Evidence of meeting #123 for Foreign Affairs and International Development in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was israel.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ali Ehsassi
Thank you very much.
We now go to the members for questions.
As I understand it, Mr. Chong is first.
You have three minutes.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My questions are for Professor Momani. Thank you for taking the time to appear in front of us, from the University of Waterloo.
I was really interested in your opening remarks about the demographic reality. It seems to us that the path to a two-state solution—politically, not legally—must be the result of a negotiated two-state solution settlement between Israelis and Palestinians, and that it also must have popular support. I'm very interested in exploring the demographic reality of Palestinians and Israelis today. You mentioned that there are some 9.8 million Israelis: 40% of them are secular, about half a million of them are in the West Bank and approximately two million of them are Israeli Arabs or Palestinians.
What is the level of popular support amongst the 9.8 million Israeli citizens? Can you break that down amongst the different constituent groups of Israeli citizens? Then I'd like to explore the Palestinian side.
Professor, University of Waterloo, As an Individual
Let me just say that I think both communities are becoming more extreme—I think that's just the reality of this awful war—so, of the polls or the numbers that we had from before, some of them have just gotten worse. I think that the time to have a two-state solution was a long time ago. Today, Israel is taken over by those extremist elements. In fact, there's a reason that we've seen, for 11 months, protests on the streets against the Netanyahu government for some of the changes that are happening inside the country.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Are there any polls you can point to that our analysts can research, as we go through the study, that indicate levels of support amongst Israeli citizens?
Professor, University of Waterloo, As an Individual
The Carnegie institution did something a couple of years ago. Nathan Brown was one of the co-authors of that report on sentiments within the Israeli and Palestinian communities towards either a two-state or a one-state solution.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Are you aware of any reputable polling of support amongst Palestinians for a two-state solution, whether they are in the West Bank or the Gaza Strip, or amongst the Palestinians who live outside of those two areas?
Professor, University of Waterloo, As an Individual
Yes, I believe there was something done very recently that suggested there was still support for a two-state solution, but the numbers are going down, and that's with every passing year. Of course, this past year that has plummeted, probably, to its lowest ever.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ali Ehsassi
Thank you, Mr. Chong.
We now go to Madame Chatel. You have three minutes.
October 29th, 2024 / 12:35 p.m.
Liberal
Sophie Chatel Liberal Pontiac, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would like to welcome all of our witnesses and thank them for taking part in this important study.
I don't think there's any dissent in this committee or in the government about the importance of having a Palestinian state and an Israeli state side by side to bring about lasting peace. I think everyone recognizes that.
In fact, today, with the first panel of witnesses, we talked a lot about the negotiation process for the Oslo accords. We also talked about the conditions needed to bring the parties back to the bargaining table in very challenging circumstances where both populations are traumatized, as we've heard. It's very challenging.
Mr. Imseis, how could Canada play its role in bringing the parties back to the negotiating table so that discussions towards a lasting peace and a two-state solution can continue to move forward?
Dr. Ardi Imseis
Thank you very much for the question.
I think the best role Canada can play is adhering to international law. We pride ourselves on having fidelity to the rules-based international legal order. Any solution to any conflict needs to be measured by and consistent with the firm guardrails of what international law requires. As I mentioned, the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, the ICJ, determined on July 19 that Israel's very presence in the occupied Palestinian territory is, in and of itself, unlawful and therefore an internationally wrongful act. The law on state responsibility does not require that the end of that act be made subject to negotiation.
The same is true with respect to the Palestinian people's inalienable right to self-determination. If you require the end of the occupation and the Palestinian people's exercising of their right to self-determination to be subject to negotiation between a bad faith, belligerent occupier—that is physically in the territory and unlawfully colonizing it—and a defenceless population subject to its control, you're in effect giving the occupying power a veto, through negotiations, over the exercise of the Palestinian people's right to self-determination.
Canada should abide by international law and encourage Israel to withdraw—as per the ICJ ruling—from the occupied Palestinian territory. Then two states can discuss other issues in negotiations between themselves.
Bloc
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC
I, too, would like to thank the witnesses for being here, and I thank them for enlightening the committee on the important study it is undertaking today.
Mr. Antonius, you talked a lot about how Canada needs to be respectful of international law.
My question is very simple. In your opinion, would recognizing the state of Palestine comply with international law?
Retired Full Professor, Department of Sociology, UQAM, As an Individual
Obviously, it would comply. However, that one step would not suffice.
On paper, all the major principles that guide the policy of the Government of Canada reinforce international law and recognize its importance, but they are not enforced. We have to learn from the mistakes of the past.
At the time of the Oslo accords, there was tremendous support on all sides for the peace process and mutual recognition. Even in Gaza, Hamas's popularity had fallen to zero, or close to it.
