AA13CR21ADD1

AS (2013) CR 21
Addendum 1

2013 ORDINARY SESSION

________________________

(Third part)

REPORT

Twenty-first Sitting

25 June 2013 at 10 a.m.

ADDENDUM 1

Middle East

      The following texts were submitted for inclusion in the official report by members who were present in the Chamber but were prevented by lack of time from delivering them.

Mr LOUKAIDES (Cyprus) – I congratulate the rapporteur, Mr Marcenaro, on his balanced report. A few days ago Naftali Bennett, Israel's Economics and Trade Minister, dismissed the two-State solution as 'hopeless' and urged the swift annexation of the West Bank. Israel's Deputy Foreign Minister, Ze’ev Elkin, said he agreed with those remarks and, three weeks ago, the Deputy Defence Minister, Danny Danon, claimed that a majority within the Israeli Government staunchly opposed the creation of a Palestinian State. These are very disappointing statements coming from Israeli officials.

Israel has the right to live in peace and security but needs to halt settlement activity and take concrete action to end the occupation of Palestinian territories. The occupation is unacceptable in ethical, political and humanitarian terms. Equally, it is unacceptable in terms of international law, as it violates the right to independence and the fundamental human rights of the Palestinian people. In the efforts to resume negotiations between the two sides as soon as possible, actions undermining the prospects for negotiation should be avoided at all costs.

A comprehensive settlement should be in accordance with International law and with respect of human rights and provide for a two-State solution, with the establishment of a viable Palestinian State with East Jerusalem as its capital. This is the only way to achieve lasting peace, stability and prosperity in the region.

This has been a tough year in the Middle East as a result of the Syrian conflict. Since March 2011, almost 100 000 people have been killed and 6.8 million left in need. In addition, the United Nations estimates that some 1.2 million Syrians have fled their country to escape conflict, becoming refugees in neighbouring countries.

Unfortunately, a number of countries are using the Syrian conflict to push forward their own agendas, regardless of the collateral damage to human lives. In our opinion, the only agenda that should prevail is the one that will serve the genuine interests of the Syrian people. Thus, the right of the Syrian people to self-determination, to choose their leaders and to carry through democratic reforms and not violent conflict, is the only solution to the tragic deadlock before us.

It is clear that the Syrian conflict is part of the wider Middle Eastern conflict. Deterioration of the conflict could possibly trigger a wider regional conflict. This is another significant reason why the Syrian conflict must be resolved in peaceful terms.

Ms AL-ASTAL (Palestine) – I thank Mr Marcenaro for his very important report and draft resolution, which supports the two-State solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict based on the 1967 borders. The American efforts that are going on must have certain time limits. We cannot have indefinite time for negotiations while Israel continues its illegal settlement activities and changing the facts on the ground. This report supports the American efforts and is also a reminder to both sides of the need for parallel measures that would speed up the peace process.

Our people continue to live with difficult measures imposed by Israeli occupation forces. We need get to a situation where we feel that Israel is serious about the peace process, introduces the measures needed with respect to human rights, releases prisoners, stops administrative detention, allows the free movement of people, ceases the Gaza blockade and stops attacking civilians. The Council of Europe and its Parliamentary Assembly have a vital role to play in this regard. I also appreciate the role of the Jordanian authorities, which support and receive Syrian refugees and host them and strongly support the Palestinian cause.

Mr HUSEYNOV (Azerbaijan) – The Israeli-Palestinian problem is among the most complicated conflicts facing us since the 20th century and over 10 years this issue has been repeatedly on the agenda of PACE, with seven resolutions adopted since 2005.

Neither Israel nor Palestine is European. However, the continually sensible attitude of the Council of Europe towards not only its 47 member States but States beyond Europe affirms the truth that this Organisation does not bear responsibility only regarding Europe. It long ago became the one trying to contribute to the solution of significant global problems.

Nevertheless, the value of all efforts is in their outcome. The draft report and resolution are fairly voluminous and objective, as their predecessors were. But let us think about the possible impact of the provisions of this resolution on the solution of the problem, otherwise the situation will probably continue without any important improvement, thus necessitating another resolution.

This concerns me very much, because we have the problem of a very complicated situation. Furthermore, the problem is a military conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia, two Council of Europe member States, and a peaceful solution to this conflict is among the obligations undertaken by both States when they acceded to the Organisation. It is true that, unlike the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, merely one resolution was adopted, which binds the Council of Europe with direct accountability regarding a solution due to its relationship with its member States.

Resolution 1416 adopted on January 2005 clearly reflects the Armenian occupation of Azerbaijani territories, the existence of a separatist regime in Azerbaijani territory, Nagorno-Karabakh, and the implementation of the ethnic cleansing policy towards Azerbaijanis residing within Armenian territory, thus stressing the urgency of the solution of the problem through diplomatic channels.

