Proceeding contribution from Lord Judd (Labour) in the House of Lords on Friday, 11 February 2011. It occurred during Debate on Middle East and North Africa.
Middle East and North Africa
Well, let us ponder those words and evaluate them for ourselves. If we are talking about Israel, we also have to face up to the issue of Hamas, which has been mentioned. What grieves me is that Hamas was a pluralist organisation, but the cards have been played in such a way as to play right into the hands of the extremist elements of Hamas. We create self-fulfilling prophecies. Of course the challenge is to have dialogue with Hamas. I certainly agree with those such as the noble Lord, Lord Alderdice, who say that, in the end, there is no alternative but to talk to Hamas—and the sooner, rather than the later, the better. In that context, we have to remember that, while provocation, which is stupid and counterproductive, by those elements within Hamas and other parts of the Middle East in, for example, their actions against innocent people in Israel should be condemned, we must remember that it is not a one-way story. The siege of the economy in Gaza has been a very cruel and blunt social and economic action, which could not have been designed better than to play into the hands of the extremists. The UN has pointed out that, in the so-called buffer zone within Gaza, last year Israeli shootings killed 52 people, including farmers and young people. Only recently, my old organisation, Oxfam, saw some of its work in the West Bank set back by the demolition that took place at the hands of the Israelis. People have to face the economic and social consequences of that action. Let us not think that the whole provocation comes from the Arabs. There is repeated counterproductive provocation from Israel itself. The solution as I see it is of course to have a viable state for the Palestinians, but if there is to be such a state it must be one with proper boundaries, not Bantustans. It must be a state that in every sense, geographically and politically, makes sense. It has to be based on the involvement of the widest possible cross-section of people in finding the way forward. In conclusion, in the region as a whole we have some huge adjustments to make. France, the US and ourselves are seen as being hand in hand with the outdated tyrannical rulers who have called the game for so long. We have to make a strategic transition to being on the side of the people. This will be complicated by the degree to which we have built up our arms relationships with so many of the outdated rulers and have become economically so dependent on the money we have made out of those situations. That has been provocative to the people and will be difficult to remove ourselves from. But these are the strategic issues. Otherwise, we will just be trying to put a finger in the dyke again—and sooner or later the dyke will crash. The lesson of Egypt is startlingly clear.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 725 c467-8
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Demonstrations Commonwealth Corruption Development aid China Finance Human rights Foreign relations Oil Protest Natural gas Politics and government Piracy Overseas students Overseas trade Visas Israel Sudan Palestine BBC World Service Syria Middle East Yemen Peace negotiations EU external relations Travel information Egypt Lebanon Gaza Tunisia Somalia Self-determination of states Jordan Algeria Westminster Foundation for Democracy North Africa Muslim Brotherhood
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-11 18:15:09 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_715226
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_715226
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_715226