Proceeding contribution from Richard Burden (Labour) in the House of Commons on Monday, 28 November 2011. It occurred during Debate on North Africa and the Near and Middle East.
North Africa and the Near and Middle East
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The Shalit prisoner swap is a recent example, and there was engagement with Hamas in relation to the release of Alan Johnston, the British journalist, a while ago. It is true that there are double standards, and if there is one thing that really gets to ordinary Palestinians and people throughout the Arab world, and to an awful lot of people beyond, it is the fact that, when it comes to Israel and Palestine, we suddenly adopt a different set of standards from those that we would see as absolutely incontrovertible anywhere else. That undermines our credibility and influence in that part of the world, and it undermines the peace process rather than taking it forward. These are not theoretical questions. We have heard, just in the past few days, that simply because Hamas and Fatah are talking together, which might lead to reconciliation, Israel has threatened to cut off water and electricity supplies to Gaza—collective punishment of an entire population because their political leaders are talking together. Now, we either say something about that or we do not. We either take a firm stand on that or we do not. I know which side of the fence I am on. That point does not just apply to dealing with political Islam. It was not long ago that any time anyone urged dialogue or engagement with Hamas, the call came from Israel that that would be beyond the pale and was impossible because they were terrorists. However, if it was just those nice people from Fatah or the PLO, such as Abu Mazen—Mahmoud Abbas—we could deal with them. But what has been the crime that Mahmoud Abbas, Fatah and the secular organisations have committed recently? Their crime has been to go to the United Nations and say, ““Just give us the same rights as you have given Israel for 63 years.”” From the reaction of Binyamin Netanyahu, Israel and, sadly, the United States—and, even more sadly, of some people in this Chamber—it might be thought that those organisations had somehow declared war on Israel. The approach to the United Nations was described as ““a unilateral move””. I cannot think of an organisation that is more multilateral than the United Nations.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 536 c715
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Armed conflict Elections Human rights International assistance EU action Foreign relations Politics and government Piracy Terrorism Saudi Arabia Israel Palestine Iran Syria Middle East Yemen EU external relations Morocco Egypt Libya Tunisia Somalia North Africa Horn of Africa Maghreb Bahrain Sahel
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 19:26:10 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_788915
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_788915
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_788915