Wonderful to have you all back.
I welcome you to the fifth meeting of our Hillary Church seminar, considering the political options following the Gaza war.
For a while there, there was a debate on whether we were talking about a two state solution or a bi national state.
So with whatever happened, it seems that the conversation is uniquely about creating a Palestinian state as
part of resolving the conflict in an enduring way for the security of Israel,
for the justice of the Palestinian legitimate national aspirations.
But there's a lot of diplomacy that will have to go into making that possibility a reality.
It's easy to talk about recognising Palestine or Palestinian statehood or a solution.
But for reasons that are obvious to every one of you in this audience,
there are seemingly insurmountable barriers between saying those words and realising that vision.
But it's not an entirely new vision. And there have been those who have been active in the halls of power in Europe, in America, in the Middle East,
who've been against all the odds working to try and keep the discussion about Palestinian statehood alive.
I will credit the excellent Ambassador, Anabel, for having brought that conversation.
First to our halls here at the Middle East Centre. That's an outreach college,
and I must say that I found it incredibly provocative to have the Israeli diplomat and
former civil servant lecturing us on the imperative of recognising Palestinian statehood.
That novelty has yet to wear off and it's a great pleasure to welcome out of your back.
He was for years the Director-General of the Ministry of Finance, the State Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Israel,
before being appointed to serve his country as associate in Turkey and as Ambassador in the Republic of South Africa,
where by photographic evidence he had the honour and pleasure of mingling with Nelson Mandela
and those who are at the forefront of resolving the apartheid situation in South Africa.
The experiences that he has had in his reflections will be shared in a forthcoming book in Hebrew.
We're waiting for the English translation examining Cyprus, Ireland and South Africa with an eye towards the Israel-Palestine conflict.
We will also be welcoming tonight's hikers. I knew they had done this.
He is a Jordanian Spanish analyst, senior analyst of the Mediterranean and the Middle East at the Asciano Institute in Madrid,
where he also teaches international relations at the IIe University in Madrid.
In his work and in his analysis, he covers the region from the Maghreb through to the Gulf.
We are particularly pleased to be welcoming Haitham,
who will be able to shed light on the country that everyone has said has been at the forefront of
European diplomacy since seven October in advancing the goal of recognising Palestinian statehood.
But a subject on which we had precious little conversations in our press and discussions.
And so to be able to get the insider's view from Madrid.
We are delighted to have you with us tonight. And then, of course, Chris Doyle, who I had no idea that we so nearly overlapped in our time in post.
But since 2002, he has been director of Cabu, the Centre for the Advancement of Arab British Understanding,
based in London, an influential think tank and meeting place for the policy world with the world of analysis.
It is also where the Secretariat of the Old Palestine Group in Parliament is based,
through which liaison Chris played a key role in helping to bring a vote to the British Parliament in a non-binding fashion,
Alas, on whether the House would move to recognise the state of Palestine.
I won't spoil it. For those of you who don't remember back to 2014 and leave to Chris to tell you that story in his own words.
But what we have tonight is a panel who will be able to tell us not just about where the history of the diplomacy,
of recognising Palestine, to realise the ambition of two states to solve the Palestine and Israel conflict as originated.
But where things stand today and where they are headed as we move forward.
So will you please welcome our three panellists tonight and I will yield at the podium to our first speaker.
The accent, I hope. Thanks a lot.
Great to be here again. I've been to San Antonio several times, but not in this whole school.
One of the school. If I was a diplomat for a while, 30 years and over the years, especially the beginning of this century,
I started sensing that the country is changing to an extent that I have a difficulty to represent it.
And then the conflict has deteriorated and the public has started to shift, as you know, to the right at a certain point.
I left the ministry and with a group of retired ambassadors and we started thinking differently.
And we were very much inspired by the British War.
LITTLE Having a shadow government created a small shadow foreign ministry without the budget.
And we started the thinking together.
And it is Israel grew stronger and became richer and more technologic and gradually developing.
This was before the 7th of October to a regional power, and we realised that the countries, individual countries are very reluctant to conform.
Israel. And the leaders of this century were usually leaders who I don't want to use the term selfish, but then took care of their families.
They wanted employment. They wanted security.
They want to create them. Israel became a strong country.
Nobody wanted to live with these with. Thought that we should go in that direction of recognition because all other avenues were blocked.
Israel would not be sanctioned internationally and no European country will call their ambassador home and break relations with us.
Nobody, nobody in Europe could afford it. And we started publicising that over ten years ago on a certain momentum of the.
Countries in Western Europe all the. 27, 28 countries, no matter if it's in the EU or outside the EU,
recognising Palestine because these were the countries that Israel really cared about.
