Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I want to reflect on an interview I watched on "Prime Time" during the week, when David McCullagh interview the former Israeli MP, Dr. Einat Wilf, about the use of force by the Israeli defence forces. It was an extraordinary engagement. She was asked if she felt their response was proportionate, to which she replied: "I assume you would have been more pleased if more Jews had been killed in the process." Rightly, David McCullagh took exception to this. He further pressed Dr. Wilf as to whether the IDF was justified in slaughtering the Palestinians, to which she responded:

The Israeli public and the defence forces defending it will not allow people to breach its borders. These are not unarmed protesters. There is no question of proportion in defending our borders.

She also spoke about the internationally agreed 1967 borders and Israel's retreat to them, which it has not done to date. In concluding, she disputed facts as to whether what the media have seen in the form of dead children were even real and called half of those who were massacred terrorists. I could hardly believe what I was hearing or the narrative that was being spouted. Unfortunately, it has been quite typical of the views of the Israeli establishment and Government for some time now. They are putting forward arguments that are scarcely credible to any of the world although perhaps they are credible to a proportion of their own audience. They have become apologists for the complete disregard for the human lives of Palestinians and view them as a problem rather than a people.

Internationally, their track record has been one of disregarding international norms. In the 1980s alone, 82 amendments were passed in the UN relating to Israel, the majority of which have been ignored. In the last decade, the situation has become demonstrably worse. Last December, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution declaring the status of Israel's capital null and void, supporting an international consensus. That consensus has clearly been breached by the United States in a move that is problematic and provocative. The US ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, announced that the US would move its embassy to Jerusalem. She claimed that no vote in the UN would make any difference and stated that the US was by far the greatest contributor to the UN, warning that the US might cut funding to the UN. This is an unfortunate reflection of the distance the United States has travelled; it is now very clearly a partisan actor in this conflict. Monday's move was rightly globally condemned. It displays a complete disregard of international law. We see this contempt reflected in Monday's statement, when the US and Israel claimed it to be a historic day while merely 70 km away the IDF was busy massacring Palestinian people, using live rounds with a policy of shoot to kill.

I also want to raise the issue of recognition. This is entirely within the gift of the Government. It could be delivered tomorrow if the Government wished. It is in the programme for Government. The Irish Government and Parliament are committed to it. I believe the vast majority of the Irish public favours it. Page 144 of the programme for Government states that we will continue to play a role in advancing a stronger role for the EU in the Middle East peace process, having regard to the stalled nature of the process at present, and that we will honour our commitment to recognise the state of Palestine as part of a lasting settlement of the conflict. Certainly in the last few days, the Government has put a great deal of emphasis on those last nine words. Most people would read them as putting such a commitment in context. They would read them as suggesting that Ireland favours a two-state solution and a recognition would be viewed in that context, without prejudice to a peace process and with a desire for such a process.

Since 2014 and the votes in both Houses, Government statements have been cautious and delaying, yet ultimately accepting the desirability of recognition in principle. I am concerned, however, that some of the statements made more recently indicate that the Government may be moving further away from recognition of Palestine, which would be quite shameful. On Tuesday, the Taoiseach said the programme for Government commits the Government to recognising Palestine as part of a two-state peace solution and that, while we stand over that Government commitment, we do not yet have a peaceful solution. That is an absurd position. What does it mean? What will the Government require? It is clear that the peace process is moribund. The programme for Government commitment recognises that. What does the Government require before it will move? It can hardly require a fully fledged peace process in which the Israeli Government clearly has no interest.

Ultimately, making the recognition of Palestine conditional on a fully functioning peace process is in the interests of one side alone, namely, the State of Israel. I hope that is not the case and that recognition will happen. I hope the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade will bring Irish pressure to bear as much as possible to end the blockade and the slaughter, as well as the casual disregard for the lives of Palestinians.

See this speech in context