Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Anti-Austerity Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

29. To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade his views on the recent policy change by President Trump regarding the two-state solution in Israel and Palestine; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8762/17]

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Anti-Austerity Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The previous US Government, in its last few months in office, agreed a new military deal with Israel worth €38 billion over ten years. Then President Trump came to office. Within days, the Israeli Government announced the construction of 2,500 new settler homes in the West Bank. Within a few weeks, Trump withdrew from the previous, at least verbal, support of the US for a two-state solution in Israel and Palestine. Is the Minister concerned about the impact of Trump's change of policy on the prospects for peace in the Middle East?

Charles Flanagan (Laois, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The two-state solution to the conflict between Israel and its Palestinian and Arab neighbours has been espoused by a consensus of the international community and supported by public opinion and responsible leaders in both Israeli and Palestinian society for many years. This support has been based on clear reasoning and analysis of the various options and alternatives, and these reasons remain valid, despite growing concerns about the possibility of achieving such a solution.

The inescapable fact is that a two-state outcome remains better than any other model that has been considered and is the only one which can deliver peace, security, freedom, justice and stability for the Israeli and Palestinian peoples.

An acceptable one-state outcome could only arise on the basis of full equality between all those living under its jurisdiction. Any belief that it will be possible instead to simply continue a version of the present occupation would be wholly unacceptable.

The recent remarks of President Trump have stepped back from the clear support for the two-state solution which previous US Presidents have given but without putting an alternative view in its place. The Administration has yet to enunciate a considered policy for the Middle East. I hope very much that when it does so, it will recognise the logic which has guided United States policy for many years.

The European Union has made clear that its support and advocacy for a two-state solution remain unaltered. The strong international consensus on this basis was expressed only last month at the Paris conference, which I attended, and in UN Security Council Resolution 2334 in December. We will continue to represent this view in our discussions with the new US Administration, both bilaterally and in the context of EU-US engagement, and to raise the issue at international forums such as the United Nations and the Quartet.

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Anti-Austerity Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does the Minister agree that the strategy of the Israeli right, which is clearly in power, is to invent facts? In 1977, 5,000 settlers lived in the West Bank. Now, however, 400,000 settlers live in the West Bank and 200,000 in east Jerusalem. There is an attempt to avoid any prospect of a viable Palestinian state and to undermine that prospect completely. This is now actively supported by the Israeli Government, as reflected in some of the laws it has passed. A one-state solution on the basis of the system of capitalism and imperialism would mean mass expulsions again from the historic Palestine area, a new Nakba and then, in reality, the imposition of an even more undemocratic apartheid construct within that one-state solution. However, this is what is now being driven by the Israeli elite, and Donald Trump has given it the green light with his comments that he can live with either a one-state or two-state solution.

Charles Flanagan (Laois, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The new US Administration of President Trump is very much in its infancy. It has not yet made clear its intentions on the matter of the Middle East peace process. There seems to be a degree of thinking aloud going on, which, in the circumstances, can hardly be regarded as greatly helpful. There are concerns in this regard. However, with every new US Administration, one must wait and see what it will actually do, what policies will be implemented and the manner in which this implementation will take place. To be fair, Secretary of State Tillerson has only just got his feet under his desk. There are, however, good reasons why the international community continues to be engaged in this issue. The international community has been strongly united in support of a two-state solution for many years. This support has been restated by the United Nations in Security Council Resolution 2334 and the declaration at the Paris conference. Deputy Paul Murphy makes an important point: those who doubt the feasibility of the two-state solution need to set out their own solution that provides dignity and freedom for both Israelis and Palestinians.

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Anti-Austerity Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Trump's intentions are very clear from his statements about a one-state solution, his undertaking to move the US Embassy to Jerusalem, his refusal to view Israeli settlements as an obstacle to peace and his decision to stop pressurising the Israeli Government to negotiate. This is in a context in which the number of demolitions of Palestinian homes in the West Bank is increasing yearly at an exponential rate - more than 1,000 last year versus just over 500 the previous year. The question is what the Irish Government will do about it. The Taoiseach, Deputy Enda Kenny, against what we think should happen, will meet Donald Trump on St. Patrick's Day. First, will he raise this issue then? Second, will the Irish Government fulfil its commitment in the programme for Government to a recognition of the Palestinian state? I agree that this would be symbolic. However, in this context, that symbolic value could be important.

Charles Flanagan (Laois, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Paul Murphy wants it both ways - he wants to have his cake and eat it. He has already stated on numerous occasions that he does not want Ireland to be represented on St. Patrick's Day-----

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Anti-Austerity Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Taoiseach is going to the US in any event.

Charles Flanagan (Laois, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----at the White House. He is now producing a list of issues to be discussed in the event we are represented. On behalf of the Taoiseach, I assure the Deputy that Deputy Kenny will fully air Ireland's interests across a range of issues. However, the United States makes its own decisions as it considers its options. We will be in a position to make our views known, with particular reference to the logic of the long-standing international position on this matter. At EU level, we will continue to be a strong voice on the issue, act nationally in our utterances and act together at every opportunity and at every level as a European Union in bilateral meetings, such as the one I had this morning with my French counterpart, at which this specific issue was discussed, and at international forums where Ireland is strongly represented in the United Nations. However, as far as we are concerned, the two-state solution is the only viable option.