Foreign Affairs Committee on Nov. 5th, 2024

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

I call the meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting 125 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format. I'd like to remind participants of the following points, and this goes for members as well as witnesses. Please wait until I recognize you by name before you speak. All comments should be addressed through the chair.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on Thursday, September 19, 2024, the committee is resuming its study of Canada's advancement of a two-state solution.

I'd now like to welcome our three panellists.

From B'nai Brith, we have Mr. Henry Topas, who is the director for Quebec and Atlantic Canada.

From the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, we have Mr. Shimon Koffler Fogel, president and chief executive officer.

From JSpaceCanada, we have Ms. Maytal Kowalski, the executive director.

You will each be provided five minutes for your opening remarks. Please do look over this way every once in a while, not only with respect to your opening remarks but also following questions from the members. There are time limits, so if you see me signalling you, that means you should wrap it up in about 20 seconds or so.

All of that having been explained, we will go to Mr. Topas for his opening remarks.

[Henry Topas, Director, Quebec and Atlantic Canada, B'nai Brith Canada]

Mr. Chair and members of the committee, thank you for inviting me to speak today on behalf of B'nai Brith Canada about Canada's role in advancing a two-state solution.

B'nai Brith is Canada's oldest human rights organization and the voice of Canada's grassroots Jewish community. Our organization, founded in 1875, is dedicated to eradicating racism, anti-Semitism and hatred in all its forms while championing the rights of the marginalized.

I believe it must be stated at the outset that as we wear poppies today to remember the sacrifices of Canadian fighting men and women who defend our way of life, it is the State of Israel today that is the bulwark against those who would tear the fabric of Canadian and western society asunder.

B'nai Brith's submission to this committee comes at a critical time as Israel, the Middle East's only democracy, faces an existential threat on multiple fronts. The recommendations we provide today are essential if Canada is to contribute meaningfully to any possible two-state framework that secures both peace and democratic stability.

Our first recommendation is that the Government of Canada unequivocally support Israel's efforts to eliminate all extra-territorial threats that currently compromise its security. The failure of the west to secure Israel has undermined previous peace efforts, forcing Israel to engage in repeated defensive actions against terrorist threats. Unless and until the Iranian-backed terror network is dismantled, a two-state solution remains dangerously unrealistic. Terrorist entities in the Palestinian territories have repeatedly shown that they are not interested in a lasting peace. Until all of these terrorist groups, including Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and Hamas, all of which are designated as terror entities by Canada, are permanently removed, a viable framework cannot exist.

As an aside, last week, at Israel's National Military Cemetery at Mount Herzl, I again personally visited the graves of the many brave IDF soldiers who gave their lives fighting the defensive war now ongoing, a war neither started nor desired by Israel. Those calling for ceasefires must remember that these groups have never failed to violate each and every ceasefire agreed to by Israel.

From outside the Palestinian territories, the Iranian regime's axis of resistance—Hezbollah in Lebanon, Ansar Allah in Yemen and Shia militias in Iraq—poses an equally dangerous threat. Any meaningful support must begin with neutralizing this network that Iran has orchestrated to destabilize the region and prevent peace.

Our second recommendation is that the Government of Canada commit to building a democratic framework in the Palestinian territories before recognizing a Palestinian state. The Palestinian Authority, led by Mahmoud Abbas—now in its twentieth year of a four-year mandate—lacks both democratic legitimacy and effective governance.

Recognizing a Palestinian state without stable and proven democratic governance risks replacing the failures observed elsewhere, with Afghanistan serving as a cautionary example.

Afghanistan's situation demonstrates the dangers of premature recognition without democratic structures. The result is a state where undemocratic governance and terror influences have led to severe and repeated human rights abuses, particularly against women. Afghanistan's challenges serve as a warning against recognizing any state in which governance and democratic accountability are completely absent.

Canada's role in ensuring that the Palestinian territories establish real and democratic governance is essential. Only reforms that restore electoral processes and accountability within the Palestinian Authority will contribute to lasting peace.

Furthermore, a two-state solution cannot succeed without a Palestinian state that recognizes Israel's right to exist. Palestine must first cease its toxic UNRWA-funded hate education for the young. It must first cease its “pay-to-slay” reward program for terrorism. Any framework remains horribly premature if these preconditions are absent.

In conclusion, the Government of Canada must not recognize a Palestinian state prematurely and Canada must avoid the mistakes witnessed in cases like Afghanistan, where governance failures and terror influences have resulted in prolonged instability and deep human suffering.

