(1 week, 4 days ago)
Commons ChamberUrgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs if he will make a statement on the UK’s assessment of the likelihood of genocide in Gaza.
Yesterday, alongside partners, the UK convened a meeting of the UN Security Council in response to the intolerable civilian suffering and humanitarian need in Gaza. As I told the House yesterday, Israel’s denial of aid is appalling. Tonnes of food are currently sitting rotting at the Gaza-Israel border, blocked from reaching people who are starving. Israeli Ministers have said that Israel’s decision to block this aid is a pressure lever. This is cruel and indefensible. Overnight, yet more Palestinians have been killed in Israeli strikes. This must end.
The message yesterday was clear: the world demands that Israel stops and changes course immediately. With our allies, we are telling the Government of Israel to lift the block on aid entering Gaza now, and enable the UN and all humanitarians to save lives now. We need an immediate ceasefire now. Humanitarian aid must never be used as a political tool or military tactic, and the UK will not support any aid mechanism that seeks to deliver political or military objectives or that puts vulnerable civilians at risk.
The International Court of Justice case on genocide is ongoing. We support the ICJ. We support its independence. The ICJ issued a set of provisional measures in this case and we support those measures. Israel has an obligation to implement them. It is the UK Government’s long-standing position that any formal determination as to whether genocide has occurred is a matter for a competent court, not for Governments or non-judicial bodies. The UK is fully committed to upholding our responsibilities under domestic and international law, and we have at all times acted in a manner consistent with our legal obligations, including under the genocide convention.
The devastation from this conflict must end. Our complete focus is on lifting Israeli restrictions on aid, on freeing the hostages, on protecting civilians and on restoring the ceasefire. We will work urgently with our allies and partners on further pressure to make Israel change course.
Overnight, the UN’s emergency relief co-ordinator, Tom Fletcher, warned that a genocide was possible in Gaza. One in five people face starvation. The entire population is facing high levels of acute food insecurity. In Gaza, Gaza North, Deir al-Balah, Khan Yunis and Rafah, there is a risk of famine. There is one primary cause: Israel’s aid blockade since 2 March.
The Security Council was told that civilians in Gaza have, again, been forcibly displaced and confined into ever-shrinking spaces, with 80% of the territory either within Israeli militarised zones or under displacement orders. Israeli airstrikes on the European hospital in Gaza yesterday killed 28 people, with further reports of at least 48 deaths overnight from strikes elsewhere. Can the Minister tell us whether the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office has conducted any recent assessment of its own on the risk that the Israeli authorities are committing genocide?
Last night, the UK’s ambassador to the UN rightly called on Israel to lift the restrictions and ensure a return to the delivery of aid in Gaza in line with humanitarian principles and international law. But that is not enough.
Notwithstanding the Government’s position that it is for judicial bodies to make a determination, what is the Minister’s response to the latest UN assessment that genocide is possible in Gaza? Can he confirm whether the UK stands by the obligation to prevent duty in the genocide convention? Parliament needs to know whether the UN emergency relief co-ordinator’s assessment will lead to a shift in the UK Government’s position. Why is it that when the horrors increase, the UK Government’s position stays the same?
Lastly, to echo the words in Tom Fletcher’s briefing:
“Will you act—decisively—to prevent genocide and to ensure respect for international humanitarian law?”—
or will you instead repeat—
“those empty words: ‘We did all we could’”?
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for asking those important questions. The testimony of the emergency relief co-ordinator, the very most senior official in the world’s entire humanitarian system, given last night at the UN Security Council meeting that we called with our allies, is clearly incredibly important. I can confirm to the hon. Member that we do abide by our international law obligations, including to the genocide convention, and we consider in all of our IHL assessments, which are ongoing, all the relevant tests—and we will continue to do so.
The hon. Gentleman asks important questions, which have echoed in this Chamber yesterday and throughout this long and painful conflict. This Government have taken steps, whether restoring funding, suspending arms exports or working with our partners in the UN and elsewhere. But clearly we are in a situation today that nobody in this House would wish to be in—nobody on the Government Benches and, I am sure, nobody on the Opposition Benches either.
We will need to take more and more action until we see the change that we need, but the central question, as I have told this House repeatedly, is that aid is not being allowed into Gaza. While it is not allowed into Gaza, there is nothing that can be done to get the aid at the scale and in the manner necessary to save Palestinian life. It is on that point that we called the Security Council and on that point that we will continue to act.
Order. May I remind Members not to use the word “you”, because I am not responsible for some of those statements?
The Minister has repeatedly said that we do everything to observe international law. Will he please accept that there is a growing body of opinion that says that the UK is not doing that, and that we are not complying with our obligations if we continue to supply parts for the F-35 programme, because these are dropping weapons on children in Gaza? We cannot say that we are observing the Geneva conventions, the genocide convention and Rome statute if we continue to supply those goods. He talks about doing all that we can. If that is the case, why on earth are we not making it abundantly clear to Israel that trading with it is not an option while this continues? So in answer to the question “Is he doing all he can?”, there are many people in this place and beyond who think that we are not.
I know my hon. Friend’s commitment to these issues over a long period of time. I do not accept the premise of his question. Whether or not we abide by our legal obligations is a question that will be determined by the courts. It is being determined by the courts this week, so I will leave it to the courts to make judgments on our obligations. We are taking all the steps that we can to bring this conflict to a close. He mentions the vital question of the F-35 programme. I know this House understands the significance of that programme, not just in Europe but across the world. The carve-out that we have put in place has been done on the basis of robust legal advice, which is being tested in the courts this week. We must abide by our obligations to our allies. We are not selling F-35s directly to the Israeli authorities. We continue to supply a global spares pool. That is necessary for the continued function of the F-35 programme, which has critical importance to European security. We make these judgments calmly and soberly, and we will continue to do so.
Order. Can we please stick to the time? The right hon. Lady is almost a minute over. We have to work within the timescales, and Members need to time speeches. Lots of Members need to get in, and we have to support each other. I think the Minister has enough to go on.
I of course welcome, as the Foreign Secretary did yesterday, the release of Edan Alexander. I know the whole House thinks of those hostages who remain in Hamas captivity. I have been in direct contact with the American officials involved in that release, and it is a very welcome development. We are focused on ensuring that there is no role for Hamas in a future for Gaza. We are working as part of the Arab reconstruction plan to try to achieve that.
The right hon. Lady asks an important question about the proportion of British aid unable to get into Gaza at the moment. For almost two months, the horrendous answer is 100%. Even before then, there were significant restrictions on the aid that we wish to get into Gaza. I saw for myself the items that were unable to cross from al-Arish into Rafah. The proportions will be very high, but I will see with my officials whether I can break it down in greater detail for her.
Slow and agonising breaths, scared, crying, emancipated bodies fighting for every heartbeat—it is death by a thousand cuts for the children and for the parents watching their babies deliberately being starved to death. Almost 1 million children are at risk of famine and death in Gaza. Those who have stood by and allowed this to happen should hang their heads in shame. I call on the Government to sanction Israeli officials until the blockade is lifted, because if we do not act now, this will be on us.
I know the strength of feeling behind my hon. Friend’s words. I am sure she is aware of the findings of the IPC report on Monday, which delineates in great detail the precise suffering being felt because of a lack of food and nutrition. We are horrified by those findings. The need for action could not be more urgent.
Israel’s continuing blockade of Gaza, now exceeding 70 days, is utterly unacceptable. Will the Government now recognise that the blockade constitutes a clear violation of international law? The Government must respect whatever determination the ICJ reaches regarding genocide. There are already clear obligations on the Government to prevent genocide in Gaza arising from the ICJ’s January 2024 order. Have the Government taken any steps to meet those obligations? Will they commit today to banning the export of all UK arms to Israel? Will they reconsider sanctions on extremist Israeli Ministers like Bezalel Smotrich, who called for Gaza to be destroyed? Will the Government commit to the immediate recognition of a Palestinian state? As the UN’s British relief chief told the Security Council yesterday, if we have not done all we could to end the violence in Gaza, we should fear the judgment of future generations. Does the Minister agree?
These responsibilities weigh heavily on me and on every member of the Government and the Foreign Office team. But let us not forget what this Government have done. Whether it is restoring funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency; suspending arms exports in the way we have described; providing £129 million of humanitarian aid and then being one of the loudest voices in trying to ensure that it enters Gaza; or working with Jordan to fly medicines into Gaza, with Egypt to treat medically evacuated civilians, with Project Pure Hope to help Gazan children in the UK, and with Kuwait to support vulnerable children through UNICEF; we are taking steps. We take the judgments of the ICJ incredibly seriously, but I cannot pretend to the House that the events in the Occupied Palestinian Territories of recent days are acceptable, and we will continue to take every step we can to get a change of course.
Tomorrow is the 77th anniversary of the 1948 Nakba, which saw hundreds of thousands of Palestinians displaced from their homes. That still continues today, and the UN Security Council has said that action is now required to prevent genocide. A key step to a peaceful two-state solution would be recognising Palestinian statehood—something that Israel is trying to prevent. With 147 countries recognising Palestinian statehood, is now not the right time for the UK to do so, too?
The question of recognition of a Palestinian state is obviously one of vital importance. We want to do so as a contribution to a more stable region. We can see the serious and immediate threats to the viability of Palestinian life, and that is what we are focused on in these most urgent of days.
I have been a member of the Conservative Friends of Israel for over 40 years, longer than anybody here. Hamas is a brutal terrorist organisation that hides its own fighters under hospitals, but it is frankly unacceptable to recklessly bomb a hospital. It is unacceptable to starve a whole people. Is the Minister aware that many Friends of Israel worldwide, notwithstanding narrow legal definitions, are asking this moral question: when is genocide not genocide?
I have heard in recent weeks a series of powerful interventions from Opposition Members, and I take them seriously with the weight they hold, particularly from the Father of the House and my neighbour in Lincolnshire. We will not move towards making determinations from the Dispatch Box on questions of legal determination, but that does not mean we will wait. The preliminary judgments of the ICJ and the provisional measures it set out are important, and we will abide by them.
As the Minister has said, the situation is intolerable with one in five Gazans facing starvation; the use of aid as a weapon of war by Israel is inexcusable. The continued firing of rockets by Hamas and detention of hostages are also inexcusable, and it all must end. I welcome the UK, with our international allies, calling an urgent briefing on the situation at the UN Security Council. There, the UN humanitarian chief was clear in his warning about the dire consequences of the situation continuing. What steps are this Labour Government taking to get more aid in, get the hostages out and bring about the ceasefire and two-state solution that we all in this House desperately want to see?
I thank my hon. Friend, who I know has been long committed to these issues and used to be an aid worker herself. She is a doughty advocate on these points. We remain absolutely committed to a two-state solution. We are focusing all our diplomatic efforts on ensuring that the current approach is changed, that we return to a diplomatic solution, and that we have a ceasefire, the release of hostages and a move back to that two-state solution, which, as she rightly puts it, is vital.
The situation in Gaza is clearly intolerable, and Israel has to find a way of getting aid in safely and without diversion. But does the Minister agree that we need to be very careful about the use of the word “genocide” and that we do not devalue the word? It is used to describe the systematic and deliberate murder of 6 million Jews by Nazi Germany. We must question whether—and I do not believe that—a war designed to release hostages and remove a terrorist threat, against terrorists that hide among the civilian population, crosses that threshold.
It is the long-standing position of Governments of all stripes that it is for international courts to make determinations of that nature, and we will abide by our obligations under international humanitarian law.
Since 2 March, no food or medical aid supplies have reached over 2.3 million Palestinians. Many of us from across this House have attended many statements and Westminster Hall debates and have submitted parliamentary questions asking the Government about this critical issue. The hostages still remain in captivity and need to be released, but the reality is that using aid to punish so many people is wrong. Does the Minister agree that under the genocide convention, the UK as a state party has an obligation not only to prevent and punish genocide, but to avoid actions that may assist or enable genocidal acts?
My hon. Friend asks important questions about aid access and the nature of aid delivery. Let me be clear: the UK will not support any aid mechanism that seeks to deliver political or military objectives or put vulnerable people at risk. The obligations under international humanitarian law and international law more broadly are clear, and they fall on Israel as the occupying power. It must abide by them.
Very few issues in politics, particularly international politics, are black or white, but this is one such issue. The Israeli Government are using collective punishment of the civilian Palestinian population, which is illegal under international law and contravenes the Geneva conventions, to which Israel is party. Does the Minister think that the British Government have lost their moral and legal compass in continuing their tacit support for Israel?
I have set out some of what the Government have done, and I could continue doing so for some time. Let me be clear. The hon. Gentleman rightly points out the absolutely appalling nature of any attempt to weaponise aid and use incendiary language, which are clearly breaches of international obligations. We have condemned from the Dispatch Box much of that language, some of which was repeated by the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Esher and Walton (Monica Harding). I take this opportunity to say again that the British Government absolutely condemn that inflammatory language. We will continue to do so, and to make our views known to the Israeli Government, in the most forceful possible way.
The international community has failed to stop Israel’s impunity. We have collectively failed to act on violations as they are committed, and to hold Israel to account. With our collective failure, Palestinians in Gaza face collective punishment. Israeli Ministers have stated that stopping humanitarian aid is one of their main levers of pressure. That is not only cruel and indefensible, but an explicit admission of violations of international law. I hear our condemnations, Minister, but I see no action. Why are we still sending arms? Why are we not sanctioning Israeli Ministers? The UN has said what many know to be true: as a signatory to the Geneva convention, we have a legal obligation to prevent genocide. Minister, when will we act?
My hon. Friend is forceful advocate on these questions. She points to failure, and I recognise that failure. So many days and months on, the people of Gaza and the west bank, and of course the hostages, are in the most distressing circumstances possible. I will not comment from the Dispatch Box on sanctions, as she would expect, but I can assure her that we will work urgently with our allies and partners on further pressure to make Israel change course.
It is becoming increasingly difficult to keep up with the slaughter in Gaza, the brutality and cruelty on the west bank, and starvation as a policy. The crimes come daily, such as the recent killing of Mohammed Bardawil, one of only three key eyewitnesses to the slaughter of rescue workers just a few weeks ago, whose bodies were buried in shallow graves. It is clear to everybody that crimes are being committed daily.
As a number of Members have pointed out, the UK is a party to international agreements that provide a positive obligation to act to prevent genocide and torture and protect the rights of others. We have an obligation, as a member of the United Nations Security Council and a state party to the Geneva conventions, to promote peace and security. What advice has the Minister taken on the liability that will attach to him as a decision maker? Have the Government received advice on whether the Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary, any senior officials or previous Ministers may be exposed when the reckoning comes?
As Members would expect, I will not discuss internal legal advice in the Chamber, whether it applies to me or other Ministers. I reassure the right hon. Gentleman that, right across Government, we understand the gravity of the situation and the weight that falls on us to ensure changes to this diabolical trajectory. We will continue to use our role in the Security Council, the G7 and the E3, as we did yesterday, and that action will not stop.
The Minister still refuses to address the central issue, which is that our obligation to prevent genocide under the Rome statute has already been triggered by the ample evidence of Israeli war crimes in Gaza. In the week marking 77 years since the Nakba, how many more times will he come to the Chamber with just words—words that do nothing? We need action. Let us be clear: it is not a case of if but when he will end the UK’s complicity in arming a state that is accused of genocide against the Palestinians, and of when he will finally impose sanctions on Israel. History will judge his delay.
I remind the House of the decisions that we took last year. We have discussed the question of the F-35 global spares pool. The basis on which we made a carve-out is clear and has been debated many times. Let me be clear: aside from that carve-out, when we came into government, we took on the solemn duty of making an assessment, which did not appear to have been made, of the serious risk of potential breaches of international humanitarian law. We then suspended arms export licences where those weapons could be used in such conduct—that means in Gaza, on the west bank, and in relation to all the areas where those risks accrued. We took far-reaching action. That action is still in place, and we continue to conduct those assessments.
I can understand why many Members may feel frustrated by the F-35 carve-out. Perhaps they also feel frustrated about our continuing to sell arms that do not risk a violation, according to the assessment that has been much discussed here. We think it right that we, for example, continue to provide body armour that might be used by non-governmental organisations in Gaza, or provide parts of the supply chain that could end up in the hands of NATO allies. We have taken far-reaching action on arms. That is important work that we are proud of.
I have just returned from the High Court this morning, where Government lawyers will argue, in defending the continued supply of F-35 components, that the evidence available does not support a finding of genocide, and that there is a
“tenable view that no genocide has occurred or is occurring”.
It appears that the Government—whether they have told the Minister so or not—have already made a determination, and that explains why they have no intention of asking for an independent assessment of whether a genocide is likely. The Government know that if they did ask for one, it would reveal an unpalatable truth that would prevent them from supplying Israel with the weapons that it needs to continue its merciless onslaught. It really is as grubby as that, isn’t it, Minister?
It is not as grubby as that. First, we will not litigate an ongoing legal case in the Chamber, as Members would expect. A judicial review on the F-35 element is happening over these days. The judge will find on that, and we will respect the judgment. Let me be absolutely clear to the hon. Gentleman: we continue to conduct assessments across a full range of responsibilities under international law. It is simply not true to suggest that we are avoiding making any internal assessment in order to justify policy. We continue to assess these things carefully. We do it on a rolling basis, regularly. What he says is simply not true.
I thank the Minister for his personal commitment to this cause, and the UK Government for putting this matter on the record at the UN yesterday as a matter of extreme urgency. May I also put to the Minister directly the challenge yesterday from Tom Fletcher, the UN’s aid chief? He said:
“For those killed and those whose voices are silenced: what more evidence do you need now?...Will you act—decisively—to prevent genocide?”
What is the Minister’s answer to that question?
My hon. Friend has been committed to these issues since before he came to this place. Tom Fletcher’s words are important. As I said earlier, he is the most senior member of the humanitarian community in the world, and what he said at yesterday’s meeting, which we called, is very important. We have not waited for yesterday’s meeting, or for the determination of international courts, to take action. Let us not forget what we have done in relation to UNRWA, on arms suspension, on sanctions on Israeli settlers, or through our convening role on the United Nations Security Council. We will continue to take action. Mr Fletcher rightly asks for “decisive” action. Has our action yet been decisive? Clearly it has not. Hostages remain detained, Palestinians continue to suffer, and a two-state solution feels very distant indeed. We have not yet had the decisive effect that we would wish to see, and we will continue to act until we do.
As well as raping, kidnapping and killing civilians on 7 October for the sake of it, Hamas had a strategy: to try to prevent further peace deals between Israel and its Arab neighbours by provoking a massive, frenzied reaction to the atrocities. Does the Minister share my dismay that this brutal strategy seems to be succeeding?
I share the right hon. Gentleman’s dismay that events in the region since the horrific actions of 7 October have involved an enormous amount of bloodshed and civilian suffering. This Government hope that we will yet see a day when the region is stable, when there are normal diplomatic relations between all its members, and when there is a two-state solution, with the two states living securely and safely side by side. I regret that it feels such a distant prospect.
Seventy-seven years since the Nakba, Israel’s illegal occupation eats away at the land. We now have—I will repeat these words loud and clear—“plausible genocide” according to the International Court of Justice, the International Criminal Court, Amnesty International and the United Nations. Given this week’s news, what new assessments have been made, and how often, to determine what other actions we can take to stop what is happening to the Gazans—the children, the civilians, and the aid workers—and to make sure that we can get aid in? What other pressures and levers can the Government use, including as part of a bloc, together with international partners and others, in addition to recognising Palestine? Surely that recognition is long overdue.
My hon. Friend asks important questions about assessments. Those are made regularly, on a rolling basis, and in the light of new events. I reassure her that we do not wait for assessments or final legal determinations before taking action. I have listed some of that action already, and I reassure her that we will work urgently with our allies and partners on further pressure to make Israel change course.
Even if the Minister cannot condemn what is obviously an act of genocide, will he tell us in clear terms whether we are still supplying parts for F-35 jets that find their way to Israel and take part in the bombardment of Gaza? Are there still flights going from RAF Akrotiri over to Israel that are carrying military equipment that can be used either to bomb Gaza or to undertake military action against the people of the west bank?
The decisions that we take on arms bind every part of the UK Government. We are a Government committed to abiding by our international legal obligations, and we will continue to do so. Let me be clear, again, on the position on F-35s. The F-35 sales directly to Israel, whether in relation to any particular component, have been suspended. Sales to a global pool, which are necessary for the continued function of the global F-35 programme, have not been suspended. Where sales go to a global pool, it is clearly possible that they could find a final destination in Israel, but to suspend our provision of components to the F-35 global pool would, in effect, render the F-35 programme inoperable. It is on that basis that we set out the decisions that we took in September.
May I put on record the relief that I and many others feel about the release of Edan Alexander? I am saying a prayer for the other hostages.
Every week that we come back to this House the horror is greater. Many of us woke up this morning to a spokesperson for the Israeli Government on the “Today” programme denying that there is hunger in Gaza at all. This House knows the reality: we are 10 weeks into a blockade of aid by the Israeli Government, and one in five are starving. The Minister will know that Tom Fletcher spoke passionately and with purpose yesterday at the UN about the collective failure of the UN to speak out previously. How do we avoid that this time? What more evidence do we need before we take action, and what more action can be done?
As I said earlier, the words of Tom Fletcher in the United Nations Security Council are important. The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification assessment that was produced on Monday—that assessment is authoritative and thorough in its production—is the most important indication of needs in Gaza. It should be taken seriously by everyone in this Chamber, and indeed by the Israeli Government. My hon. Friend has long been committed to these issues, and he knows the actions that we have taken so far. I will not speculate from the Dispatch Box, other than to reassure the House that we will be working urgently with our allies and partners to ensure that Israel changes course.
There can be few now who would believe that the conduct of the Netanyahu Government is anything other than gross and disproportionate. However, does the Minister agree with me that the actor in the region that has unequivocally embarked on genocide is Hamas, with their self-avowed policy of killing Jews and eradicating the state of Israel?
I have condemned Hamas for their despicable actions and ugly and unacceptable rhetoric many times from this Dispatch Box, and I am happy to do so again. It is the events of 7 October, in all their full horror, that triggered this most recent, most horrific round of violence.
In addition to calling for the release of all hostages, Tom Fletcher, the UN emergency relief co-ordinator, asked last night what action we will tell future generations that we each took
“to stop the 21st century atrocity to which we bear daily witness in Gaza.”
What action will the Government take if, in the next 24 hours, Israel does not allow aid into Gaza?
As I have said throughout the course of the afternoon, the responsibilities weigh heavily on all of us. We do not view the situation as acceptable, and we will continue to take steps with our allies and partners to urge Israel to change course.
As we meet here, in this rather grand Palace of Westminster, the reality on the ground is that Palestinian children continue to die in the rubble. Is it not becoming clear that the central policy of the Israeli Government seems more about protecting the political skin and life of the current Israeli Prime Minister than even saving the lives of the remaining Israeli hostages and saving the lives of Palestinians? I appeal to the British Government to be again on the right side of history, of the law and of moral judgment, and not to back one particular individual, fighting for his political life, back in Tel Aviv.
The right hon. Gentleman speaks powerfully about the various views in Israel. I will not speculate on the decision making of others, but I listen very carefully to the words of the Israeli hostages themselves when they have been released, what they make of the circumstances in Israel and what policy they think should be adopted. Those are important voices and they echo loudly, both in this Chamber and across the world. We are clear that, whatever the intentions, the international obligations under law on the Israeli Government in relation to Gaza are indisputable, and we call today, as we have called every day, for them to abide by them.
I declare an interest as the secretary of the National Union of Journalists parliamentary group.
It is the anniversary of the murder by Israeli forces of Shireen Abu Akleh, the renowned journalist. Alongside her on that day was another journalist, Ali Samoudi, who was shot in the back. Two weeks ago, the Israeli forces arrested him and dragged him from his home, and Ali is now in detention somewhere, but we do not know where. Under international law, journalists are afforded special protection. Will the Minister immediately take up with the Israeli Government the question of where Ali Samoudi is and seek to do everything we can do to secure his release? He works for CNN, Reuters and Al Jazeera, and all he was doing was simply reporting on some of the war crimes that are taking place.
My right hon. Friend raises incredibly important points about journalists and I am happy to take up the case in question. Not just journalists but a whole set of people are afforded special protections under international law, including medical professionals and aid workers, many of whom we have seen involved in terrible incidents in Gaza. We have been pressing for accountability and justice on those questions; I think in particular of the three British nationals killed in the World Central Kitchen incident more than a year ago, for whom we are still waiting for justice.
Does the Minister accept that, where prima facie evidence of genocide exists, awaiting for the determination to be made formally by a court is not sufficient for us to meet the duty to prevent under the genocide convention?
In this case, the International Court of Justice is clearly the correct authority. It has issued a set of provisional measures, which we support.
Civilians are starving to death in Gaza. Aid has been held for 10 weeks and used as a weapon against innocent civilians. My constituents are rightly outraged by what they are seeing, and so am I. While I welcome the Minister’s words, what further actions can the Government take to send a clearer message to Israel that this absolutely has to stop? Will the Minister look again at sanctions? Will he look at arms export licences? And will he recognise the state of Palestine?
I know my hon. Friend’s constituents will be concerned, just as my constituents in Lincoln and those across the whole country are concerned. I saw the situation with my own eyes when I went to al-Arish, where British aid was languishing while people desperately required it in Gaza. I saw the restrictions that were preventing aid getting in. I can assure her and her constituents that I have raised this personally in every way that I have thought I am able to do so, to try and make progress, and we will continue to do so. It is a source of continued personal frustration to me, and frustration to the Government, that we have not been able to get aid back into Gaza in accordance with international law.
Does the Minister have any information about how much aid is being held in Hamas-controlled warehouses in Gaza? Is the key to this desperate situation our links to Tehran? At the end of the day, the Iranian regime pulls the strings of its puppet organisation, Hamas, who are holding the hostages in conditions akin to torture.
We take serious steps to ensure that Hamas do not get access to aid. We supported a review into the function of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East. In his remarks yesterday, Mr Fletcher set out his view on the robustness of the United Nations provisions to try to prevent Hamas from stockpiling aid. The findings of the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification report on Monday about the circumstances in which Palestinian civilians are trying to live in Gaza make for sobering reading. I agree with the hon. Gentleman that Iran’s malign role in the region must stop. It has supported Hamas, who have brought nothing but pain and misery, not just to Israelis but to Palestinians as well.
Last week, in response to a question I asked, the Minister said:
“Forcible movement of the Gazan population out of Gaza would be forcible displacement”.—[Official Report, 6 May 2025; Vol. 766, c. 588.]
Forcible displacement is a war crime; it is already happening and it is about to accelerate. Will he say in turn, as the head of UNRWA said this week and as the former Israeli Defence Minister, Moshe Ya’alon, said last week, that Israel is committing war crimes in Gaza?
I will resist my hon. Friend, who is not just a doughty advocate for the Palestinian people but a respected lawyer. As he would expect, I am not going to take the opportunity to make a determination at the Dispatch Box, but I will be clear again that forcible displacement is clearly prohibited by international law, and we are clear on that at all times.
Amnesty International has described the two-month siege in Gaza as “genocide in action”. According to experts, Israel is deliberately creating conditions that could lead to the physical destruction of the Palestinian people, a pattern many argue amounts to genocide. As a signatory to the genocide convention, does the Minister agree that the UK has a legal duty to act when there is a risk of genocide, and that the duty to prevent begins not when genocide is confirmed, proven or established, but when there is a reasonable suspicion that it is occurring? The alarms are flashing red and the warning signs are there for the Government to act. Will they act?
I have set out the process of determination, the provisional measures that have been issued by the ICJ and the Government’s determination not to wait until cases are concluded but to take action now to try to preserve life.
Israel is intentionally starving Palestinians and action should be taken to stop the war crimes and genocide. Those are the words of a leading United Nations expert on the right to food. Will the Minister tell us what is preventing the Government from imposing sanctions on Israel? What are they scared of? If we cannot discuss this from the Dispatch Box, we certainly cannot discuss it behind closed doors.
The House has heard me talk about sanctions in the same terms over a long period of time. I understand my hon. Friend’s frustration about my not being able to speculate from the Dispatch Box about the sanctions we might take, but to do so would reduce their effectiveness and frustrate the will of the House. We keep all of these matters under close review. We are not scared in the performance of our duties. We are working all the time to try practically to change the situation on the ground, and that is to what all our efforts are directed.
Barely a day goes by when I do not receive impassioned pleas from my constituents begging for actions, not words, from this Government. Many have shared their distress that we celebrated the defeat of tyranny on VE Day at the same time that the people of Gaza starved and were being bombed to oblivion. They say that we are complicit in genocide. What does the Minister say to my constituents? I agree with them, but I feel powerless to do any more than come to this House every time and say the same thing.
Deeds, not words. We are restoring funding to UNRWA, suspending arms licences and giving £129 million in humanitarian assistance to the Occupied Palestinian Territories. We have continued work at the UN Security Council and in relation to international courts. I recognise the frustration of the House, and I do not in any way wish to weigh misery between the many, many people still in Gaza or the west bank facing real hardship at this moment, but the action of this Government has made a real difference to Palestinian lives—I have seen it with my own eyes. There are people who are in safety now because of the UK Government, and we will continue to do what we can. I accept that there is more to do, but our actions do have impact.