If Pakistan is doing it, or Indonesia or Guatemala, but the Western Union will do it, especially if it will trigger North American recognition.
This will make the difference and this is something that governments can do without Israel really having a say in this.
And it's so important that on the 30th of October 2014, almost ten years ago, I opened the radio in Israel and Sweden recognised Palestine.
Out of the blue was out of the blue because it was a very technical thing.
The Labour Party won elections and in the platform of the Labour Party it said that if we ever make it to power we will recognise Palestine.
So the new Prime Minister stood in front of the Parliament.
This, I believe, a choice. I promised it to the Swedish public.
The Israeli response was like an AIDS earthquake.
The. It was really unbelievable.
Israel could not believe that the country of Europe having a good relations with us,
with our member and our foreign minister, with a guy called Victoria Lieberman, I don't know how many.
And he was so furious that he went on TV and called the Israeli public to boycott the year.
We called our ambassador of home and kicked out the Swedish ambassador and.
It was unbelievable. We we knew that this would be the reaction because, of course, Israel was really afraid of all the moment and.
It so happened that less than two weeks later I was invited to San Antonio's college.
And by the way, it's not that the Amanda College here, and they were very proud that they're the smallest college in Oxford.
Something was psychology. We had this discussion there.
And your professor, obviously, they said, Come, let's have breakfast together at the all of them.
And we had breakfast. It was summer, third week of September.
And he's telling me, you know, there is a motion in our parliament to recognise doesn't doesn't move and it just doesn't have any chance.
But I'm telling you, just for the record and.
I ask you, what should I do? How can I help? And he said, The guy from the small college is a lord.
He's like news. He hosted us in the small college. Excuse me.
I don't remember the name. His name is John. All the nice little drop on the desk.
Go to him because he is his say in the Liberal Party.
And then they ask if you can help.
I came to look under those and I told him, Look, this is exciting because Sweden just the eastern group.
It so happens that the parliament will involved would call upon the government to recognise by this time it's sensational.
He told me. I didn't know. I didn't know about such a motion.
I'll. Let me drink. I'll be back to you. And the.
Two days later, I was visiting and only visited one of the mountains and the calls and he said, Yes, there is such a motion and you can help us.
How can I help you? Said you just write a letter to the Liberal Party signed by 100 Israelis that you supported.
Try to find names that are known in Europe.
I was on a mountain, you know, which was by far taller than the tallest mountain within Israel.
And then ten years ago, these machines they did works with.
But I approached this group of retired ambassadors and I told them I need 100 signatures in a letter to the Liberal Party.
And we need within a day or two, because I think it was Wednesday and the vote was Friday.
Took them a day or a day and a half and they signed it.
They sent a letter to the Liberal Party, signed by 324 Israelis, among them big names in Europe.
Of those like almost scores and David Grossman and and others names like Moses.
I mean, if you know and this guy he couldn't believe is the one that won the night with the Rangers and he said this is very help.
And he basically told me, look, the Labour Party will support the government because of the people,
but they will be against it doesn't have any chance. It doesn't have any chance.
But I came back to Israel. We worked on it like mad.
And the the the vote.
It was an overwhelming with an overwhelming majority don't get me I think it was to 114 to 10.
The conservatives didn't vote.
And it was an unbelievable shock in Israel that the British Parliament is calling on the British government to recognise Palestine.
We were thrilled. I mean, it was it was so fast.
And the what we decided to do, we decided to approach another 15.
The West European governments,
the East Europeans were not relevant because all the East Europeans recognised by the Steinbeck back in 1988 because they were communists then,
so they were not whether we we started one parliament after the other in the
petition group and we stopped this one 2000 and it was our humble machine.
We send this petition to every member of Parliament in every West European countries.
I think somebody can go get a check. The British decision was at the end of September.
October, November, December 12.
European parliaments called upon the governments to recognise by different wordings the most
and the strongest wording was that I was wrong and I think it was unanimous in Ireland.
In other parliaments the language was is softer, but 1212 months unbelievable momentum and we.
We seen those twice a week of hip hop in Israel and Italy and France and Spain.
And the Israeli public was taken by surprise.
We had three or four that were left to January and February.
And, you know, there is this Christmas pause on the 5th of January, 2015.
There was the big ISIS terror attack in Paris and the whole world gathered in Paris and demonstration against ISIS.
When we came back to the few parliaments that didn't do it and there was nobody to talk about because we made a brilliant move.
He connected. He tied in Hamas with ICC by the Palestinians with offices.
And then what became after we genuinely hit to Europe, there was nobody really we could go and it disappeared.
The momentum disappeared because of ISIS.
