Professor S. Michael Lynk:

I will. I recognise the importance of time to the committee. The Deputy has asked me four questions. Why has the international community, particularly the EU, not acted with more resolve in defending the rules-based international order? A lot of it has to do with the United States, quite frankly. Europe bows or pays tribute to the United States by stating it will allow the US to take the lead on this. As a result, we do not see a lot of sunlight between what the US does and what Europe winds up doing in respect of it. I wish there was more independence, more imaginative diplomacy and more courage from the Europeans to separate themselves from the Unites States regarding policy towards Israel and Palestine. The EU has brought in some small, tapered measures, especially as regards differential policies, that make sure the money it sends to Israel as part of various cultural or economic agreements does not go to the occupied Palestinian territories for the support of Israeli settlements. However, it has barely begun putting labelling onto settlement goods, which is one of the tiniest of measures of retribution with respect to that.

Kofi Annan, in his 2012 memoir, Interventions, which I highly recommend to anybody, stated it is the excessive possessiveness of the United States - I believe those are his exact words - that has deterred the Security Council and the international community from taking the kinds of steps required to try to bring a successful resolution to Israel-Palestine, specifically to the Israeli 55-year-long occupation of Palestine. That is agreed upon by a number of commentators. If committee members looked at last year's op-ed by Ban Ki-moon, they will see he stated the same thing regarding the role of the US being that of retarding the ability to find a just and final solution consistent with the UN.

The Deputy asked what else can be done regarding accountability measures. I state in the recommendations in several of my recent reports that it is important for international states, and I again particularly push this on Ireland, to be supportive of the ongoing investigations at the International Criminal Court in The Hague. It is one of the few effective accountability measures currently in place. Since the Palestinians joined the court in January 2015, backdated to June 2014, they have raised allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity contrary to the Rome Statute, with respect to the wars in Gaza in 2014, 2018 and 2021. Of course, they have also complained about the settlements, which are defined in the Rome Statute, and in Irish law when that statute was incorporated into it, as a war crime. Legally speaking, that is very low-hanging fruit. It is important for Ireland to be clear, consistent and regular in stating that it supports the ICC investigation of this, and that it hopes as the investigation goes on to the third and final stage, there will be litigation and trials with respect to this.

I would like to see Ireland state clearly that it supports the continuation of the UN database concerning businesses that have dealings in the occupied territories with Israeli corporations or with the settlements. The settlement economy could not be nearly as successful as it is, if it was not for the regular international relationships it has formed with a number of international and Israeli companies in order to be able to lubricate itself. If we start putting sand in the machinery that supports the Israeli settlement economy, it suddenly becomes much more costly for Israel to maintain its defiance of the international community. As I said, if a new advisory opinion is going to the International Court of Justice, it would be wonderful for Ireland not only to support that but to be one of the leaders in seeking the support of the General Assembly and, if it reaches the International Court of Justice, to take a position and enter an argument with respect to that.

The Deputy asked me about the Biden Administration. The Trump Administration that preceded it took four or five step backwards on the American position towards Israel and Palestine. The Biden Administration has walked back two or three of those steps. To its credit, it restored funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, UNRWA, and reopened a relationship of sorts with the Palestinian National Authority, but the latter's office in Washington is not yet open. The Americans have not reopened the consulate in East Jerusalem closed by the Trump Administration. The Biden Administration has not undone the recognition by the Trump Administration of the illegal annexation of the Golan Heights by Israel. It has not undone the moving of the American Embassy to Jerusalem. For any close observer, it is clear there is no desire by the Biden Administration to launch any kind of peace process on its watch. Its major issue with respect to the Middle East is keeping its relationships with Israel and Saudi Arabia firm and ensuring that a new nuclear weapons control agreement is reached with Iran. If Israel is able to keep the situation in the occupied Palestinian territories quiet, the US will not disturb this continued growth of settlements and the deepening entrenchment of the occupation.