Thank you very much.
Thank you, sir, for joining us, and thank you to all of the witnesses.
First of all, let me say at the outset that we all abhor the deaths that have taken place in recent days, the 293 deaths on both sides, 280 of whom were Palestinians and 13 of whom were Israeli citizens. That's to be condemned. This type of violence and death is to be abhorred.
I want to move to some of the structural issues and problems that gave rise to this circumstance, and also talk about Canada's role in all of this, in the sense of our own foreign policy.
I want to start by raising the concern that has been raised by Canada's failing to continue to support the United Nations resolutions that have been condemnatory of illegal occupation of the Palestinian territories for some decades now. I want to suggest that Canada ought to change this policy, but also underscore the fact that Canada stands ready, as the minister said recently, to assist when negotiations have been achieved. This is in fact providing an incentive to the status quo.
If I may, I want to quote from an individual by the name of Daniel Levy, a former negotiator with the Israeli government in the peace talks, who suggests that other roads should be taken. He was talking to the UN Security Council about a year ago after the annexation proposals were dropped, or at least stalled. He says that this was not a cause for self-congratulation. There's no reward for the avoidance of criminality, he said.
He talked about the peace process, as currently framed, as being a deeper structural problem. As it was currently framed and pursued, he says it is “a place of refuge from hard choices”, a comfort zone with a law of diminishing returns, that it has a lock-hold and has brought us to the brink of annexation and the precipice of the Palestinian Authority's financial collapse. He said it's not a question of resuming negotiations, of more of the same guarantees, further deterioration...a failure of learning, politics and imagination.
Daniel Levy further says that there's been some talk about “creating the conditions, the building blocks for future progress that can deliver equality, dignity and security for Palestinians and Israelis”, and I think that's what we all want. He also suggests that there needs to be accountability for human rights and international law. In the case, of course, that we're dealing with, the allegations against Israel, he says, “If the unlawful and peace negating policies [of Israel] continue to be met with impunity, then there should be no expectation of positive change. It's that simple. Israel pursues policies in violation of international law and...UN resolutions because it can.” He suggests that human rights and international legality should be “our guiding star”, no longer subordinated to maintaining a peace process that has so palpably failed to deliver.
I'd like you to comment on that, sir, in respect of Canada's position, which used to be strongly supportive of UN resolutions seeking to ensure that it was recognized that the occupations were illegal and looking for some change.
Why did Canada stop supporting those resolutions? Doesn't he agree that the impunity of Israel with respect to this occupation is in fact incentivizing a lack of progress in the peace talks?