I was there the better in Europe, and nobody was ready to think on any favour to any Muslim country or nation or people.
And everything then is passed.
And it was gone. It was gone. The recognition was gone and the two states was gone.
And we started working on different things.
Until the morning at 8 a.m. on the 7th of October.
I don't have to tell you stories. You live these stories in the last four months.
But I was in one of these where all of us in the jump started their morning from their bed.
With the allowance and we were sure its mistakes.
And that was then. And after a few hours we saw the magnitude of and.
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Came back. To the agenda and to the national agenda.
We were speaking earlier. And I think if there is still a Ph.D. student that can make a complete analysis on how often was the two states mentioned,
and I wanted to talk about the flipped over or since you would see that it's bad,
it's but it was written by the DS speaking about the Lord,
come on is thinking about the and it was speaking about it in the bedroom and he was spending it with his son and.
We that were living through this momentum of September to December 2014 with our experience and a lot of work through.
We see that and human and human to.
The big difference this time is that it's a different Israel.
Israel was. Prove itself overconfident.
And this is the. The reflection now over the world.
You don't deal with Israel. Israel is too strong.
Just that. And the Palestinians are nothing. What can we gain from the Palestinians?
This was not only the most ridiculous, it was on the Middle East.
You saw that records and everybody wanted to be a friend, obviously.
And Israel today is different. Israel of today, although we our prime minister, is still full of himself speaking on eliminating Hamas and so on.
And Israel is very vulnerable now. Very vulnerable.
And the this wall was an unbelievable blow to the Israeli public, discovering the weakness of our army,
the weakness of our intelligence and the abilities of the Palestinians.
We were totally unprepared. But the implications are far beyond the military and the casualties and the social implications on our economy.
You have just seen that. I don't know if you heard about the Q that Moody's downgraded the rating of the Israeli economy.
And in international pressure now, especially what I call the positive press, I see recognition as a positive move.
No sanctions. I don't think any country in Europe will really apply economic sanctions.
We saw today in a move of the Netherlands and some of the military.
But generally speaking, the United States and Britain will not McCarthyism.
Now beginning on the settlers. But.
But. Recognising Palestine, if it would have such a moment to look upon it by governments,
by governments starting on the national level and building a momentum that will move
to the U.N. and then the U.N. headed recognition of Palestine is a member state,
not resisting because Palestine is already recognised as a state, but they are not a member state.
If this will happen, it's a new ballgame.
It's a new ballgame. And Eugene mentioned that they have a book coming out and the big lesson for why that was parity of esteem, priority of esteem.
Nobody in Israel had heard such a thing about such a thing.
And if we had the two countries, Israel and Palestine, having the same status in the U.N., it's a new ball game in the game, all tied in.
And the whole issue on these two and more questions.
Thank you. I don't. I would like to call to the podium.
Haitham Ahmed from London. Thank you for the update on where things stand now this moment in Europe.
Hello, everyone. Thank you very much for rolling for an invitation.
Thanks for being here. Have a great thing with this group of interesting speakers in the parliament.
So I guess I'm here, as Professor Rogan explained, because I come from Spain,
and Spain has been credited as being at the forefront of calling for recognition of the state of Palestine since October seven.
Have to do something that's not totally true.
The only reason why Spain is seen as the country in the forefront is because the Israeli governments made it publicly
and admit that its goal was objective to attack the Spanish prime minister for what he dared to say in late November,
not because he said something new or even because he did something really different.
Not much has been done before to say some statements, some important symbolic moves,
but no initiatives, no sanctions, no nothing that is outside of the EU boss.
So the fact that the Israeli prime minister and his foreign affairs minister decided to recall the Israeli
ambassador from Madrid and made a big fuss of what Spanish by Mr. together with the Belgian Prime minister,
was next to him. I guess not too many people remember that the Belgian Prime Minister was friends is what's basically brought me here today.
So let me tell you a little bit of what the Spanish government has said and done over the past few months.
But before that, let me give you a little bit of background of the diplomatic relations that the
Kingdom of Spain has had with both the state of Israel and Palestine in modern times.
And that was passed in 1986.
Doctors. Once Spain had become democracy, it was able to join the European community.
And in 1986, talking about recognitions, Spain recognised the state of Israel, plus a late comer in the European countries.
1986. The recognition happened under a socialist government led by people in a hurry.
So it was a leftist government that decided against the traditional Spanish position
of having close relations with the Arab countries to recognise the state of Israel.
That allowed Spain to be the Spanish capital of Madrid to host the Madrid peace conference in 1991, five years after took a read.
It was viewed as a country that, you know, for all the different actors in the region.