I thank the Minister for outlining the horrors being inflicted on the people of Gaza so clearly yet again, but we have heard words from the Dispatch Box many times in support of the Palestinians before. He talks about court proceedings, but they take months, if not years, to complete. Men, women and children are dying every hour from hunger, disease and bombs in Gaza at the moment. They cannot wait. What is the Minister doing? We need action, not words.
I have outlined some of the action, but I reassure my hon. Friend that we are not waiting for legal determinations, not least because the ICJ has issued provisional measures, and because it is the policy of this Government that we are acting now to try to improve the lot of Palestinians.
One thing we can all agree on is that we want to see the safe release of the hostages. It is evident that military action, in and of itself, was never going to achieve that. With that in mind, do the Government support or condemn Israel for the most recent escalation of military action? If they are not prepared to condemn it at this stage, how many more innocent deaths must there be before they do?
The hon. Gentleman refers to the hostages. Some of the released hostages have made this argument with the greatest force, and they are important words. Let me say concretely and clearly that the British Government oppose the return to war in Gaza by the Israeli Government; we oppose the most recent escalation.
I am sure that I am not the only Member of this House who is getting increasingly frustrated by the number of discussions that we have where we say the same things over and over again while the horrific situation for the Palestinian people in Gaza worsens day by day. Does the Minister agree that for us to send a clear message to Israel, we need to do three things: suspend all arms licences to Israel, including the F-35 licences; impose sanctions against Israel; and recognise the state of Palestine?
The House has heard me speak of my frustration on a number of occasions—I share that with my hon. Friend. I think I have addressed the three substantive points that he raises already in this session.
I am the Minister; these responsibilities weigh particularly heavily on me. I am not blind to the IPC or to Tom Fletcher’s testimony at a session that we called. Do hon. Members think that I am unaware of the horrors being meted out to people in Gaza? I am not unaware: I am taking every action that I can, as are other Ministers. It is an intolerable situation, as hon. Members heard from the Prime Minister earlier, and we are lifting every effort to try to change it.
Nobody wants war, but we must reflect that this is a war. It is a war between our ally Israel and the aggressor, Hamas. It was Hamas who brutally murdered, mutilated and raped innocent Israeli citizens. It is Hamas who still keep 58 hostages under lock and key. It is Hamas who, in their own charter, have genocidal intent, calling for the wiping out of Israel and the killing of Jews. Will the Minister at least accept that those people who wish to call those trying to defend their own citizens genocidal are playing into the hands of the terrorists themselves, who will continue to use their own citizens as human shields and give no pathway to peace?
I condemn Hamas and their actions entirely. Israel is an ally, but we say to all our allies that international humanitarian law is a binding framework for us all. When it is breached in one place, the breach echoes around the world. That is why we have been so clear on these questions throughout.
I am sick and tired of coming back to this Chamber, asking the same questions and getting the same answers, when war crime after war crime is being committed and a genocide is taking place. It is a sick joke to believe that it is right—which it is—to impose sanctions on Russia for its unlawful invasion of Ukraine, but that tut-tutting at Benjamin Netanyahu and telling everyone “We think this is really bad” somehow cuts the mustard: it does not. Words are not enough to stop war crimes. We need more than words and more than actions. Can the Minister advise this House how many more Gazans need to be killed, injured and starved by Israel until the Government do the right thing and bring widespread sanctions in, like they did with Russia? People think that we are scared and that this is a double standard.
We have taken action, as I have described this afternoon. I have already assured the House that it is certainly not fear that shapes our actions. I am always happy to return to this Dispatch Box to answer questions from parliamentarians about this question, but I do not want to give the House the impression that that is all I do. When I am not in this House, I am working on these tasks with urgency. I have listed some of the actions that we have taken since I became the Minister. I will continue to work on these questions and to return to the House to answers Members’ questions.
Over the last 18 months, Israel has facilitated 1.7 million tonnes of aid going into Gaza. Very sadly, much of that aid has ended up in warehouses and trucks have been raided by Hamas operatives. The aid has failed to get into the hands of the people who desperately need it. We now have a position whereby the blockade has continued. Will the Minister come up with a credible plan to get the aid in, require the Israel Defence Forces to facilitate the aid going to the people who desperately need it, and prevent Hamas and other terrorists from capturing the aid and preventing the people of Gaza from gaining the aid that they desperately need?
Where Hamas have interfered with aid deliveries, I condemn that utterly. We have to be clear that considerable amounts of aid were not allowed into Gaza, even before this most recent blockade, which is now ensuring that nowhere near the scale of aid required is getting in. As I think the hon. Member is alluding to, there are proposals for other methods of getting it in. We would support proposals to get aid into Gaza, provided that they are in accordance with humanitarian principles, which are vital in every conflict zone around the world. The UN emergency relief co-ordinator yesterday set out his views on how those principles need to be adhered to.
UK manufacturers of F-35 components can place GPS markers on every single component, and the UK Government can ensure that every component that is exported has a GPS marker on it, so what is the Government’s excuse for continuing with their programme on F-35s when they can distinguish the destination of every single component?
I have set out the position on F-35s and the manner in which the global spares pool works. That is information provided by the experts who are responsible; I understand that some hon. Members may disagree with those facts. The discussion is happening in a judicial review this week, and I will not get ahead of that process.
One in five people in Gaza are facing starvation, 90% of people are now displaced, over 50,000 people are dead, and Gaza is the most dangerous place on earth for humanitarian workers. This has to end. The Government keep on condemning Netanyahu, but he does not listen. The time for words has to stop—we need action. Will the Minister take this opportunity to commit to sanctioning extremist members of the Israeli Cabinet, suspending all arms trade with the Israeli Government and recognising a Palestinian state?
Those three points have already been put to me over the course of the afternoon, so I will not repeat my answers, and I will not speculate on further sanctions. However, as the hon. Gentleman references sanctions on settlers, I will point out that we have taken far-reaching sanctions on settlers. We oppose the violent expansion of settlements in the occupied territories, which are illegal under international law, and we will continue to do so.
I thank the Minister for his often candid comments in this Chamber, but we will continue to come here and ask questions, since our constituents continue to be horrified—as we are—by the devastation that is playing out in Gaza. The UN has stated that action must be taken now to prevent genocide, so does the Minister understand that when our constituents hear a legal response, they remain so frustrated, and that they want to see tangible action?
I do understand the frustration of constituents; as I said earlier, that frustration is shared in Lincoln and across the country. Everybody in this House and everybody across the country wants to see an end to the awful scenes on our television screens.
The Minister has stated that the legality of the UK’s F-35 exports is currently being tested in the courts. In the High Court, the Government have made submissions that
“No evidence has been seen that Israel is deliberately targeting civilian women or children”,
and that there is
“also evidence of Israel making efforts to limit incidental harm to civilians.”
If the Government need to be shown evidence that Israel is deliberately targeting civilians, I suggest the Minister and his colleagues review the footage captured by the BBC of yesterday’s bombing of Gaza’s European hospital, the footage emerging from the Nasser hospital, the millions of hours of livestreamed footage available since 7 October, or the thousands of reports and articles published since. The past 18 months have seen a total war on all of Gaza, with acts of ethnic cleansing and extermination, according to the UN. Does the UK deny the existence of that evidence, and if so, have the Government committed perjury?
It is obviously inappropriate to try to rehearse submissions that are currently being heard by the court.
The Minister knows this, but we should put on record that when President Netanyahu says there is “no way” he will stop his onslaught in Gaza, he does not do so with the consent of the hostage families, or indeed of the majority of people in Israel. Even President Trump is now avoiding him. My hon. Friend the Member for Vauxhall and Camberwell Green (Florence Eshalomi) is right: we have obligations too. I hear the Minister’s frustration, and I think that across this House we want to give him strength so that he can go further. He will have heard the calls for sanctions and reports to international criminal courts. Will he give us a vote in this place about immediately recognising Palestine, as we had in 2014, so that we can strengthen his negotiations with Israel and send a clear message that what is happening in Gaza is wrong and must stop?
I know that my hon. Friend has an incredibly brave and courageous constituent who is herself a member of a hostage family. Whenever I have seen her, her words ring in my ears, as do those of other hostage families, and I know they do so across the world. They are important views expressed by those who are most directly affected by the horrors of 7 October and all that followed.
I have already rehearsed some of the arguments in relation to recognition.
I thank the Minister for his clarity that genocide is a legal test of whether a crime has been committed
“with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group”.
That is exactly what the Hamas terrorist group state in their foundational charter: the intent to destroy Israel and Jews worldwide, as they actively sought to do on 7 October. If they wanted to end the war, Hamas would release the 58 hostages they continue to hold. How is the Minister supporting our friend and ally, the democracy Israel, in its fight against this genocidal terrorist group?
I agree with the hon. Gentleman about the horrors of what Hamas have done, and the ugly and unacceptable rhetoric they have often employed, not just towards Israelis but towards Jews everywhere, and I recognise the anxiety in this country about the rise in antisemitic rhetoric ever since 7 October. As I said earlier, Israel is our ally, and we have stood with her when she faces legitimate security threats. We have always urged her, as a friend, to abide by international humanitarian law. Where there is a risk that she does not, we make that clear, as we have discussed over the course of this afternoon.
I preface my question by saying that no Member of this House should doubt the dedication and compassion with which the Minister fulfils his duties. Over the past few days, the World Health Organisation has warned that Gazans face intergenerational scarring as a result of hunger in the territory. The WHO quoted figures produced by the Gazan Health Ministry, which held that 55 children have died as a result of malnutrition. What assessment do the UK Government make of the extent of malnutrition in Gaza and the number of deaths attributable to starvation as a result of Israel’s refusal to allow aid to enter the strip?
My hon. Friend asks important questions, and I know that he follows these issues closely. The most up-to-date and authoritative assessment of those questions is Monday’s IPC assessment. We are considering it in detail—its findings are appalling. We are not yet able to fully delineate the link between aid restrictions and those findings in the level of detail that my hon. Friend has described, but the connection is obvious.
I am glad that the hon. Gentleman was able to travel; as I have said before from the Dispatch Box, I recognise the importance of Members from across the House seeing these situations up close and being able to form their own judgments. I am the relevant Minister, and I speak with the authority of the Government.
The Minister, who is a good man, recognises that the 70-day aid blockade has made starvation widespread in Gaza. During the recess, I was on a delegation with the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon). We were nearby in Egypt, and we heard real fears that annexation of both Gaza and the west bank is near-inevitable. The Minister has told us what steps he has taken up until now, but there has been a clear escalation, so can he please give us some hope that there are further levers that can be pulled? We do not want to be on the wrong side of history.
I will not speculate about further actions, but I recognise, as I did in my previous answer, how welcome it is that my hon. Friend has travelled to the region. Egypt is an important partner for the UK on this question. I saw the vital role that it is playing in supporting healthcare for injured Palestinian children. I saw injured Palestinian children myself in al-Arish hospital, and I was pleased while I was there to announce a £1 million UK contribution to ensure that Palestinian civilians displaced into Egypt get the help and healthcare that they need.
The UN says that Israel’s denial of aid is evidence of
“the systematic dismantling of Palestinian life”.
There is therefore a risk that we are witnesses to genocide. The Minister’s Government can reinstate airlifts of aid along the lines of those arranged last year, which would send a powerful message. Will the Minister act now and enable aid airlifts?
We have supported airlifts in the past, as I am sure the right hon. Lady knows, and we were glad to work with our Jordanian partners on that question. I have to be straightforward with the House: given the scale of need in Gaza, we should not be displaced from the central question, which is ensuring that the road crossings open. That is the only way to get aid in at the scale required.
Things should have been clear at the outset when Yoav Gallant, the former Israeli Defence Minister, said that Israel will “eliminate everything”. Some 18 months and 52,000 deaths later, Israel Katz, also a Defence Minister in Israel, stated that blocking aid was being used to “pressure” Hamas, making starvation an openly stated Israeli weapon of war. Elimination, eradication or genocide—as Tom Fletcher said, can this Government now urgently act to prevent it?
My hon. Friend asks important questions, and I have been clear from this Dispatch Box, and I am clear again, that aid must not be used as a pressure tool, it must not be used as political leverage and it must not be used as a military tactic.
We have had truly shocking statements in this Chamber. The Foreign Secretary suggested that not enough Palestinians had been killed for it to constitute a genocide. The Prime Minister stated that although he understood the definition of genocide, he did not refer to it as a genocide. The Minister repeats that it is a matter for the International Court of Justice. If that is the case, why are Government lawyers advancing submissions that no genocide has been conducted when it comes to the sale of F-35 parts?
As I have said, I am not going to try to litigate the submissions of the court case on the questions that we have described. I have addressed the issues repeatedly in this House. I have always been clear that we would defend that case, and that is what we are doing, and we will see the judgment of the judges.
Currently, 4,000 newborns in Gaza are unable to access essential lifesaving care due to the destruction of medical facilities. Severe malnutrition and the death of critically ill children is now a daily reality. In the light of the ongoing suffering of children, does the Minister agree that it is time for the UK to go further in its actions and find alternative ways to get critical medicines into Gaza, protect those vulnerable children and ensure humanitarian access into Gaza? Will he consider alternative routes for those children who desperately need critical care?
My hon. Friend is committed to these questions. I responded to an earlier question by emphasising the central importance of road routes in ensuring aid of the scale required. However, I assure the House that we continue to look at what alternatives we can find to help where we can. That has included supporting a small number of Gazan children to get access to specialist healthcare here in the UK, which they are currently accessing. Where we can help, we will help, but I must be honest with the House about the scale of aid that is required if the IPC findings of Monday are to be averted.
Three weeks ago, while I was in the west bank, I spoke to a young Palestinian refugee mother who asked me, with tears in her eyes, “Why has the world forgotten us?” My response then has been echoed today: the world has not forgotten them, but what we have done is fail them completely. The failure looks like this: the United Nations has now confirmed that since March, more than 100 children every single day have been killed or injured. Imagine if it was our children. If, God forbid, 100 European children or 100 Israeli children were being killed every single day, would we be supplying even a penknife to the perpetrators of the crime—yes or no?
The death of any child is a tragedy. I have set out already the steps that we have taken in relation to arms suspensions. I reassure those watching not from the UK, as I reassured the Jordanian MPs whom I saw this morning, that nobody has forgotten about Gaza—not in this House, and not in this country. It will continue to be an issue of first-rank importance for this Government, and I will continue to work every day to try to see the changes we have described this afternoon.
The Minister has touched on the UK Government supplying the global pool of components for F-35 jets for international security and peace. Considering that we are seeing the live-streaming of a genocide against the Palestinian people—F-35s are a crucial part of that, and are being used to bomb civilian camps and hospitals—are the Government considering whether Israel, given its actions, should be part of that global pool?
I do not wish to seem evasive, but when these questions are being determined in the court this week, I do not want to get ahead of those submissions and those discussions.
Some thanks should be given to the Minister for his temperament, his well-chosen words and his reaction to all the questions. He has shown incredible patience, and we all admire him for that. Undoubtedly, there are innocent people who are suffering and have been suffering since Hamas’s genocidal attacks on 7 October. The suffering of Israeli and Palestinian children means that we must find a way forward to secure peace, so how does the Minister believe we can further push for the aim of peace and make the welfare of the children in this region—the innocents—a priority?
The hon. Gentleman is unfailing in his courtesy, and I am grateful for it again this afternoon. He asks the vital, central question: how can we return to a diplomatic process that provides for security and stability in the region? It must be in accordance with the Arab reconstruction plan, with no place for Hamas in the future, an immediate release of hostages, an immediate return of aid and a return to a diplomatic process that can provide for security and stability for two states side by side.
My constituents write to me on an almost daily basis, horrified by the humanitarian catastrophe unfolding before our very eyes. The denial of aid to innocent Palestinians is not only intolerable, but unconscionable. My hon. Friend was right earlier when he talked about deeds, not words, so what does further pressure on Israel look like? What practical measures will our Government take to prevent genocide, in line with our international legal obligations?
I can reassure my hon. Friend and her constituents in Paisley that we discuss these matters urgently with our friends and allies, and we will always abide by our international legal obligations, including those she mentions.
Given the genocide we are witnessing unfold before our eyes every single day, will the Government drop the 2030 road map for UK-Israel bilateral relations and impose economic and diplomatic sanctions to apply pressure on Israel to abide by its obligations under international law?
I thank my hon. Friend for her continued engagement in these questions. As you would expect, Madam Deputy Speaker, I am afraid that I will not be speculating on further sanctions from the Dispatch Box this afternoon.
I acknowledge the dedication of my hon. Friend and British diplomats in this regard, but my constituents are deeply concerned. Does he agree that the Israeli Security Cabinet’s recent plans are completely unacceptable? Its aid blockade is also totally unconscionable. We must make plain to this Israeli Government that we and the international community will not tolerate this, and that as in other theatres of conflict, we will consider all practical steps, including military aid drops, to get aid through to those who need it.
I recognise the concern that my hon. Friend’s constituents will be feeling, but I can reassure him that we are considering all measures to try to ensure that aid gets into Gaza. I regret that there is no alternative to road access, given the scale of the aid required, but we will continue to work on these questions with the urgency that he has described. I am grateful for his words about British diplomats. Let me reassure the House that not only the ministerial team but the diplomatic service of the United Kingdom works on these questions each and every day, includes in yesterday afternoon’s session of the UN Security Council.
The 10 long weeks since the Israeli blockade began have brought famine to the region, while food is rotting across the border and the Israeli Government are lying and denying the scale of the atrocities. Israel’s Defence Minister, Israel Katz, has been quoted as saying that the blockade is a “main pressure lever” to secure victory. When will the UK Government, as a member of the UN Security Council, impose meaningful sanctions to stop the genocide that we are seeing?
We have covered sanctions and determinations, but I can reassure my hon. Friend that we consider our position on the Security Council to be an important responsibility, which is why we called the meeting yesterday that has led to so much of the discussion this afternoon.
In the scenes and pictures that we are seeing, many of our constituents are looking for family members. One such family member is Dr Radi, who is stuck in north Gaza and is very ill and frail, and whose son and daughter-in-law are important NHS doctors in my constituency. What are we doing to ensure that there is a way for people who need care and are stuck in Gaza to come out, and to be cared for by family members here?
It is a top priority for me, and for my officials, to ensure that British nationals or their dependants who are in danger in Gaza are able to leave safely. I do not wish to comment on the specifics, but I am happy to take up that case and others with my hon. Friend and any other Members whose constituents are in similar circumstances.
I, too, thank the Minister for all his work on this issue. Given the UK’s commitment to a two-state solution, and given our obligations under international law, can he explain how the Government justify engaging in trade negotiations with Israel while the UN is warning us about genocide in Gaza, and does he agree that pursuing a trade deal in these circumstances would undermine both our ability to broker a two-state solution and our positive obligation to act to prevent violations of international law?
I can assure the House that my focus is on the matters that we have discussed this afternoon. They are urgent and immediate, and they crowd out all other priorities.
The truth is that there is no need for any organisation to tell the public that what is happening is genocide. After all, we have seen the attempted extermination of the Palestinian people televised live for over a year now. I put it to the Minister that this Government will be remembered as having been complicit in, and accomplices to, the war crime being committed by Israel. What actually has to happen before our Government will take meaningful action in the name of humanity and decency?
On the very first day I became a Minister, we restored funding to UNRWA, and within weeks we had taken the far-reaching actions that I have described in relation to arms sales. I understand the force of the question, and I understand the feeling of our constituents throughout the country, in my constituency of Lincoln and elsewhere, but let us not pretend that this Government have taken the same steps as the previous Government. We took a series of steps, and we took them quickly and decisively.
I am not suggesting to the hon. Member that what we have done is enough—no one could hear this discussion and think it is enough; no one could have listened to the UN Security Council yesterday afternoon and think it is enough. But there is a difference between saying that there is more to be done and saying that nothing has been done.
After 70 days of aid being blockaded, we are watching an entirely preventable famine unfold in real time in Gaza. Meanwhile, the Israeli Government’s anti-NGO Bill seeks to restrict the ability of lifesaving humanitarians to operate, and instead militarises aid delivery in violation of international humanitarian law. I thank the Minister for all his efforts and for his challenge on this point, but will he continue to challenge the Israeli Government on it, and does he agree that there has to be accountability?
I am familiar with the draft legislation in the Knesset, and we are engaging on the questions it raises.
I thank my hon. Friend for all his work—it must sometimes feel very lonely on that Front Bench—and particularly welcome the urgent session that we managed to secure at the United Nations, but things have become more difficult in recent days, and we must ask whether we are doing enough with our allies on a number of fronts, particularly recognition. A private letter has been sent by dozens of my colleagues on this side of the House, and there is unity on both sides of the House in favour of recognition of the state of Palestine, action on sanctions for Ben-Gvir and Smotrich, and on the violent settlements. Above all, can we please rule out a trade deal?
I am genuinely grateful to all Members across the House who ask me questions and seek me out across the Palace to convey the force of their views on this. I have seen the letter to which my hon. Friend has referred, and I recognise, given the strength of feeling in all parts of the House, that I will be returning here almost daily. We will continue to work on the issues that my hon. Friend has outlined. I will not rehearse answers to her substantive policy questions, but I assure her that I will continue to engage with those on the Government Benches and others on the important questions that are being raised.
(1 week, 5 days ago)
Commons ChamberAid must be restored to Gaza. It should never be used as a political tool, and Israel is bound under international law to allow the unhindered passage of humanitarian aid. The UK has jointly called an urgent session of the UN Security Council this afternoon to address the dire situation in Gaza.
The current intentional blockade of food, water and medicine by the Israeli Government is preventing life-sustaining supplies from reaching thousands of children, who the Minister knows are most vulnerable to malnutrition and premature death. Save the Children estimates that over 65,000 children are suffering. What decisive action are the Government taking beyond the E3 statement to make it clear to the Government of Israel that their siege in Gaza must end immediately and that a humanitarian aid system cannot be replaced with a military-controlled one? Will he consider sanctions and the cessation of arms and rule out any trade deal, as children should not pay the price for the inaction of the international community?
My hon. Friend is right to raise the plight of children in Gaza and, indeed, all those suffering from the lack of aid and the continued conflict. This Government have been clear that the ceasefire must be restored. Since the E3 statement, which she mentions, we have taken the decision jointly with our partners to call an urgent session of the UN Security Council, given the gravity of the situation.
The looming famine in Gaza is not a natural disaster; it is a direct result of the deterioration of the ceasefire agreement. It is deeply concerning that this is putting the entire population of Gaza at critical risk of food insecurity and potential famine. Can the Minister assure me that this Government are supporting every possible opportunity to get vital resources and humanitarian aid into the region?
I can give my hon. Friend that assurance. We are doing everything we can to ensure that aid gets in, that hostages are released, that Hamas are no longer in charge of Gaza, and that we get the ceasefire and path to a two-state solution that we so desperately need.
The UN’s Philippe Lazzarini is right, isn’t he, to say today that Israel is committing a “massive atrocity” by blocking aid to the children of Gaza? As well as the urgent need for aid, the Palestinian people need more trade with countries like the UK. Will the Minister explain how my constituents in Rochdale can buy more Palestinian goods, such as olive oil, herbs and dates, and support tech companies and the many co-operatives that operate in the west bank and in Gaza?
I know that Rochdale is the home of the co-operative movement in this country and that there are many co-operatives in the Occupied Palestinian Territories as well. On 20 April, we signed a memorandum of understanding with the Palestinian Authority. That includes pursuing further co-operation in exactly the areas he describes, including economic development and trade.
Gaza faces imminent famine due to the Israeli Government’s blockade, and over 2 million people face catastrophic hunger levels. What action are the UK Government taking to lift the blockade and secure the delivery of humanitarian aid to Gaza?
This Government have a clear position on the vital importance of aid returning to Gaza. That is why we are calling an urgent session of the UN Security Council this afternoon. It is why the Foreign Secretary has made these points repeatedly and clearly to his Israeli counterparts, as indeed have I.
How long will the UK walk by on the other side as Palestinian children bleed and starve to death? Is it not time that this Government, and indeed His Majesty’s loyal Opposition, show that they are supportive of Israel, but that that support does not necessarily mean they are supportive of a particular Government—in this case, the racist, brutal regime of Netanyahu?
Let us not forget what this Government have done. We restored funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency after the Conservatives froze it. We suspended arms export licences whereas the Conservatives did not take action. We have provided £129 million in humanitarian assistance to the Occupied Palestinian Territories. We are not on the other side of the road. I welcome the right hon. Member’s strong views on this; I found his intervention last week very powerful indeed. There is no one on the Labour Benches who does not understand the gravity of the situation. That is why we invited the Palestinian Prime Minister, why we signed the memorandum of understanding, and why we are calling an urgent session of the Security Council. This Government will not be on the other side of the road from Palestinian suffering.
Last week the United Nations issued a report describing the situation in Gaza as
“one of the most ostentatious and merciless manifestations of the desecration of human life and dignity”.
The Government have always insisted that it is not for them but for the courts to determine what is and what is not a genocide, but the Minister will know that the genocide convention also puts a legal obligation on states to act to prevent a genocide. Does he believe that the UK has fulfilled its legal obligation under that convention to prevent a genocide in Gaza?
As I said to the right hon. Member for The Wrekin (Mark Pritchard), we are taking action—not just rhetoric, but action—to try to address the situation in Gaza. That includes calling the Security Council to an urgent session this afternoon, alongside our partners. We will continue to take the action that we think is needed to ensure that the people of Gaza get what they need.
We hear about the actions that the Government are taking, but unfortunately none of them are leading to the prevention of the starvation and killing of innocent civilians. The latest numbers, which are only an estimate, show that over 60 children have died of starvation according to official records. We do not know how many have died but have not yet been recorded. There is one step that the Government have not taken. I welcome the aid, but when it stands on the other side of a crossing and cannot get to the people who need it, it is useless. Some 10 or 11 months ago, aid was airdropped into Gaza. Why are the Government not airdropping aid or providing it by sea, and will they condemn the bombing on 2 May of the freedom flotilla, which went to provide aid?
As I think the House knows, I am familiar with the impediments to getting aid into Gaza—I went to the Gaza-Egypt border to see the restrictions for myself. We have made these points in public and in private, and we will continue to do so. We are talking to our Jordanian partners and others—many in the region understandably have real concerns about the lack of aid getting in. Although we are considering, with Jordan and others, what the alternatives may be, I must be plain with the House: there is no alternative to a land route if aid is to get in at the scale that is required, so we must be clear with the Israeli Government and all partners in the region that opening those crossings is critical.
Mr Lazzarini has said that children in Gaza are more likely to die of starvation than of an act of violence. What does my hon. Friend expect from this afternoon’s session at the UN? What specifically will be asked for that would move the situation on? Israel cannot be allowed to continue using food as a weapon of war.
I think I was clear about the Government’s expectations in my previous answer. Those expectations are grounded in Israel’s international legal obligations. Ultimately, this is a week of diplomacy: the President of the United States will be in the region, and we will raise these issues in the Security Council. I hope that diplomacy will be able to make progress towards a ceasefire and the restoration of aid.
Gaza has been starved of humanitarian aid for over 70 days now. Ministers have repeatedly expressed their disappointment, but there is no evidence that the Israeli Government are listening or have any intention of reopening the supply routes. In March, the Foreign Secretary withdrew his assessment that the blockade is a breach of international law. Will the Minister state how many days the blockade must continue before the Government recognise it as a breach of international law? To make clear the UK’s support for Palestine’s right to self-determination and opposition to the extremist policy of annexation by force, will the Government commit to working with France towards the joint recognition of the state of Palestine at the conference next month?
The Foreign Secretary has been clear repeatedly, as have all Ministers from the Dispatch Box, that it is the long-standing policy of British Governments that we do not make legal determinations. We made an assessment when we arrived that there was a real risk of serious breaches of international humanitarian law, and that continues to be our finding. Given the events that many in this House have rightly raised, we continue to make those assessments and include all those events in them.
On the French-Saudi conference in June, we continue to talk with all our partners. As I said in my previous answer, this is a period for diplomacy. A ceasefire is desperately needed, and it is diplomacy that will get us through to the next stage.
We are committed to strengthening support for British nationals abroad, including introducing a right to consular assistance in cases of human rights violations. The Department is considering a package of measures, which we will announce in due course, alongside options for stakeholder consultations.
Every year, an estimated 5,000 British citizens are arrested abroad, many of them under false pretences. Many are used as hostages and denied access to legal representation, and their families are left without information, not knowing what has happened to them. High-profile cases at the moment include those of Alaa Abd el-Fattah in Egypt and of Jagtar Singh Johal in India. None of these people has an automatic right to support, as is the case with other countries such as the United States, so can the Minister give us more details about exactly what the consular assistance will be and whether it will be automatic for everyone?
