Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

424. To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the detail of his attendance at a meeting hosted by the French Government on 30 June 2016 where 29 representatives from different countries and organisations were trying to relaunch the Israeli-Palestine peace talks through international support and engagement; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21123/16]

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

The conference held in Paris on 3 June was the first part of an initiative by the French Government based on their concern at the worsening prospects for the achievement of a two state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and their strong feeling that the international community had to act to try and retrieve the situation. These are views which Ireland has also consistently stressed, under a succession of Ministers, and so I strongly welcomed this initiative by France.

EU attendance in Paris was necessarily restricted, to avoid unbalancing the meeting, and Ireland was one of ten EU member States present. Other attendees included the United States, Russia, China, Japan, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the United Nations and the Arab League, and others.

In my intervention at the conference, I commended France on their initiative, which they have taken forward despite all the manifest difficulties. I strongly supported the necessity and importance of international engagement, not just to jump-start a process but throughout it. My view on this is informed by the experience on this island, as well as my assessment of the situation on the ground.

I recalled that the action of destructive policies on the ground meant that the status quo was not an option. And I supported the intention in the French plan to hold a larger conference in the autumn, to which the parties would be invited, to try and restore the conditions for negotiations.

I would have preferred the conference to be able to reflect these points more strongly in its final communiqué, but France professed itself satisfied that the meeting had started the preparations for the main conference later in the year. I assured France of Ireland’s support in this work.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

425. To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the reason neither the Israelis nor the Palestinians were invited to a meeting hosted by the French Government on 30 June 2016; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21124/16]

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

It was for the French hosts to decide who to invite to the conference in Paris on 3 June. Ireland was one of only ten EU member States invited, and I participated on behalf of the Government.

The French initiative on the Middle East is aimed toward a broad conference towards the end of the year, to which I understand France intends to invite both Israeli and Palestinian participation. The meeting on 3 June was a preparatory meeting, whose main purpose was to re-enlist the engagement of the wider international community in the peace process.

Given their expressed opposition to the conference, it seems unlikely that the Israeli Government would have agreed to attend on 3 June. In my meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu on 14 June I encouraged a more positive response to the process, and I hope both parties will attend the second conference.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

426. To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the response of the Prime Minister of Israel, Mr Benjamin Netanyahu, after a meeting on 30 June 2016 called for direct talks with the Palestinians without preconditions; if he considers this a reasonable request; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21125/16]

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

Prime Minister Netanyahu has called on many occasions for direct negotiations without preconditions. Indeed he repeated this to me when I met him in Jerusalem on 14 June. As a principle this, of course, sounds positive and reasonable. However, all peace processes are unique, and what is said must be understood in context.

It is clear to all that a final agreement in the Middle East can only be reached in direct talks between the parties. Only they can make the deal. However, by ‘direct’ Mr. Netanyahu also implies that there should be no international presence in the talks, only the two parties. The Palestinians have made clear that they need an international presence, because they are by far the weaker party and as a guarantee that the talks will be serious.

Mr. Netanyahu makes his remarks knowing that important preconditions for Israel have already been met earlier in the process. The mainstream Palestinian movement represented in the PLO and the Palestinian Authority have recognized and accepted the existence of Israel, occupying more than three quarters of historic Palestine, and have renounced armed struggle. Nonetheless, Mr. Netanyahu does also sometimes add new preconditions himself.

On the Palestinian side, they have not demanded prior recognition by Israel of a Palestinian state. They have however insisted that they can only enter negotiations if these are going to be a genuine attempt to reach peace, and not just a process for its own sake. They have also demanded that seizure of Palestinian land, and construction of settlements, cannot continue while talks proceed. When this demand has been refused they have sought alternative confidence building measures, such as release of prisoners.

These Palestinian demands – preconditions or confidence building measures, depending on one’s perspective – arise from the political necessity of reassuring their people that, in entering negotiations with Israel, they are not simply being strung along to occupy time, while the seizure of their land continues unabated.

Regrettably, experience has shown that these fears are justified. Mr. Netanyahu is now leading his fourth government, and international confidence in his commitment to a genuine peace negotiation is low. Only he can confound that judgement.