UK position towards settlements remains unchanged: settlements in both East Jerusalem and the rest of the West Bank are illegal under international law and an obstacle to peace. Along with the strong and consistent messaging which the UK delivers on this issue, we have looked at various other ways of expressing our concerns.

In December 2009 we decided to issue labelling advice to retailers and importers of food and agricultural produce, originating from OPTs. The release of this advice was driven by requests from consumers, retailers and NGOs, who had expressed the urgent need for clearer advice on the origin of food and drink goods. And the Foreign & Commonwealth Office pulled out of a property deal to relocate our Embassy in Tel Aviv to Hakirya Tower. This was because Hakirya’s owners had been unable to confirm that they were not involved in settlement-building in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

We along with our international allies will continue to make clear that for peace negotiations to succeed all sides must refrain from provocative actions on the ground, in particular settlement expansion, which will lessen the chance of successful negotiation.

3. During our visit, we heard about a growing non-violent peace movement within the West Bank. We also had discussions with Palestinian and Israeli activists campaigning for Palestinian human rights. What is the FCO doing to support these growing non-violent peace protests in the Occupied Palestinian Territories? Does the FCO support include financial assistance?

The UK recognises the rights of Palestinians under international law to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and freedom of association.  Palestinians are entitled to protest peacefully against the occupation, as the Committee saw during its visit to the Occupied Palestinian Territories, against the route of the separation wall. Peaceful protest forms an important element of the Palestinian Authority’s two-year plan published in August 2009.

This plan was subsequently and explicitly supported by the 27 member states of the European Union in the December conclusions of the EU Foreign Affairs Council.

At the moment we do not provide financial support for grassroots organisations which demonstrate against the route of the wall. Part of our reason for not doing so is that the most prominent of those organisations are also directly involved in the international campaign to boycott, divest from and impose sanctions upon Israel as a whole. Our stance on boycotts against green-line Israel is well known: boycotts have no positive role to play in alleviating the suffering and insecurity that Palestinians and Israelis have endured in recent years. Boycotts, by their very nature, widen gaps in understanding, polarise debate and block opportunities for co-operation and collaboration. However, we do provide financial and technical support to a wide range of NGOs which advocate human rights both in Israel and the OPTs. We would also consider future funding for Palestinian organisations involved in peaceful protest. As noted in our response to the first of the Committee’s questions, we also remain extremely concerned at the recent targeting of such activists by the Israeli military justice system.

4. During our visit, we met Tzipi Livni, Leader of the Opposition Kadima Party. She raised with us directly grave concerns, which were also raised separately by other senior Israeli interlocutors, in relation to the fact that a UK magistrates court had issued an arrest warrant for Livni, and that she therefore potentially faces arrest should she travel to the UK. We are aware that the Government is giving urgent consideration to this issue of universal jurisdiction and particularly as to how the current procedure by which arrest warrants can be sought and issued without any prior knowledge or advice by a prosecutor, can be changed to address this issue. We have been informed that the Spanish authorities recently changed their procedures to meet similar concerns expressed by the Chinese Government. We also note that you have clearly stated that Israeli leaders must be able to travel to the UK and have a proper dialogue with the British Government. What progress has the Government made in its consideration of how the British system should be changed? Is the Government likely to bring forward legislation to address this before the general election?

As set out in the Justice Secretary’s Written Ministerial Statement of 4 March, the Government has considered the matter of universal jurisdiction very carefully. We have concluded that there is a case for restricting to the Crown Prosecution Service the right to prosecute this narrow range of universal jurisdiction offences, in circumstances where the offence is alleged to have been committed outside the United Kingdom by a person who is not a British national. The effect of this change-which would require legislation-would be that in such cases it would no longer be possible for anyone other than the CPS (or the Law Officers) to obtain an arrest warrant.

The Government recognises that this is a controversial issue, involving as it does the long-standing right of private prosecution. Therefore, rather than legislating now, the Government is going to seek views on the proposals that we are minded to make.

As the Committee will be aware, the Justice Secretary has written to the Chairman of the Justice Select Committee to ask if his Committee would consider those proposals.

5. Several senior Israeli officials and politicians welcomed the UK’s partnership in seeking meaningful sanctions against Iran. Could you outline the steps that are being taken to develop broader co-operation amongst the other countries in the Middle East in developing a regional approach to Iran?

We have a regular and detailed dialogue with countries in the Middle East about a range of regional challenges including Iran’s nuclear programme and its regional behaviour. Our dialogue is used to share assessments; discuss recent developments; seek support for E3+3 policy on Iran; and to listen to regional concerns. We aim to develop a shared understanding of how to address the challenges. Regional countries tell us that they are deeply concerned by Iran’s nuclear ambitions and its destabilising behaviour in the Middle East (for example its support for Hizballah and Hamas and its support for militia groups in Iraq). Regional countries share the UK’s objective of finding a diplomatic solution to Iran’s nuclear programme.

The Foreign Secretary has also attended and hosted regular meetings between the E3+3 and regional countries to discuss developments on Iran. The UK hosted the most recent meeting in New York in September 2009.

6. On our previous visit in March 2009, a number of Members were able to visit Gaza to assess the situation there post Operation Cast Lead. The Israeli MFA made clear that it would not allow the Committee access to Gaza during our most recent visit. As you are aware the FCO gave us strong advice against a visit to Gaza and told us it would not facilitate a visit via Egypt on the basis of concerns about the security situation. We are very concerned about this lack of access to Gaza and the fact that we were unable to assess conditions there for ourselves. We were told that although there is no shortage of basic food and medicine and that some humanitarian aid is getting through, there are still problems when it comes to the availability of other materials which are essential to the reconstruction of Gaza and of the provision of basic services there. What access do Government officials have to Gaza? What is the Government’s latest assessment of the situation there? What steps are the Government taking to ensure that essential resources are able to reach Gaza?

We share the Committee’s concerns regarding the current humanitarian situation in Gaza. On your first question, FCO officials have visited Gaza on several occasions in the last twelve months, however, these visits are only made if there is a clear business imperative and that logistics for these visits are planned with professional protection teams.

While we have seen an increase in the number of lorries and volume of humanitarian aid getting through, this still falls significantly below what the United Nations says is the minimum necessary to establish a decent life in Gaza. The 2010 FCO Annual Report on Human Rights clearly highlights our concerns.

We shall continue to press the Israeli Government to ease border restrictions for the flow of humanitarian aid, trade goods and reconstruction material. We also continue to call on Hamas to abandon all acts of violence and respect human rights in Gaza and to release Gilad Shalit immediately.

7. In view of the failure of efforts led by the Egyptians to secure a Palestinian National Government, what is the UK Government’s attitude to some of the views we heard that Gaza should be put aside for the time being, while efforts are made to reach agreement on the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

Certainly Hamas cannot be allowed to block peace negotiations, and we shall continue to support US efforts to reaffirming meaningful peace talks between Israel and President Abbas. But at the same time the situation in Gaza should not be put aside. There is an urgent need for an increase in the flow of aid, and - as events in the past have shown - there is always a worrying possibility that Gaza - related events can have a negative impact on the atmosphere for negotiations.

12 March 2010

---