The safety and security of British nationals overseas is a top priority for the Government. This is a complex area of policy—the hon. Lady has described the wide range of different consular cases that the Foreign Office responds to, from kidnap cases to more routine cases. As I set out to the Foreign Affairs Committee, given the complexity of these issues we will come back to Parliament in due course with options for consultation.
I remind the Government that their manifesto promised a legal right to consular assistance in cases of human rights violations. The Government have now been in power for close on a year. This is not something that should take a big shove; surely, we should do it straight away. Surely such assistance should be a legal right. People including Ryan Cornelius and Jimmy Lai are still being held. Ryan Cornelius has been held illegally for 17 years, which the UN has criticised as a human rights violation. For ages we did not send anybody to see him; surely now we must act and call out these regimes. The first place to start is by giving those people the absolute right to consular assistance.
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his question and his commitment to these issues. Were it only so that passing a right in this place would secure the release of the people whose cases have been raised. In every case that has been mentioned by the right hon. Gentleman and by the hon. Member for Edinburgh West (Christine Jardine), the people concerned do receive consular assistance. I have met the families of Ryan Cornelius and Alaa Abd el-Fattah; they both remain very much in our minds. It is important that we get the rights correct. These are complex cases, and we are bound not just by what we decide in Parliament, but by the relevant conventions and diplomatic norms. We will take action to try to preserve the safety of British nationals overseas, but it is right that we take our time to ensure that we get it correct.
It is at times of crisis that British nationals abroad need consular services the most. I share many of my constituents’ concerns about the violence in India, Pakistan and Kashmir, including those of a 12-year-old boy who contacted me yesterday about his aunt and uncle who are stranded in Pakistan, as is one of my lovely neighbours. Although airspace has now been opened, what steps is the Minister taking to ensure that all British residents have access to consular services and are able to return to the UK as soon as possible?
My hon. Friend is a doughty champion for her constituents, including at all hours throughout the weekend, and I recognise her commitment and the commitment of many others in this House. The Foreign Secretary set out in a “dear colleagues” letter the details for ensuring that MPs are able to contact the Foreign Office in a timely way, and I encourage all those watching at home to sign up to our travel advice and to keep watching it carefully.
One British citizen denied consular access is Jimmy Lai, who faces life in prison for exercising the rights guaranteed to him under the joint declaration between the United Kingdom and China. My hon. Friend will have seen reports that America intended to raise the case of Jimmy Lai during its recent talks with China in Geneva. What steps can the Government take to capitalise on America’s renewed interest in his case so that we can secure his freedom?
We continue to call on the Hong Kong authorities to end their politically motivated prosecution and release Jimmy Lai immediately. As my hon. Friend would expect, I will not comment overmuch on the actions of other states, but I will say that the Prime Minister has raised this matter directly with the relevant authorities, as have the Foreign Secretary, the Chancellor and many others.
The Government are committed to securing Alaa’s release, and we continue to raise his case at the highest levels of the Egyptian Government. The Foreign Secretary has raised the case on multiple occasions, as have I. The national security adviser has also raised this case, as has the Prime Minister.
I thank the Minister for his response. Members of the family of Alaa Abd el-Fattah are again in the Gallery today, and his mother Laila has now not taken food for seven months. I met her again recently and she is so frail now. Does the Minister agree that Alaa’s arbitrary detention, long after his sentence ended, continues in violation of the Vienna convention, and that there must be consequences for Egypt, including international legal options and new travel advice, given the evident dangers to British nationals detained in Egypt?
I would also like to pay tribute to the fortitude and bravery of Alaa’s family, both those in the Gallery and, of course, Laila, whom I have met on a number of occasions and the Prime Minister has met, too. We consider Alaa a British national. He holds both British and Egyptian nationality. We have been clear on that point, even though it is disputed by the Egyptian Government. We are committed to continuing to work on this case.
My hon. Friend has long been an advocate on these issues. We emphasise the necessity of demonstrating commitment to the protection of human rights in all our engagements with the Syrian Government. Our public statements have also made it clear that civilians must be protected from violence, and those responsible held to account. The protection of all civilians and their full inclusion in the transition process is vital for peace in Syria.
I thank my hon. Friend for transmitting his constituents’ concerns, which I know are felt widely across this House. I can confirm that our permanent representative in New York will be expressing the full force of our views, as we heard earlier in this session.
The entirety of Hezbollah has been proscribed in the UK since 2019. Raising money for terrorist organisations is a criminal offence. This Government will continue to take robust action against those suspected of raising money for terrorist organisations in the middle east and around the world.
We are committed to recognising a Palestinian state at a time that has the most impact in achieving a reality most conducive to long-term peace in the region, and we continue to talk to our partners about that. The other issues that the hon. Member raised have already been discussed in this session.
Will my hon. Friend confirm that this Government are totally opposed to the expansion of Israel’s military operations in Gaza and are four-square behind restoring the ceasefire?
As I said last week, we are opposed to an expansion of Israel’s military operation. I was also asked about the Israeli Finance Minister’s comments about the destruction of Gaza—comments that I had not seen at the time. I have since seen them and I condemn them.
Today we welcome the release of Edan Alexander, the latest hostage freed by Hamas, after over 500 days in captivity. The fact that they still have people in captivity is disgraceful and barbaric and puts into perspective the fact that the group Kneecap are being platformed in Croydon, after they shouted support for Hamas from a stage. What pressure are the Government putting on the Palestinian authorities to ensure that the remaining hostages are returned to their families as they should be? They should never have been taken in the first place.
We continue, with all our partners, to call for the immediate release of all hostages. I think particularly of Avinatan Or, who has a British mother and who is still in captivity under who knows what conditions. We will continue to press for the release of all hostages.
On 15 May we will commemorate the 77th anniversary of the 1948 Nakba, which saw hundreds of thousands of Palestinians displaced from their homes and dispossessed, and it still continues today. I pay tribute to Ministers for the diplomacy they are engaged in and for the recent memorandum of understanding that was agreed with Palestine, but the children of Gaza cannot wait weeks and months. They need food and water now. What more can we do?
(2 weeks, 4 days ago)
Commons ChamberWith permission, Mr Speaker, I will make a statement on India and Pakistan. The whole House will have been closely following developments in recent weeks following the horrific terrorist attack in Pahalgam on 22 April, which left 26 tourists dead. Last night, soon after 21.00 British summer time, Indian forces launched missile strikes against nine sites in Pakistan and Pakistani-administered Kashmir. The Government of India have described their actions as
“measured, non-escalatory, proportionate and responsible”,
and deliberately targeted at terrorist infrastructure. Following India’s actions last night, a military spokesperson for Pakistan stated that 26 Pakistanis have died and 46 were injured, including civilians and children. The Pakistani Government, at a meeting of their national security council earlier today, stated that they reserve the right to respond in a manner of their choosing.
This is an incredibly delicate moment in an evolving and fast-moving situation. As my right hon. and learned Friend the Prime Minister noted just now, rising tensions between India and Pakistan are a serious concern. The Government have been monitoring the situation closely and staying in close contact with all the key partners. Since the developments overnight, my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has been in contact with both the Indian External Affairs Minister Jaishankar, and the Pakistani Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Dar. Our high commissioners in Delhi and Islamabad have also been in close contact with their hosts. This morning, I met the Pakistani Finance Minister Aurangzeb. The Foreign Secretary has also been co-ordinating closely with other partners, notably the United States and the Gulf.
Our consistent message to both India and Pakistan has been to show restraint. They need to engage in dialogue to find a swift, diplomatic path forward. The UK has a close and unique relationship with both countries. It is heartbreaking to see civilian lives being lost. If this escalates further, nobody wins. We clearly condemned the horrific terrorist attack last month, which was the worst such attack in Indian-administered Kashmir for many years. Now, we need all sides to focus urgently on the steps needed to restore regional stability and ensure the protection of civilians. The UK will continue to work closely with our international partners in pursuit of short-term de-escalation and longer-term stability. The Foreign Secretary will have a chance to discuss the situation with EU Foreign Ministers in Warsaw today. He and the whole Government will stay in close touch with the Governments of India and Pakistan, as well as with those with influence in the region.
De-escalation is of the utmost importance, not least given the large number of British nationals in the region. The safety of British nationals will always be our priority. Overnight, we issued factual updates to our travel advice for both India and Pakistan, updating British nationals on military activity and potential disruption to flights in the region. British nationals in both India and Pakistan should stay up to date with our travel advice and follow the advice of the local authorities.
I am acutely aware that for many communities across the UK, and indeed Members across the House, this is a personal and sensitive situation. The British-Pakistani and British-Indian communities make a huge contribution to this country. We recognise that this will be a difficult time for many. We look to all community and faith leaders to spread the message that now is a time for coming together across religious and ethnic differences. We now need to see calm heads. Britain will continue to play its full part for de-escalation and diplomacy. I commend this statement to the House.
On 22 April, terrorists brutally killed 26 tourists in Pahalgam in a barbaric and savage act of violence. Most victims were killed at point blank range by gunshots to their head. My thoughts and prayers are with all those affected by that murderous, violent terrorism in Pahalgam. It was an act of terrorism, and we must reflect on the fact that Pahalgam has joined Mumbai, New Delhi and other places in India in being forever scarred by an act of terror.
This is clearly a precarious moment. We want to see tensions ease between India and Pakistan. We want to avoid state-on-state military escalation. We are also clear that India has the right to take reasonable and proportionate steps to defend itself, and to dismantle the vile terrorist infrastructure that has caused death and continues to threaten it.
Terrorists based in Pakistan threaten India and western interests—it was the country that Osama bin Laden was hiding in—and because of the long history of violence being inflicted by terrorists on India, the UK has in place long-standing security co-operation agreements with India. In fact, last week in the House, I reminded the Government of those agreements, why they exist, and why they should matter to us in the UK. Given those links, the UK Government should be at the forefront in working with our friends and allies to tackle the terrorist threats that we face collectively. The Minister will not be able to speak about intelligence sharing between the UK and India, but will he at least confirm whether our intelligence and security services have been in contact with India about the incidents that took place, and whether they are supporting its investigations? Have the Government provided any specific security assistance to India in the aftermath of the terrorist attack in Kashmir? Could Britain offer specific support that might help avert escalation?
Does the Minister agree with India’s assessment that the Resistance Front, which claims responsibility for the 22 April attacks, is a front for the proscribed Pakistan-based terrorist group Lashkar-e-Taiba, which has a clear history of committing acts of terror against India, and has reported links to Hamas? There are reports that Hamas representatives met it earlier this year. Will the Minister confirm whether the UK Government are aware of any co-operation and links between Lashkar-e-Taiba and Hamas? I asked him that last week, and he did not respond, so I would welcome an answer on that important point today. Does he know which terror groups are currently operating in Pakistan, and their links to other terrorist groups that threaten our interests?
Last week, the Minister said:
“We are playing our role to try to ensure that tensions do not escalate.”—[Official Report, 29 April 2025; Vol. 766, c. 176.]
The British Government have a role to play, and need to leverage their influence to help ease tensions. What direct discussions have been taking place between the India and Pakistan Governments since those attacks two weeks ago? Was the UK informed in advance of the actions being undertaken? Does the Minister have a plan to support easing those tensions?
The Minister referred to the Foreign Secretary’s calls with counterparts and his engagement. Will he give more evidence of those discussions? Have Ministers undertaken an assessment of the terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan? Has he had discussions with the Pakistan Government on this matter? Can Ministers give assurances that there are sufficient measures in place to ensure that no British aid to Pakistan, either bilaterally or through multilateral sources, ends up in the wrong hands?
The diaspora communities in the UK have strong links to both India and Pakistan, as the Minister said, so can he give an update on the actions that will be taken to prevent the escalation of tensions affecting communities in our country? Can he give details of extra consular capacity and support that the UK will give to the high commissions in both countries for British nationals in Pakistan and India? Finally, will the Minister now be more forthcoming with the House about the Government’s assessment of who carried out the terror attack in Kashmir and whether they were working with any other malign actors? Is he working through the security implications for the UK?
The right hon. Lady asks important questions. Let me take this opportunity to reiterate our condemnation of terrorism in all its forms. Our thoughts are still with those affected by the despicable acts of 22 April, their loved ones and the people of India. The Prime Minister spoke with Prime Minister Modi on 24 April and the Foreign Secretary spoke with his counterpart on 27 April. We are all, as the right hon. Lady would expect, in regular contact with our counterparts. As she may know, the Foreign Secretary is travelling and I am not privy to his very latest contacts, but I know that they are ongoing.
The right hon. Lady asks important questions about community relations in this country. I am working closely with my Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government counterparts, who are talking to affected communities across the country and recognising the sensitivities that she points to. I can confirm that I have had extended discussions with my Pakistani counterparts about the terrorist threats within Pakistan and the efforts that need to be made to address that. That is a terrorist threat that affects Pakistan herself, which, even in recent months, has suffered significant terrorist attacks.
The reality is that India’s air strikes in Pakistan and Azad Kashmir have seen the killing and injury of dozens of civilians, including children, and led to a massive escalation in the real threat of war between two nuclear powers. That follows two weeks of bulldozer tactics and thousands of mass arrests in Kashmir, the unilateral withdrawal from the Indus treaty effectively threatening collective punishment on millions of Pakistanis and now this act of aggression, all in complete contradiction of international law.
The Minister is right to say that the international community must now focus on de-escalation and stability, but that cannot be achieved in full without addressing the central issue of Kashmir, an issue close to the hearts of many hon. Members. Indeed, the plight of the Kashmiris has been raised by me in this Chamber over the last decade. Does the Minister accept that the UK has a moral, historical and legal duty and responsibility to end this 80-year period in which UN resolutions on Kashmir have, frankly, sat gathering dust? Will he act so that the sons and daughters of Kashmir get their birthright of self-determination, promised to them decades ago?
It is well known to this House that there are, of course, a range of wider issues between India and Pakistan, and Kashmir is one of them. However, on this most delicate of days, it is important that the House remains focused on the importance of de-escalation. That is my key message from the Dispatch Box today.
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
I thank the Minister for advance sight of his statement.
The terrible terrorist attack last month brought death to 26 civilians and rightly shocked and appalled many. Yesterday’s military strikes by India and the subsequent exchange of artillery fire in Kashmir mark a deeply concerning escalation. The prospect of New Delhi and Islamabad engaging in further tit-for-tat military action risks destabilising the entire region and leading to more civilian deaths. Their status as nuclear powers also generates severe global risks. It is vital, therefore, that both Governments work to de-escalate the current crisis.
Maintaining open lines of communication is key to preventing escalation and enabling a diplomatic off ramp for both Governments. Will the Minister therefore provide more detail on the conversations that he says have taken place overnight with Government representatives in New Delhi and Islamabad? What steps are the Government taking to help maintain an open dialogue between both Governments? Will he also confirm whether additional resources are being provided to support British nationals in Pakistan and India to ensure their safety?
Given our shared history, and now as a Commonwealth partner to India and Pakistan, the UK has a particular responsibility to support efforts at mediation and to help prevent retaliatory actions that could contribute to more deaths on both sides. Will the Minister describe what plans the Government have to engage international partners at the UN to support mediation efforts?
Yesterday’s strikes follow a series of escalatory measures taken by India and Pakistan over the past week, in addition to the cessation of military activity. It is vital that these countermeasures are wound back. Will the Minister confirm what, as part of mediation efforts, the Government are doing to press India to reinstate the Indus Waters treaty and Pakistan to reopen its airspace?
Indian and Pakistani communities across the UK will be very worried by these new developments, and it is vital that they are fully supported. In addition to the remarks the Minister has already made, will he provide more detail on what steps the Government are taking across all Departments to support communities here in the UK?
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his questions, which I will try to take in turn. I can confirm that the Foreign Office is taking action to ensure that the best possible consular service is available to British nationals in India and Pakistan. There have been a number of changes in relation to airspace even over the course of the last 24 hours, so I encourage Members of this House and anybody watching at home to keep Foreign Office travel advice as the central place for information. This is a fast-moving situation and options for air travel may change—indeed, they have changed over the last 24 hours—so please do keep updated on that. I confirm that my Department is taking steps to try and ensure that our call centres are open, and those who are concerned should get in direct touch.
As I said earlier, we are in direct touch with both Governments, and I was with the Pakistani Finance Minister shortly before coming to this House. I will not comment in great detail about the substance of those discussions, other than to say that my key message in those engagements was the same message that I just repeated to my hon. Friend the Member for Bradford East (Imran Hussain), which is that now is a time for de-escalation.
India’s record on Kashmir is not something to be proud of: it has been ethnic cleansing Kashmiris for over 78 years. Modi’s record on human rights—from an individual who once was barred from coming to this country—is not forgotten. Kashmir has a history that spans over 4,000 years. It has never been part of India and never will be, so that can remain a distant dream of Modi’s. Does the Minister agree that now is the time to de-escalate, but also to make sure that the promises of a plebiscite for the Kashmiri people are also delivered so that this issue can be resolved once and for all?
My hon. Friend is right to focus on de-escalation. That is my focus this afternoon from the Dispatch Box. Our position on Kashmir remains unchanged, but the focus for now must be on ensuring that there are no further threats to regional stability.
The Minister has rightly underlined the fact that we face an incredibly dangerous moment, but that Britain has a uniquely deep, historical and influential relationship with both these great countries, which we must now deploy with great energy and skill. Does he agree that the Government of Pakistan must take more action against the terrorist organisations that operate from their soil? Does he also understand the outrage that Indian people, including the diaspora in Royal Sutton Coldfield, feel at these dreadful events?
I recognise the right hon. Gentleman’s long-standing attention to these issues. As Secretary of State for the Department for International Development, he sent a young DFID official to Pakistan in 2010, and I remember his commitment then. He is right that Pakistan has been plagued by terrorist threats within its own borders. It is a plague that has been of concern to its neighbours, but also most acutely to many Pakistanis, as we have seen devastatingly in recent months. They must do more to seek to tackle that threat and I have discussed that with Pakistani Ministers through the course of my ministerial duties.
India is, of course, right to feel outrage at the terrible attack of 22 April. There are now civilian casualties on both sides, and it is vital that we focus on de-escalation and trying to restore calm and regional stability.
I thank the Minister for coming to the House so soon. Could he confirm when he or his Department last met the ambassadors of India and Pakistan, and will he ensure that the dialogue continues with them?
I can confirm to my hon. Friend that the dialogue will continue. Of course, the Prime Minister was in touch with Prime Minister Modi just yesterday, and I was with the Pakistani Finance Minister and, indeed, the Pakistani high commissioner in London just an hour or two ago.
Following the terrible terrorist atrocities on 22 April, as the Minister has outlined, India took diplomatic action and further actions to penalise Pakistan. Pakistan then retaliated. But it was made clear at the time by India that either Pakistan removes the terrorist spaces along the line of control, or India would remove them. Last night, nine sites were hit. Those were terrorist bases where terrorists were being trained to commit further atrocities in India. [Interruption.] Will the Minister call on Pakistan to ensure that those terrorist bases are removed once and for all?
The situation remains incredibly delicate and fast-moving, and we have seen rival accounts through the course of the morning about events. We will of course track these events very carefully. I responded to the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Sir Andrew Mitchell) on the question of the terrorist groups in Pakistan, which pose a threat to Pakistan as well as others. We will of course continue to monitor events very closely. There is still much that is disputed, but it is absolutely obvious that for regional stability to be restored, we need to have direct, urgent contact between India and Pakistan and calm heads prevailing.
Twenty six people lost their lives in the Pahalgam terrorist attack, and now 26 people lost their lives in yesterday’s attack. The truth remains that no evidence has been presented to anybody—any national or international partners—to say that Pakistan was, indeed, responsible for the attack on Pahalgam. I thank the Minister for coming so soon to the House and for all his efforts in trying to de-escalate. But to actually get de-escalation, and if India is so certain, does he agree that India should share that evidence with the world to justify this barbaric attack killing 26 people and attacking mosques in the middle of the night?
As I said in the previous answer, there is clearly a considerable amount of debate about the facts of what has happened just in the last few hours. I do not wish to focus, and it would indeed be inappropriate for the UK to speculate, on those exact facts. We need to focus from this House on de-escalating the risks to regional stability that we see today.
There is enormous distrust between both nations, which stems from the dispute over Kashmir. Immediately after those terrorist events in India last month, India was quick off the mark to blame Pakistan. In response, Pakistan made it plain that it had nothing to do with it. Pakistan’s position is, how can armed terrorists travel 230 km over devastating terrain by foot, assassinate people and then return by foot into Pakistan in an area that is the most militarised zone on this planet? It is somewhat incredulous that blame was put on Pakistan virtually within an hour of this atrocity. Will the Minister commit to leveraging our diplomatic influence to encourage an environment that is conducive to open dialogue? Does he agree that there is an ever-growing imperative to normalise relations and address underlying issues, from territorial disputes to acts of violence, to have peaceful negotiations and mutual understanding?
The hon. Member is right to finish his remarks focusing on the importance of direct dialogue, which I of course support. I will not seek to adjudicate from this Dispatch Box on the competing claims about the facts.
After the recent terrorist attack, as tensions on the subcontinent sadly escalate and videos of the destruction circulate, many of my Slough constituents of Indian and Pakistani heritage are extremely worried about the safety of their loved ones as bullets fly and bombs drops. That is especially the case for those of Punjabi and Kashmiri heritage because they already have been, and will be, impacted the most by the death and injury of their family and loved ones. While sending condolences to all affected and recognising the UK’s historical ties and responsibilities, will the Minister assure Parliament that our Government will be at the forefront of efforts to de-escalate tensions between the two nuclear armed nations and that we will ensure that negotiations are enabled to chart a path to peace and prosperity?
I can assure my hon. Friend that we are very much involved in the efforts to try to encourage de-escalation. I encourage Members with constituents and their families who are concerned by developments to point them towards our travel advice, which we will keep updated as and when the situation requires.
The barbaric terrorist attacks in Kashmir on innocent Indian and Nepali tourists caused deep distress in my constituency, which is home to many Indian nationals and those of Nepali nationality. I welcome the Minister’s tone about de-escalation—he is getting the tone just about right—but may I also urge him to ensure that none of the escalation of tensions in that part of the world happens here in the UK, and that Hindu temples in particular are offered the same funding and security given to mosques around the country?
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his measured and reasonable question. I will take away the issue he raises. I have been in regular contact with the Minister for Faith, Communities and Resettlement in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government. We are discussing these issues closely, recognising the sensitivity in constituencies like the hon. Gentleman’s and many others that have been mentioned.
The Minister will know that our British constituents with strong links to Kashmir are both horrified by the terrorist attack and terrified by the escalation of violence that we have seen overnight, as well as by the online hatred being fomented. Two weeks ago, I asked the Minister about the possibility of missiles being used in escalation. We have now heard from the Indian Foreign Secretary that they believe there are further terrorist acts planned, and the Pakistani Prime Minister has called last night’s events an “act of war”. The Minister will be aware of the UN Security Council meeting planned for Monday. What words of comfort can he offer our constituents who are horrified about what might happen in the next couple of days that this Government will push not just for de-escalation but a long-term solution that guarantees the peace and security of everybody in Kashmir?
I thank my hon. Friend for conveying the concerns of her constituents so effectively. Regional stability is in the interests of India and Pakistan, and indeed the UK, and it will be to those ends that our diplomacy will be focused. As she acknowledges, my focus this afternoon is on de-escalation, but of course we will engage with both Governments on the full range of the interests engaged.
I thank the Minister for his statement. We also condemn the abhorrent terror acts and abhor any loss of civilian life. We do have two nuclear armed states, though, who are setting up with one another. There has been a diminishing of the international rules-based system. In his approach, can he assure me that he will be stressing the importance of that rules-based system when it comes to mediating between the two parties?
I can assure the hon. Member that the UK remains committed in all our interactions to emphasising the pre-eminent importance of international humanitarian law and the rules-based international order.
The murder of 26 civilians in Pahalgam was truly horrific, but India’s airstrikes have resulted in the deaths of 26 civilians in Pakistan and Azad Kashmir. This cannot be a bizarre, macabre game of tit-for-tat where the only people who suffer are civilians on both sides. Can the Minister reassure my Rochdale constituents, many of whom are concerned about family members, that the Government are doing everything they can through their consular access and also at diplomatic level to de-escalate the situation and to make it crystal clear to India that water cannot be used as a weapon of war against the wider people of Pakistan and Kashmir?
My hon. Friend is right, of course. Civilians must be protected. For British nationals concerned by developments, I would encourage them to refer to our travel advice, as I said earlier. This is obviously a fast-moving situation and we will not always be in a position to update our latest advice from this Dispatch Box, so constituents should please look there first and foremost for advice from the British Government about how to ensure their safety. My hon. Friend refers to some of the wider issues that we discussed last week, including the Indus water treaty, which I understand is in abeyance rather than being repealed. Some of these longer-term issues will of course need to be discussed, but the first priority must be de-escalation.
What role does the Minister envisage the Commonwealth playing as an honest broker in discussions between India and Pakistan? Will he also assure the House that, given the fact that the trade deal with India was signed just yesterday, there will be a clear demarcation of Government response and the Government will not feel in any way fettered, as a result of that trade deal, in acting as an honest broker between the two countries? This is an important matter and I hope that he can assure the House on it.
Our priority is to ensure direct contact between India and Pakistan and to ensure that those tensions are directly de-escalated. We are of course very proud that we are Commonwealth members with both India and Pakistan, and that Commonwealth membership reflects a deep and unique history between the UK and India and the UK and Pakistan. We welcome the free trade agreement that was announced yesterday, and of course these are close, deep friendships between both the countries involved. We will, in all our efforts, seek to restore regional stability and we will do that with both our friends.
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for your advice on tempering our language in here, because words have consequences. I thank the Minister for his statement and the Foreign Secretary for all the work that they are doing in the background. Yesterday in this House, we celebrated the end of world war two and I commended the role of the British Indian troops—now known as India and Pakistan—who fought shoulder to shoulder, with their shoulder to the wheel, to ensure that we, the allied troops, won and world war two was ended. As someone with Indian heritage, born in India and whose parents were born in Pakistan, I know only too well that neither nation will take a backward step, so what can the Minister do to assure me and my residents in Ilford South that we will do everything possible to bring both the superpowers to the negotiating table to restore peace to this volatile part of the world?
I thank my hon. Friend for the sensitive and personal tone that he brings to his remarks. I, too, have seen the Commonwealth war graves in Pakistan and India, which are a tribute to the service of many from the British Indian forces that fought in world war two. I can assure him and his constituents that we will do everything we can to play our full diplomatic role.
Given the significance and frightening ramifications of further tensions and instability between these two nuclear-armed neighbours, I agree with the Minister that de-escalation and diplomacy are the absolute priority. Can he tell the House whether he has sought assurances that UK-manufactured weapons and military equipment have not been used in attacks against civilians? Can I ask him now to explicitly rule out supplying any UK-made weaponry to either side, in a bid to increase the pressure on all parties to engage in much-needed dialogue?
We have some of the toughest arms export rules in the world, and they will be fully adhered to in this case. I do not intend to make further announcements from the Dispatch Box about that regime now, but I am sure that in due course I can return to the House to provide a further update.
Ten days ago, this House stood united in condemning the attacks on civilians on both sides of the conflict, yet since then, the violence has tragically escalated, with more innocent lives lost overnight as a result of an Indian attack on civilians in Pakistan and Azad Kashmir. While we all want to see an immediate de-escalation of military action to prevent further loss of life, does the Minister agree that lasting peace in the region cannot be achieved until the core issue of Kashmir is resolved and the Kashmiri people’s right to self-determination under the UN resolution is recognised and upheld?
I recognise my hon. Friend’s long advocacy on these questions. Today we are calling for de-escalation, and our position on Kashmir remains unchanged. I am sure I will return to this House to discuss the longer-term issues between India and Pakistan in the fullness of time.
May I welcome the Minister’s statement? Of course terrorism, wherever it occurs, should be condemned. On behalf of my constituents, many of whom are of Pakistani heritage and Indian heritage, may I join the Minister in calling for de-escalation and for dialogue between India and Pakistan? Ahead of the meeting in New York next week, what more can the UK do, as a permanent member of the UN Security Council, to ensure that the United States is fully engaged in that process?
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his tone and for his question. I can confirm that the Foreign Secretary and other members of the Government are in direct touch with other permanent members of the Security Council, including the United States.
This is a delicate moment, and it is in no one’s interest to see further escalation, so of course I condemn the loss of civilian life, both in the terror attacks and in the ongoing military strikes. I join the right hon. Member for The Wrekin (Mark Pritchard) in saying that it is really important that we work with our international allies and partners to try to de-escalate the situation. I was contacted by a constituent in the region who is concerned about himself and his family, so may I ask what role the FCDO is playing with British nationals in the region?
My hon. Friend is a doughty champion for her constituents. We have been updating the travel advice and I can confirm that my Department has taken steps to be able to respond as fully as possible to the concerns of our collective constituents who are in the region. Foreign Office travel advice will be the first and best place for constituents across the country to be looking.
