Foreign Affairs Committee on Nov. 5th, 2024

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank the witnesses for being here and sharing their insights on this important issue.

In her testimony, Ms. Kowalski said something that I have always strongly believed, which is that the people of Israel and Palestine cannot continue to live in a state of permanent war. It's not possible. She probably said it much more eloquently than I could have.

Last week, a former Canadian ambassador to Israel, Jon Allen, argued that the greatest threat to Israel comes from within, and that Israel will never be safe as long as it continues to occupy the Palestinian people's territories in the West Bank and Gaza. Colonization has continued for years, particularly in the West Bank, in violation of international law. There were 1,900 Jewish settlers in the West Bank in 1977; 331,000 Jewish settlers in 1997; and 741,000 Jewish settlers in the West Bank in 2022.

Mr. Fogel, you underscored the consequences of doing something. Have you looked at the consequences of doing nothing? Nothing has changed since 1977, and that led to the October 7 massacre and the butchering currently under way in Gaza and Lebanon.

What do you think the consequences of doing nothing are?

[Shimon Koffler Fogel]

Thank you for the question. It's an important one.

I don't suggest that nothing be done. I think Canada should invest in the Palestinian Authority, much like Maytal suggested. I think we should be investing resources—not just finance, but also expertise—to help develop, and allow to become entrenched, the civil society institutions a country must have to sustain itself and govern effectively over the future. That kind of investment....

Bringing Palestinian society to a place where they see themselves as stakeholders in protecting something—which was the expectation of Oslo, but which collapsed in 2000—is the necessary fundamental in moving forward.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

How can we make heads or tails of this? This question is for Mr. Topas, since, on October 7, 2023, Richard Robertson, director of research and advocacy at B'nai Brith Canada, said the following: “It is inconceivable for Canada to continue diplomatic relations with the Palestinian Authority, which has the blood of Canadian citizens on its hands.”

How can you say, on the one hand, that we must invest in the Palestinian Authority and, on the other hand, that we must cut all ties with the Palestinian Authority?

[Henry Topas]

To answer the question, I would first remind you that Israel evacuated its citizens from Gaza almost 20 years ago and left all its facilities behind. It provided water and electricity to Gaza, and the people of Gaza voted for Hamas. What was the result? No matter how many times a ceasefire is ordered, what happens? These people don't abide by them, and now we're asking what we're going to do to invest in the Palestinian world? We've tried to do so before. All kinds of movements were put in place and agreements were reached, which were violated one after the other.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

I don't have much time left.

So, unlike Koffler Fogel, you are suggesting that we not invest in the Palestinian Authority.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

I'm afraid I'm going to have to cut it off. You are over time right now.

We next go to our friend, the NDP member.

You have four minutes.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to mention at the outset that I had the opportunity to visit Israel and Palestine a few times, including as a parliamentarian. For a Quebecker and a democrat to witness what is happening in the West Bank is an upsetting experience. We're talking about military occupation, checkpoints, daily humiliation and children being arrested by soldiers and tried in military courts.

I'm also thinking of the arrogance of extremist settlers, particularly in Hebron, the theft of land and the destruction of villages, farms, olive trees and herds, at times. I returned from there with the image of a military boot crushing a human face. It's not a good feeling. I think we need to take action, as a country, to change this situation.

Ms. Kowalski, what do you think of what's happening in the West Bank, which has been occupied for about a year, and settler violence? Do you think the Netanyahu government is using the war in Gaza in part to accelerate the West Bank annexation?

[Maytal Kowalski]

The English for the last part was cut off.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Do you think the Netanyahu government is using the war in Gaza to accelerate the annexation of the West Bank?

[Maytal Kowalski]

Thank you so much for the question, and thank you so much for bearing witness to what is happening in the occupied West Bank right now.

The extremist ministers in Netanyahu's government are absolutely using the cover of the Gaza war to advance annexation. We've seen a number of outposts—I think there are about 43 illegal outposts, according to the Israeli government—that have gone up since October 7. If you want a contrast, in past years, between 1996 and 2023, the number of illegal outposts per year on average was about seven. You can see that this is really being accelerated.

We also see that it isn't just an issue of de facto annexation, which has been talked about a lot. Now we're moving into what is being called by many experts a de jure annexation. Finance Minister Smotrich has moved the administration of the West Bank from a military administration to a civil administration. He even admitted this himself: “It will be easier to swallow in the international and legal context”. That is so they won't have to say that what they are doing is annexation.

I would also say that since October 7, OCHA has documented nearly 1,600 attacks by Israeli settlers against Palestinians. We have also seen Israeli authorities destroying, confiscating, stealing or forcing the demolition of about 1,800 Palestinian structures across the West Bank.

I would also like to note that in a—

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

I have just one minute left.

In this context of speeding up the illegal occupation and annexation of the West Bank, how important is it that we recognize the State of Palestine?

[Maytal Kowalski]

It's crucial that we do this and move on this now, because, as I mentioned in my opening testimony, what we are looking at is a one-state reality, and every day we see that creep closer and closer. We still do have the opportunity for a two-state solution. That opportunity is not gone and the two-state solution does exist, but every day that we wait to take bold action makes it harder to do so.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you very much, MP Boulerice.

We now go to MP Aboultaif. You have three minutes.

[Ziad Aboultaif, Conservative, Edmonton Manning, AB]

Thank you for the generous three minutes.

