Dr. Noura Erakat:

I will make three brief comments to close. The first is to emphasise the idea that Israel has an obligation to treat the Palestinians in the pandemic. Not only is there a blatant contravention of that obligation as Israel sends its excess vaccines across the world to curry greater diplomatic relationships with new allies, it is now before our eyes evicting Palestinians from their homes when they should be staying at home for shelter to avoid spreading the pandemic. In addition, they are using tear gas on protesters during a pandemic that primarily affects the lungs and breathing. There is not only a disregard to treat the Palestinians, but an exacerbation of that vulnerable condition through policies of outright violence. "Neglect" would be too kind a word.

Second, regarding what seems to be a disagreement between me and the ambassador, I do not think that disagreement is significant to our point. Whether one believes and aspires to a state or to a different political configuration for coexistence, peace and justice is not the point. My point of demonstrating that it is no longer that the state is obsolete is to highlight how the peace process framework and diplomatic approach has become counterproductive to achieving any outcome with dignity for Palestinians. It has become a way for those who want to express solidarity with Palestinians to retract into a crouching posture and say they support peace, want to see two states and dialogue and that we need to go back to the negotiating table.

That becomes a way of deflecting the responsibility to say that there must be accountability and sanctions and that there must be a restraint on the more powerful party that is oppressive in what is a clear disparity in the distribution of power. Israel can prevent President Abbas from travelling outside Palestine. There is no parity in this. What the state framework does is obscure the power disparity and that this is an issue of rights, belonging and resisting erasure. Regardless of the political outcome, I urge the committee to insist on accountability, the application of a rights-based framework, sanctions, pressure and naming the power imbalance instead of using an obscuring framework that allows even the United States, which supports Israel in fulfilling this violence, to say that it believes in the two-state solution, which has not only become empty, but a liberal veneer for violence.

In response to the question on what will happen to the Palestinians in question, they will become like me and the majority of Palestinians who live outside Palestine. Of the global Palestinian population, 66% live in exile. They become refugees. They become people who are living in the diaspora for the rest of their lives. That is why this struggle is not about finding a new home. It is about remaining on the land. Palestinians understand that, if they are removed, they can never return. That is what is at stake and why even the topic of Palestinian refugees has become so inflammatory within Israel discourse. They equated the right of refugees to return and belong with an existential threat to Israel. That is what we must resist.

I thank the committee again for this opportunity. I look forward to seeing how it becomes part of the solution in a legacy of freedom and justice.