I thank the Minister for his statement, and I associate myself with all Members of the House in the condemnation of the terror attack in Pahalgam. I want to express my concern at the military escalation between nuclear-armed neighbours, which has already resulted in the killing of 26 innocent people. I have thousands of Kashmiri and Indian constituents—I myself am of Indian heritage—and they are absolutely terrified by what they saw last night. They have been glued to their screens worrying about their loved ones. The Minister has already explained what diplomatic steps the UK is taking to de-escalate the situation, but will he reassure my constituents that those steps will be neutral and impartial, will not favour one country over the other, and will prioritise peace and stability in the region?
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question and for his acknowledgment of the importance of de-escalation. I confirm that we will prioritise regional stability, the reasonable interests of both countries and, indeed, the UK’s interest in the region, which includes stability between two great friends of this country.
I wholeheartedly support the Minister in his calls for de-escalation. I reiterate my condolences to the families who have lost loved ones in the attacks last month and overnight. About 20% of my constituents have Pakistani-Kashmiri heritage but, for our common humanity, we should extend our condolences to anyone of any religion or origin, from either side of the line of control, who has lost a loved one. Will the Minister confirm which international allies he has been working with to de-escalate tensions? Has the Minister been in contact with the United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan, which was established back in 1951 and has extensive intelligence in the region? If so, what has been said?
As well as the direct contact with India, Pakistan and the variety of other nations that I have mentioned, I can confirm that we will continue to be in wide touch, including with colleagues in the Gulf, and I am due to speak shortly to my Saudi Arabian counterparts. As the House would expect, we will be in regular and intense dialogue with all those with an interest in the region, and we will be sharing with them our calls for de-escalation.
Does the Minister agree that whether it is the Nile, the Indus or anywhere else, weaponising water is wrong and particularly affects the world’s poorest? Does he share my disappointment at the suspension of the 1960 Indus water treaty? Does he further share my concern that were India tempted to exploit that suspension, China might decide to interfere with the headwaters of the Brahmaputra?
The Indus river system is of enormous importance to both India and Pakistan, and it will be vital that all actors and international partners work towards its long-term sustainability.
I thank the Minister for his statement on this deeply concerning matter. Given that he has already highlighted the friendship that this country enjoys with both Pakistan and India, will he provide reassurances that it is in that manner that ongoing conversations with both countries will be conducted? Will he detail which conversations have already happened or are planned with our international allies to de-escalate the situation?
I can confirm that it will be in that spirit that we conduct our diplomatic efforts. Many hon. Members have alluded to their own family connections with India or Pakistan. As I said earlier, I lived in Pakistan during my first lengthy overseas posting. I know that many hon. Members from across the House feel our friendship with both India and Pakistan very deeply, and it is in that spirit that we will conduct our work.
My heart goes out to the families of the 26 tourists who were killed last month, but my heart also goes out to the 26 civilians and children who were killed in Pakistan last night. I urge the Government to do all they can to de-escalate the situation. Will the Minister confirm when our Prime Minister will speak to the Indian and Pakistani Governments, in particular Prime Minister Modi?
The Prime Minister spoke to Prime Minister Modi yesterday, before these events. We have been in touch overnight and throughout the day with the Indian Government, and I have been in touch throughout the course of the day with the Pakistani Government as well.
Everyone in this House knows that India has suffered a number of terrorist attacks over the years, including one on the Indian Parliament. Just last month, 26 innocent lives were lost following a devastating act of terrorism in Pahalgam. Although India has a right to defend itself and its people, does the Minister agree that war is not good for both sides, and that it is time for de-escalation and for Pakistan to work with India to eradicate terrorism from the region?
I agree with my hon. Friend that de-escalation is vital, and it is to that end that our efforts are dedicated.
I commend the Minister and the Foreign Secretary for their efforts to maintain dialogue with both countries and, in conjunction with international allies, to de-escalate the situation. Given the urgency for de-escalation, is there a reason why this matter cannot be taken to the UN Security Council for a more urgent discussion than is currently planned?
The agenda of the UN Security Council is agreed in New York, and when we are in a position to update the House on what that agenda looks like, we will of course do so.
I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests as chair of the all-party parliamentary group on Pakistan.
My constituency is home to people of Indian, Pakistani and Kashmiri heritage. They were all absolutely gutted when they heard about the incident that took place two weeks ago and about what happened last night, and my condolences go to the families of all those who have died. India’s decision to launch strikes without providing clear evidence of Pakistan’s involvement in recent attacks is reckless and deeply irresponsible. Pakistan, despite routinely being blamed, has actually suffered more from terrorism in the past 10 to 15 years than any country in the world. There was a terrorist attack there as recently as March. Pakistan has responded very carefully to what is happening. Will the Minister urge India to stop escalating tension and to press for credible evidence and dialogue, instead of aggression?
Our focus from the Dispatch Box is on de-escalation and regional stability. My hon. Friend, who has a long-standing commitment to these issues, is right to focus on the damage that the scourge of terrorism has caused Pakistanis, as well as others, and that has been the subject of many discussions between me and my Pakistani equivalent. Pakistan herself would most benefit from the eradication of the scourge of terrorism within her borders.
Every day we witness the collapse of international limits on force, diplomatic norms, humanitarian law and institutions built by nations after two world wars to secure a more peaceful world. Now, with two nuclear powers clashing and an escalation that could easily trigger a third world war, I ask the Minister to confirm the UK’s unwavering and unconditional commitment to international law, and to condemn the Indian state’s offensive against its sovereign neighbour, which has claimed the lives of 26 civilians, including children. I understand the views of Members across the House, but I wish to emphasise the paramount importance and urgency of settling the long-standing issue of Kashmir through multilateral means and under the mediation of international bodies, such as the UN, so that lasting peace can finally take root in the region.
As I am sure will be clear to all Members, I am focused on de-escalation and regional stability. The UK continues to stand by the importance of international humanitarian law and a rules-based international order. International humanitarian law governs the actions of all states towards necessity and proportionality, and we expect all of our friends, and indeed every nation state, to abide by them.
I represent a large Pakistani and Kashmiri community in Burton who are watching in horror and fear at the risk of further military escalation. Many have family and extended family in the region, and are understandably anxious about their safety and wellbeing. What assurances can the Minister offer to my constituents that the UK is actively engaging with all international partners to support de-escalation, protect wider regional stability and protect civilian lives?
I recognise the concerns that will be felt in my hon. Friend’s constituency, as they are felt in Lincoln and elsewhere. I can assure him and the whole House that we will use our full diplomatic weight to try to ensure de-escalation in the region.
I thank the Minister for his statement. Like other Members, all my heart is with the innocent lives that have been lost, and my condolences go to all those who grieve today. It is a salient reminder of what the pastor told us at my Baptist church in Newtownards a few weeks ago: there are 67 wars in the world, so this really is a world at war. With news reports this morning that up to five Indian air force planes may have been shot down, the escalation of this situation is clear and incredibly worrying. Does the Minister believe that we can successfully intervene and negotiate peace, and what assessment of nuclear capacity has been carried out to ensure global security?
The hon. Gentleman asks important questions. The UK’s goal is de-escalation to try to ensure that we return to regional stability. The other issues between India and Pakistan—which have long been discussed in this House—are important questions to which we can return, but today the focus must be on de-escalation.
I thank my hon. Friend for his statement and the sympathy he has shown to those affected by these tragic events. Residents in my constituency, which has a large Pakistani and Kashmiri community, are looking for leadership from the Government. They have family and friendship networks in the areas attacked last night that are deeply affected. We all recognise how sensitive and delicate the situation is, and the need for calm thinking and dialogue. Will the Minister outline in a little more detail the actions that the Government are taking to help reduce tensions and de-escalate the risks in this situation?
I thank my hon. Friend for his question and for the concern he shows for his constituents in Watford. As I have said, we are in regular touch with all those states that have an interest and with the two parties themselves, and we will continue to be so.
(2 weeks, 5 days ago)
Commons ChamberWith permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will make a statement on the middle east. Yesterday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced that the Israeli Security Cabinet has approved a plan to expand and intensify Israel’s military operations in Gaza. He said that the Israel Defence Forces operations will extend across more of Gaza. Tactics will no longer involve short raids, with the implication that Israel will hold the ground it takes. Reports suggest that the plans could include full military occupation of the Gaza strip. Prime Minister Netanyahu said that Gaza’s population will be moved “for its protection”. Tens of thousands of reservists are being called up. In parallel, the Security Cabinet reportedly approved a plan to deliver aid through private companies.
This comes at a time when the scale of civilian suffering and humanitarian need is already intolerable. More than 52,000 people have now been killed in Gaza. Israel has fully blocked the entry of humanitarian aid for over two months. The World Food Programme says its food stockpile has been exhausted. The announcements from the Israeli Government have rightly sparked grave concern that this conflict, which has already wrought so much bloodshed and suffering, may enter a dangerous new phase. I know that concern will be felt right across the House.
Let me make the Government position crystal clear: we strongly oppose the expansion of Israel’s operations. Any attempt to annex land in Gaza would be unacceptable. Palestinian territory must not be reduced or subjected to any demographic change. We want this war to end. We want an immediate ceasefire, the release of all hostages, the urgent provision of humanitarian aid and a pathway to a political solution.
We all recognise that Hamas continue to hold hostages in the cruellest fashion. Their actions show their complete disregard for the interests of the Palestinian people. Hamas must not divert aid for their own financial gain or use civilian infrastructure for military purposes. We repeat our demand for the immediate release of the hostages, but an expansion of this conflict is not the route to achieve their safe return. That is why it is so strongly opposed by so many hostages’ families. Negotiations offer the best hope of ending the agony of those waiting for loved ones who are held captive, alleviating the suffering of civilians, and ending Hamas’s control of Gaza. It is evident that Hamas cannot be defeated through military means alone. An expansion of military operations will result in the deaths of more innocent civilians and put the hostages at yet greater risk. The fighting must stop.
The Government have said since day one in office that the only way to ensure a path towards long-term peace and stability is an immediate ceasefire, the release of hostages, better protection of civilians and significantly more aid entering Gaza. Diplomacy is how we ensure security for Israelis and Palestinians, not more bloodshed. All the people of this region deserve to live in peace, prosperity and security. We urge all parties urgently to return to talks, implement the ceasefire agreement in full and work towards a permanent peace. We continue to use our full diplomatic weight to bring about a ceasefire and end the suffering.
After more than two months of aid into Gaza being blocked, Palestinians continue to face immense suffering. Essential supplies of food and medicine are either no longer available or quickly running out. As the United Nations has already said, it is hard to see how, if implemented, the new Israeli plan to deliver aid through private companies would be consistent with humanitarian principles and meet the scale of the need. We need urgent clarity from the Israeli Government on their intentions.
We must remember what is at stake. These humanitarian principles matter for every conflict around the world. They should be applied consistently in every war zone. As we have said repeatedly, humanitarian aid must never be used as a political tool, and Israel is bound under international law to allow the unhindered passage of humanitarian aid. I repeat my call for Israel to engage with partners to allow for a rapid and unhindered resurgence in the flow of aid into Gaza.
We reiterate our outrage at recent strikes by Israeli forces on humanitarian workers, infrastructure and healthcare facilities. Israel must do far more to protect the civilian population and humanitarian workers, and hold to account those who are responsible. Over a year since the appalling attack on the World Central Kitchen, in which three British nationals were tragically killed, we continue to press for a conclusion to the Israeli investigation and a decision as to whether criminal proceedings will be brought. The UN and humanitarian partners must be able to carry out their work in safety, in accordance with their principles.
Last week, we welcomed Prime Minister Mustafa of the Palestinian Authority to the United Kingdom. We signed a landmark memorandum of understanding and confirmed a £101 million package of support for the Occupied Palestinian Territories. We will continue to support the Palestinian Authority as the only legitimate governing entity in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, including in Gaza. During that visit, we reaffirmed the UK’s commitment to recognising a Palestinian state as a contribution to a two-state solution. Only a political horizon of moving towards a two-state solution can ensure the long-term peace and security of both Palestinians and Israelis. I commend this statement to the House.
I call the shadow Foreign Minister, Dame Priti Patel.
Today is day 578 since the atrocities of 7 October and the capture of the hostages. Fifty-nine innocent hostages continue to be held in cruel captivity by Hamas, and those who are still alive have no access to aid or communication with their family. Does the Minister agree that Iran and Hamas are to blame for events since 7 October, and that the immediate return of hostages would aid efforts to secure the ceasefire? What discussions has the Foreign Secretary had in recent days with the US, and with middle eastern and other partners who have brokered previous agreements on efforts to secure the release of the hostages? What exactly is Britain contributing to these efforts? Is the UK’s convening power being used effectively, and what international pressure is the UK trying to bring to bear on Hamas to release the hostages and to ensure their removal from power?
The Minister stated that Hamas cannot be defeated through military means. On what basis has he reached that assertion, and what is his alternative to get Hamas to lay down their arms? On aid, he mentioned the Israeli Government’s fears about aid diversion. If the current situation on aid access is to be unblocked, the Government must seriously engage with Israel to address the many concerns, and the broader situation, that have led to the breakdown of the ceasefire. How much UK-funded aid is waiting to enter Gaza, where is it being held, and what is the Minister doing to engage with his Israeli counterparts, so as to find practical solutions to this issue? What engagement has taken place between the Foreign Secretary and his Israeli counterparts on the decision of the Israeli Security Cabinet to undertake this new operation in Gaza, including on its objectives?
We all want to see a sustainable end to the conflict, the return of the hostages, the alleviation of this awful crisis and, eventually, a two-state solution, with the region free of Hamas and of threats from Iran. The Government talk about wanting to achieve these things, but clearly they need to convince us all that there is a plan for achieving them. Let us be clear: the root cause of so much bloodshed and misery in the middle east is the regime in Iran, and if this Government are serious about achieving a sustainable peace in the middle east, they must have a strategy to deter Iran and undermine its regime and its awful approach, which is to sow destruction and export repression around the world, including to the UK; we heard about that in a statement earlier. When will the Government come out with a clear strategy for dealing with this malign threat to peace and stability, both in the middle east and elsewhere?
For months we have been asking questions of this Government; in fact, I asked the Minister the same question just last week. As we saw on 27 March, the Intelligence and Security Committee sent a report on Iran to the Prime Minister. How many more militants and terrorists will be bankrolled by Iran, threatening lives, before the Government have a clear strategy in place? What engagement is taking place with the US to tackle Iran’s destructive influence and ensure that it never becomes a nuclear state?
While the Minister is at the Dispatch Box, can he update us on other matters in the middle east? On Sunday, the Iranian-backed Houthis recklessly fired a missile at Israel, which landed near the main terminal of Ben Gurion airport and injured six people. Let alone the risk to aviation, many more could have been injured or killed on the ground; that, no doubt, must have been the desired outcome of the Houthis. Do the Government have a plan to deal with the ongoing threats of the Houthis, including the threat they pose to stability and security and to our own interests?
On Syria, the Government announced to the media on 24 April that they were lifting 24 more sanctions, but it took six days before they informed the House through a written ministerial statement that they would be doing so. Will the Minister explain why the House was given that discourtesy and why the matter was not brought to the House earlier? We still have no clarity about the criteria being used to lift the sanctions, the entities identified or the impact. The Government are also not applying any conditions. The US is imposing conditions on Syria when it comes to easing sanctions, including destroying chemical weapons and co-operating on counter-terrorism.
Will the Government explain why they have taken a different route from our allies when we have consistently worked in concert with our international partners? Why are we now working in isolation and in such an unco-ordinated way? The last Conservative Government led a co-ordinated approach when it came to Syria, and this Government are now behind the curve. We have to be cautious when it comes to lifting sanctions. The situation in Syria is fragile, particularly when we saw the appalling clashes between the pro-Government and Druze communities. Are the Government pressing Hayat Tahrir al-Sham into action?
Finally, will the Minister update the House on the situation in Lebanon? What is his assessment of the current situation, including the adherence to the ceasefire, the terms of UN Security Council resolution 1701 and the broader political stability?
I thank the right hon. Lady for her important questions. I take the opportunity to respond to her important questions about the attack on Ben Gurion airport. I absolutely condemn the Houthis’ continued missile attacks, including the attack on Ben Gurion airport over the weekend. Israel has extensive experience of the dangers of civil aviation attacks of this kind, and we reiterate our support for its right to self-defence in the face of Houthi attacks. The House heard from the Defence Secretary last week some of the efforts we are taking in the collective self-defence of our allies in the Red sea.
The right hon. Lady raised a number of other important points. I can update the House that we are in regular contact with those pressing for a ceasefire in the region—most obviously, of course, the President of the United States’ special envoy, Mr Witkoff, who I believe is in the region now. Of course, the Foreign Secretary has been in touch with his counterpart in Israel, as well as with many others. He has been in Oman and Qatar recently, and as the right hon. Lady would expect, I have been in regular contact with all those with an interest.
The right hon. Lady asks for an update on sanctions. I was not aware of any discourtesy in the sequence of how we announced the Syria sanctions, but I am happy to take that point away. If there was any discourtesy, I can assure her that it was accidental. We took the steps that we did in relation to sanctions because we want the new Syrian Government to succeed. Britain’s interests—indeed, Israel’s interests—are in a stable and secure Syria. The new Syrian Government have taken welcome steps. As the right hon. Lady points out, there are still areas of major concern, but the judgment that I took alongside the Foreign Secretary was that we should lift sanctions that clearly no longer targeted entities controlled by the Assad regime—given that it is clearly no longer in power in Syria—and maintain sanctions where assets held by the Assad family were still relevant. We took a series of principled steps to try to ensure that the new Syria has the best possible chance of being the success that would be in Britain’s national interest. We maintained those sanctions on the Assad family, and we did so in close co-operation with our allies.
I agree with the Minister’s comments and condemnation of Israel’s actions in Gaza. The problem is that I have agreed with him every time he has made these condemnations of Israel, and the whole House generally has joined him in that, but the reality is that Israel is taking absolutely no notice of the Government’s position. Its actions now in Gaza—the starving of the population and the threats of wholesale movement of that population away—are completely unacceptable. Will the Minister consider a rapid recognition of a Palestinian state, hopefully together with France and other allies, and will he seriously consider sanctions against Israel if it pursues the wholesale removal of Palestinians from their homes?
I know the strength of feeling of my hon. Friend and of so many Members on the Benches behind me and, indeed, across the House. It is obviously a source of great anguish to me and all in the Government that we continue, this far into our government, to not have the ceasefire in place that we have long called for. We are working with our allies to try to persuade Israel to change course. As he will know, I will not comment on sanctions from the Dispatch Box, but we have been as clear as we can on our position in relation to the many areas we have discussed in the House week after week, month after month where there has been a failure to see improvement, whether that is the protection of civilians or aid into Gaza. We will, of course, continue to discuss all other matters in relation to this fraught and tragic situation with our close partners, as he would expect.
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
The Israeli Government’s decision to approve plans for an expanded offensive, summarised by officials as the “conquest” of Gaza, is disgraceful. It will wreak more devastation and displacement on Palestinians after months of bombardment. It will also narrow the path back to a ceasefire, while severely harming the chances of getting the remaining hostages in Hamas’s captivity back to Israel alive. Does the Minister agree that if the Israeli Government carried out their threat to seize and hold Gaza, that would constitute a further flagrant breach of international law? In that instance, what would this Government’s response be?
The latest aid blockade of Gaza has now lasted for more than 60 days. The UN has described it as a “growing humanitarian catastrophe”. Prime Minister Netanyahu’s latest proposal to deliver aid through private companies at military hubs appears to contravene basic principles of international humanitarian law, including the neutrality of aid, and has been criticised by aid organisations as dangerous and unworkable.
The Israeli Government’s refusal to reopen aid routes is utterly unacceptable and contravenes their obligations as an occupying power. We welcomed the Government’s pledge of a £101 million package of support for the Occupied Palestinian Territories. However, without more action to secure the reopening of aid pathways, this new package will provide limited relief for Palestinians suffering in the strip. Can the Minister provide details on how the Government are working with international partners to pressure the Israeli Government to allow their aid to reach Gaza? Can he update the House on whether contingency measures are being considered to ensure that aid reaches those suffering in Gaza, even if the Israeli Government continue to block the direct supply of aid into the strip?
The hon. Lady asks a series of important questions. I sought in my statement to focus very clearly on what has been announced by the Israeli Government, including by Prime Minister Netanyahu on Sunday. I do not wish to be drawn into speculation about the various reports of how this operation may be conducted; I wish to stick only to the public announcements.
We have been clear all the way along in our commitment to a ceasefire and our desire to return to the framework of the ceasefire that was negotiated with such relief. We are in regular touch with Special Envoy Witkoff. We hope that through his efforts, he will be able to secure a return to a ceasefire. That would be far preferable on all the axes that the hon. Lady describes, whether that is the safe return of hostages, the desperate need for humanitarian aid to return to Gaza or, in our view, Israel’s security. She asks important questions about the role of an occupying power in the provision of aid. My officials set out our view on the legal position on Friday at the International Court of Justice.
The Israeli Government’s plan to expand their military operation in Gaza and displace its population speaks volumes about the effects of their impunity—impunity to break international law, to cut off food and medical supplies, to starve a population and to kill tens of thousands of civilians. What will the Minister do to end the impunity with which Israel is acting? When will he finally sanction those Israeli Ministers, apply a full arms embargo, ban all settlement goods and, most importantly, recognise Palestine?
I thank my hon. Friend for her important questions. I have set out at the Dispatch Box the steps we have taken, whether it is in relation to sanctions, arms or goods, and I will not rehearse them here; I can see that many Members want to contribute. As she would expect, I will not comment on further sanctions.
My hon. Friend asks the question that I know is on the lips of so many in this House, about recognition. What we see in Gaza and the announcements over the weekend are a very significant, immediate and practical threat to the viability of Palestinian life, and we are taking every practical step we can, alongside our allies, to try to focus on the ceasefire. That must be our most immediate priority, given the threats that hang over such a significant civilian population as we speak.
In his statement, the Minister said that the UK Government
“reaffirmed the UK’s commitment to recognising a Palestinian state”.
Up to now, the excuse has been that we have to wait until negotiations are complete. There are no negotiations—all we have is extremist settlers trying to force out Palestinian people from their villages in the west bank, which I have seen with my own eyes. In the name of God, why can we not give the Palestinian people some hope? Why can we not give them the same right to self-determination and recognise a Palestinian state now?
I thank the right hon. Gentleman and my constituency neighbour for his commitment to these issues. The problems the Palestinian people face at this moment are acute, immediate and practical. As I have set out, we stand by our commitments. We want to make a contribution to practically improving the lives of the Palestinian people, and we will view recognition in that light.
No one can deny any longer that Israel is committing war crime after war crime, with over 50,000 Palestinians killed, millions forcibly displaced, the complete blockade of Gaza for the last two months and now plans to annex the entirety of the Gaza strip. Just what will it take for the Government to properly act over Netanyahu’s breaking of every single international norm and rule? I say to the Minister that simply opposing the expansion of military operations from the Dispatch Box is not securing peace or helping the Palestinian people. The Government have rightly imposed widespread sanctions on Russia. Why do they refuse to impose widespread sanctions on Israel?
I recognise the passion in my hon. Friend’s voice, and as he knows, it is not just at this Dispatch Box that we have set out our views. He asks for widespread sanctions. Of course, as the House knows, we have imposed sanctions on violent settlers, and we have suspended arms licences, according to a careful process and having looked at the risks to international humanitarian law. We will continue to take action across the full range of our diplomatic options, and not just at this Dispatch Box, as he would expect.
What dialogue is ongoing with Egypt at this time? There are concerns about the pressure on Egypt, not just from the situation in Gaza and its obvious interest in the Rafah crossing, but in the south from the conflict in Sudan. Egypt remains an important party in getting to a resolution. What is the Government’s current dialogue with and support for Egypt?
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his important question. Of course the conflict affects not just Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories but many of its neighbours, including Egypt. I confirm that the Government have been in regular dialogue with their Egyptian counterparts, and I have an upcoming exchange with one of my Egyptian counterparts on exactly these questions.
The people of Gaza are being starved deliberately, and they need full, immediate, unimpeded delivery of adequate aid. Will the UK Government insist that Israel ensures that aid is distributed not by private military contractors, but by the UN and international agencies, according to the UN’s recognised humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, independence and impartiality?
My hon. Friend rightly highlights the importance of the humanitarian principles she outlines. Those are important principles not just in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, but right across the world. It is a proud part of British history that we have been such forceful advocates for those principles, and we will continue to be so with Israel and any others who seek to undermine them.
The hon. Member will forgive me, but there are few things more infuriating in this House than listening to Ministers—whether they are of the blue persuasion, or of the red persuasion, as now—fail to call out collective punishment for what it is, fail to call out war crimes for what they are, continue to justify the sale of arms to Israel, and find every excuse possible not to recognise the state of Palestine. Perhaps he will be the one who surprises me, gets to his feet, and says that the plan as laid out by Benjamin Netanyahu is tantamount to ethnic cleansing. Will he do that, yes or no?
The right hon. Gentleman, perhaps unsurprisingly, goes for rhetoric, and he wants me to opine on questions of law and make determinations that Ministers, for a long time, have rightly chosen to treat as questions for the courts. He asked me to take action. As a Government, the Labour party has taken action. It has taken action on arms, and on sanctions—we have a record that we can defend; we are not simply here for rhetoric.
Not a week goes by without more worrying news coming out of the middle east, and my thoughts are with the innocent people in Gaza who are worried about a new offensive, with the hostage families who are worried about their loved ones, and with Israel following the Houthi attack. Will the Minister join me in condemning the Houthi attack, and in calling for negotiations to continue that will see aid get into Gaza and hostages returned home?
I thank my hon. Friend for his question—I know of his long personal commitment to those so badly affected by this conflict. I join him in condemnation of the Houthi attack. The House should be under no illusions about the nature of the Houthis. They are no friend to the Palestinians, and their repeated strikes against international shipping—indeed, against practically any flagged vessel that crosses through the Red sea—are a threat to global peace and security, and to international trade. Their actions targeting civilian aviation do nothing for the Palestinian people.
After 18 months of the diplomacy that the Minister referred to, it is clear that Israel has not significantly complied once. After watching children being shot in the streets, medics and hospitals consistently targeted, British citizens and rescue workers murdered and their bodies concealed, red lines such as Rafah reduced to rubble, and the hostages still in captivity, we now learn from an Israeli Government Minister that Gaza is to be “entirely destroyed”. We are watching the livestreamed starvation of an entire people. The Minister talked about his anguish, which I know is genuine, but can he not see what the majority of the House can see, which is that he is facing a catastrophic failure of Government policy, for which the Palestinians, the Israelis and the rest of us may well pay a heavy price for many years to come? He is an intelligent man. Can he not see the moral and tactical case for a change in strategy that might bring about peace?
The right hon. Gentleman talks powerfully, and the scenes in Gaza are visible to us all. He asks questions about tactics and strategy, and the right strategy must be over the next two weeks for Special Envoy Witkoff’s efforts to see success. We need to see a ceasefire restored. Those who are advocating for that political process need our full support, and that is where the efforts of the Government are focused.
Israeli Government Minister Smotrich said today that Gaza is to be “entirely destroyed”, and its people are to “leave in great numbers to third countries”.
That latest threat is on top of the deliberate blockage of aid into Gaza, on top of the ongoing displacement of the past 19 months, and on top of 50,000 deaths. There are clearly breaches of international humanitarian law. The Minister has been clear in his condemnation, and clear that this is not the way to bring the hostages home. If the Israeli Government are not listening to his words, and surely they are not, will he consider what meaningful action the Government can take? Will he consider further sanctions against Israeli Ministers, and against goods that are made in illegal settlements on stolen Palestinian land?
I thank my hon. Friend for her important question. Clearly the rhetoric of some Israeli Government Ministers has crossed a threshold after which we would all condemn them—the Foreign Secretary has condemned a series of statements. I was not familiar with that statement, but it looks as if it would fall very much in the same category. As she would expect, I will not comment on further sanctions. As I have made clear, we have taken action and we will keep further action under review.
The Minister has made the Government’s position crystal clear that the Israeli plan is unacceptable. How will British Government policy towards Israel change as that plan is implemented?
As the right hon. Gentleman will know, we hope to avoid having to deal with that hypothetical, and we will seek to persuade the Israeli Government not to embark on a path so damaging, for all the reasons I have set out this afternoon. I am sure the right hon. Gentleman will be asking me that question in the House should we fail.
Yet again, the unimaginable horror of what is happening in Gaza has been joined by yet more unacceptable behaviour from the Israeli Government. Let me be clear to the House: the butchers of Hamas could draw this to an end today by releasing the hostages, but that does not make right the starvation and destruction of the Palestinian people in Gaza. A dictionary definition of ethnic cleansing includes the mass expulsion of a people from their land. I ask the Minister two questions. What does he think and how does he feel when he hears Israeli Ministers say:
“We are finally going to occupy the Gaza Strip… Once we occupy…we can talk about sovereignty”?
Those of us on the Labour Benches stood on a manifesto commitment to recognise the state of Palestine. If not now, when?