Was neutral enough, friendly enough. At the time when US President George H.W. Bush, the father of Spanish guidance, told him,
I'd like to hold international peace conference on the Middle East in two weeks.
Can you please, please, please underscore that summit?
I think James Baker was the Voluntarios diplomacy, etc.
So it took place in Madrid. That's why I told him. I think the peace process when it was launched was in Madrid.
Just to give you a little bit of history of where Spain is in all this.
There was a social summit in Spain in 2012.
It was no longer a socialist government. It was a conservative, the People's Party government.
In 2012, Spain joined other EU member states in voting in favour of the recognition of Palestine as a non-member observer state.
Writing it is that status nothing permanent.
Sorry, non-member observer state, as the United Nations does not the recognition of statehood, but in a way one recognised state.
Well, there's something wrong because those the Conservative Party, the same Conservative Party does in 2014 following another round of violence and.
Decided to place a temporary ban on weapons exports to Israel.
It's not that Spain was exporting really a lot of weapons. It was more symbolic measure for some months.
Spain made it public that it was not exporting weapons to Israel 2014, that same year in the month of November.
As I was just mentioning, the Spanish parliament was one of those who joined that momentum in Europe, and there was not a unanimous vote.
I think there were two and for some reason voted against.
But all the rest of Spanish and peace, of all the different political parties represented in Parliament,
voted in favour of a non-binding motion asking the Spanish government to recognise the state of Palestine in 2014.
One year later, there was a different regulation in 2015 of the recognition of the rights of Soviet Jews.
To get of citizenship battles, a law passed by the Spanish parliament.
I think it was a unanimous vote at the time. There were certain conditions that needed to be met.
But those Jews who could prove that they had origins and roots in Spain, this class,
that's why they would consider some Yugoslavian Jews could access the Spanish citizenship without in their citizenship, whatever, whatever they have.
There was no public opinion rejection of that law.
This is also to give you an idea of reconciling, you know, sometimes difficulties with its past and with history going back centuries ago.
Let's jump to the past four months, 2023.
Following the attacks on Israel on October 7th, the EU did not manage to come up with a common position for.
A week. One would say that he was slow.
It takes time for all to see the machinery in the situation like that.
A week is a lot, especially when you have different EU representatives starting to do their own not common position, but sometimes personal position.
You know, individually I'm thinking of the president of the commission of, you know,
the EU Parliament as well, and the cacophony that was coming out of Brussels.
So it was the Spanish presidency of the European Semester of Spanish classes,
convenes a Council of European Foreign Affairs Council to I suppose you can cancel on the 15th.
It's eight days after that to come up with a European common position, EU common position.
It was not very much of a common position for just the minimum asking for,
you know, whatever, a few things, not even a ceasefire or humanitarian pauses.
It was, you know, the wording was a bit difficult. Spain pushed a lot.
This is, I think, where it started to emerge, like in the forefront of, you know,
European countries doing something different and not following what the Germans want the rest of the EU member states to do.
And I will talk a little bit about Germany that some other EU member states for them that have been,
you know, I guess looking at a more forceful EU position.
So on November 24th, the Spanish prime minister went to Israel, a visit to Israel and met with the president, met with the prime minister in public.
Made several statements asking for immediate release of the Israeli hostages in the hands of Hamas and other Palestinian groups,
something that has been repeating again and again and talking about Israel's legitimate right to self-defence when being attacked in the first place.
But also telling Netanyahu that the right to self-defence is not does not allow for
collective punishment and that international humanitarian law has to be respected.
Drastically massive retaliation plus not respecting international humanitarian law.
He said the same thing at the Rafah crossing on the Egyptian side.
Together with the prime minister next to him. And that is what led our governments to go very angrily against him.
Let me give you a few ideas to try to explain to you this.
I think you accept existence Spain towards Israel and Palestine.
Obviously, there's a long history. No. History will go back centuries.
Relations with the immediate Mediterranean and neighbourhoods with Arab countries under the Franco dictatorship.
When Spain had difficulties joining the United Nations because there were
sanctions or there were countries that were not willing Spain to join the UN.
Some newly born Arab states, newly independent Arab states, also brought their votes in favour of Spain to the UN.
So that's a little bit of, you know, decades ago.
But in the Spanish public opinion, especially society, there is a strong feeling towards the right to self-determination.
It it's very present, right and left self-determination of the Palestinians.
Having been under a dictatorship, have you been isolated?
I think also conflicts in a way in viewing this right for some variation for the Palestinians.
When extremist groups in Palestine acts, we see that the reaction in some European societies.
Tends to mix those groups with the Palestinians, or at least that's public opinion levels in Spain.
I think we have a. Very vivid memory of home-grown terrorism.