Welcome to the panellists.

Mr. Topas, you precondition the Palestinian state working toward the two-state solution with two things: One is for Iran to quit interfering, basically, in the Middle East affairs the way it is, and also that to have long-lasting peace, we need to go back to negotiation.

The Oslo accords created a platform for that. Where did the Oslo accords fail, and how can we go back? The war is going to end at some point, and everyone's going to go back to the negotiation table. Do you think that Oslo is still the platform on which we can go ahead and begin a negotiation toward a lasting peace?

[Henry Topas]

I can't tell you whether Oslo is the proper formwork for a lasting peace for such negotiation, because every negotiation that has taken place based on Oslo has failed—every one of them.

My co-witness, Mr. Fogel, made it very clear that there were five such negotiations. If you read any of Bill Clinton's writings, he basically said very clearly that Palestine had a chance, but walked away from the table because their own people would have killed them if they had gone ahead with it.

[Ziad Aboultaif, Conservative, Edmonton Manning, AB]

But the solution is a two-state solution.

Mr. Fogel, can you comment on the same question? Do you believe that Oslo is still a good base from which to continue negotiating toward a long-lasting peace? I think that's the bottom line.

You recognized the condition that a two-state solution has to be in place; otherwise, where are we going from here?

[Shimon Koffler Fogel]

I think that everybody around the table who does support a two-state solution would agree that the basic terms of reference, as presented in Oslo, still inform what would likely be a resolution to the conflict: mutual recognition, guarantees of security, land swaps that would accommodate and account for some of the current Israeli presence in the territories but compensate Palestinians with other territory so that it was net neutral. Those parameters, I think, are still there.

The benefit we have today, which we didn't have in Oslo, is a growing level of comfort among the Arab world. The surrounding countries, through the Abraham accords—the peace treaties with Jordan, Egypt, the flirtation with Saudi Arabia—could support whatever the parties directly negotiate.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you.

We next go to MP Oliphant. You have three minutes.

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank all of the witnesses today. Your presence here shows us both the breadth of opinion and the diversity of the Jewish community in Canada and the importance to you of both Canada and Israel.

I want to start by saying very clearly that I unequivocally support the State of Israel, the defence of Israel, the people of Israel and their right to have peace and prosperity. That doesn't mean I necessarily unconditionally support the Government of Israel, nor would I ever support any government unless it protects its own citizens, the rule of law and the international rules-based order.

I would say the same for the State of Palestine, recognized by 146 countries but not yet Canada. I will unequivocally support a state of Palestine. That doesn't mean that I necessarily support its government at the current time, but I separate those issues, as I do in Canada. I don't always support the governments in Canada either. There have been several I haven't supported, but it doesn't mean that I'm not loyal to Canada.

What I want to be very clear about, however, is that the question we are dealing with at this committee is Canada's recognition of the State of Palestine. The question is not if we will or whether we will or not; we will. Canada will. I am convinced of that, so the question is about when we do it.

We have talked about a negotiated recognition. I'm not a student of history, but I don't believe that recognition of states is always negotiated. Canada will unilaterally, as we have always done, recognize states. We did that with Kosovo and we've done it with a number of places.

What are the pluses and minuses of recognition of the State of Palestine for Canada and for Jews in Canada? How will it help?

I want to begin with Ms. Kowalski.

[Maytal Kowalski]

I think the pluses are, as I mentioned earlier, that it is then not a question of when negotiations happen and it is not a question of what we are negotiating, whether a state or something else: It is that we are negotiating.

There is a State of Palestine. It is widely recognized. The question will be what that looks like, and it will be those final status issues that will be left to negotiations.

In terms of minuses—I think this is also something I brought up in my testimony—we don't want it to just be a symbolic move. We want to make sure that other actions follow, and that is also why I talked about not only moves that we can take to strengthen the Palestinian Authority but also about things that we should be asking Israel to do, because, as you said, we can support the State of Israel and realize that the government is working to the detriment of that state.

There are clear actions that have to come along with this recognition. You are right, and I agree with you. On unilaterally recognizing the State of Palestine, I think that there is no reason it should not be done by Canada or to think that it will not have benefits, so we should move forward with it.

For the Jewish community, the thing that I first want to say is that with all due respect, we are not the story here; the story is about millions of stateless Palestinians who have been waiting for so long for justice and to be treated as a sovereign people in their ancestral homeland. It should be us, Jewish Zionists, first and foremost, who recognize that. That is our story. We should have more empathy than anyone for the fact that they want it.

I think the only way that we are the story, the only way in which the Canadian Jewish community is a story, is that it is incumbent upon me and my colleagues here at the table to not fearmonger among the Jewish community and to not create nightmare scenarios of what recognition will mean but instead explain to our community why this is beneficial and how this is getting us to a two-state solution, since we know that the majority of our community supports a two-state solution.

Other than that, the focus really does need to be on Palestinians.

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

I suspect that's my time.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Yes, that's correct.

We now go to Mr. Bergeron.

You have a minute and a half, sir.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll come back to you, Mr. Topas, because I didn't have time to finish asking my question.

Unlike Mr. Fogel, you're not proposing that we give even more attention to the Palestinian Authority; you're proposing that we cut ties with the Palestinian Authority.

Did I understand you correctly?

[Henry Topas]

I don't think I said that.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Mr. Robertson said it.