My hon. Friend has a deep commitment to these issues; he raises them here and elsewhere often. Let me be clear: any attempt to annex land in Gaza would be unacceptable. Palestinian territory must not be reduced or subjected to any demographic change. He can read from that the strength of our views on some of the announcements made by some of those associated with the Israeli Government. We want to see a Palestinian state that can function safely, side by side with a safe Israeli state, and it is regrettable that that seems like such a distant prospect. I am sure that we will continue this discussion in the House in the weeks and months to come.
In the light of the latest outrage from the Netanyahu Government in displacing hundreds of thousands of innocent Palestinians, which comes on top of the starvation of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, the murdering of aid workers and the expansion of violence by settlers, we get from the Minister strong opposition, a request for “urgent clarity” and a reiteration of his “outrage”. He says that he is taking action, but he can hear from all sides of the House that nobody is satisfied with the level of action that the British Government are taking. I implore him to listen to the support from all sides of the House, recognise a Palestinian state, impose a full arms embargo on Israel and sanction Smotrich and Ben-Gvir. In the name of God, as others have said, please can we get aid into Gaza so that people will stop starving?
The hon. Lady is right to press on the absolutely vital importance of aid getting into Gaza. Those are points that we make regularly and with force to the Israeli Government. Part of my anguish is about the reports that I read, as so many in the House do, of the continued failure for that to happen. I will address a point that I think she may have made, which others have also made, about whether there are alternative routes to get aid into Gaza. A range of alternative routes, other than through the land crossing, have been tried. It is the view of the British Government that no route other than a land route can get the scale of aid that is now required into Gaza. Israeli decision making is preventing those land routes from being in operation. The hon. Lady asks about the recognition of a Palestinian state, and I refer her to my previous answers.
I thank my hon. Friend for his statement following yet another appalling turn of events towards Gaza by the Israeli Government. In a Westminster Hall debate in February, I said I feared that
“if the occupation continues, it will become increasingly difficult to apply international law to the situation on the ground.”—[Official Report, 12 February 2025; Vol. 762, c. 198WH.]
I now fear that if we do not recognise a Palestinian state, there will be no Palestinian state that includes Gaza left to recognise. Will the UK Government take immediate steps to recognise the state of Palestine?
We are clear about the principles of international law that apply. As I said to the right hon. Member for Witham (Priti Patel), on Friday we appeared at the International Court of Justice to set out our understanding of the obligations on an occupying power—in this case, Israel. We were clear about what international law, in our view, meant for the occupying power.
As we have heard, the Netanyahu Cabinet has approved an illegal plan to expand its military offensive to capture and occupy all of Gaza. That will put 1 million children at acute risk of starvation, epidemic disease and death, with the deliberate blockade of food and essential supplies. Does the Minister deny that that constitutes genocide in real time? When did he last assess the real risk that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza?
As the House knows, I will not make a determination from this Dispatch Box on questions of law. We assess risk. I can confirm that those assessments are ongoing and that a prevention of humanitarian aid reaching Gaza is part of them.
As we approach the anniversary of the ICJ advisory opinion on the occupation, what is delaying the UK Government’s response? Is it that the opinion requires not just recognition that the occupation is illegal, but the Government to set out what steps they will take to end that occupation? Will the Minister at least say from the Dispatch Box whether the Government believe that the movement of the Palestinian population of Gaza would constitute a forcible displacement?
Forcible movement of the Gazan population out of Gaza would be forcible displacement, and that is a clear concept in international law.
Israel is an important security, trade and democratic partner, but that does not give it a blank cheque. The fact is that 13,000 children have been killed and 25,000 have been injured, maimed or wounded—some of them have been orphaned. I have been in this House for 20 years, and for many years I have supported Israel—pretty much at all costs, quite frankly—but today I say that I got it wrong. I condemn Israel for what it is doing to the Palestinian people in Gaza and the west bank. I withdraw my support right now for the actions of Israel and what it is doing right now in Gaza. Of course the hostages should be released, of course Israel has a right to exist, and of course Israeli and Jewish people should have the right to live in peace, but so do the Palestinian people. I have said it before, and I will say it again: the life of a Palestinian child is as precious as the life of a Jewish child.
This is a particular moment in time. We have had lots of statements over the past 18 months. Not only is this not Parliament’s greatest hour, but I am really concerned that this is a moment in history on which people will look back and in which we have got it wrong as a country. Will the Minister stand up to our friends and allies in the United States and make a strong stand for humanity, for us to be on the right side of history and for having the moral courage to lead, not just to follow the United States, and to make a difference? That is why we are all elected here. Let us stand up for life. Let us stand up for all children, not just Jewish children.
That was a very powerful intervention. I will not linger long in the answer, other than to say that I hear the right hon. Gentleman’s words and feel their force. I will of course endeavour to stand up on the international stage and here at this Dispatch Box equal to the strength of some of these contributions.
We have heard throughout the afternoon all the things in Gaza that have been committed by Israel. The truth of the matter is that Israel is committing the cold-blooded murder of medics, civilians, UN staff and even many aid workers in the aid flotilla in international waters. In the west bank, there are more than 500,000 illegal settlers, and illegal violent settlers using force, backed by the IDF and the Israelis, have been killing and maiming people. Does that not show that the actions of Israel have been all about occupying Gaza and the west bank and that, as Israeli Cabinet Ministers have been saying, Israel basically wants a full Judea and Samaria and that it will not stop at Gaza or the west bank, but continue?
Order. Before I bring in the Minister, may I ask hon. Members and the Minister to make their questions and answers a little bit shorter?
Let me restate the British Government’s position in relation to the west bank and the Gaza strip: we hope that both those territories will be a vital part of a single Palestinian state and that is the objective towards which we strive.
In the past year, 100,000 tonnes of bombs have been dropped on Gaza, which is the equivalent of five times the power of the nuclear weapons used over Hiroshima and Nagasaki some 80 years ago. That action in Gaza has resulted in the deaths of at least 60,000 people, and on top of that we are now going to have the complete invasion of Gaza by Israel. At what point will the Government cease all arms supplies and military co-operation with Israel, cease the use of RAF Akrotiri and, above all, stop the export of any parts for F-35 jets, which have been complicit in the killing of 60,000 people in Gaza? Surely it is time for the British Government to say no: no more, no weapons, no co-operation, no support, and to save lives in Gaza and the west bank. Now is the time to say and do that.
I have set out the position in relation to the carve-out for F-35 components. To be clear to the House, we have suspended the sale of F-35 parts where they go directly to Israel. It is only when we do not know their final destination that their sale is not suspended. I will not rehearse the recognition points, given the pressure on time.
Let us be clear, the masked murderers of Hamas could end the suffering of the Gazan people today if they released the hostages and agreed to a ceasefire. But let us also be clear that this extremist Israeli Government, in their own actions in the past few days and weeks, are endangering the state of Israel. As the right hon. Member for The Wrekin (Mark Pritchard) made absolutely clear, the Israeli Government are undermining the state of Israel by their actions, more than any Hamas extremist could dream of. I agree with what the Minister says about practical measures and pragmatism rather than symbolism, but does he not think that the most practical step that this country can take is to recognise the state of Palestine, in conjunction with other states, as soon as possible, in order to move the peace process on?
I assure my hon. Friend that we want to move this process on, towards a political horizon and a peaceful solution, as quickly as we possibly can.
I have been in the Minister’s shoes and I sympathise with him as he grapples with an extremely complicated and fraught situation, but does he agree that there cannot be any sustainable peace in the region or a viable Palestine without dealing with Hamas? If so, what would be his plan to achieve that with others, beyond pious rhetoric and hand-wringing?
The right hon. Gentleman is knowledgeable and experienced. He is right to focus on the central importance of removing Hamas from any position in Gaza where they could pose a threat, both to the Palestinian people and to Israeli civilians, who have suffered so terribly at their hands. The answer is to remove Hamas and have the Palestinian Authority returned to their rightful place as the sole legitimate Government authority for both the west bank and Gaza.
In addition to continuing its cruel aid blockade, a far-right Israeli Minister deplorably told a gathering in the Occupied Palestinian Territories that Gaza is to be “entirely destroyed” and Palestinians will be forced to flee in large numbers “to third countries”. Will the Minister wholeheartedly condemn that, as well as the Netanyahu regime’s proposals to expand their military operations in Gaza? Will he confirm to the House exactly what the Government are doing, with their international allies, to stop these cruel and callous proposals?
As I told my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes), I have not seen those remarks, but we have been clear about what we think is acceptable and we have condemned remarks by other Israeli Ministers. Once I have had an opportunity to review the remarks that my hon. Friends mention, I am sure I will be in a position to provide a further comment. I reiterate our condemnation of the cruelty of some of the measures that have been put in place, particularly the block on aid into Gaza.
An Israeli human rights group has now described Israel as using starvation as a method of warfare, which is a war crime under article 54 of the Geneva convention. Will the Minister join Ireland, South Africa and many other countries in clarifying that there has been a genocide and apartheid against the people of Palestine? It is time to speak up and out, and to speak for Palestine.
I will not rehearse the points I have already made about the determination of genocide and about recognition.
The evacuation orders of the Israeli forces have resulted in the forcible transfer of Palestinians in Gaza into ever-shrinking spaces, where they have little or no access to lifesaving services and continue to be subjected to attacks. What steps will the Government take to put pressure on Israel to ensure it does not go ahead with its plans to move Gaza’s population? Do the Government agree that the plans constitute forced displacement, which is a war crime?
As I have said, we are clear on the status of forced displacement under international law. My hon. Friend’s contribution is very important. I know many hon. Members are conscious of the multiple displacements of many Palestinians in Gaza, who have been displaced not once or twice, but in many cases more than three times. The treatment of Palestinian civilians who are just trying to live is terrible, and I share the feelings of the House about that.
The UK Government were right to state at the International Court of Justice last week that Israel has a responsibility under international law to provide food and essential humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza, and yet we know that Israel has blocked all aid shipments for the past two months. Given the catastrophe unfolding before our eyes, is it not worth resurrecting negotiations and discussions with international allies about the possible airdrop of humanitarian aid, so that, at the very least, we cannot say that we sat idly by and watched an entire population starve?
We have been involved in discussions about airdrops. There is a role for them and we have spoken with partners in the region who have been keen to see airdrops as a contribution, particularly given the pressures on aid, and I am not ruling them out. However, given the scale of humanitarian aid that is needed, I must be clear with the House that helicopter airdrops can only reach a certain level, so while that aid would be welcome, it would be a very partial response to the scale of need that we see.
The Israeli Government’s plan to expand their military offensive in Gaza, including holding ground and moving the Palestinian population to the south of the district, is wholly unacceptable. It is a clear act of aggression and flies in the face of international law. I welcome the Minister’s statement that this Government strongly condemn Israel’s actions, but does he accept from voices across the House that the recognition of Palestine as a state is imperative if we are to work towards a lasting peace?
I agree with my hon. Friend that a safe and secure Palestinian state, alongside its neighbour, a safe and secure Israeli state, will in the end be the vital component of sustainable peace in the region.
Madam Deputy Speaker,
“Gaza will be entirely destroyed”.
That is a direct quote from Israel’s Minister of Finance, Bezalel Smotrich, earlier today. That is the language of ethnic cleansing and genocide from a pariah Government who are using starvation as a weapon of war. Warnings that the Israeli Government will seek to displace the entire Palestinian population and flatten all of Gaza have been repeatedly ignored by this Government over many months, yet that is now the reality that Gazans face. Given that the UK have continued to give support to Israel throughout the conflict—there are reports that an RAF jet flew to Israel with F-35 parts and military personnel only last week—have British intelligence services and the Foreign Office been blindsided by Israel’s approved plan?
If the hon. Gentleman is asking whether the Foreign Office was aware of the plan before it was announced, the answer is that we were not aware. In all of our interactions since we became the Government, we have been clear on the view we would take on proposals of this nature.
For more than a year and a half, we have witnessed a genocide being livestreamed on our screens. We have seen children in Gaza being blown apart by Israeli bombs and infants wasting away from Israel’s imposed starvation, and now Israel is proposing a full invasion and occupation of the entire strip. The Israeli Government are making a mockery of international law, and we are enabling it. It is not enough for the UK Government just to condemn the Israeli Government; when will our Government end all arms sales to Israel and implement trade sanctions? We cannot be asking in years to come, “What did we do to prevent a genocide?” and for the answer to be, “Not enough.”
I will not rehearse the F-35 points that I discussed with the right hon. Member for Islington North (Jeremy Corbyn), but on my hon. Friend’s point about international law, this Government will continue to stand for international law, as we did on Friday at the ICJ. We were absolutely clear on our position on international law as it pertains to the occupying power, which is what Israel finds itself as in Gaza.
From the Father of the House to the 2024 intake, we are hearing across the Chamber—from Labour, Conservative, Green, Plaid and Scottish National colleagues—a consensus about what the Government need to do on behalf of the British people. We need our Government to recognise the Palestinian state, we need to make sure that the hostages are returned home, and we need to stop the killing of innocent Palestinians who are now faced with starvation. Minister, on behalf of this House of Commons, I plead with you and the Government to take action—
I have been at this Dispatch Box on many occasions discussing these issues, but I can confirm to the hon. Gentleman that I have felt the force of the contributions made this afternoon.
I thank the Minister for coming to the House this afternoon to give this update, and for his strong opposition to the proposed expansion of Israel’s military operation. Constituents continue to be horrified—as do we all—by the consequences of the assault on Gaza, the blockade of aid, and now the news of escalation this weekend. They ask, if diplomacy is failing, what comes next? What more can the Minister tell my constituents about the latest negotiations? I join others from across the House in the call for meaningful action, including recognition.
We are fully committed to playing our full diplomatic role. I hear the frustrations of my hon. Friend’s constituents—indeed, I hear the same frustrations from my own constituents in Lincoln. I know that many across the country watch these scenes with growing horror that they continue this long into the conflict. We will be working on this issue, including with our European partners, particularly France and Germany. We have issued E3 statements together; it is a source of shared frustration that more progress has not been made. As I said in an earlier answer, we hope to see progress towards a ceasefire. We are supporting the efforts of Special Envoy Witkoff in that regard, and we will spare no effort.
Over and over again, from all parts of this House, we witness grandstanding against mass migration and the most vulnerable in any society—refugees and asylum seekers—while knowing all too well that refugee crises are not born in a vacuum, as attested to by the situation unfolding in Gaza before the eyes of the world. Refugees have no choice; they are forced out of their homes and thrust on the world, looking for somewhere safe to seek asylum. After last week’s elections, the Prime Minister—
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. After last week’s elections, the Prime Minister pledged to the British public that he would go harder on the issue of migration. Given what the Israeli Government are now saying, I ask the Minister whether his Government will come down harder—through action, not mere condemnation—to ensure that the world is not faced with a new and devastating refugee crisis.
As the hon. Gentleman knows, one of the most painful elements of this crisis has been that even those Palestinians in Gaza who wish to leave have not been able to do so. Regrettably, we have already discussed forced displacement many times this afternoon, so I will not rehearse the point, but I can assure him that in the face of potential further escalation in the conflict, we will redouble our efforts to secure the ceasefire that I know everybody in this House wants to see restored.
I am going to get all Members in, but I urge short questions.
Israel is starving Gaza to death. I am sorry, Minister, but when Israel is using starvation as a weapon of war and Palestinians are being ethnically cleansed before our eyes, mere words of regret or condemnation from the Government are simply not good enough. We in this House will be judged in history for failing the Palestinian people, so I urge the Minister to listen to the consensus that is being built across the House today and act. We do not need words; we need action for the Palestinian people.
I have heard the force of the contributions. I say gently to my hon. Friend that unlike my predecessors, I have taken action in response to this crisis, as have the Foreign Secretary and others. However, in the face of the scenes coming out of Gaza, it is clear that no one can be claiming victory at the moment.
I thank the Minister for his statement, as well as for his carefully chosen words; it is never easy to respond to all these questions. As he has stated, peace talks must be a priority for the region, and it is absolutely essential that food and aid can reach children. Has the Minister been able to talk with our allies in Israel about allowing independent third parties immediate access to Gaza to distribute needed supplies, while also ensuring—very importantly—that Israel’s safety is not compromised in any way?
The hon. Gentleman talks about the importance of independence and impartiality, which are exactly the principles that should be guiding the humanitarian operation in Gaza. He is absolutely right that Hamas must not be diverting aid for their own financial gain or using civilian infrastructure for military purposes. The best way to ensure that is to open up Gaza and allow the aid agencies in to operate effectively.
The Israeli Government have publicly declared their intent to occupy Gaza indefinitely, and are systematically denying Gaza’s entire population access to the most basic needs for sustaining human survival. This is a war crime, so does the Minister agree that, alongside France, the UK Government must urgently recognise the state of Palestine at the United Nations conference on the two-state solution in June?
I reassure my hon. Friend that we want to make our full contribution in moving a two-state solution forward, and of course, we are in touch with all key regional partners in the run-up to the June conference.
Missing from so much of the debate around the awful conflict in Gaza are the voices of the Israeli people and the opposition. They have been crying out for another hostage and ceasefire deal. Israel is a liberal democracy with elections due next year. Does the Minister agree with opposition figures, such as Yair Lapid, Benny Gantz and Yair Golan, that the threatened expansion of operations in Gaza will do nothing to bring the 59 hostages home or to remove the Iranian-sponsored death cult that is Hamas?
My hon. Friend has a deep focus on these issues and is committed to playing his full role here in them. He will understand why I decline the opportunity to comment on Israel’s internal politics. I will restate the British Government’s view, though, that the fastest route to safety for those hostages is a ceasefire. The points that he makes are made with some force.
I thank the Minister for his statement. I appreciate that the Minister cannot comment directly on sanctions, but he knows that I have privately urged him to consider further sanctions and further measurable action. Given the ongoing horror and the statement from the Israeli Government, please will the Minister consider further concrete action?
My hon. Friend guesses right about my likely response: I will not comment on sanctions from this Dispatch Box. She has raised these issues with real force with me, and I am sure that she will continue to do so. We will continue to keep sanctions under review.
I thank the Minister for his statement, and I very much welcome the strong words of condemnation. None of us will ever forget the horrors of 7 October for the Israeli people, but these latest announcements show an Israeli Government who I fear are out of control and making fools of us as allies. First, when my hon. Friend commits to using the full diplomatic weight to bring about that ceasefire that we all urgently want to see, what concrete next steps does he envisage, given that neither Hamas nor Netanyahu seem bothered in the slightest about international humanitarian law? Secondly, the Prime Minister has previously described the recognition of a Palestinian state as an “undeniable right”, so when will we see that right honoured?
I thank my hon. Friend for his commitment to these issues. I will not rehearse the arguments about recognition. It is obviously a vital part of what I hope will be a practical set of steps forward to try to address the truly horrific scenes we see emanating from Gaza. I join him in pressing on those party to the conflict who are in breach of their international humanitarian law obligations to change their approach.
I echo the Minister’s words condemning Hamas and condemning the Houthi attacks on Ben Gurion airport. An aid blockade is an aid blockade, annexation is annexation and war crimes are war crimes. Israel may be our formal ally, but this weekend the Israeli Government have committed to the seizure and occupation of the Gaza strip, which this Government have repeatedly stated is a violation of international law. Can the Minister tell this House the reasoning that FCDO officials have provided to him for not escalating UK sanctions on Israel? Does he agree with me and the calls of this House that the time has come for significant action in the face of crimes that, had they been committed by any other country, we would have already done something about?
As my hon. Friend knows, officials advise and Ministers decide, so I will not labour the questions about Foreign Office advice. We will be taking action in response to the events that we see, as this House would expect. I will not comment on sanctions further from the Dispatch Box, but I recognise the force of the contributions and the commitment of many of my hon. Friends, including her, on these questions.
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for coming to the House today. The long-term occupation of Gaza is entirely incompatible with a viable two-state solution and completely undermines any small prospect of a lasting peace. A full-scale occupation of Gaza is inconsistent with international humanitarian law, so can the Minister please advise the House and give some reassurance that the Government are considering urgently recognising the state of Palestine? If the Israeli Government move on the actions that have been referenced throughout this debate, will the Government seriously look at further sanctions? I know the Minister does not like to talk about that from the Dispatch Box, but can he give an assurance that such a review will take place, should Israel move forward with the actions that it has outlined?
My hon. Friend is right that permanent occupation of Gaza would be a grievous blow to a two-state solution. Clearly, the Gaza strip should be a central part of a Palestinian state, and I can assure him that we continue to keep all these matters under close review.
I thank the Minister for his statement. It is crucial that there is recognition of the Palestinian state and that the Palestinian people are represented as equals at the negotiating table. Given what has gone on in the region recently, does the Minister agree that Israel must immediately lift all restrictions on aid and allow unfettered access to humanitarian assistance in Gaza? If Israel refuses, what levers can we use to save innocent lives?
My hon. Friend is right about the critical nature of the aid shortages in Gaza. The World Food Programme has been clear that it is running out of all stocks to sustain life, and it is vital that the Israelis reverse their path and allow aid back into the strip.
The Palestinian people have a right to determine the future of their country. What specific action will the Minister take on the proposed indefinite occupation by Israel of Gaza? It risks eroding the sovereignty of the Palestinian people, sets an extreme precedent in international law, and ultimately jeopardises any path to a lasting peace.
My hon. Friend asks important questions. We are raising these issues directly with the Israeli Government, and we are talking with our allies about what steps we may take next.
It has now been more than two months since Israel blocked food and aid getting into Gaza. Aid agencies tell us that 95% of their work has been stopped or drastically reduced because of the blockade. I welcome the Minister’s comments condemning these appalling actions, but we are now facing a total collapse of the aid system in Gaza. Is it not time now to go further than words and take action against these extremist Ministers who are advocating for this starvation policy?
My hon. Friend is a former aid worker. He understands how these things work, and his warnings about the scale of risk for the humanitarian system, which is supporting so many Palestinian lives, are well made. I will not rehearse the comments I have made.
The Government are right to strongly oppose the Israeli Government’s plan to expand military action, which is unconscionable. Does the Minister agree that what should be expanded is the provision of humanitarian aid, and that what should be intensified are negotiations and diplomatic pressure on all parties to bring about a ceasefire, a return of hostages and a credible peace process that results in two sovereign states?
Gaza has had aid blocked for two months. Netanyahu said that the population may be moved for their own safety—safety from whom? Can the Minister explain what further diplomatic consequences Israel will face if it continues down this road?
My hon. Friend is right to centre on the safety of the Palestinian people. Diplomacy in relation to this situation continues at pace. I will not provide a running commentary from the Dispatch Box, but I can assure him that we are in direct contact with the Israeli Government on these questions and with our allies to discuss next steps.
(3 weeks, 5 days ago)
Commons ChamberUrgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
(Urgent Question): Will the Minister make a statement on the killing of 26 people in Pahalgam in Kashmir and the increasing tension between India and Pakistan?
The horrific terrorist attack in Pahalgam in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir on 22 April was devastating. [Interruption.]
Order. Members must sit down, because the Minister is on his feet replying.
Our thoughts are with those affected, their loved ones and, of course, the people of India. This attack left 26 people dead, most of whom, we understand, were tourists travelling to the region. Following the attack, India has announced a number of diplomatic measures against Pakistan, and Pakistan has reciprocated. The official UK travel advice for Indian-administered Kashmir continues to advise against all travel to Jammu and Kashmir, except for travel by air to the city of Jammu, travel within the city, and travel within the union territory of Ladakh.
This is a very sensitive situation, with real risks to regional and wider stability. Understandably, there has been huge interest within UK communities. Kashmir has been a flashpoint for conflict between India and Pakistan many times over previous decades. The Prime Minister spoke to Prime Minister Modi on 25 April to express his condolences on behalf of the British people. The UK condemns all forms of terrorism and the extremism that sustains it, wherever it occurs. The Foreign Secretary spoke to India’s External Affairs Minister Jaishankar on 27 April to pass on the UK’s condolences and to express the UK Government’s support to the Indian people at this difficult time. The Foreign Secretary has also spoken over the weekend to Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, Ishaq Dar.
Heightened tensions between India and Pakistan inevitably raise concerns about escalation. Effective channels of engagement to safeguard stability in the region are essential. The UK supported the UN Security Council press statement on 25 April, which condemned the attack and reaffirmed that acts of terrorism are criminal and unjustifiable. The long-standing position of the UK is that it is for India and Pakistan to find a lasting resolution to the situation in Kashmir, taking into account the wishes of the Kashmiri people. It is not for the UK to prescribe a solution. We will continue to monitor the situation closely through our high commissioners in New Delhi and Islamabad.
I thank you, Mr Speaker, for allowing this question, and I thank the Minister for his statement. I have three further points.
First, this is a terrorist attack of the utmost barbarity, and it deserves to be condemned by all. My thoughts are with the families of those killed. The killing took place in a popular tourist location, and most victims were tourists. Among the victims was a man married only the week before, who was honeymooning with his wife. The manner of the selection of the victims was particularly horrific, with the killers actively seeking out non-Muslims before killing them in cold blood. The Minister will be aware that the Kashmir region has been the scene of previous terrorist attacks that have claimed many innocent lives, including in Chittisinghpura, where 35 Sikhs were killed in 2000. What support can the UK provide to ensure that the terrorists are found and brought to justice, and to ensure that their networks of support are dismantled?
Secondly, there has been a significant escalation of tensions between India and Pakistan, including the measures that the Minister has outlined. India and Pakistan have engaged in large-scale military hostilities in the past in the region, and there is a real risk that the nations could revert to a military conflict again. What can the UK do to encourage a de-escalation of tensions, while ensuring the eradication of the terrorist organisations and their support networks wherever they exist?
Finally, the Minister will be aware that there have been protests in the UK outside India and Pakistan’s high commissions. Those protests have been characterised by provocative language and gestures, including what appears to be a throat-slitting motion by an alleged Pakistan official. Windows have been smashed at Pakistan’s high commission in London, and an individual has been arrested and charged. Does the Minister recognise the importance of proactive work with communities across the UK to ensure that we do not see a downturn in community relations here?
I thank my hon. Friend for his engagement on these questions. I am sure that the whole House shares his horror at the details of this incident—the targeting of the victims and the way in which it was carried out.
First, I will address the scenes on UK streets. We are aware of reports of the video that my hon. Friend refers to; the Metropolitan police are investigating, so I will not provide any further commentary on that particular incident, but it is obviously concerning. We take seriously our responsibility for the security of all embassies and high commissions under the Vienna convention, so both the Pakistani and Indian high commissions will receive all the support of the UK state to ensure that they stay safe. As my hon. Friend has said, and as I know many in this House feel, these issues have long been discussed with passion on British streets. We call on all sides, all community leaders and all involved to call for calm at a time of tension in the region.
I thank the hon. Member for Smethwick (Gurinder Singh Josan) for securing the question and my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman), who also requested a question on this topic today, for the support he has given to India.
My condolences, thoughts and prayers are with all those affected by the murderous violent terrorism that has taken place in Pahalgam. I recognise that for India and the diaspora communities—those in the UK in particular—this has been a really difficult week. This was an act of terrorism, and we should call it out for exactly what it is. It is part of a long-standing pattern of attacks on civilians, visitors to the region and minority communities, and the UK must always stand with our friends during times of this nature.
We have a series of long-standing security and counter-terrorism partnerships with India, going back to the New Delhi declaration in 2002 and including the India-UK strategic partnership in 2016, the comprehensive strategic partnership announced in 2022, and the UK-India 2030 road map agreed under the last Government. Under those partnerships, security issues have been absolutely watertight, which is why we must always be in lockstep with our friends in India.
Can the Minister tell us what information the UK Government have on those responsible for carrying out these terrorist attacks? Do the Government believe that Lashkar-e-Taiba, the terrorist group proscribed in the UK, bear responsibility? Are the Government aware of any cross-border links to Pakistan among the perpetrators of this terrorist act? Given that attacks seem to take place at the same time as high-profile US politicians visit India—this is not the first time—do the Government have a view on whether this is a coincidence, or whether it demonstrates a pattern of targeted and deliberately timed attacks?
We know that the Prime Minister spoke to Prime Minister Narendra Modi last week, but has the UK provided any specific support in response to this terror attack or taken any practical steps to assist our friends in India? Have the Government undertaken an assessment of the security implications of this attack for the UK? If Lashkar-e-Taiba or a front linked to them are responsible, it should be noted that disturbing reports are emerging that this terrorist group may have had engagement with Hamas. Have the Government made an assessment of the relationship between groups causing terror and destabilisation in Kashmir and those pursuing violence and terrorism that threaten our interests and global peace and security?
Finally, can the Minister give an update on the actions being taken to prevent tensions from escalating among communities in the UK—including protections for the high commissions, which have already been mentioned—and will the UK leverage its influence to ease tensions between India and Pakistan?
I thank the right hon. Lady for her questions. India is a friend to the UK, and we have been clear about the depth of our friendship in our response to this incident. She would not expect me to comment in detail on intelligence and security matters in relation to this attack, but I assure her that we are looking at it very closely. She is right that wherever terrorism is found, it is a threat to global peace and security, including in the UK. I will not comment further from this Dispatch Box on links between some of the groups that the right hon. Lady has mentioned, but I assure her that our security agencies take these matters very seriously, as she would expect.