The terrorism officer, E.T.A. in the Basque Country, and how Spaniards managed to come to the conclusion that in fact some of the best.
That was a slogan that defeated attack in a way bus.
See? In fact, no. Yes to masks.
No to either. So I think that differentiation between what Hamas or other groups do and what the Palestinians as a people are,
that is very present in the psyche of this time years because of the experience and the trauma that the country something also.
I mean, do you say that despite public opinion, pro or anti pro Palestinian, Israeli or vice versa, it's more difficult than that.
I gave you some examples to show why that is the case.
What has happened since October seven at the European level, At the EU level?
Well, you've also provoked profound divisions, Profound divisions when it comes to the messaging or the positioning,
voting at the United Nations General Assembly. He wasn't able to come up with a common position, unlike with the war in Ukraine.
It had its member states had three different positions.
Some voted in favour for a resolution asking for immediate humanitarian cease fire with the release of hostages, etc.
Others are things like, well, maybe he didn't think that conditions were right.
And some EU member states will be against that resolution.
The division was profound. And also.
The EU has been unable to formulate the policy.
To ask for a cease fire or even to sanction settlers, extremist settlers in the West Bank that are attacking Palestinians.
What is shocking, I mean, when you look at the Biden administration that has already made some sanctions on a number of those settlers,
the EU as of today has not been able to do the same thing.
Okay, So. What did the Spanish prime minister do?
I think he was a bit early in his statements that he made,
that the time was still October and November, and he made those statements before others followed him.
I don't know if it was because of know political.
I do believe that he had like the sense that this is where we're going to be heading.
So I'm never ahead of the curve. But what he said is what others are repeating today, the recognition of the Palestinian states.
Solution based on not a peace process, but a two state process.
And now we try to break with the cycle of occupation, of resistance, terrorism, of collective punishment,
and realising that the risk of having a regional conflagration and regional war in
the Middle East would be too high and too costly and too dangerous for the EU.
And I think that is something that as of today the EU High Representative for foreign and Security policy,
Mr. Josep Borrell, who happens to be standing as well, he is one of the vocal voices in Brussels.
I think one of the you wise voices in Brussels who is seeing that the risk is real, the risk is high, the escalation needs to take place immediately.
The human cost not only, you know, the human cost and the reputational costs for the EU,
but at the same time is talking about Ukraine and the right of Ukrainians to defend themselves against aggression, humanitarian law,
etc., etc., while next door around Mediterranean,
the same neighbourhood that so he knows he belongs to something terrible is
happening and it's undermining the EU and the international rules based order.
So I'll leave it here and maybe we can continue the meeting. Thank you. And we had over the.
Chris Doyle, thank you very much. And it's a huge excited to be here.
It's fantastic news. And to follow both Alan and Hiaasen on this.
You know, when we talk about recognition, it reminds me of so many debates and discussions over the years.
In fact, I first started in cover in 1993, just before the onset crisis in my first stint,
and we got a call and it was early September and the person didn't identify themselves and said, Listen, we've had a request from the Daily Mail.
They want to know how many countries, how many states have recognised the PLO.
You know, I was I was young then and I sort of said, I think it's about a hundred whatever, you know, the figure was.
But I'm not really sure. And I asked my colleague and I said, Well, listen, I think you really ought to ring the PLO office.
I had no growth. We are here now.
So, yeah, I go back some time on this issue, but it's in tons of time.
It does feel we talk about recognition now.
Boy, doesn't it feel like it doesn't.
Isn't that incredible? But actually, there is even now a discussion about possible recognition without any commitment,
without anybody actually saying we're definitely going to do it.
At the moment, the Palestinians are asking in Gaza whether they will survive the month.
That is really the story of this. That is the context in which we're talking about the lack of courage is quite shocking.
Because recognition should never have been some punishment for Israeli poor behaviour.
It should never have been something to bash an Israeli government with.
It should have been something to push forward Palestinian politics and their legitimate quest for self-determination.
So is it too late as we look at Gaza? The Gaza Strip?
Gaza has always played a fundamental role in Palestinian politics.
Is it a box to be so smashed, so destroyed that actually it won't be able to be part of a future Palestinian state should it come into being?
We're looking at a situation, you know, the fatality counts, 28,000.
We're now well over 12,000 children having been killed.
70% of the victims, women, children. 60% of the buildings have been destroyed or damaged.
Only 13 out of 36 hospitals or even partially operational primary health care centres destroyed.
What is there left?
If, ladies and gentlemen, tomorrow we were able to get that magical cease fire, the C word that everyone's been refusing to call for.
It would take years to restore Gaza.
Gaza not just to make it forget being liveable, just to be just safe.