The Parliamentary Assembly adopted another resolution on the Israeli-Palestinian issue. The years are passing by and the lives of humans continue to suffer in uncertainty. In order to prove our concern about the issues, we conduct debates and adopt documents, but there is no desirable result. It cannot go on for ever and ever. If there is no result, it means that we are probably not doing something right. Perhaps our resolutions, which seem correct, should be changed or perhaps we should define our targets more accurately.

We direct our efforts regarding problem resolution towards the parties to the conflicts. Logically, that is correct. However, do these protracted conflicts obey any normal logic? Would it be more correct to point out clearly in our resolutions the forces interested in the deepening and continuation of these conflicts, demanding a response from them and pressing them to some extent within the competence of the Council of Europe?

I am well aware that the settlement of the Armenian-Azerbaijani military conflict that became part of our destiny does not depend solely on the will of the Azerbaijani and Armenian States. In the absence of open and underground interventions and pressures, these two neighbouring States would probably have signed a peace treaty long ago. But they are not allowed to. We well remember the punishment of Armenian efforts to act freely as an independent State by the hurricane of fire perpetrated in the parliament in Yerevan.

If the Council of Europe is set upon effective assistance in the resolution of these the long protracted conflicts, it should by all means make innovations in its approaches and methods of struggle, by focusing in its documents on the external factors preventing such resolution.

Mr LEIGH (United Kingdom) – Europe’s relationship with the Arab world has changed immensely in the past hundred years. A century ago, Britain and France were negotiating the carve-up of the Ottoman Empire between themselves with the carelessness of great powers aware of, and perhaps drunk on, their apparent supremacy. In the days of the Sykes-Picot agreement, it was easy for us in Great Britain to betray the promises we had made to King Faisal. Today, the Arab world contains within it major players on the international scene, whether viewed in political, economic, or cultural terms. Much more today than ever before, we must consider seriously the thoughts, opinions, and situation of the Arab peoples.

Over two years into the Syrian Civil War, it is understandable if we, far away from the conflict, are suffering from a feeling that something must be done, but how much? Contrary to the jingoists on both sides, this is a deeply complex conflict with many shades of understanding. There is no right or wrong side. There are religious divisions, tribal concerns and the urban/rural divide, as well as other social factors at play in this war.

We in Europe must keep aware of the increasingly worrying position of Christians and other religious minorities in Syria. Incidents of anti-Christian violence in areas under rebel control have been widespread. These have taken forms varying from subtle intimidation to outright murder and span the full spectrum in between.

It is dangerous to view the previous situation with rose-tinted spectacles. Mr Assad and his father were doubtless brutal dictators. But it is also true that they provided a context in which Syria’s diverse minorities felt relatively secure. For example, in a country in which Sunday is a working weekday, Christian civil servants in Syria are allowed time off on Sunday mornings in order to attend services. “We have been leading a life that has been the envy of many,” the Melkite Archbishop Isidore Battikha told the Wall Street Journal, “but today fear is a reality.”

The opposition Free Syrian Army is more a collection of groups and battalions than an actual unified fighting force, and this means there is both a lack of accountability and an inability to rein in its most wayward elements. The rebels we talk to are mainly confined to safe hotels in the West. Jabhat al-Nusra, a part of the opposition forces that has gained fame for its ability to strike at targets in Damascus, has strong ties to Jihadist forces in Iraq and elsewhere.

Many opposition battalions are funded by wealthy individuals from the Gulf with an interest in establishing an Islamist State in Syria. Even those who have defected from the Syrian Army to join the opposition have expressed their doubts about the aims of opposition groups. “This is a secular nation,” one such Syrian told the London Review of Books; “They want to bring back the days of the caliphate.”

This increasing uncertainty has potential to destabilise the entire region. The foolish invasion and occupation of Iraq caused many fearful Iraqi Christians to flee to Syria, which seemed to offer comparative safety and security at the time. Now Iraqi refugees, Christian and Muslim alike, are forced to flee to Lebanon, Jordan and elsewhere, alongside many Syrians. The large numbers taking refuge in Lebanon risk further destabilising that country with its intricately delicate balance of power, and the legacy of a 15-year civil war.

Rather than debate sending weapons, which can only kill more people, we should concentrate on the refugee situation and saving lives. The Lebanese are doing their best to be hospitable. The Mayor of one Lebanese town told a UNHCR official, “You call them refugees. We call them neighbours.” But the strain on Lebanese society is growing. According to UN estimates, there are over 500 000 Syrian refugees in Lebanon. In Jordan there are 480 000, with 386 000 in Turkey, 158 000 in Iraq, and over 80 000 in Egypt. Months ago, King Abdullah of Jordan said “We have reached the end of the line. We have exhausted our resources.”

I am ashamed to hear politicians saying we should be sending weapons to support the Syrian rebels, when each gun and bullet we give means money not spent on emergency housing, beds, health services, improving access to water, and alleviating the misery of those who have been forced to flee their homes because of intolerance and warfare. The Middle East does not need our guns. It needs our help. We in Europe must force our governments to provide all practical help as well as monetary support for the refugees and the other innocents in the Syrian conflict. Sending arms into the conflict will only escalate the violence and increase exponentially the misery these people are suffering.