The right hon. Lady asks important questions about the Indian high commission. As I said in my earlier answer, we will offer our full support. There is 24/7 enhanced protection outside the high commission, and it will be a top priority for the Government to ensure that no harm comes to any Indian diplomats or, indeed, any other diplomats here in the UK.
We are playing our role to try to ensure that tensions do not escalate. Many of us in this House are familiar with the tense and storied history between the two countries. We are friends to them both, and we do not want to see an uncontrolled escalation in tensions.
May I pay my respects to those who have lost loved ones in the horrific terrorist attack in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir? My thoughts are with them at this devastating time. Many of my constituents have written to me about the escalation of hostilities here in the UK. Can the Minister say what conversations he is having with Indian and Pakistani counterparts to address this situation?
This escalation is unsettling for communities within the UK. British Pakistanis and British Indians are valued parts of our community, but we look to all community and faith leaders to spread the message that now is the time for coming together across religious and ethnic differences, not to play out the tensions between two states on the streets of the UK, and we will continue to send that message.
I associate myself with the comments that have already made, reflecting on the grief of the communities torn apart last week. Tuesday’s horrific murders were utterly devastating, and those responsible must face the full weight of the law. The escalation of tensions between India and Pakistan is alarming, as are reports of incidents of fire being exchanged by soldiers at the border, and it threatens to destabilise the entire region. It is vital that leaders in both countries commit to an open dialogue and wider efforts to de-escalate. We hope that that includes India committing to reinstate the Indus waters treaty, the suspension of which threatens water access for Pakistanis, and Pakistan reopening its airspace to Indian-owned airlines.
The UK must engage with both Governments and encourage a return to dialogue and a retreat from retaliatory action to ensure that decisions taken in the wake of Tuesday’s horrific attack do not endanger more lives. Can the Minister confirm what conversations he has had with officials in New Delhi on reinstating the Indus waters treaty and with officials in Islamabad on reopening its airspace?
It is vital that effective channels of engagement to safeguard stability in the region exist, and we are encouraging both parties to that effect. There has been a lot of speculation about the diplomatic measures that have been announced so far. As we understand it, international agreements have been put in abeyance, rather than being rescinded. In the long term, the proper functioning of water management in the Indus water catchment area is vital for both sides of the line.
The whole House is united in its condemnation of the horrific attack that killed 26 people in Pahalgam, Kashmir. It has rightly been condemned by all in the region, and we must now see a full and independent investigation where those responsible are brought to justice. The response from the Indian Government has been somewhat concerning, with unilateral action taken to revoke the Indus waters treaty, risking the lives and livelihoods of millions in Pakistan. We are now hearing reports of crackdowns in Kashmir, with 1,500 people rounded up by the police and bulldozer tactics used on households. Hard-line groups have issued statements promising reprisal attacks, death threats and action against every Muslim in India. Kashmir continues to be a flashpoint between the two nuclear neighbours, so does the Minister agree that the international community must now seriously focus on de-escalation and long-term peace in the region? Can he also set out what the Government are doing to ensure that Kashmiris do not face further persecution or oppression?
This is clearly a time of heightened tensions, which inevitably invites concern both in the region and here in the UK. We are, as I said, engaged with both states to try to find the most effective way to prevent these terrible incidents from ever being repeated, but also to ensure continued stability in the region.
I asked at business questions last week for a statement on this issue this week, so I am grateful to you, Mr Speaker, for making sure that we have that statement through this urgent question.
The reality of this terrorist attack, which was well organised and well co-ordinated, is that, despite the Minister’s words, these 26 men who were murdered systematically by being shot in the head were either Hindu or Christian. This was a deliberate Islamist attack on those tourists who were just going about their business in a peaceful manner. These terrorists were well equipped, and they were well co-ordinated.
The sad reality is that while the Government may offer expressions of condolence and support to the people of India, the terrorist bases that exist along the line of control in the part of Kashmir illegally occupied by Pakistan continue to operate across that line of control. Will the Government commit to full support for India in apprehending the terrorists responsible and bringing the backers of those terrorists to justice? Will the Government take all steps to support the erosion and elimination of terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir?
The hon. Gentleman has come to have an argument, but I am not sure which part of the statement he did not like. Until the investigation is concluded, we should not speculate on the nature of the attack. I say to him that will do everything we can to ensure that those who committed this horrific attack are brought to justice, and India will have our support in that.
I share in the comments made in this House. We are horrified by this terrorist attack, and my thoughts are with the families, the victims and those in India. We have seen worrying scenes play out in London, as my hon. Friend the Member for Smethwick (Gurinder Singh Josan) mentioned. We cannot let the situation escalate on to UK shores. We all bear a responsibility to help de-escalate tensions. What steps is the UK taking to support international bodies, especially the United Nations, in their calls for a de-escalation in tensions?
As I have said, we have spoken at the senior level to both states, and we have made clear the importance of maintaining stability in the region at this time.
I echo the words of condemnation over the horrific terror attacks in Pahalgam, which took the lives of 26 innocent tourists. I express my heartfelt condolences to all those who have been affected. The rapid escalation of events following this tragedy has been deeply worrying. India’s unfounded claims against Pakistan are a dangerous and irresponsible reaction to the tragedy suffered in Kashmir. The unilateral and illegal decision to suspend the Indus waters treaty threatens to cut the lifeline of 200 million people in Pakistan, and it cannot stand. Will the Minister join me in expressing concern over the knife-edge position that these two nations are in and call for adherence to the guidance set under international bodies of law? Will he make a plea to calm the situation? If it is exacerbated, it will have severe consequences that spread much further than that region alone.
I think I have set out our views on the importance of stability in the region already this afternoon. I agree with the hon. Member that it is critical for all actors and international partners to ensure the long-term sustainability of the Indus river system.
I welcome the statement from the Minister today. In light of the awful terror attack in Indian-administered Kashmir, what work are the Government undertaking to consult the Kashmiri diaspora here in the UK and identify their concerns?
Both the Foreign Office and other UK Government Departments engage regularly with the British Kashmiri community—who are an important part of so many communities across the United Kingdom—and will continue to do so.
I am sure the Government recognise that the strategic aim of this sort of terrorist atrocity is to provoke indiscriminate retaliation and undermine peaceful relations between neighbouring countries between which there may be some history of hostility. Will the Minister impress on the Indian Government the necessity of focusing on the actual perpetrators and not on the wider community, and will he impress on the Pakistani Government the importance, in good faith, of tracking down those responsible?
Too often in the region for which I am responsible, and indeed in this country, we have seen terrorist attacks designed to have exactly the effect that the right hon. Gentleman has described, namely to provoke tension, intercommunal hostility and a breakdown of law and order. As he says, a proper, law-enforcement-led response based on a focus on the actual perpetrators is important in this area, as it is throughout the world.
May I first send my condolences, thoughts and prayers to all the victims of this heinous terrorist attack in occupied Kashmir?
There is a large Kashmiri diaspora in my constituency, and many of my constituents have reached out to me expressing deep concerns. A number of them have mentioned the Indus waters treaty. Pakistan has already been suffering from the effects of floods in past years, from which it has not recovered. At times of escalation and troubles such as this it seems to be communities at large, be they in India or Pakistan, who suffer. What message can the Minister give my constituents to reassure them that the UK is doing all it can to de-escalate, bring things back to normal and hold the perpetrators to account?
We are focused on holding the perpetrators to account. I am familiar with the issues facing Pakistan in relation to acute natural disaster: I was there during the disastrous floods in 2010, and I recognise the importance of the Indus river system in both India and Pakistan and of co-operation between the two states to manage that vital system. There is a great deal of speculation about what has been decided and what has been agreed, but we understand that diplomatic treaties are being held in abeyance and that there is still space for a long-term answer to some of these questions.
As an officer of the all-party parliamentary group on British Hindus, and with a constituency that contains a considerable Indian and Pakistani community, I was especially shocked and saddened by the news of the horrific murder of 26 people last Tuesday, and I have received many emails from constituents raising their own concerns. Of particular concern are reports of the targeting of Hindus and Christians: such race-based terror is unacceptable anywhere in the world. What steps are the Government taking to encourage both India and Pakistan to investigate these terrible crimes, and to ensure that lines of communication are kept open to avoid a further escalation of the conflict?
We are encouraging direct lines of communication, and we are of course encouraging Pakistan to provide all possible assistance with the investigation of these horrific crimes.
May I associate myself with the comments of the Minister and other Members who have condemned the killing of 26 innocent people?
Given that tensions between India and Pakistan are running high and resulting in arrests, does the Minister agree with me, and with others who have raised the point, that we must not let this issue boil over into our streets? If anything, we should be working to convey a message of peace and hope to that part of the world. In the light of the tit-for-tat actions being undertaken by Pakistan and India, does the Minister also agree that we need to encourage the holding of an open, independent inquiry to establish the facts, ensure accountability and help to restore calm? That would be far better for the world than India and Pakistan—nuclear powers—going to war.
My hon. Friend is, of course right: peace and calm are vital for communities here and across the world. The two states are talking to each other, which is welcome. India’s concerns for its own security are understandable in the light of such a horrific incident. It is clearly taking steps to try to establish the facts as best it can, and it will have British support to do so.
At a time of such tragedy, language is incredibly important. All of us, in all parts of the House, condemn this terrorist incident, but a number of my constituents have been particularly concerned about the BBC’s describing it as “militance” rather than as what it is—a terrorist attack. Will the Minister use his position to make representations to the BBC to ensure that it understands the importance of the language it uses?
I resist calls for Ministers to police the BBC’s language too much, but let me be clear: this was a horrific terrorist attack, and that is the view of the British Government.
We have seen the Kargil incursion, the Chittisinghpura attack, the hijacking of Air India Flight 814, the attack on Gandhinagar, the attack on the Lok Sabah itself, the attack on the Taj Hotel in Mumbai and the suicide bomb attack at Pulwama that killed 44 people, and now 26 tourists have been murdered at Pahalgam. That is just a short list of the activities of Pakistan-based terror organisations such as Jaish-e-Mohammad, Lashkar-e-Taiba and its derivatives, including The Resistance Front, that have taken place since you and I were first elected to the House, Mr Speaker. They destabilise international security between two nuclear states, and cause unwarranted tension in community relations here. Is it not time to make the support that we give to Pakistan conditional on its finally dealing with and closing down the terrorist training camps that it harbours?
We expect all our friends to work closely on the shared international scourge of terrorism. Pakistan itself has faced a series of deeply damaging terrorist attacks in recent months and years, and we press Pakistan, as we press all our allies in the region, to take the steps that are necessary to investigate not only the terrorist threats that face it, but those that face its neighbours.
I share the sentiments that have rightly been expressed by all other Members. It is crucial to condemn unequivocally all forms of violence irrespective of their source, and our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families.
The recent incident is a stark reminder of the fragile peace that hangs by a thread in a region that has suffered for too long from recurring cycles of violence. The intricate history of Kashmir requires a diplomatic approach underpinned by international co-operation Does the Minister agree that the role of the UK, as a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, must be to encourage and support efforts that prioritise dialogue and reconciliation between India and Pakistan? Does he also agree that the law-abiding people of Kashmir deserve to live in peace and security without the shadow of perpetual conflict, and that will be achieved only if they have the right of self-determination?
Of course the people of Kashmir, both Indian-administered and Pakistani-administered, have the right to live in safety, and we want to see that right exercised; and of course there must be dialogue between India and Pakistan at this time of heightened tensions. Let me add, however, that in the face of such a horrific attack, India also has the right to investigate, to find the perpetrators and to bring them to justice for these terrible crimes.
A number of my constituents have expressed deep concern about the developments in Kashmir, and we all condemn the attacks and growing tensions in the strongest possible terms. Does the Minister agree that advocating for a peaceful resolution in Kashmir is also part of maintaining community cohesion in the UK, given that so many of us have constituents with family members and friends in the region?
I do, of course. The UK supports a peaceful resolution of the long-standing issues in Kashmir between India and Pakistan. It is a matter for the two countries and we will support them in those endeavours.
I join Members across the House in condemning this act of terrorism. The hon. Gentleman will know that his party’s manifesto pledged to pursue a new strategic partnership with India. I welcome that, but could he explain to the House what steps are being made in regard to that pledge? It will be by concerted diplomatic efforts, but it will also be by leadership from the Dispatch Box around re-characterising our commitment to India, that people will gain strength from this Government’s response.
I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for giving me the opportunity to cast away any doubt there might be. We stand with India in the face of this horrific attack. We have, at the very highest levels, been in direct contact with the Indian Government. This is an absolutely atrocious incident and they have our support in trying to bring the perpetrators to justice. If he will forgive me, I will leave it to the Minister responsible for India to provide an update in the House in slower time on the state of our relationship. It continues to grow from strength to strength.
In light of the recent tragic attack on civilians in Kashmir, which we all condemn, what steps are the Government taking to de-escalate tensions, and to urge the Governments of India and Pakistan to engage in a transparent and impartial investigation to establish the facts, while also pushing forward a new diplomatic engagement to address all outstanding issues, including the core dispute of Kashmir, through meaningful dialogue and a commitment to peace that prioritises the lives and rights of all Kashmiris?
As I said earlier, we have been engaged with both Governments. The long-standing position of the UK is that it is for India and Pakistan to find a lasting resolution to the situation in Kashmir. It must take into account the wishes of the Kashmiri people and it is not for us to prescribe a solution. We will continue in those efforts.
The Minister outlined that the Government have been in communication with both India and Pakistan, and the risk of escalation. Given that risk, has the Foreign Secretary been in communication with any other regional powers, such as China?
Honestly, I have not spoken to the Foreign Secretary in the past 24 hours so I am not totally sure, but I will write to the hon. Member and let him know.
I, too, associate myself with the condolences for the innocent families who have become victims of this appalling attack. It is important that there is an evidence-based investigation and I hope that, from what the Minister has said, Pakistan is assisting India in identifying the perpetrators and ensuring they are brought to justice. Tensions are certainly high, both within India and Pakistan. I appreciate the Minister’s remarks on the assistance being provided at the moment, but can this be used as an opportunity to also look at the longer- term issues that Kashmir has faced for decades?
I set out the Government’s position on the core dispute in Kashmir in the previous answer. I repeat that we encourage the Pakistanis to co-operate fully with the Indian Government in their efforts to investigate and we hope that they will provide assistance. This obviously remains a time of great heightened tensions, so direct dialogue on these issues is particularly important.
I join the Minister and other Members in my unequivocal condemnation of this heinous and cowardly act of terrorist violence. My heart goes out to the families and the victims. We stand in full solidarity with them, as well as with the civilian populations of India, Kashmir and wider Pakistan. As has been highlighted, the killings have heightened tensions in the subcontinent. At present, both nuclear-armed countries, India and Pakistan, are on a war footing. The escalation in military action will have ramifications globally, especially in the UK where reactionary bigots and far-right politicians are sowing division among British Kashmiris, Indians and Pakistanis. My Kashmiri diaspora and my Indian family and friends and I would like to know what specific steps the UK Government are taking to help de-escalate the heightened tensions in the region and the increased tensions within our borders.
As I said, we are seeking to play our full diplomatic role to help manage the heightened tensions between India and Pakistan, and the concerns of the region. It is vital that all of us in positions of influence at a community level here in the UK do everything we can to ensure that those tensions do not play out on British streets.
Many of my constituents have contacted me in the past few days to register their horror at the appalling terror attack in Kashmir. I join the Minister in condemning it unequivocally. Will he confirm that the UK stands firm against terror in any form? Will he further confirm what steps the Government are taking to support our long history of community cohesion in the diverse constituencies of this country, such as Ealing Southall?
I can confirm that we stand against terrorism in all its manifestations. We will be working closely with all communities, including through colleagues in this House, to try to address the concerns that are being raised.
One of the consequences of mass immigration and radical diversity at home is that we see foreign conflicts play out among diaspora communities in Britain. We should all do everything possible to stop this domestic disintegration, including drastically curtailing immigration, but will the Minister take this opportunity to tell Members of this House who have played the politics of communalism to stop playing with fire?
I think the hon. Gentleman’s question is: will I condemn the existence of British Indian and British Pakistani communities? No, I won’t. There is tension between those communities and I have called for calm. If he is asking me whether I think there has been too much immigration over the last 14 years, yes indeed—[Interruption.] I am very happy to take guidance from Mr Speaker on what the question was.
I thank the Minister for his statement. I would also like to associate myself with the condemnation of this horrific and cowardly attack on innocent people. Ilford South is home to a large diaspora of Indian and Pakistani descent. Following the horrific murder of the 26 tourists, whose only crime was being in the wrong place at the wrong time when the terrorists orchestrated their heinous attack, India points the finger at Pakistan and Pakistan denies any involvement. Both are nuclear powers. What steps are the Government taking to de-escalate this particular situation?
As I have said, we have been engaged with both states extensively over the past few days. We are taking all the steps we can to ensure that heightened tensions do not lead to the risk of uncontrolled escalation.
Many of my constituents have been hit hard by the recent massacre in Kashmir. The perpetrators of the massacre must face the full force of the law. An open dialogue between India and Pakistan is now vital to avoid an escalation of tensions over Kashmir. How are the Government working to support efforts to de-escalate and to prevent cross-border exchanges escalating into a full-blown conflict?
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his important question. We will continue to work with both states on the issues he outlines in the way I have described over the course of the afternoon.
It is our common humanity that unites many of us in this House in our condemnation of a terrorist act and our condolences to the families affected, whether they have community links to this country or not. I hear what the Minister says, and I support entirely his call for an investigation, as many Members do. What is troubling my British constituents who have family in the Kashmir region are the words of the Indian Defence Minister, who has said there will be a “strong response” in the coming days. In previous crisis moments, we have had missile strikes, airstrikes and special forces action from the Indian Government, and we have seen an explosion in anti-Muslim attacks in India in the past couple of days. What words of reassurance can the Minister offer my British constituents, who are concerned about human rights around the world and concerned about family members, that this Government will always speak up for innocent civilians, wherever they may live and wherever they may find friends?
My hon. Friend makes an important point. We do, of course, stand up for human rights around the world, and we will continue our work to try to address heightened tensions between India and Pakistan. We want to avoid a dangerous spiral of escalation in the region.
It is incumbent on us as an international community to engage with leaders on both sides. What have the Minister and the UK Government done so far to promote an open dialogue specifically and to ensure it stays open?
As I say, we have spoken at a senior level to both Governments and we are encouraging direct contact, which we understand is in place.
My constituents, particularly those from the Kashmiri and Pakistani communities, strongly condemn this terrorist atrocity in Pahalgam. They are also worried about India’s response, in particular its suspension of the Indus waters treaty, but also the bulldozing of homes of those not connected to this attack in any way. Does the Minister agree that the Kashmiri people should not be subjected to collective punishment, as the people of Palestine have been in Israel?
As I hope has been clear in all my answers, a terrible terrorist attack has been perpetrated, and India has our full support in going after the perpetrators of that attack. We do, of course, expect all our partners to do that in accordance with their domestic standards and laws.
I thank the Minister for his answers to the questions and for the calm way he has responded, which is appreciated in this House. I travelled to the region in question some four or five years ago as chair of the all-party parliamentary group for international freedom of religion or belief; there was tension then, and there is greater tension now, in every sense of the word. The slaughter of tourists in that idyllic meadow in Kashmir can never be seen as anything other than pure, unadulterated evil: people were killed simply because they were Hindus or Christians. Our thoughts and prayers are with the families who mourn their loved ones today. What steps can the Minister take to provide support for the Government to deal with terrorism, and how can we get the message to British citizens that they should under no circumstances whatsoever travel to that region?
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question. I will reiterate our travel advice: we advise against all travel to Jammu and Kashmir except for travel by air to the city of Jammu, travel within the city of Jammu and travel within the union territory of Ladakh.
People in India and around the world were horrified last week by the news of the terror attack in which 26 innocent tourists were killed in Jammu and Kashmir. My thoughts are with all those who have lost loved ones. This was an appalling attack, aimed clearly at destabilising the situation in Kashmir. In my constituency, I have large Pakistani, Indian and Kashmiri communities, and many of my constituents are now very concerned about an escalation of tensions in the region. How are the British Government working with the Indian Government to provide support in the wake of this terror attack, and what more can the Minister say about the constructive role Britain must play in finding a diplomatic resolution?
My hon. Friend reflects the strength of feeling in her constituency, as in so many of the constituencies represented in this House. We will continue to play our full diplomatic role, and we welcome the efforts of my hon. Friend and many colleagues across this House in engaging right across the spectrum of their constituencies.
The Kashmiri community in Stoke-on-Trent will have condemned the appalling atrocities taking place last Tuesday, but that condemnation will have quickly turned to fear and anxiety about what it means for their friends and loved ones in both the India and Pakistan-administered sides of Kashmir.
I have listened carefully to the Minister’s answers on the Government’s position that this is now an issue for India and Kashmir to resolve alone, and I welcome the actions the Government are taking to reduce tensions. However, in the long term, a peaceful settlement for this community will need help and need international facilitation, per UN resolutions 39 and 47. Self-determination for the people of Kashmir is going to take more than warm words from Ministers. Can the Minister therefore set out what actions he will take through the UN and his counterparts in other countries to ensure that we start to move down the path of peace quickly?
My hon. Friend is a doughty advocate for his constituents in voicing their concerns. The long-standing position of the United Kingdom is that it is for India and Pakistan to find a lasting resolution to the situation in Kashmir, taking into account the wishes of the Kashmiri people. It is not for us to prescribe a solution.
Like many colleagues in this House, I was appalled by the terrorist attack in Kashmir, and my heart goes out to the victims and their loved ones. What really worries me now is the hatred, threats and incitement we have seen online since the attack, which I know are deeply unsettling for many of my constituents. Does the Minister agree that the incitement of hatred online is completely unacceptable, and can he share what measures the Government are taking to monitor and act against it?
We are aware of hatred being incited online in relation to events in the region, and we condemn it utterly. Where the threshold is met for police action, it should be taken.
I share the horror at this despicable act of terrorism inflicted on 26 innocent people, many of whom were on holiday—one young man was on his honeymoon. My condolences are with all those affected. The ripples are widespread and felt by the global Indian community, including my constituents in Winchburgh. They have raised their concerns with me about this incident, but they are also really fearful of what happens next. Can the Minister give my constituents assurances that the Government will work with international partners to support peace and stability in the region, and that community cohesion will remain a top priority for this Government?
India and Pakistan are our friends. We have historical connections to both states and to communities right across the region, and we will continue to be committed to regional stability. Of course, we also call for calm on our own streets.
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Smethwick (Gurinder Singh Josan) on securing this urgent question, but I do say to the Minister that this really should have been a statement. We are all horrified by the act of terror that we saw just days ago and condemn it without equivocation. I have heard from many of my constituents from both diasporas in recent days, and it is important to note that many people are feeling this act of terror deeply in my community, and up and down the United Kingdom. India and Pakistan are two very important members of the Commonwealth. Can the Minister specifically outline what engagement the British Government have had with the Commonwealth to help to reduce tensions?
If my hon. Friend would like a statement, he can stay for 45 minutes and he will get another one from me. We have been in direct contact with both India and Pakistan, and we will continue to do so.
I thank the Minister for his condolences and for his strong condemnation of this horrific terror attack. In recent days, I have been contacted by hundreds of families in my constituency who have been horrified by these events. It is clear that the awful terror attack in Kashmir has sent shockwaves through the British Indian community and the global Hindu community more broadly. My constituents have spoken overwhelmingly of justice, and understandably so. We all want to see peace and de-escalation, but understanding that people will be held to account for these horrific crimes is vital to getting there.
I would just like to press the Minister a little more to be clear that the UK Government, when they stand with India, are doing all they can to identify the parties responsible for these events and those who support and fund them, so that they can be held to account and justice can be found.
Of course, we want to see the perpetrators held to justice properly, and we will be supporting India to do so.
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Earlier, I asked the Minister to tell Members of the House who were playing the politics of communalism to stop playing with fire. He not only failed to do so, but attacked me for observing the undoubted tensions and sometimes even violence that take place here as foreign conflicts are played out in this country. Can you advise me on whether the Minister can withdraw this attack? If he simply misheard my question, can he be allowed to answer it now? This is a very serious issue.
Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. As I understood the question, the hon. Gentleman was suggesting that there had been too much immigration from, presumably, both India and Pakistan over the last period, and that that was leading to communalism within constituencies across the country. This Government —[Interruption.]
Order. The hon. Member for West Suffolk (Nick Timothy) is not going to carry on speaking from a sedentary position.
I have been absolutely clear from this Dispatch Box that I do not want to see any communal tensions in the UK. I have repeatedly called for calm. If the hon. Gentleman is saying that he believes that too much immigration has led to these—[Interruption.]
Order. Obviously, we are not going to get anywhere like this. Sit down, Minister. I am not responsible for the answers that the Minister makes. I am sure that this matter will not rest there, but it will have to rest for now because we are moving on to the next urgent question.
(3 weeks, 5 days ago)
Commons ChamberWith your permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will make a statement on the inward visit of Prime Minister Mustafa.
Yesterday, at the invitation of the Government, the Palestinian Authority Prime Minister, Dr Mohammad Mustafa, visited the United Kingdom. Prime Minister Mustafa was accompanied by Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Varsen Aghabekian and Minister of Health Dr Maged Abu Ramadan. The Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary both held meetings with Prime Minister Mustafa yesterday, and I was delighted to meet him again this morning. This visit reflects the UK’s steadfast support for the Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian people at this critical juncture in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
During the visit, we reaffirmed our unwavering commitment to advancing a two-state solution as the only pathway to achieving just and lasting peace in the middle east, where Israelis and Palestinians can live side by side in peace, dignity and security. We are clear that the Palestinian people have an inalienable right of self-determination, including to independent statehood. The Government are committed to strengthening our bilateral relations with the Palestinian Authority. The PA are the only legitimate governing entity in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, and it is important that Gaza and the west bank are reunified under their authority. The UK is clear that the PA must have a central role in the next phase in Gaza. There can be no role for Hamas in the future of Gaza. We have been clear: Hamas must immediately release the hostages and relinquish control of Gaza. Israelis must be able to live in security next to their Palestinian neighbours, and 7 October must never be repeated.
The Foreign Secretary and Prime Minister Mustafa signed a landmark memorandum of understanding to enhance the bilateral partnership between our two Governments. The memorandum of understanding established a new framework to guide and enhance the strategic partnership, and high-level dialogue across areas of mutual interest and benefit, including economic development and institutional reform. As part of our meetings with Prime Minister Mustafa, we discussed the gravity of the situation in Gaza, the west bank and East Jerusalem. We condemned the appalling suffering of civilians in Gaza and agreed on the urgent need for a return to a ceasefire in Gaza with the release of hostages and unblocking of aid. Aid workers need protection. Only diplomacy, not more bloodshed, will achieve long-term peace.
We also shared our alarm at the heightened tension in the west bank. We reiterated our clear condemnation of Israeli settlements, which are illegal under international law and harm the prospect of a future Palestinian state. We called for an end to settlement expansion and settler violence. We are also clear that Israel must release frozen Palestinian Authority funds.
Prime Minister Mustafa outlined the essential reforms that the Palestinian Authority are currently undertaking. We fully support the implementation of those much-needed reforms, including through providing technical assistance. The reforms will strengthen financial sustainability and economic development, enhance the transparency and efficiency of governance and service delivery, and promote peaceful co-existence with neighbouring countries. As part of our MOU, the Palestinian Authority underlined their commitment to delivering their reform agenda in full as a matter of priority. As part of the visit, we also announced a £101 million package of support for the Occupied Palestinian Territories. It will be directed at humanitarian relief, support for Palestinian economic development and strengthening Palestinian Authority governance and reform.
As the Foreign Secretary made clear, we will not give up on the two-state solution, with a Palestinian state and Israel living side by side in peace, dignity and security. The visit is a significant step in strengthening our relationship with the Palestinian Authority—a key partner for peace in the middle east—at this critical moment. I commend this statement to the House.
I am grateful to the Minister for advance sight of his statement. The Government’s MOU fails to stand up to credible scrutiny, as it fails to outline in any way how it will help to achieve a meaningful end to the conflict. The MOU says that the PA are the “only legitimate governing entity” across the west bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza and that the UK Government want to see the PA running all three. There clearly cannot be any future for Hamas—we completely agree with that—but how will the Minister and the Government bring this about without a strategy for the removal of the terrorist Hamas regime in Gaza? I have asked this question many times from the Dispatch Box, but the Government simply have no answers.
There is a commitment in the MOU that the Palestinian Authority will hold presidential and parliamentary elections in “the shortest feasible timeframe”. What is that timeframe? Who is dictating that timetable? What mechanisms are being put in place for elections, and has this been supported by Arab partners and neighbours who are signatories to the Cairo plan to rebuild Gaza? Does the Minister believe that the Palestinian Authority, in their current form, are capable of holding free and fair elections? If not, is it the Government’s intention to provide election assistance? How would the Government rule out Hamas being able to run in those elections? There is nothing explicit in the MOU about a plan to ensure that terrorist infrastructure in Gaza is dismantled once and for all, which is inexplicable. What dialogue has taken place with key middle eastern allies since the Cairo plan for Gaza was published?