The reason it didn't work was that on the day the Oslo accords were signed, September 13, 1993, settlement construction in the occupied territories was ramping up again. In seven years, between 1993 and 2000, Israel moved four times as many settlers into the occupied territories as in the previous 25 years. All of this was done in violation of international law. However, no serious pressure was brought to bear to put an end to it. That's where the problem lies.
Bloc
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC
Mr. Imseis, yesterday the Knesset banned the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, or UNRWA, from entering Palestinian territory.
First, can you explain the importance of UNRWA in the Palestinian territories?
Second, do you think this decision could speed up the process of making the occupied territories, particularly Gaza, completely uninhabitable, with the goal of ultimately turning it into a buffer zone that could be used for settlement?
Dr. Ardi Imseis
I do agree with that. The Israelis have long had a problem with UNRWA. By passing the legislation they did yesterday and withdrawing the privileges and immunities of the agency to operate in the territory that they occupy, the OPT, it deprives the agency from being able to discharge its obligations.
For instance, one of the provisions of the legislation is that no Israeli can communicate, discuss anything or have contact with any agency official. You can imagine that the hundreds of checkpoints erected, maintained and manned by the Israeli military across the occupied Palestinian territory need to be traversed by UNRWA officials in UN-marked and plated vehicles on a daily basis, or on an hourly basis. It is now illegal for these soldiers to speak to or entertain UNRWA's very presence in that territory.
What this means is that, because UNRWA is the largest provider of humanitarian aid and assistance to Palestinians in the occupied Palestinian territory, if you remove—as the Israelis are attempting to do—UNRWA's presence in the territory, you make it a whole lot harder for Palestinians to live.
The occupying power has an obligation under international law to provide humanitarian aid, assistance and relief supplies to the protected populations—see article 59 of the fourth Geneva convention—and it has an obligation to do that also under article 60. If UNRWA is not there to do it for the occupying power, that burden falls to the Israelis, and they will not do it. They have made it very clear.
This is, in effect, an attempt to hasten the ethnic cleansing of occupied Palestine, in my respectful view. I say this as a former legal counsel to UNRWA of some 12 years. I've served with UNRWA. I spoke regularly with Israeli officials, including in the IDF. I understand the operations of the organization, and I hold myself out to answer any question in relation to UNRWA.
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Thank you very much.
Thank you to all the witnesses for being here today. This is such an important conversation.
Professor Imseis, I'm going to ask you a series of three questions, if I can get through them.
In late September, Jordan's foreign affairs minister, Ayman Safadi, said at the UN that Arab countries are “willing to guarantee the security of Israel” if Israel ends its occupation and a Palestinian state is established.
Can you comment on the role of Muslim and Arab countries in potentially supporting the security of Israel once the occupation ends and a Palestinian state is recognized?
Dr. Ardi Imseis
It's vital. In 2002, after many decades of the Israeli government clamouring for the recognition of its neighbours in the Arab world and in the Muslim world, the Arab peace initiative was launched by the League of Arab States, holding out an offer of full recognition of the State of Israel if Israel were to withdraw, as it is legally required to do, from the whole of the occupied Palestinian territory. That was 22 years ago. That offer is still on the table.
When Foreign Minister Safadi mentioned that just the other day, that was a big thing, because the moment that Israel withdraws, the Arab states and the Muslim states, all of them—these are over 51 states—will recognize Israel.
They'll therefore have bilateral relations with Israel that require that they respect Israel's territorial integrity and political independence in Israel's borders. The key is that Israel is not Palestine. Israel has no sovereign rights or legal rights in occupied Palestine. That's the quid pro quo. Respect international law; we recognize you and will protect you.
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Excellent. Thank you.
That goes forward to some of the legal obligations that Canada has. We look at the ICJ decision that came out earlier this year that recognized the occupied territories are against international law.
What are Canada's obligations with regard to that decision?
Dr. Ardi Imseis
As I mentioned earlier—or I should have mentioned—the International Court of Justice made it clear that Canada has an obligation, first, not to recognize the legality of Israel's continued presence in the territory or to do anything to either aid or assist it in the maintenance of its illegal presence in the territory.
This requires a complete revolution in the bilateral relations among all states—but in this case, Canada and Israel—to ensure that none of those relations do anything to help Israel maintain its presence in the occupied Palestinian territory. This covers economic, political and diplomatic relations, social relations, civil relations, the whole lot.
We have, for instance, a free trade agreement with Israel, which is all good. Canada can do that with Israel, but that free trade agreement recognizes that Israel defines Israel as including the occupied Palestinian territory. This is a violation of the ICJ advisory opinion. It is a violation of the peremptory right of Palestinian people to self-determination. The agreement itself, as a matter of international law—see article 53 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties—is illegal, ab initio. This needs to be reviewed.
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Thank you.
Very quickly, we've heard the government say that they would recognize Palestine when the time is right. When is the right time, Professor?
Liberal