Gerald Nash (Louth, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I agree with the proposers of this motion - and, I think, with all balanced and informed opinion - that the status quois untenable and dangerous. We are also agreed that what is needed is an early resumption of negotiations, with clear parameters and with a specific timetable. I believe in a free, sovereign, independent and democratic Palestine living peacefully side by side with Israel. Much like our own peace settlement, we can already describe what the essential outlines of that settlement will be: it will allow for a democratic and sovereign state of Palestine, living in peace and security alongside Israel on the basis of the 1967 lines, with special provision for the status of Jerusalem in both states. There will ultimately be agreement on issues to do with borders, security, water rights, the status of Jerusalem and freedom of access to religious sites and outstanding legalities concerning Palestinian refugees, including resolving the problem of the right to return. Ireland and the European Union are committed to a two-state solution, which of course involves recognition of Palestine alongside Israel.

I should be clear, if any clarity is needed, that our ongoing commitment to a secure and peaceful state of Israel is not in any doubt. All our actions and policies should be designed to advance the goal of peace and to secure a comprehensive peace agreement. I repeat my belief that there cannot be a comprehensive peace without the two-state solution. So long as there is no real prospect of political talks resuming any time soon, there will be continuing loss of faith in political action as a way forward. The relentless announcements of settlement expansion continue, entailing continued evictions of Palestinians to expropriate land and resources for settlers. The result has been a rise in demonstrations, in the use of lethal force by Israeli authorities against demonstrators, and in random and deadly attacks on Israelis.

There is much soul-searching going on in the international community about what we can do to break the stalemate in the Middle East. Where there is no agreement at EU level, there is scope for member states to take national initiatives. Sweden's decision to recognise Palestine has focused attention on a possible new direction.

It is important to be realistic too. Recognition of Palestine before full statehood is actually achieved is not a magic formula that ends the occupation, advances the talks or even predetermines the outcome. Already, 135 countries have recognised the state of Palestine. Unfortunately, simply saying it is so does not make it so. State recognition is a serious business and should not become an exercise in collective make-believe, because this favours nobody. We in this country should know better than most that a sovereign territorial claim that exists only on paper is no solution. In fact it can become a substitute for policy and a barrier to engagement on the real issues. It helped some people here to escape into an imaginary world of their own construction, where reality was never confronted. I would not support recognising a state of Palestine that exists only in the same fanciful world as our own thirty-two county, rebel song republic. This would do a gross disservice to the people of Palestine and all those around the world who want to see a just and lasting settlement to this most intractable of problems. That is just one of the reasons it is important to stress that recognition of a state, both in terms of whether and when, remains constitutionally a matter for Government in the ongoing conduct of international relations. This motion, and the motion in the Seanad last October, are recognised as non-binding on the Government on those two points. None the less, this is an important articulation of the views of this Parliament on where we stand on the question of Palestine.

In summary, we must continue to do all we can to bring the parties to the table. The key focus must remain on getting substantive negotiations going, bringing the occupation of the Palestinian territories to an end and bringing about a Palestinian state that exists in reality as well as on paper. In the interim, we should not rule out any option, including an early formal recognition of Palestine, if a united international and multilateral position on that point will help to bring the parties to the table and to get real and meaningful talks under way.

See this speech in context