On the question of recognition of a Palestinian state, the Government’s approach is incoherent, and the MOU provides no clarity on the long-term intentions, conditions or timing of this happening. Does the Minister agree that we are not at the point of recognition, and that recognition cannot be the start of the process?
There is no mention anywhere in the MOU of efforts to build upon the Abraham accords as a way of achieving regional stability, despite the accords providing the framework to support and finance a new future for Palestine and support a two-state solution. Were efforts to expand the accords discussed with the Palestinian Authority leadership yesterday?
On the economic front, the MOU talks about boosting trade, but what kind of increases are we looking at in value terms, given all the instability in the region? In which sectors are the Government now pursuing trade, and will this involve the UK Government spending money on trade promotion measures?
Why is there no mention of welfare reform in PA-controlled territory, which we know is in dire need of urgent attention? Meanwhile, the reference to education is extremely vague and unsatisfactory. It needs to be much clearer and set proper parameters, so that there are clear plans for educating and upskilling a whole generation who have been poorly served by their political leaders for too long. Can the Minister confirm whether he held discussions with the PA about the urgent need for them to do everything in their powers to banish antisemitism from Palestinian school textbooks? Can he provide any detail on the opaque commitment to
“education, scientific and cultural exchanges”?
What form will those take?
Can the Minister clarify what exactly the £101 million he announced yesterday will go towards? Which organisations will be entrusted with the money and whether UNRWA—the United Nations Relief and Works Agency—will receive any of it? What specific programmes will it fund? The entire document contains only a brief mention of the need to tackle corruption, which is inadequate. What is his assessment of the current corruption levels and the PA leadership’s efforts to deal with it? What is his definition of progress?
The section on security co-operation also needs unpacking and more accountability. Exactly how will security co-operation be enhanced, and which “global challenges and threats” does the Minister envisage jointly countering with the Palestinian Authority?
The MOU also states:
“The Participants commit to action to uphold the rights of women and minority groups and prevent the targeting of individuals in these categories.”
Does the Minister believe that these rights are being sufficiently upheld in the west bank at present? Indeed, the question of full civil liberties, including freedom of expression and media freedom, needs serious attention. The PA have their work cut out to prove their credibility.
There is a section on climate change in the MOU. Can the Minister tell us exactly what is the best practice he is seeking to learn from the Palestinian Authority when it comes to tackling climate change? On the current conflict, what have this Government done since the House last met on this issue to support international efforts to secure the release of those poor hostages who remain in such cruel captivity in Gaza?
Finally, I turn to Iran. If we are serious about sustainable peace, we must address the root causes of this terrible suffering. We still have no clarity from the Government about how they see the UK working with the US Administration, so I will give the Minister another opportunity to answer that question. Will he furnish us with the Government’s official response on the legal attempt here in the UK to challenge the proscription of Hamas?
The shadow Foreign Secretary asked many questions. Let me be clear: the British Government see the Palestinian Authority as a vital partner, and they are a vital partner that must go through reform. The new Prime Minister has shown leadership on that reform agenda and has made progress on a range of issues. The right hon. Lady raises a number of important issues. One is the content of textbooks, an issue on which we have discussions with the Palestinian Authority and which I have discussed with other parties who have strong views, understandably, on the importance of ensuring that both communities are raised with a belief in co-existence rather than hatred.
There are a range of other very important reform questions that are at issue. One of them, on which the Prime Minister has shown real leadership, is the so-called “pay to slay” arrangements. Progress has been made on that, and we must encourage the Palestinian Authority in those reform efforts. The memorandum of understanding is intended to provide a framework to upgrade that co-operation, because the Palestinian Authority are the vital partner for peace.
The right hon. Lady rightly asked what we will do to ensure that Hamas leave the Gaza strip and do not play a governance role. One of the most important things we can do is ensure that there is a serious and credible alternative to Hamas, and that must be the Palestinian Authority, which is what our efforts are aimed at.
The right hon. Lady asked two important questions about the UK Government’s position in relation to Iran. We welcome the talks between the United States of America and Iran. I was in Oman after the first stage of the talks and the Foreign Secretary has been there recently. We are talking to all parties and we want to see a diplomatic solution to the nuclear weapon threat that Iran poses not just to the region but to the world. We hope that these talks will prove successful.
The right hon. Lady asked, reasonably, about the allocation of the £101 million. I am not in a position to give a full breakdown of exactly where the money will go, though I will provide the House with that breakdown. I would anticipate that funding is directed to UNRWA and the Palestinian Authority directly, but once we have full programmatic details, we will return to the House with that breakdown. We are talking to partners about those allocations and I am happy to come back in writing on some of the more detailed questions.
Lastly, we support the Abraham accords. I was very pleased, while the right hon. Lady was there, to sign the UK up to an agreement with Bahrain and the US which includes explicit reference to the Abraham accords. We are supporting the Abraham accords not just in our words but in our actions.
I call the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee.
At the meeting last night between the Foreign Affairs Committee and the Palestinian Prime Minister and his delegation, it was clear that they were very encouraged by the discussions they had had with the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary, and rightly so, because the memorandum of understanding shows serious thinking about the long-term future of Israel and Palestine and leadership towards peace. Does my hon. Friend agree that now is the time to take the next serious step, which is to finally recognise the state of Palestine? The best time to do that might be alongside the French in New York in June.
I thank my right hon. Friend for her question and her courteous treatment of the Palestinian Prime Minister last night. The question of recognition is raised repeatedly in this House. Our position remains the same: we do wish to recognise a Palestinian state, and we wish to do so as a contribution to a two-state solution. We will make the judgment about when the best moment is to try to make the fullest possible contribution.
As I said to the Palestinian Prime Minister this morning, our responsibility is for the reality of the situation on the ground—the practical viability of a Palestinian state. Of course, other states have taken a different position from the UK Government and chosen to recognise a Palestinian state. That has not called it into existence. Our job in the British Government is to make a practical contribution to a two-state solution, and that is how we intend to approach this issue.
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
I was glad to see the Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary meet the Palestinian Authority’s Prime Minister Mustafa and reaffirm this country’s support for a two-state solution. A Palestinian state as part of a wider two-state solution remains the only path to long-term peace and security for both Israelis and Palestinians. The Liberal Democrats have called for the immediate recognition of the state of Palestine. I ask the Minister this question most weeks and will ask it again, and I hope the position will change one week: following yesterday’s meeting, will the Government now take this vital step and commit to working with international partners such as France on issuing a joint recognition statement?
Now is the time for a restoration of the ceasefire, the release of the hostages and a return to the political process. This Government have pledged a £101 million package of support for the Occupied Palestinian Territories, including for humanitarian relief. That is welcome, yet for more than 50 days Israel has blocked aid from entering Gaza and shuttered border crossing points. As a result, the food stocks of the UN World Food Programme, which previously reached half of Gaza’s population, have entirely run out. The risk of starvation, disease and death is very real, even as 116,000 tonnes of food aid languishes at border checkpoints. In a joint statement with French and German counterparts, the Foreign Secretary called this “intolerable”, and rightly so, but what are the Government doing to end the blockade and ensure that aid can flow into Gaza?
The International Court of Justice has opened hearings on Israel’s responsibility to facilitate humanitarian relief in Gaza. Will the Government commit to abiding by the court’s judgment? Two weeks ago, the Government said that they continue to consider the ICJ’s opinion on the OPTs. Can the Minister update the House on when we can finally expect the Government’s response?
The Government have also reaffirmed their condemnation of violent west bank settler activity, but what concrete steps are being taken to pressure Israel to act on illegal settlements? Finally, will the Government now consider sanctions on those Israeli Ministers, such as Smotrich and Ben-Gvir, who encourage settler violence?
I have set out the position on recognition in a previous answer, and I am afraid that I will have to test the hon. Lady’s patience because on sanctions I will also set out the position, which is very familiar: we do not comment on sanctions in advance, as to do so might impact their effectiveness. I can confirm, however, that we have raised these issues, including the blockade of aid. As she has identified, we issued a statement with our European partners last week, and the Foreign Secretary raised this with his counterpart on 15 April.
I welcome the work that special envoy Sir Michael Barber will be doing in the Palestinian Authority. When I was working in Pakistan as a diplomat, I saw the excellent work they were doing in building the public sector. Does the Minister agree, however, that that work will be futile if Israel continues to undermine the PA by taking steps towards the annexation of the west bank, and what steps are the Government taking to ensure that this does not happen?
I join my hon. Friend in what he says about Sir Michael Barber. We were both in Pakistan at a similar time and both saw the excellent work he did on girls’ education there, and I welcome his vital role in relation to the Palestinian Authority. I have been clear, as has the Foreign Secretary, about our position on settlements. They are illegal under international law and we oppose completely any annexation of the west bank.
The Foreign Secretary rightly said in his statement yesterday that Hamas have no future in any of the possible ways forward for Palestine and for Gaza. That is a statement of the obvious, but what is the Government’s strategy for Palestine? In particular, given that the Minister avoided the point made by my right hon. Friend the Member for Witham (Priti Patel), what discussions has he had with the Americans, because it seems to me that the Trump plan for Gaza, in particular, is very different from any conceivable plan that the UK Government might have?
The right hon. Gentleman, one of my predecessors, asks what our plan for Palestine is. Our support to the Palestinian Authority is an important element of our work in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories. They must be at the centre of the efforts to ensure that there can be a future for both Palestine and Israel that involves two safe and secure states side by side. We of course speak regularly to our US counterparts across the whole range of issues in my area—in many areas we may diverge, but we continue to have a very close relationship and discuss these matters closely.
As my right hon. Friend the Member for Islington South and Finsbury (Emily Thornberry) mentioned, members of the Foreign Affairs Committee met the Palestinian Authority Prime Minister yesterday. He was steadfast in his comments to us on his advocacy for peace for the people in Gaza, in the west bank and the occupied territories and in Israel. Those of us on the Labour side of the House stood on a manifesto that stated:
“Palestinian statehood is the inalienable right of the Palestinian people. It is not in the gift of any neighbour and is also essential to the long-term security of Israel.”
The Minister has been asked this question before, but the time to recognise the state of Palestine is long overdue; the time is now. When will the UK finally recognise the state of Palestine?
My hon. Friend is committed to these issues. I know that she has travelled to the region recently and has a long history of advocacy, as do so many in this House. As I said in my previous answer, the role of the British Government must be to try and practically bring about the safety and security that two states can provide, and we will consider recognition in that context.
As has been mentioned by colleagues on the Foreign Affairs Committee, yesterday we met the Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority. He outlined to us their plans for the running of Gaza once the conflict is over. However, the Palestinian Authority are also in desperate need of long-overdue reform. Hamas’s rule of Gaza has been an absolute disaster for the Gazan people, but the future of Gaza cannot be for the Palestinian Authority to run Gaza in the same fashion in which they have been running the west bank. What guarantees do the Government have that the PA are going to undertake those reforms to their governance, to the corruption issues, and to the rule of law that are desperately needed so that the people of Gaza have a better future?
A central element of our discussions with the Palestinian Prime Minister is that reform agenda. The Palestinian Prime Minister is relatively new in his position and, as I said to the right hon. Member for Witham (Priti Patel), he has made some important commitments and important practical changes, and we must support the Palestinian Authority to reform in order to best serve the Palestinian people.
May I put on record my thanks to the Minister for his statement today and commend him and the Foreign Secretary for securing this landmark memorandum of understanding with the Palestinian Government? Following my meeting yesterday with Prime Minister Mustafa, can the Minister tell this House how the MOU and the £101 million for the Occupied Palestinian Territories will allow the Palestinian Authority to reform and provide crucial public services to the Palestinian people?
It was a sign of the Palestinian Authority’s commitment to some of these practical questions of service delivery that their Health Minister travelled with the Prime Minister for discussions. The MOU provides a framework through which we can have that reform discussion, including strategic dialogues on a whole range of questions such as the important education questions that the right hon. Member for Witham (Priti Patel) raised earlier.
For how long does the Minister think he will be able to recognise a Palestinian state that retains sufficient economically viable land to actually be a goer?
The right hon. Gentleman raises an important question about the economic viability of the Occupied Palestinian Territories and what any future state of Palestine would rely on for its economy. There clearly are very important questions to be considered about energy, water and the areas themselves. Clearly, many of these issues have been considered as final-status determination issues envisaged for the end of a two-state solution conference. We are doing everything we can to try and support the most practical measures possible to enable the Palestinians to live the most dignified lives that they can.
May I place on record my thanks to the Minister for all the work that he and the Secretary of State are doing on the MOU, which is very welcome?
On the question asked by my right hon. Friend the Member for Islington South and Finsbury (Emily Thornberry), the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, I appreciate that we stood on that manifesto, and rightly so, but things have since changed. The Government’s position was that we would continue recognition as part of the peace process, but Israel has been blocking aid to Gaza for 50 days now, people are starting to die of starvation, settler violence is increasing in the west bank and we now have an MOU, so is this not the right time to review our position? Will the Minister at least commit to going away and reviewing the decision and give the Palestinians the state recognition that they are way overdue?
My hon. Friend is very committed to these issues, and raises them with me here and elsewhere. I will not restate the position, but I will once again confirm from the Dispatch Box our commitment to our manifesto and that we consider recognition an inalienable right of the Palestinian people. However, it must be part of the practical steps taken to bring the violence to an end and a peaceful resolution to the region.
I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests.
Given that the horrific attacks of 7 October were perpetrated by Hamas, that hostages still remain in captivity in Gaza, that those attacks were carried out with the support and participation of many Gazans, and that there were senior Palestinian Authority diplomats who openly celebrated those attacks, does the Minister not think that unilaterally recognising Palestinian statehood at this moment would constitute a reward for terrorism, rather than the fruit of peaceful negotiation?
The right hon. Lady refers to the conditions of the hostages. Last night, along with my hon. Friend the Member for Wirral West (Matthew Patrick), I attended a presentation by Eli Sharabi, who has British family members and was taken by Hamas on 7 October and held in the most unimaginably cruel conditions. He was released, only to discover that the British passports that were held by his family as a source of protection were not enough to save them, and were not enough to prevent the killing of his brother 300 metres from him in a tunnel. The whole House remains focused on the hostages who remain in unknown conditions, probably deep underground. Anyone who had anything to do with that can have no role in the future of Gaza. It is, in part, out of our determination that Hamas must leave the strip that our support for the Palestinian Authority is so important.
I welcome the significant strengthening of ties between the UK and the Palestinian Authority, not just in trade and extra funding from the UK, but because, as the Foreign Secretary said last night,
“The UK is committed to urgently advancing Palestinian statehood as a key part of a two-state solution.”
It was my pleasure last night to meet not just Prime Minister Mustafa but Basel Adra, the director of the Oscar-winning documentary “No Other Land”, who made clear that recognition is his central demand too. Does the Minister therefore agree with me that President Macron was right when he said last month that
“We must move towards recognition, and we will do so in the coming months”?
I welcome my hon. Friend’s engagement and commitment to these issues. I will not rehearse the position that I have set out already on recognition.
Two weeks ago, I had the privilege to speak on behalf of the UK Parliament at the Inter-Parliamentary Union, where over 1,200 MPs from 188 countries passed a resolution supporting a two-state solution. No one voted against it. There was plenty of notice of the UK not recognising a nation state. Last night, I asked the Palestinian Prime Minister what difference it would make if the UK recognised a Palestinian state, and he replied that
“it would be a paradigm change, a new platform. It all starts with that recognition.”
Given the crucial meetings between the UK Prime Minister and the Palestinian Prime Minister as equals, what practical impediment stands in the way of now recognising Palestine as a nation state? I hear repeatedly that we are looking for a practical solution, so will the Minister explain that to the House?
Owing to time constraints, I will not rehearse the vital questions about security and governance that will clearly need to underpin a two-state solution in which both states are able to live in peace, security and co-operation. Those final-status determinations have long been vexed. While we are committed to the inalienable right of the Palestinians to a state as part of a two-state solution, let us not pretend that there are not vexed issues at the centre of what a Palestinian state would look like. That is one reason why so much diplomacy has been focused on these issues over the years.
I warmly welcome the Minister’s statement and thank him for bringing an extensive range of expertise to his role. Does he agree with me that it is only right for a British Government Minister to ask searching questions of both the PA and the Israeli Government? Will he reassure me that he will continue to ask questions about accountability for the killing of humanitarian workers who are trying to perform their duties?
I thank my hon. Friend for his kind words and for his dedication to these issues. Clearly, there has been an absolutely tragic loss of life among aid workers who are delivering vital services in Gaza. We all remember that a year ago a tragic incident killed seven aid workers from the World Central Kitchen, including James Henderson, John Chapman and James Kirby, three British nationals who remain in our thoughts. It has been more than a year and we expect an update on the investigation by the Israeli military advocate general. We want to see full justice and accountability for British nationals affected by violence, including in relation to the strike in March on a UN building, in which a British national was seriously injured. Over the course of this devastating conflict, more than 400 aid workers have been killed. Our demands are driven by nothing other than a desire to protect the lives of humanitarian workers and demand accountability for those who are killed.
If our Prime Minister can meet the Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority, and if the United Kingdom Government can enter into a memorandum of understanding with the Government of the Palestinian Authority, what barriers can remain to the United Kingdom recognising the state of Palestine as a matter of logic?
I gently suggest to the right hon. Member that that logic does not wholly follow. There are complex final-status determination issues that would underpin any recognition. No two-state solution will be straightforward without significant negotiation, diplomacy and agreement on both sides. As I have set out, recognition remains our goal, but let us not pretend that it is a straightforward decision without complexity.
In his remarks yesterday, the Palestinian Prime Minister quite rightly reminded MPs of the UK’s historic, moral and legal obligations to the Palestinian people. The importance of our actions to uphold international law today cannot be underestimated, so I must ask the Minister why the UK is still reluctant to sanction Israel for its war crimes against the Palestinians? Why are the Government deepening our trade ties with Israel, as the International Court of Justice warns countries not to assist or aid illegal occupation? Finally, I ask the Minister to listen to the growing calls in this Chamber and announce when the Government will finally recognise the state of Palestine.
Our position is clear on international humanitarian law and on the importance of accountability. I will not test your patience, Madam Deputy Speaker, by again going through the points about recognition.
In 2014, I was one of 39 Conservatives who voted in this House for recognition of Palestine. Since then, Governments have come and gone, and thousands of lives on both sides have been lost. The Minister said a few minutes ago that he could not go into the full details, but I am sure it would be helpful—if not today, in the very near future—to Members from across the House for him to provide a detailed analysis of what needs to change before recognition can take place.
I am confident that I will be back in this House to talk about the details of recognition soon.
As another Member of this House who voted in 2014 to recognise the state of Palestine in a motion that this House passed, I will say that progress on this matter is long overdue. I hope the Minister has heard loud and clear the message from many of us that continuing to delay that is problematic.
The right hon. Member for New Forest West (Sir Desmond Swayne) might be surprised that I agree with him: there is a concern about what will be left of the state of Palestine. Despite the existence of theogenic technology, Israeli forces are now burning to the ground the agricultural fields in northern Gaza in apparent pursuit of the tunnels that Hamas are using for their terrorist attacks. We know that nearly 4,000 children in Gaza have been diagnosed as suffering from acute malnutrition. We all desperately want to see aid resuming to Palestine, because we know that there is no future for any state if people are starving to death. Will the Minister update us on the practical details he discussed last night with the Palestinian Authority about how we will get food back into Gaza and get movement in this process?
My hon. Friend raises important questions about the viability of the Palestinian state. The Occupied Palestinian Territories must not be reduced either geographically or by forced displacement, and I am happy to reiterate that point at the Dispatch Box. There is clearly an urgent crisis. The World Food Programme has said that it has now run out of food in the Gaza strip. The single most important measure that can be taken to address that crisis is an end to the blockade of aid into the Gaza strip, and that is what we continue to call for.
Can I invite the Minister to bring a greater sense of urgency to the situation? There are children starving to death in Gaza and dying for lack of medicines. There is no water and hardly any power going in. The hospitals are not functioning. That is all a disaster made by the deliberate action of the Israel Defence Forces. What action is the Minister taking to ensure that the blockade ends and that food, medicine and all the necessities for life go in? Those people who are dying of starvation can see food over the fence in Israel, but they are being deliberately starved to death.
As I said in my previous answer, we are clear that the single most significant contribution that can be taken on that problem is ending the blockade of Gaza. We have been clear with the Israeli Government at the highest levels, including on 15 April, in the meeting between the Foreign Secretary and his Israeli equivalent, that that blockade must be lifted. On the longer-term questions of health and some of the other basic social services, I will say that of course we discussed those issues with the Palestinian Authority and relevant Ministers over the past two days. As the right hon. Gentleman says, this is very urgent, and the World Food Programme has been clear. That is why we made the statement over the weekend.
It was sobering yesterday listening to Dr Mustafa, the Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority, not least as he stressed the UK Government’s leadership role and the importance of the recognition of the state of Palestine. Bearing in mind that leadership role and the fact that 147 jurisdictions already recognise that state, will the Minister explain to the House today the reasons for the impediment to that recognition? It is really important that we hear that, because we are here to hold the Government to account.
Some 147 states have recognised a Palestinian state, yet no Palestinian state is fully functioning. That underlines the importance of taking the practical measures that will be absolutely vital not only to support Palestinian life, but to ensure that two states can co-exist peacefully, side by side. Many Members have referred to some of the practical impediments, whether it is the removal of Hamas from the Gaza strip or the economic challenges that face the Palestinian territories in both the west bank and Gaza. Let me be clear. An extremely violent conflict continues. Without a ceasefire, it is hard to imagine the creation of a state. I am sure that we will continue to discuss the merits of recognition, but let us not pretend that there are not serious practical considerations to bear in mind before the practical establishment of a Palestinian state is possible. The British Government are focused on changing the actual facts on the ground. That is the approach that we will take.
Other hon. and right hon. Members have talked about what might be left in Palestine, but I will ask about who might be left. Some 20% of the 55,000 pregnant women there—that is 11,000 pregnant women—are so malnourished that their pregnancies are now high risk. That really undermines the future of Palestine’s population. What assurance can the Minister give us that the £101 million will be directed to those people who really need it?
As I have said already, once we have fully allocated the funding, we will return to the House to outline how it has been prioritised.
I was pleased to see that the Foreign Secretary, along with France and Germany, strongly condemned the use of humanitarian aid as a political tool. The Minister will know very well that the only way to bring peace and stability to the region is by working together with our network of allies. Bearing that in mind, what conversations has he had with our European and international allies about the Palestinian-led planning of recovery and reconstruction in Gaza, as outlined in yesterday’s excellent memorandum of understanding?
My hon. Friend asks important questions. The Foreign Secretary and I, and the whole ministerial team, are engaged with our international partners. We have made a number of statements with European partners; with the Qataris on Sunday, when the Foreign Secretary travelled to Qatar; and in Oman, to which the Foreign Secretary and I travelled recently. We are engaged with many other important partners in the region, including Egypt, Israel and many others.
We have heard Members across the House ask about recognition and sanctions. Yesterday, I joined a private briefing organised by the Palestinian NGO Network, Medical Aid for Palestinians, Oxfam International, Save the Children, the Norwegian Refugee Council and the Association of International Development Agencies. The message I took away, which is burned into my brain, was that, on the ground, food, water and medicines—the essential of life—have all run out, as the Minister said. Baby milk and the water needed to make it are not available. Would the UK Government’s response be the same if the people who were starved, and denied water and medicine, were in Ukraine, God forbid, and if Russia was the perpetrator?
The UK seeks to play its full role in every humanitarian crisis. We have conducted important conferences on Sudan, and have attended to issues in Ukraine and the Occupied Palestinian Territories. We act wherever we can to try to avert humanitarian suffering.
I welcome the Minister’s statement, in particular the announcement of £101 million for humanitarian aid and the signing of the memorandum of understanding. The Minister has reconfirmed his commitment to a two-state solution. However, in order to have a two-state solution, we need to recognise both states. What criteria are being used to assess when the time is right to recognise Palestine as a state? If the Minister is not able to provide a detailed response today, I am happy to receive one in writing.
I thank my hon. Friend for his question. There is no end of detail to discuss in relation to recognition, and I am sure that we will return to this House to discuss it further. Of course, when we talk of a two-state solution, we envisage two recognised states living peacefully together, providing for their joint safety and security. That is implicit in our long-standing support for a two-state solution.
In his statement, the Minister said that there could be no role for Hamas in the future of Gaza. I support that, but there can be no future for Gaza unless the killing and destruction ends. That is why, in September last year, it was welcome that the Government suspended 29 arms export licences, following concern that there was a risk that they could be used by the Israelis to break international law in Gaza. However, a further 34 export licences to Israel were granted between September and December last year—more than were originally blocked. Can the Minister explain that decision, and provide the latest number of arms licences to Israel that have been approved?
In September, we set out the basis on which we chose to suspend arms licences, and that basis remains. There is not a full restriction on providing licences; many licences are provided either for dual-use goods, or for goods that could not possibly be used for the activities that have caused concern. For example, licences would be issued for body armour used by non-governmental organisation workers in Gaza. There are also items for the legitimate defence of Israel, such as components that could enable its missile defence system to defend it against Iranian drones. I do not have the exact number of licences; it tends to change relatively regularly, given the nature of the flow between the two countries.
I too welcome the MOU and the funding we will provide to the Palestinian Authority. When I went to Jerusalem last year with other Members, we talked to the NGO community—an absolutely vital community in both Israel and Palestine, working for democracy and human rights. On 5 May, the Knesset is planning to vote on another law that will clamp down on the activities of NGOs working to help build a two-state solution. The law will impose an 80% tax on donations from foreign state entities, including the United Kingdom, and ban access to courts for NGOs. What discussions has the Minister had with counterparts in Israel to ensure that our state funding can go to towards building that two-state solution with both Israeli and Palestinian NGOs?
We support efforts by both Israeli and Palestinian civil society actors to build links across communities, and I know that many in this House have engaged with organisations of that kind. We are aware of the draft legislation in the Knesset, and we are engaging with colleagues in Israel on these questions.
Today, the International Court of Justice heard that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza under the world’s watchful eye. All of us are witnesses to the most horrific crimes against humanity, which are being carried out in plain sight. A million children have been cut off from the basic necessities for survival for well over a month. They are at risk of starvation. I repeat those words: a million children are at risk of starving to death. I fear that once this is over and done with, and all is said and done, we will make mere memorials to mark the most horrific war crimes of our time. This is a tragedy that the world has the power to stop but is refusing to. What more can the Government do to ensure that the civilian population of Gaza, including a million children, are not starved to death, and why is it not being done?
The Government are in no doubt about the severity of the humanitarian situation in Gaza. That is why last week, we made statements—both with our allies and alone—about the politicisation of humanitarian aid and the urgent situation that the UN agencies are reporting. More than 90% of Gaza’s population has been displaced, and many have been displaced repeatedly. Many Members of this House have heard harrowing tales of residents of the Gaza strip simply trying to survive, returning to their home only to find it totally destroyed, or trying to find medical assistance as hospitals across the strip go out of operation. The Government are in no doubt about the severity of the situation, and we raise it with the emphasis that the hon. Gentleman would expect.
I commend my hon. Friend on all the work he is doing—I know that a huge amount is going on behind the scenes—and particularly on the memorandum of understanding and the additional funding. When I hosted a meeting of the Britain-Palestine all-party parliamentary group last night, it was quite clear how grateful Prime Minister Mustafa was for the stance that the UK was taking, and that he saw it as part of a sequence of steps towards recognition. Yes, he wanted that as soon as possible, but he recognised the steps that needed to be taken, because of the difficult international context, to ensure that recognition would make a difference. However, who among our other allies, either the E4 or the Five Eyes—except the US, obviously—has provided a similar sort of MOU that can be built on?
I will have to revert to my hon. Friend on whether others have a memorandum of understanding. The European Union and others have done important work with the Palestinian Authority, but I was very grateful for the words of the Palestinian Prime Minister last night in Parliament. He has particularly recognised the importance of the UK’s work on the reform agenda and on many other things, for which I am very grateful.
More than 15,000 children have been murdered, more than 15,000 women have been murdered, and more than 15,000 innocent men have been murdered. The Minister used the word “contribution” when making reference to a two-state solution. I ask him whether the contribution of all those who have been murdered—the blood that has been spilled—is not sufficient for Palestine to be recognised as a state.
As I said in my last answer, we are incredibly conscious of the suffering in Gaza. We want to see a ceasefire, we want a political process, and we want two states living securely side by side, and all our diplomatic efforts in relation to this question are focused on that.
In his meeting with MPs, the Palestinian Prime Minister was clear that Israel will change course only if there is real action from states. He stressed that, in line with the International Court of Justice ruling, states have a legal responsibility to impose sanctions—including ending all trade in settlement goods—and to cease any aid or assistance that sustains Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestinian territory. Those measures are backed by a significant number of MPs across this House. When will the Government finally impose meaningful sanctions in order to hold Israel accountable and apply the pressure needed to stop it trampling all over international law without any consequences? Rightly, the Government did that for Russia; wrongly, they will not do it for Israel.