Canada's support as a leader in international peacebuilding is essential to establish a democratic and secure base for any solution that can bring stability and peace to Israelis and Palestinians.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you, Mr. Topas.

We now go to Mr. Koffler Fogel.

You have five minutes for your opening remarks, sir.

[Shimon Koffler Fogel, President and Chief Executive Officer, Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs]

Thank you, Chair and members of the committee, for the opportunity to address this critical discussion.

My name is Shimon Fogel, and I'm the president and CEO of the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, which represents more than 150,000 Jewish Canadians through Jewish federations across Canada.

CIJA is a national non-partisan organization committed to preserving and protecting the quality of Jewish life in Canada through principled advocacy.

Today we address the committee's study on Canada's advancement of a two-state solution. This topic carries far-reaching implications for Canada's foreign policy, for Israel's security and for stability in the Middle East. While CIJA supports a peaceful two-state solution, this outcome must be achieved through direct negotiations.

Your committee has heard and will be hearing from many witnesses who reflect a broad cross-section of perspectives on the issue, and that's as it should be. However, I offer one word of caution: While the Jewish community, like so many others, is not monolithic, on the issue of support for the Jewish state there is almost universal consensus. We submitted to the clerk two independent research projects that underscore this point. To put it bluntly, there are more Canadians who believe in flat-earth conspiracy theories than there are Jews who oppose an independent Jewish state in our ancestral homeland.

The studies confirm that only 3% of self-identified Canadian Jews reject Israel's legitimacy. It would be misleading to attach significance to such a marginal view and conclude that from a Jewish community perspective, there exists any meaningful ambivalence about the place of a Jewish state within the family of nations.

It's important to remember that Palestinian statehood is not an absolute right. According to UN Security Council resolutions 242 and 338, statehood is conditional, requiring first the recognition of Israel's security and the legitimacy of the Jewish state in our ancestral homeland. The resolutions mandate direct negotiations to achieve these terms before statehood can be conferred on Palestine by the international community. Premature recognition contradicts this foundational formula, creating a destabilizing precedent.

Another vital component is Palestinian agency. Currently there is a worrying lack of accountability within Palestinian leadership. Statehood cannot be treated as an entitlement; it must come with the obligations of responsible governance. Recognizing a Palestinian state without first establishing structures for effective governance would risk creating a failed state from the outset. This would not help Palestinians. It would not help them achieve a better, more stable future, but rather doom them to ongoing instability.

Statehood also requires that essential issues such as borders, water rights, the electrical grid distribution, the status of Jerusalem and the Palestinian demand for the right of return be resolved first. Recognizing a state without addressing these core matters through direct negotiations not only overlooks practical functionality but also condemns both parties to enduring conflict. Without negotiated agreements on these points, the envisioned end of conflict is unattainable. A unilateral approach would leave all these issues unresolved, with no mutually agreed-upon mechanisms to address them.

Canada has historically maintained a balanced approach to this conflict, supporting peace processes grounded in negotiation, mutual recognition and security guarantees. To depart from this approach by endorsing a unilateral path risks emboldening rejectionist elements and reinforcing the idea that peace can be achieved without compromise. By supporting direct engagement, Canada upholds its values of fairness, security and commitment to true peace.

In conclusion, Mr. Chair, CIJA believes that Canada must remain committed to a fair, negotiated resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

One day, we hope there will be a vibrant, democratic state of Palestine, but to pretend that there is a viable Palestinian state today is inaccurate, irresponsible and based on harmful half-truths. Only a true two-state solution, achieved through direct negotiations, can ensure lasting peace, security and stability in the Middle East.

Thank you for the opportunity to share my thoughts. I'm more than happy to answer any questions in the discussion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you, Mr. Koffler Fogel.

We now go to Ms. Kowalski.

You have five minutes.

[Maytal Kowalski, Executive Director, JSpaceCanada]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, for inviting me to be here today.

My name is Maytal Kowalski. I'm the executive director of JSpaceCanada. JSpaceCanada is a pro-Israel, pro-peace, pro-democracy Jewish Zionist organization that advocates that Canada promote and preserve the two-state solution in Israel and Palestine, as championed by our community of Canadian Jews.

I myself am a dual Canadian-Israeli citizen. I was born in Winnipeg and moved to Israel with my family in 1994. I want to thank you for holding these meetings at such a crucial time.