The water supplies, the sewage. That's the context in which this debate is sort of rather nervously going forward in Westminster.
Let's be clear. We are asking for a very small measure in terms of the context, and that's before we get to the West Bank.
The West Bank, which of course would be the larger part of such a state, one assumes.
Over 700,000 settlers. It's tripled since the days of Oslo.
When I took that first phone call from the PLO office all over the West Bank, not just close to the Green Line.
New areas, ABC, H1, H2, seem zone nature zones, military reserves, foreign zones.
And somehow this is all going to be unravelled to create what should be a viable, credible, independent, sovereign Palestinian state.
Well, that's. That's the context in which we're dealing with.
And if we can't get our politicians to do that right now, it's the most.
And we're late also today. You may have heard that Britain has sanctioned full sentence.
It's very much the same number as the United States.
So, you know, little baby steps of accountability here.
But quite frankly, if you could go back decades and give examples of where Israeli settlers could have been sanctioned.
I'm sure Alon, you know, will agree member Moshe Lwanga in Hebron and his wife and, you know,
and others who have committed outrageous acts of violence to push Palestinian communities off their land.
So it's only now. Right. It was sort of last.
Point. Perhaps, but we're actually going to take some minor action.
Forgive me, but I think if you went to Israeli human rights organisations, other groups,
you could identify a huge number of Israeli settlers who perpetrate such acts of violence.
And where are the actions against those groups that actually organise this?
Well, you see, I mean. You see pogroms this time?
If you went back for 14 months, girls pogrom at Howrah outside Nablus.
One in Hebron, too. I turned up the day after I saw the results.
What settlers have been led in by the army with the complicity of the Australian,
with the assistance of the Israeli army into the Palestinian controlled area and QE1 and the run amok.
So this is forward thinking about doing that.
I would say, though, to point out that the executive order of President Biden does allow for some considerable action against such groups.
I hope that they will actually, in the United States, consider going forward with that.
And if we have to wait for the United States, then do it. So be it. So why, why, why haven't why are we so reluctant?
Why says reluctance to do this?
As Eugene said, we do a lot of work with members of Parliament and former member of Parliament in the audience, and we take delegations out there.
And I actually took Graham Morris, who introduced that vote in the House of Commons out the West Bank.
We had a had a delegation, and I remember discussing it.
And one reason I remember is because we'd been out on a long journey visiting various communities had been under threat from settlers around Nablus.
We got a call later in the day and said, Would you, the delegation, please come and visit Muqata and the memorial to Yasser Arafat?
And we were pretty exhausted. It's been a long day.
And because we've been out on, you know, very much visiting these communities, we weren't wearing suits or jackets.
We weren't appropriately addressed. So we did we did decide we had to go back.
But one of the mops was wearing a sort of bright blue and white shell suit.
And so, of course, photographers turned up British delegation.
We sort of put on a reasonable probably something similar to what I'm wearing now.
And he's wearing his blue and white shell suits. But at the time, they hadn't realised that Arafat wasn't recognised by the Israelis as president.
They don't, is Chairman Arafat. That's right. So we had this discussion and actually triggered the discussion about recognition and statehood.
And so Graham did put forward that debate.
It was one 270 votes, 12 at the time, largely those figures slightly misleading because a huge number abstained.
You know, at the time, but it was an indication of a considerable amount of parliamentary support.
I remember actually the morning of that day, we had some Palestinians in the office refused to leave and I said, we're going to win that vote.
I thought that was just not going to happen. Come on. They looked at me as if I was mad and I said, No, no, it's going to be won.
It's not going to. It's not finding it's not going to change things.
But we'll win the vote quite handsomely.
That has always been actually quite a lot of backbench support for recognition.
So it begs the question, why not?
It is the lack of courage, it's the lack of courage to stand up to a very assertive Israel, one that is prepared to hit back.
One that is prepared to push back. And we have to have a political system and leaderships who have had to say, no, we are going to do this.
And that's what we've lacked. Let's be it's lack of political will.
There is a Palestinian element to this, of course, as well.
It would be, I think, easier to push such an agenda if there was a more coherent Palestinian leadership.
The division between Hamas and Fatah, of course, has not made it easier.
The lack of credibility of the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah also.
But since 2011, William Hague made clear at the time that Palestine, qualified as a state, had all the ingredients of a state.
And in many ways it actually has many of the characteristics that other countries that are recognised perhaps don't have it.
And you don't recognise a specific government. You don't endorse it.
You don't say, we like this, you're recognising statehood. It's not about saying we like to pay more than Hamas or anything like that.
And of course it would be a state under occupation. The Israeli argument is right that still be under occupation the day after.