Mr KAIKKONEN (Finland) – This is not the first time the Parliamentary Assembly has discussed the situation in the Middle East. Since the adoption of the latest resolution in 2010, the peace process in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has not progressed as hoped, so this discussion is very important. We must overcome any fatigue and try our hardest to resolve the situation in the Middle East.

This report outlines a solution to the conflict in a clear manner with “two States for two peoples,” or better yet, “the two democratic and pluralist States” model based on the 1967 borders, with limited and mutually agreed land swaps. This solution can be fully supported. I am pleased with the latter definition of the two democratic and pluralist States. In this definition, the rights of the minorities living in Palestine and Israel have also been taken into account.

I took part in the delegation that visited Jordan and Palestine last April, organised by the Sub-Committee on the Middle East. After numerous informative meetings with representatives from both sides, I realised that, above all, we must now be realists. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has lasted for decades and thus the solution cannot be expected to be made overnight. Therefore I welcome the approach in the report: if a permanent solution cannot be found in the short term, interim arrangements can be made. This kind of pragmatic approach could very well lead to a more permanent and comprehensive solution in the future. Permanent peace is found only through trust, and smaller steps can help to create it.

In addition, it is crucial that we understand and stress the importance of the United States in the peace process. It is the United States that holds the key to the conflict resolution. Europe’s role is to support the United States in its efforts. A comprehensive economic plan for the West Bank announced last month by the United States Secretary of State John Kerry is very welcome and necessary to combat the high unemployment rate in the region. As Mr Kerry has said, improving lives and expectations for Palestinians, many of whom are young and unemployed, is crucial for building an independent Palestinian State at peace with neighbouring Israel.

There are also external issues that affect Israeli-Palestinian relations. Perhaps one of the most alarming is the civil war in Syria. The report describes how the civil war has already killed almost 100 000 people. More than 1.2 million are living abroad in refugee camps, and there are several million displaced people inside the borders of Syria. Furthermore, it seems that chemical weapons have also been used. The international community must react to the situation more forcefully than it has before. Even military means should be considered if other methods fail. Bringing the hostilities to an end is crucial not only for the Syrian people but for the stability of the whole region, including Israel and Palestine.

I support Mr Marcenaro’s conclusions and the adoption of the draft resolution. The model of two democratic and pluralist States serves the aspirations of both parties: Israel’s right to be recognised and the right to live in safety, as well as the Palestinians’ right to an independent State. The Council of Europe and its Parliamentary Assembly should continue to promote dialogue and build confidence between the two parties in order to find viable and long lasting solutions for peace. Furthermore, the Council of Europe should encourage and promote the role of the United States in the peace process.

Ms GÜNDEŞ BAKIR (Turkey) – In a time of change and transformation in the Middle East caused by the Arab Spring, sectarian violence in Iraq 10 years after the Iraq war began and a civil war in Syria that has gone beyond the point of no return, Israeli-Palestinian peace is today more important than ever. But peace is an empty word without justice, and justice delayed is justice denied. The absence of peace and the occupation that began in 1967 continue to deny the Palestinian people their dignity and freedom. This is unacceptable, and, ultimately, it too is unsustainable.

For both Israelis and Palestinians and, indeed, for all the people of the Middle East, it is crucial to end this conflict and bring a just and enduring peace to the Middle East based on two democratic and pluralist States for two peoples based on the 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine.

I am fully convinced that a just peace can be achieved. However, it needs substantial political leadership from both sides. Unfortunately, Israeli and Palestinian leaders have fallen victim to their own rigid public rhetoric and policies, making it notably difficult to change direction without losing their political base. A culture of death has emerged which has to be immediately transformed to a culture of life. In order to achieve that, mutual violence must stop. Palestinians should stop launching rockets to Israel from Gaza and Israel should stop all types of military operations against the Gaza strip that have killed a disproportionably high number of Palestinian civilians. Sustainable security against terrorist attacks cannot be achieved through military action, but rather through democracy, freedom, job creation and increasing the welfare of all classes of citizens regardless of their ethnic identity or religion. Israel should also discontinue building new separation walls or settlements in the occupied territories including East Jerusalem.

       Israeli Governments’ policies have turned Palestinians into people who have nothing to lose and have made its citizens, both Arab and Israeli, more vulnerable to extremist ideologies. And it is this atmosphere in the country which causes the security threats. Violent extremism stems from poverty, from hopelessness. The Palestinians are arbitrarily arrested, detained and transferred to Israeli prisons in violation of international humanitarian law. Their lands are confiscated in the occupied territories, they are denied control over their own natural resources including water, their homes are demolished, they are denied building permits, and their access to their land, their workplace, education, health and other services is hindered.

We have a proverb in Turkish which says “A true friend speaks bitterly.” To play the win-lose game in the Middle East is fruitless. Israel needs friends and alliances in the region. The construction of ever more separation walls, which will soon besiege the whole country, is the physical indication of a paranoia. Israel is actually building a prison for itself, which makes it more isolated, politically and physically, from its neighbours and the international community.