While some would argue that only just over a year from the horrific Hamas terror attacks of October 7 this is not the time to discuss peace, I would like to quote former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert, who stated just last weekend that using October 7 as an argument against the creation of a Palestinian state is a “gross mistake”. It is precisely because of October 7 and precisely because a two-state solution is the best way to defeat Hamas and other terror entities that we must act now.

Since February of this year, JSpaceCanada has been advocating that Canada recognize a Palestinian state alongside the State of Israel, broadly based on 1967 borders. This is also my recommendation today, but I want to make sure that this is not merely a symbolic gesture. Therefore, I ask of you, in addition to and in tandem with recognition, to consider the following actions.

Commit to a continuation of ongoing sanctions on entities, organizations and individuals directly involved in, financing and/or supporting settler violence and annexation in the occupied West Bank, including extremist Israeli politicians and government officials such as Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich.

Support and strengthen the Palestinian Authority as an alternative to Hamas rule in the face of plans by finance minister Smotrich to collapse the Palestinian Authority through withholding tax revenue collected by Israel.

Finally, pressure the Palestinian Authority to commit to a range of reforms aimed at enhancing democracy and governance, fighting corruption, revising its prisoner payment program and addressing incitement.

We know from a variety of polls that the majority of Canadian Jews, Israelis and Palestinians still support a two-state solution and a diplomatic—not militaristic—solution to the conflict. You simply cannot have a two-state solution without one of those states being the State of Palestine. Canada's long-stated position has been that a state of Palestine should be recognized as a part of final status negotiations directly between Israelis and Palestinians.

When my family moved to Israel in 1994, it was at the height of the Oslo accords, mere months before the Israeli-Jordanian peace treaty was signed. At the time, when both Israelis and Palestinians were actually involved in negotiations, perhaps such a policy made sense, but it is no longer 1994, and peace is no longer seemingly just on the horizon.

The Israel I knew and loved as a child has been all but sacrificed for messianic, ultra-nationalistic visions of the Israeli far right. We must acknowledge not just what we want to see in the future, but what exists now. What exists now is a one-state reality, where, between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River, one state, Israel, controls the entry and exit of people and goods, oversees security and has the capacity to impose its decisions, laws and policies on millions of people without their consent.

Canada's foreign policy must adapt itself to the Israel that exists now. This is precisely what being a friend of Israel means. If I stop my friend from drinking and driving, I'm not punishing my friend: I am saving them. Right now, by enabling this Israeli government headed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, not only are we allowing our friend to drink and drive; we are encouraging them to take another few shots before getting in the driver's seat.

After all, when Netanyahu's own party, the Likud, sponsors an event to encourage resettling the north of Gaza, in the words of a friend of JSpaceCanada, the father of 20-year-old hostage Nimrod Cohen, held in Gaza for over a year, “They want to lay the foundations of their settlements over the body of my son.”

I am here representing a large portion of the Canadian Jewish community that feels connected and attached to Israel, believes in Israel's right to exist as a secure democratic home of the Jewish people and, precisely because of that attachment and connection, opposes the current Israeli government and wants to see their Canadian government take strong action.

You may hear reasons today as to why a step like Palestinian statehood recognition is risky. There will always be inherent risks with working towards peace, but they will never outweigh the risks of living forever by the sword and being in a state of perpetual war.

At a rally with the peace organization Peace Now, in Israel, mere kilometres from where I lived in the early 2000s, a man named Haim Perry held a sign that read, “Better to have the pains of peace than the agonies of war”. Haim Perry was taken hostage by Hamas on October 7. In June of this year, he was murdered at the hands of Hamas in the absence of a hostage release and ceasefire deal that could have freed him.

For the memory of Haim Perry, Hersh Goldberg-Polin, Vivian Silver, Judih Weinstein and so many others, including the tens of thousands of Palestinians whose names we never even got to learn, we must pursue a path of peace through whatever mechanisms we can, such as recognizing the Palestinian state even if it is painful, because it is better to have the pains of peace than the agonies of war.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you very much, Ms. Kowalski.

We'll now turn to the members for their questions. First up is Mr. Marty Morantz.

You have four minutes.

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you all for your submissions.

Mr. Fogel, it's been the long-standing policy of Canada that a two-state solution is the best path forward, so long as it is negotiated and that both states live side by side in peace and security.

Are you concerned that this motion, which is the subject of these hearings, seeks to change this long-standing position?

[Shimon Koffler Fogel]

I think this study reflects an anxious desire to make a contribution, break the cycle that currently exists and find a path towards what I think all of us share: an independent Palestinian state and a secure Jewish state living side by side. However, the temptation to do something is outweighed by the consideration of what the consequences are of doing anything.