But you would get to the parity of esteem that you mentioned.
It would be nice to have some esteem for Palestinian rights, to be honest.
But apparently esteem is important when they come to negotiations.
In theory, you have to end the occupation first. But in this conflict, things don't go according to what should happen.
And that's for very obvious reasons.
And occupiers shouldn't be allowed to negotiate with an occupied party because it has the dominant hand can dictate terms.
Briefly, going forward, what what can we expect?
Unless the international community, such as it is, starts taking very serious action.
And I mean humans this week, I think all of these options are going to look very remote.
Personally, my view, I don't know if Alan agrees. I think Netanyahu needs the crisis to continue.
I don't believe he's going to sign any cease fire to his signature.
He's not going to back one with Hamas.
It's not in his own personal or political interest.
If anything, he wouldn't mind the whole thing spreading into the West Bank even more severely than it is for my.
You keep the crisis going. You don't change the leader in the middle of a crisis.
The whole thing carries on. Netanyahu may be able to stay in office.
I don't think he has any desire to. I think he wants to work out a way to go into.
And he certainly has no desire to see a Palestinian state. Everything that he has done in the right wing of the Likud is to prevent this coming out.
The split between Hamas and Fatah.
Even the withdrawal out of Gaza in 2005 was about facilitating this split in Palestinian politics to undermine the Palestinian national movement.
If we are serious moving forward, we have to reinvigorate the Palestinian national movement.
We have to demonstrate that those prepared to use a non-violent path can achieve credible gains.
Those prepared to negotiate can achieve that freedom, and that those who wish to use violence aren't going to achieve it.
At the moment. All our policies applying to the likes of Hamas.
It's extraordinary. They're getting more popular, more funding, more credibility, whether we like it or not.
And I'm not sure that's understood in Westminster.
I'm not sure it's understood how much of our reputation, such as it is, has been utterly damaged by this across the world.
The double standards involved are fairly extreme. North, South America, rest of Asia, Africa are looking at us and saying,
Don't ever come to us ever again to talk about international law and human rights.
And that's something we should all be very concerned about.
So recognition is just but one of the things that needs to happen in order to correct that.
And I'm not saying at this stage just to finish on this point,
but that necessarily means a two state solution is my blueprint for resolving this conflict is not for me to put that out there,
but recognition is a way at least the person can say we recognise Palestinian self-determination.
We give it to me, how the two parties decide to live with each other is is for them obviously regions that are absolutely essential,
like ending that occupation. Before you can get.
Thank you very much.
Okay, panellists, we're going to take the questions here from the tables who are not getting up and going to the podium each time we get a question.
Before I launch into questions, I should have said from the outset that this is a doubly special seminar tonight because unusually for San Antonio,
it brings two senators together,
and particularly in our contact with you think we're very grateful to our colleagues from the European Studies Centre who are the joint hosts?
I saw colleagues from the European Studies Centre filtering into Nice to see you guys here, but of course it's a joint centre.
So let me recognise that one right now and thank them for their help in bringing this together.
I'm going to prompt ITER and thank Chris to say just a little bit more where things are going.
Chris, you were actually at the reception hosted by the conservative Middle East Counsel when Lord Cameron made his surprise announcement
that Britain actually was looking to recognise Palestinian statehood as part of a post conflict of Gaza and Palestine situation.
And very shortly after that we saw the White House making a very similar statement.
So if you could share with us, you know, what the mood was like when Cameron actually made that announcement and whether you
think that that reflects a concerted effort bringing Britain and America together.
Before you answer,
I think really it's whether there is momentum building between Spain and other countries in the EU to try and take a kind of vanguard role.
While you talk about an EU that's sort of divided three ways in its voting so far, at least in the Security Council, you know,
is there something meaningful coming from Spanish diplomacy with other like minded countries that might be creating a momentum in Europe,
such as what I thought was talking about had been the norm in 2014?
So could I ask you to do just that? And then I promise, guys, the questions are yours.
Yes, I was in in the room when Cameron made this address.
A few comments. Firstly, I thought he was genuine.
I think he did say at the time we want to see the fighting and now he gave his blessing to that.
And I think, you know, he was serious. The Government's position has transitioned to one now and said it's sort of calling for pauses.
It is a pause, moving to a seamless, credible, sustainable cease fire, which is almost as good as saying an immediate cease fire.
That just can't come out. And and so on the issue of statehood, he didn't say we're going to recognise,
but he said we reserve the right to do it and they would do it very much not at the end of the process, but in the middle of it.
So in other words, it would be done in order to actually encourage things forward,
not as at the last step, if it was a very nuanced change in emphasis as much as anything.
