Seanad debates

Wednesday, 11 July 2018

Situation in Palestine: Statements

 

10:30 am

Photo of Niall Ó DonnghaileNiall Ó Donnghaile (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire agus cuirim fáilte roimhe. Cuirim fearadh na fáilte croíúil roimh iad siúd atá sa Ghailearaí linn don díospóireacht freisin. I thank the Tánaiste for his contribution. Listening to him, I could not help but think of Einstein's definition of insanity, which involves doing the same things over and over again and expecting different results. The Tánaiste spoke about the issue of solar panels, electricity and water for the occupied territories as if Israel would not continue to shut off and control people's water and electricity. He spoke about advocating strongly for a commercial port in Gaza knowing full well what happens to fishermen in Gaza and what happens to children when they are playing soccer on the beach in Gaza. I do not doubt the Tánaiste's bona fides in this regard but based on fact and reality, I do not share his hope in that regard.

The Tánaiste also cited the peace process as cause for the State not to support this Bill. He then outlined the litany of executions, slaughter and mass murder, the imprisonment of children in military courts, the continued demolition of homes and further illegal incursions into Palestinian lands. There is no peace process in the Middle East and it is a flag of convenience, a cloak and a cover to try to use that as an excuse not to support this Bill.

The Tánaiste said he does not want to place himself on a particular side or be accused of being partisan. As I stated during the previous debate on this issue, sometimes in peace processes, we need to place ourselves in a particular partisan position. Sometimes we need transformative decisions to be taken on the international stage. The most glaring, obvious and relevant example in our own peace process was when the British Government, the European Union and the US domestic and foreign intelligence agencies told President Bill Clinton not to grant Gerry Adams a US visa. All of the great and the good , all of the so-called experts and all of those who were opposed to the advance of dialogue and a peace process said, "Don't do this." What was required, however, was a decisive and definitive political decision. We have seen the fruits of that decision play out and the impact it had on our peace process. I put it to the Tánaiste that he needs to take a definitive decision in this regard and support this Bill.

The Tánaiste also cited legal, political and practical effects as reasons not to support the Bill but to oppose it. It struck me that he did not once mention the morality of this issue.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.