I am concerned that the hunger to make a contribution is coming at the expense of a thoughtful contribution.

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Would it be fair to say that for any resolution of this matter to succeed, it would need to be underpinned by popular support among both Israeli citizens and the Palestinian people? In other words, when you unilaterally recognize a Palestinian state without properly consulting both sides and making sure both sides are on board, don't you run the risk of continuing the cycle of violence?

[Shimon Koffler Fogel]

I think that's exactly the case. Absent buy-in from the direct stakeholders, there is no externally imposed solution that has any ability to be sustained in the long term—or even, indeed, in the short term. I think building up the peace camp in both Israel and in Palestinian society is an essential first step. We're not there. It doesn't matter how much we might want it; the two-state constituency, in either community, is simply not there now.

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

If the Palestinian state were unilaterally recognized without negotiation or popular support, what would the likelihood be that this type of resolution would succeed?

[Shimon Koffler Fogel]

I think the likelihood is zero.

For Palestinians, there would be no incentive to address all of the outstanding issues with Israel. From an Israeli perspective, it would be seen as rewarding terror. Also, there is no path that leads to sustainable peace between the two.

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

That was my next question.

Regarding this idea of rewarding terror, there are still hostages being held, so I have trouble seeing any buy-in for Canada's unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state among the vast majority of Israelis while their children are still being held hostage by terrorists in Gaza.

Wouldn't you agree?

[Shimon Koffler Fogel]

I agree.

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

We next go to Dr. Fry.

Dr. Fry, you have four minutes.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for coming here.

I think we all agree that Israel has a right to defend itself from the terrorist attack on October 7. However, we also see the horrible humanitarian situation in Gaza. Most of us believe.... Why do we want to condemn generations of children to hate and fear, over all of these years?

Canada has always supported a two-state solution, and I'm hearing from many of you that this is important. I would like to know, if somebody could tell me—Mr. Fogel, for instance—why it has been 75 years since this was first suggested. It has not happened. What are the challenges? What are the barriers to this? We've had Shimon Peres. We've had Olmert. We've had a lot of people who supported it and wanted it. We had Oslo doing this. What is the reason it has never come to pass?

[Shimon Koffler Fogel]

From my perspective, there's only one cause, and that's rejection of the legitimacy of the Jewish state. It was rejected by the Arab states in the region before the establishment of Israel in 1948. It was rejected by Palestinian leadership on five successive comprehensive and internationally backed U.S.-sponsored peace proposals, beginning with Oslo but not ending with Oslo.

Until Palestinians can wrap their heads around and accept the legitimacy of a Jewish state as their neighbour, we are condemning the region to conflict.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Thank you. I have only a short time for questions and answers.

Ms. Kowalski, you have made some really clear statements here today. What must happen before...? I hear everyone saying we....

The question is, what happens? Will it completely derail a peace process if Canada unilaterally makes a decision before things change? What do you think of the conditions that must happen? This is what we're studying here. What is the process to move towards a negotiated two-state solution?

Give me—quickly, if you can—about five conditions that must exist.

[Maytal Kowalski]

Sure.

I think the first is actually recognition of a Palestinian state by Canada.

I want to say really briefly that the reason it's important is that in past negotiations, in Oslo or in other negotiations, we actually weren't talking about a Palestinian state; we were talking about an autonomous region or what a lot of diplomats and leaders refer to as a “state minus”. There are 146 countries right now that recognize the State of Palestine. As more countries recognize that State of Palestine, it means that when negotiations do happen again, we're not negotiating whether it's a state or something else; we are negotiating, now that we know that it is a state, what that looks like and how we make it happen.

As to how we make it happen, the answers are all there. We have seen these processes happen before. We know that what has been lacking has been leadership—Israeli and Palestinian leadership able to speak to their people and explain why these steps are important.

I would also say that it is important to understand that while there is responsibility on both sides—for both the Israelis and the Palestinians and their leaders to do a better job on this and to be at the negotiating table—we must recognize that in this situation right now, Israel holds the majority of the cards. Israel is in a position of strength. Israel is a sovereign state, whereas Palestinians are stateless people who are divided between Hamas and the Palestinian leadership. We have to be able to recognize where the systems work in advantages and disadvantages, and put the pressure on both peoples accordingly.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Thank you.

How am I doing, Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

You're over right now.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

I'm over?

I'm sorry, guys. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

No worries.

Next we go to MP Bergeron for four minutes.