And he also made it very clear that Israel would not have a veto over this and
that therefore the British decision is one that could be taken at any time.
In terms of actual substance and what he said, it wasn't a huge change,
but actually it been said by a foreign secretary in a one and he made it, I think, pretty obvious that.
It wasn't beyond the bounds of possibility that Britain could go down this path in the not too distant future.
And I think that everyone in the room could read the signs that, you know.
Israel be aware, you know, this is within our power to do and we might do it.
And the decision the United States has made knows this is one of the things they are looking at now.
But are they going to move any further? Have we heard anything more since?
Not. Not a great deal. But I would say that what is key is.
These leaders, I think, are now there, having criticised what Israel has done in Gaza.
But they don't want to go back to the situation of another war in Gaza.
This is the sixth major Israeli war in Gaza since 2006.
They don't want to go back to and know not to go back there.
They understand there's got to be a potential solution on the table and the only one they can coalesce around is a two state solution,
which would require the recognition of a Palestinian state.
And the only time we push back against the Israeli government is when Netanyahu said or the Israeli ambassador said,
we're never going to allow a Palestinian state. And then they criticised.
And that's, I think, the context in which the visa bans on settlers, the sanctions on settlers have come about.
So I don't think you can block statehood because we are going to push back very hard on that.
Fairly hard. And then. Yes.
So there is an EU momentum on recognition.
Okay. So from what I know, the Spanish government, Spanish officials are talking with other like minded European governments trying to.
Think of the good timing. Maybe not the best time, but good, good timing to make a difference.
Clearly, what's going on today makes it very difficult to just, you know, make a statement.
We recognise the state of Palestine as if that's going to solve the monstrosities that we are seeing today.
I think some European countries are waiting for signals from Washington.
So the fact that now there is more and more talk about the Biden administration considering the recognition of the statehood for Palestine,
that will make some countries, especially Germany, always Germany, you know, consider that maybe that's a good idea.
Today, there was a statement by the high representative, the E.U. high representative for foreign and security policy.
Suggesting the need for an arms embargo against Israel.
So that is obviously he doesn't have the power to make the 27 EU governments follow or, you know, impose that arms embargo.
But the fact that he's already speaking about that, the Germans are unhappy, the Austrians,
the Czechs and the Hungarians don't like at all what Mr. Borrell is saying.
But, you know, if Washington, you know, starts moving in a different direction, that could make a difference.
I think coordination between. EU.
Some EU governments like the Spanish government with Arab governments.
And this is something you know, I was mentioning this earlier to Chris.
The level of coordination among some Arab governments and even from Muslim countries among Arabs, is something that we are not used to seeing.
Those of us who follow and study the region,
we have seen that weeks after October 7th there was a summit of the Arab League and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation that was convened
in Riyadh with almost all heads of state showed up and the Iranian was there and everyone was there and they issued a final statement.
In which, by the way, they talked about the two state solution. So the Iranians need to be asked, you know what?
You know, there's something about a two state solution. Iran also signed that statement.
And today there's a meeting in Washington.
President Biden will be hosting King Abdullah of Jordan, who is carrying a message from the Arab group to Washington.
Arab countries, they all you know, we all know they have their own calculations, interests, but all of them have seen that things have gone too far.
The risk for the entire region, the risk of escalation of a regional war,
the risk of the Netanyahu government deciding to expand, you know, operations beyond the West Bank and also domestic stability.
I'm talking about Jordan and stability for Jordan.
What if there's a forced transfer of Palestinians from Gaza through Rafah into the Sinai or from the West Bank into Jordan?
The Jordanian government has talked about a declaration of war.
If that happens, the Egyptians are talking about red lines, a lot of things.
So just to conclude, I think the on the issue of recognition, we have to look also at the signals coming from the region itself.
There was a Saudi statement from the Saudi foreign ministry three days ago in which the Saudi government
was telling the three permanent UN Security Council members that have not recognised Palestine yet.
That is the U.S., U.K. and France, that in the absence of a recognition of Palestinian states, the borders of 67,
with East Jerusalem as the capital and the absence of an end of the aggression in Gaza and withdrawal of all forces from Gaza,
there will be no normalisation between the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Israel.
So the sequencing now turned upside down.
It's not the Abraham Accords. One one, like single recognitions, is the other way around.
We work on Palestine, then recognitions will come and normalisation and Israel will become a normal country in its neighbourhood.
That's the point, is achieving normalisation requires all states to be normal.
To have normal status, you must have recognised boundaries, which is not the case.
It's just not the case. And so, I mean, it's again, it's not a punishment,
it's just using diplomatic terms and there fully normalisation didn't exist before the before the 7th of October they were about to sign.
I don't.