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his question, but I would gently correct him; as he knows, this Government have taken steps since we became the Government, including sanctions. He also knows that we do not comment on sanctions in advance of issuing them.
The Minister is a good man and his answers indicate just that, so I read with interest the release on the Government website regarding the visit. I saw the language referring to the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Does the Minister not agree that Government language must be considered and unbiased? While we welcome dialogue and we hope for peace, to achieve that we cannot and must not roll over and use narratives that are not helpful and useful. We must be careful that the Government do not sow division and distrust with our Israeli allies.
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his kind words. The term Occupied Palestinian Territories has long been the language of the British Government under multiple different Governments, and it reflects our legal view of the position.
I welcome the Government’s commitment to securing a peaceful future for the region, but that future feels far away for the families of the hostages still held by Hamas. As the Minister mentioned, yesterday he and I heard from Eli Sharabi, who talked about the horrors of his experience and how he lost absolutely everything. He is working tirelessly to secure the release of all hostages, including Avinatan Or, who has British links. Does the Minister agree that the first step in securing the peaceful future we all want to see is the immediate release of all the hostages?
I do, and I pay tribute to the work of my hon. Friend, who has been a tireless supporter of hostage families, including Emily Damari, her mother Mandy and, of course, Avinatan Or, who is an Israeli citizen with a British mother. He is very much in my thoughts, as are all of those left in tunnels for phase 2. They are awaiting a ceasefire that cannot come urgently enough. I join my hon. Friend in calling for the immediate release of all hostages.
I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. The Palestinian Authority are key to a two-state solution and should be the basis of the viable Palestinian state we all want to see. I welcome the Minister’s focus on practical steps to build up the Palestinian Authority. I think those are a lot more important than statements that might be interpreted as a little performative. Can the Minister update the House on the Government’s work with the PA to improve the situation on the ground in the west bank, including tackling the recent increase in Iranian-backed terrorism there and the expansion of Israeli settlements, both of which represent major practical barriers to a two-state solution?
My hon. Friend raises important points, and he has a long history of engagement on these issues. The security challenges in the west bank are important and he is right to raise them. I have set out our position on settlements clearly already from the Dispatch Box, and I reiterate that. We are talking to the Palestinian Authority about those practical challenges and the importance of being able to demonstrate the effectiveness of the Palestinian security forces to prevent violent disturbances within the areas they control. It is vital that settlements are restrained and that the terrible increase in settlement activity is reduced. It is vital, too, that Israel enables the Palestinian Authority to function effectively, which includes paying salaries, having electricity and all the other basic fundamentals that a nation state would require.
It was a real honour to join the meeting with Prime Minister Mustafa in Parliament yesterday. I welcome the Minister’s hard work in the signing of the MOU. I desperately want peace for Palestinians and for Israelis, and I was touched by Prime Minister Mustafa’s gracious remarks that the way forward has to be peace for all, dignity for all and justice for all. Does the Minister agree that while we work through the short-term practical considerations of recognising the state of Palestine, we have to keep our eyes on that long-term prize of peace, dignity and justice, and that a state of Palestine is a vital part of that?
My hon. Friend is right. Those are the principles for long-term peace for both parties, and that is what we will need to work towards.
The memorandum of understanding is significant, and the message to the Minister about the recognition of the state of Palestine is equally significant. Member after Member has raised the famine in Gaza and its implications. We are seeing pictures of children who, as a result of malnutrition, are not surviving the hospital treatment they are getting. Historically, our country has been faced with this situation before, and we have overridden blockades. We have not allowed other countries to veto humanitarian aid. Are we not near that stage now? We cannot allow Israel to veto the delivery of aid. Should we not be looking with our partners at the logistics we have on the ground in that region to deliver the aid by sea and by air, whatever statements Israel makes?
With and without our partners, we have looked at a range of mechanisms whereby aid might be brought into Gaza, but the truth is that without effective deconfliction mechanisms, aid workers are at real risk, as we have seen in recent months and weeks. There is also a question of scale. There have been airdrops and sea movements of aid into Gaza, but nothing can equal the scale required other than lifting the blockade, and that is what have been focusing on.
After 570 days, 59 hostages remain. Does the Minister agree that their unconditional release is a key to the ceasefire? What did Prime Minister Mustafa have to say about that yesterday?
I thank my hon. Friend for his doughty advocacy in this regard. Prime Minister Mustafa told me that he wanted hostages to be released, and I am sure my hon. Friend will have seen some of the other commentary from the Palestinian Authority on these questions. This is critical: the hostages must be released as soon as possible, and I know the whole House continues to share that view.
(1 month ago)
Commons ChamberUrgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs if he will make a statement on the London Sudan conference.
Co-hosted with the African Union, the EU, France and Germany, the London Sudan conference convened Foreign Ministers, major donors and humanitarian leaders to galvanise co-ordinated international action on the conflict. Discussions focused on ensuring humanitarian access, protecting civilians and supporting a Sudanese-led peace process that preserves Sudan’s territorial integrity. A co-chairs’ statement set out the shared principles of an immediate ceasefire, rejection of external interference, opposition to parallel Governments, a return to a civilian-led transition and a principled approach to full, unimpeded humanitarian access.
Although this was not a pledging conference, international partners did announce over £800 million of support to address the humanitarian situation. This includes a further £120 million in UK aid for this year, which will reach over 650,000 people with food, nutrition support and emergency assistance, including for survivors of sexual violence. It follows our sustained push to ensure aid reaches those in need, including through access corridors such as the Adré crossing from Chad.
The UK will continue to lead international efforts to end the conflict in Sudan. Our immediate goals are clear: to bring an end to this destructive war, to protect civilians and to get aid to where it is needed most. Our vision for Sudan is to work with the Sudanese people and international partners to deliver the democratic and peaceful future that they deserve.
I thank Mr Speaker for granting this urgent question. It is so important that we shine a light on this conflict, which is the worst humanitarian crisis in the world at this time. Sudan is experiencing the most extreme hunger crisis. Conflict-related famine, mass displacement, and extreme and sexual violence and killings continue to devastate millions of people. About half the population—24.5 million people—are experiencing acute food insecurity, with 650,000 facing catastrophic hunger. The conflict has led to an unprecedented displacement, with 8.6 million people internally displaced since the start of the conflict and nearly 4 million people forced to flee across borders.
Unfortunately, the crisis continues to get worse. In recent days, we have seen the Rapid Support Forces attack the Zamzam camp, which housed about 500,000 displaced people, and the Sudanese Government allegedly attack a market in western Darfur, which is speculated to be one of the worst single incidents of the conflict. I share the Minister’s aspirations, as I am sure does the whole House, but we cannot underestimate the scale of the challenge. I was pleased that the Government took part in the conference, but it was very disappointing that it was not possible to get the other participants, particularly the Arab nations, to sign up to an agreement at the end of it. It was also disappointing to find the RSF declaring an alternative Government within a few days of the conference.
What are the Government doing to encourage a greater role for the African Union, particularly in discussions at the United Nations? Generally, there is a view that if the African Union was more involved, it would be more difficult for Russia to veto UN resolutions. Secondly, what are we doing in relation to the United Arab Emirates and its role in the conflict, which has been significant?
This is a truly tragic sequence of events for the people of Sudan. The right hon. Gentleman has long had an interest and he is right to call me to the House to answer questions. We had hoped that at the conference last week, we would be able to issue a communiqué agreed by all parties. As he identifies, there is a whole range of countries with an interest in Sudan. We are at real risk at the moment not only of a further degradation of the situation for those in Zamzam, northern Darfur and across Sudan, but, as he says, of a declaration of parallel Governments, none of which will lead to the peaceful democratic future that the Sudanese have long hoped for.
The Foreign Secretary took the decision to try for this conference in an attempt to ensure wide agreement among the parties, because he recognises that there must be no hierarchy of conflict. The situation in Sudan is catastrophic and we are making every effort. The conference was the beginning, not the end, of our efforts to try to reduce the suffering in Sudan.
Let me begin by supporting the remarks of my right hon. Friend the Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell) and congratulating him on securing what is a very important urgent question.
Many millions of innocent Sudanese civilians have been caught up in what is a barbaric conflict. They deserve peace and dignity. They are facing the most appalling, dire humanitarian crisis. It is a fact that red lines have been crossed in the conflict, and that cannot be allowed to stand. We all want to help chart a course to a meaningful peace for the people of Sudan, and we are aware of the various pillars articulated in the London Sudan conference statement. We all agree on the need for an immediate end to the fighting, on preventing the partition of Sudan, and on the need for urgent humanitarian access.
Crucially, the Foreign Secretary’s conference did not see any new practical measures agreed with the African Union and other partners to help the warring parties into a ceasefire and an end to the conflict, and, importantly, to deter the ways in which the conflict is being escalated, because there has been no de-escalation whatsoever. Supporting a transition to a civilian-led Government is clearly crucial, and it must be led by the Sudanese people. What practical diplomacy are the Foreign Office and the Foreign Secretary doing to help international processes such as Cairo to stay on track and to build confidence among the Sudanese civilian and political forces?
Finally, the Minister mentioned the additional £120 million in humanitarian aid announced by the Government for 2025-26. Will he inform us which organisations the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office is partnering with for the delivery of this new aid, whether delivery has started and whether it is actually making any impact whatsoever? Will he also confirm that in parallel to announcing this new aid, he is working to keep border crossings open and pressing for the proper safety nets to ensure that this aid ends up with those who genuinely need it, and not in the wrong hands?
Like the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell), the shadow Foreign Secretary raises important questions about the African Union. We thought it was particularly important that we co-hosted this event with the African Union; clearly, this is an important conflict with wide implications for those in the neighbourhood and in east Africa. We are taking practical steps, and we conducted the conference in closed session in order to enable the kind of frank discussion that is required to advance towards a more peaceful solution in Sudan.
I would not wish to give the House the impression that we have made dramatic progress towards an end to the violence in Sudan. We are all familiar with the terrible reports that continue to come in—even this morning—of events in Darfur and across Sudan.
Through the conference, we were able to bring greater unity among the international community on what the necessary next steps must be and on the importance of maintaining open border crossings, which, as the shadow Foreign Secretary sets out, are vital, in addition to trying to ensure that humanitarian access can be exercised right across Sudan. We have been in discussions with Tom Fletcher, the emergency relief co-ordinator, who has today spoken to some of the key participants. In terms of practical steps, I can confirm that we remain in direct contact, through our special envoy for Sudan, with both the RSF and the Sudanese armed forces. We are absolutely clear that we need a civilian process towards civilian Government.
The Government were right to co-ordinate this conference as a first step on the path to peace. It is obviously disappointing that it was not possible to establish a contact group at the end of the conference, but I know the Minister will be working hard to progress bilateral talks, not least with the external actors in this conflict such as the UAE and Egypt.
I want to put the spotlight on women and girls in this conflict, who are experiencing high levels of sexual violence. What discussions were there on the protection of women and girls, and on the further steps that could be taken both to ensure the safety of those experiencing trauma today because of their experiences and to protect women and girls in the future?
My hon. Friend is absolutely right to put the focus on violence against women and girls in Sudan. It is absolutely appalling—the latest reports are lurid and graphic in their details of what is befalling women and children right across Sudan. The Minister for Africa has been leading international efforts to maintain a spotlight on these questions. He chaired a UN Security Council briefing on conflict-related sexual violence in Sudan just last month, and was also at the UN Security Council in November further highlighting this issue. This conflict is disproportionately affecting women and children, and the UK will remain completely focused on doing everything we can to bring that to a close.
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
The Sudan conference in London presented an opportunity to generate international consensus for a path to peace in Sudan’s civil war, the world’s largest conflict. It was deeply disappointing that the conference failed to establish a contact group for the conflict, as such a group could build international political will to move towards an end to the fighting. Will the Minister therefore outline what new diplomatic initiatives he will pursue to establish a contact group?
I welcome the announcement of £120 million more for humanitarian aid, but with aid access being wielded as a weapon of war on both sides, can the Minister assure us that it will reach civilians?
Gender-based violence is a terrible feature of the war, so what steps can be taken to protect women and children? I am also deeply concerned by reports that other nations are supplying arms to the warring factions, particularly the reports that the United Arab Emirates have provided weapons to the Rapid Support Forces, which are alleged to have committed mass civilian killings and are accused by the US of genocide in Darfur. Will the Minister outline what steps he has taken to stop the flow of arms to ensure that British exports are not used in Sudan?
The shadow Foreign Secretary also raised those questions. I am happy to write to the House with further details about aid delivery, both in relation to the £120 million in further funding and the concerning reports over recent days about restrictions in aid access, particularly in Darfur. Once the situation becomes clearer, I am happy to provide a full update to all parties on the practical questions about aid delivery.
The hon. Lady asks about the practical successes of the conference and what is next on the diplomatic front. The statement from the co-chairs, which include not just the UK, but the African Union, the EU and others, attempted to capture what was an important and frank set of discussions over the course of the day, and set out five principles. It went further than any other recent statement, calling for a ceasefire, rejecting external interference, opposing parallel governance and supporting a transition to civilian-led Governments. My Foreign Office officials have been talking to all parties with an interest in Sudan, including the two belligerents, to make it clear that the statement is the strong view of the international community and that we expect to see it put in place.
It is true, as the two most recent questions have set out, that we were not able to secure a contact group at the conference. I would not want the House to think that, as frank and behind closed doors as it was, the conference was therefore a failure. The fact that this is difficult is all the more reason why it was important for the UK to show leadership and to bring the African Union and others to the table to discuss these issues.
What is happening in Sudan should shock us all. UNICEF has warned that children as young as one are being raped. More than 220 cases of child rape have been reported since 2024, so we need outrage and, more importantly, action. Can the Minister confirm how much of our aid, if any, is being spent on supporting survivors of sexual abuse and violence, and also how we are using our role as penholder on Sudan at the UN to push for action specifically on sexual violence?
My hon. Friend has worked extensively on these issues, and I know her commitment to them. I will write to her with a full breakdown on which part of our aid programmes are working with survivors. As I set out in answer to an earlier question, the Minister for Africa has led efforts at the Security Council on ensuring that the whole international community is focused on the atrocities that she has just described. We are also leading efforts at the Human Rights Council to establish and renew the mandate for the UN fact-finding mission, which will be crucial to supporting future accountability efforts in Sudan.
I appreciate the pressures on the Minister’s officials, but does the Minister agree that this disaster playing out in Sudan is under-reported, and, therefore, may I encourage him in the future to take every opportunity to come to the House voluntarily with statements, rather than rely on urgent questions, to give him the opportunity, which he has quite rightly taken today, to spell out where we are in this awful situation?
I am always happy to come to the House, but let me just clarify that I am not the Minister with policy responsibility for Sudan; that belongs to the Minister for Africa in the Lords. Since taking office, the Foreign Secretary has shown strong personal commitment to this conflict. He is intensely aware of the many conflicts in the world, but appreciates that this is the one that is causing the greatest humanitarian disaster. There is a danger of appearing to create a hierarchy of conflict, and the Foreign Secretary is personally committed to ensuring that that is not the case, and that is why he took the leadership that he did last week.
Sudan is the world’s biggest humanitarian crisis, and we know that there has been a particular toll on women and girls, as other Members have mentioned. Some 80% of hospitals in conflict-affected areas are not functioning, and maternal deaths have spiked, so can the Minister say little bit more about how aid will support hospitals in the region?
I thank my hon. Friend for her important question. As I have said in previous answers, we are very focused on the fate of women and girls in Sudan. We have been working through the United Nations and with the emergency relief co-ordinator to ensure that the necessary aid is in place, whether that is for the function of hospitals, to support survivors or to protect the mechanisms to prevent civilian suffering. I will update the House once the position is clearer, given the events of the last few days.
I congratulate the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell) on securing this urgent question and laying out the unimaginable horror of what is currently happening in Sudan. There is a very real danger that the catastrophe in Sudan will spread to neighbouring countries. Since 2023, an estimated 800,000 Sudanese refugees have fled to Chad, which is already one of the poorest countries in the world and ranked No. 1 in the list of countries at risk of genocide. What assessment has been made of the impact of overseas aid cuts to the likelihood of genocide occurring in Chad, and what are the Government doing proactively to prevent a genocide in Chad?
The hon. Gentleman asks an important question. Since the conflict began, 3.6 million refugees have fled to neighbouring countries. That of course includes Chad, but also Egypt, South Sudan, Uganda and the Central African Republic. Many of these countries I know well, and I served in South Sudan for the Department for International Development for two years. These are countries with delicate political balances and that have seen recent incidences of severe conflict. What happens in Sudan makes a difference to neighbouring countries. I do not think that what is centrally at issue here is UK aid to Chad. What is centrally at issue is violent displacement from Sudan, and we will remain focused on those questions.
I commend the Foreign Secretary for co-hosting the conference and for giving this situation the political and diplomatic attention that it warrants. The crisis in Sudan is awful. The UN has warned that
“never in modern history have so many people faced starvation and famine as in Sudan today”.
The UN puts that down to the deliberate starvation tactics by the RSF and the SAF. Can the Minister outline what further measures the Government are taking to end the deliberate obstruction of food aid by the warring parties?
The UK condemns the growing body of evidence of serious atrocities being committed against civilians in Sudan. The escalation of violence, killing of civilians, sexual assault of women and restriction of humanitarian access must end. That is why in January the Foreign Secretary visited the Sudan-Chad border and raised awareness of the conflict. It is why we hosted the conference last week and are in regular touch with both the parties themselves and all those with influence, including regional players, the United Nations and major donors. We are trying to do everything we can to ensure that humanitarian access is properly restored.
Might it be expedient if we use our intelligence resources to expose and shame those who are fuelling the conflict through arming the antagonists?
We are clear that there should be no external interference in Sudan and that a continuation of this conflict serves no one. It is why we took the efforts last week that we did, and we held the conference in closed-door sessions in order to allow the frankest possible exchange of views on the way ahead.
The scenes from Sudan are beyond harrowing. There is brutal murder, millions at risk of starvation, and millions more have been displaced, with women and children watching their sons, fathers and husbands be brutally killed and many of those women and children being victims of the most horrendous sexual violence. In Newcastle-under-Lyme, I represent a number of people from the Sudanese community—either born in Sudan or whose parents were born in Sudan. They are watching the TV in horror, fear and sorrow. What we are doing to engage with and support the British Sudanese community here in the United Kingdom?
My hon. Friend speaks about the horrors for British Sudanese residents who are looking back at home and seeing such atrocious scenes. I am sure that the Minister for Africa will be happy to meet with my hon. Friend and his constituents to discuss the issue further. I have Sudanese constituents in Lincoln, and I know the horror that they feel each and every day looking at this imagery.
Does the Minister agree that religious freedom must remain a key pillar of the UK’s foreign aid policy? That said, with Sudan now ranked as one of the worst countries in the world for Christian persecution according to Open Doors, will he confirm whether the protection of religious minorities will be a condition—indeed, a priority—of the distribution of foreign aid to Sudan?
Freedom of religious belief remains a real priority for the Government. On my way to the House, I was with our new envoy for freedom of religious belief, meeting with the Baha’i community, who have suffered in Yemen and Iran. This remains an important question for the Government, and we will remain focused on it through the envoy.
The Minister rightly condemns the violence against women and girls in Sudan. Will he update the House specifically on what assistance is being provided to the victims of female genital mutilation? Those women are literally castrated. Will he ensure that we are providing assistance to those poor women?
I have heard the House’s interest in the fine detail of which elements of our aid programme are working with survivors, and I commit to providing that further information in due course.
I am deeply concerned by the ongoing conflict in Sudan and in particular the sexual violence that was brought to light so shockingly by the hon. Member for Norwich North (Alice Macdonald). When the Minister next engages with his counterparts in South Sudan, will he raise the case of Dr Ding Col Dau Ding? He travelled from Norfolk to South Sudan to practise medicine shortly after independence and saved many lives across east Africa in his time there. Just a year later, he was shockingly murdered, and his family—my constituents—have been fighting for justice for almost a decade. Will he meet me and the family of Dr Ding to discuss how they can finally secure justice for their beloved brother and son?
I am not familiar with the case. I will discuss it with the Minister for Africa and ensure that the hon. Member gets a proper response.
I thank the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell) for securing the urgent question. Despite the barbarity of Sudan, it seems to be the forgotten conflict. What steps are being taken to investigate and prevent the transfer of arms to Sudan via third countries who may have been present at the conference over the weekend and are allies of the UK?
We were clear in the co-chairs’ statement, as we have been in many other places, that we do not want external interference in this conflict. We are taking every step we can to try to ensure that we get back to a diplomatic solution and back to a civilian transfer towards civilian rule, which is what the Sudanese so desperately need.
The Minister clearly understands the issues and responds to our questions, so we thank him for that. Having, like others, raised the Sudanese war on numerous occasions and the acts of depravity and war crimes that have taken place over the last number of years, I and many others were disheartened to see the end to any semblance of peace talks. However, we must not lose heart and give up. The people of Sudan deserve a better chance of hope and a future without living in fear. How will the Minister facilitate further peace talks? What discussions have taken place with allies to produce a co-ordinated global effort to stop the torture, the maiming and the killing and to bring peace to all?
I say with regret that the two protagonists of the conflict do not appear prepared to enter into serious talks at the moment. That was why they were not invited to the conference. The conference was not an attempt to mediate a peace deal as that is not possible if neither participant is prepared to do so. We made the judgment that the conference was so important to try to cohere international support towards the next steps to try to reduce the violence. We are working with all our partners to try to do that.
(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberOver the weekend, two Members of this House—my hon. Friends the Members for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) and for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed)—on a parliamentary delegation to Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories were detained and refused entry by the authorities. They had both been granted entry clearance in advance of travelling to Israel. On arrival in Tel Aviv at 2.30 pm local time, the two hon. Members were held in immigration for six hours. When I spoke to them at 8.30 pm, they believed they were to be detained overnight without their mobile phones.
While the situation was ongoing on Saturday night, the Foreign Secretary spoke to his counterpart, the Israeli Foreign Minister, and I spoke with the Deputy Foreign Minister and the Israeli ambassador. Following that intervention, both hon. Members were released from detention, but their entry was still denied. Foreign Office officials supported the two MPs and their staff at the airport as soon as they were alerted to the situation. After a public statement at 10 pm from the Israeli immigration authority, they were then flown back in the early hours of Sunday morning.
It is my understanding that this is the first time a British MP has been barred from entering Israel. That decision appears to have been taken on the basis of comments made in this Chamber. As the Foreign Secretary has made clear, and as I am sure almost every Member of this House will agree, their treatment is unacceptable and deeply concerning. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”] It is no way to treat democratically elected representatives of a close partner nation. We have made this clear at the highest levels in Israel. I pay tribute to the contributions that both Members have made to this place since they were elected. I know that they both believe in a two-state solution. They have our support and solidarity.
The Foreign Secretary and I spoke to both MPs while they were in Israel, and I met with them earlier today. They have behaved with great dignity. They were part of a delegation visiting humanitarian projects amid the appalling situation in Gaza and a dangerous and deteriorating situation in the occupied west bank. They were going to see for themselves what is taking place in the occupied territories and to meet those directly affected by the shocking rise in settler violence.
Such visits are commonplace for MPs from across this House and from all parties. Indeed, I am told that more than 161 Members of Parliament have conducted such visits. They enrich our knowledge and experience as legislators and representatives. They create connections with countries, political counterparts and civil society. Indeed, I note that both Medical Aid for Palestinians and the Council for Arab-British Understanding have supported visits involving Members from all the main political parties, including those on the Benches opposite. All Members should therefore be worried by what this decision means and the precedent it sets.
So our message to the Israeli Government is not just that this is wrong, but that it is counterproductive. We have warned them that actions like this only damage the image of the Israeli Government in the eyes of hon. Members across the House.
Amid this unnecessary and unwelcome decision, the bloodshed continues in Gaza. The hostages are still held by Hamas, essential aid is still blocked by Israel, and yet more innocent Palestinians are suffering. The killing of 15 paramedics and rescue workers in Rafah on 23 March was one of the deadliest attacks on humanitarian staff since the war began. These deaths are an outrage, and we must see this incident investigated transparently and those responsible held to account. Our thoughts remain with the victims and their families.
We will not go quiet in our calls for the violence to stop or in our demands for humanitarian workers and civilians to be protected. We urge all parties to return to ceasefire negotiations. It is clear that this conflict can be won not by bombs and bullets, but by diplomacy. A ceasefire is the only way we will bring the conflict to an end and return to negotiations for a lasting peace in the region. This is the only way we can end the needless loss of humanitarian workers striving to alleviate suffering, and it is the only pathway toward the two-state solution that we all want to see, where Israelis and Palestinians can live in peace and security. I know that hon. Members across this House will continue to work towards that goal. I commend this statement to the House.
I had hoped that the right hon. Lady might come to the Dispatch Box to withdraw the comments of the Leader of the Opposition—comments that the shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury was not prepared to support. I remain none the wiser from the comments of shadow Minister what the position of the Conservative party is on the detention of British MPs overnight, despite having clearance to enter, and their return.
Many Conservative Members have been on such delegations; I can see one of them in the Chamber. I am sure that the Conservative party would have the full support of this House were the right hon. Member for North West Hampshire (Kit Malthouse), my neighbour the Father of the House, the right hon. Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh), or indeed the hon. Member for Brigg and Immingham (Martin Vickers), who is also from Lincolnshire—all of whom have been on such delegations—to be treated in this way. The whole House would support them.
These are not difficult questions, and I am truly surprised by the answers. The right hon. Lady asked me further questions, but the Leader of the Opposition did not take the opportunity to ask questions before her Sunday round—not of the two MPs concerned, and not of the Foreign Office. She characterised their comments in this House as “Hamas propaganda.” She can make whatever political characterisation she likes of Back-Bench MPs, but she seemed to imply that the reason for their removal was that they were not going to comply with Israeli laws. [Interruption.] Would you like me to read out her comments?
Order. The word “you” is not appropriate.
Forgive me, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Leader of the Opposition said on Sunday:
“If you look at the reasons the Israeli Government has given for why they’re not letting them in—they don’t believe they’re going to comply with their laws.”
The reason for the denial, which the Israeli Government gave to the two MPs in writing, was for the prevention of illegal immigration considerations. The Leader of the Opposition should apologise.
I would like to start by thanking the Foreign Secretary, the Minister for the Middle East, the British embassy in Tel Aviv and the British consulate for their continued support.
It has been a challenging few days. What happened to me and my hon. Friend the Member for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) is unprecedented: we were denied entry based on our legitimate political opinions, which are firmly aligned with international law. We are not the only ones speaking about the atrocities, we are not the only ones calling for change, and we are not the only ones saying that the current actions of the Israeli Government must change. Indeed, many Israeli people and charities in Israel have also called for the Israeli Government’s actions to change
There is no direct route into the west bank, so we had to go through Israel. This act was not just a diplomatic affront. Neither was it about security; it was about control and censorship. No state, however powerful, should be beyond criticism. I desperately want to see a two-state solution; I desperately want to see peace. I hope that the Minister will be able to work with his counterparts in Israel to prevent this denial of entry from happening again, so that we can continue to act in good faith to shed light on what is happening.
I pay tribute to the dignity of my hon. Friends the Members for Sheffield Central and for Earley and Woodley.
I can assure my hon. Friend that we will continue to work with the Israeli Government, and all our partners across the region, towards a two-state solution. I welcome the strength of support from her and many other colleagues in this House.
To be clear on the position of the Israeli Government: they do have the right to decide who enters their country, as indeed do we. On this occasion, the two Members of Parliament were given clearance to enter, so it was known to the Israeli Government before they arrived at the airport that they would be travelling. It was therefore with some surprise that I received the call on Saturday evening.
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
I thank the Minister for providing advance sight of his statement. The Liberal Democrats wholeheartedly support his rebuke of the Israeli Government for detaining two hon. Members of this House and denying their entry into the state of Israel. I am disappointed, however, that this House has not been able to speak with one voice on this matter.
I was shocked by the leader of the Conservative party’s comments yesterday morning, and I am deeply disappointed by the shadow Minister’s comments today. The Liberal Democrats believe that Members should be free to advocate without fear or favour on issues of national and global importance. We believe it is vital for parliamentarians to be able to see for themselves the realities of the situations we discuss in this Chamber.
Israel’s actions are inconsistent with the behaviour we would expect from an ally and from a democracy, and it is regrettable that the leader of the Conservative party and the party spokesperson do not agree. Transparency in the middle east is vital for securing a long-lasting political settlement, which must be based on openness and trust. Has the Foreign Secretary since made clear to his counterpart in the Israeli Government that such treatment of parliamentarians is unacceptable, and that no further parliamentarians will be treated in that way or denied entry into Israel?
Will the Foreign Secretary also raise with his counterpart this morning’s deeply disturbing reports of Palestinian detainees being subjected to torture, and this weekend’s report that the initial IDF account of the deaths of 15 aid workers at the hands of Israeli forces has been contradicted by video footage from a victim’s mobile phone?
I confirm to the hon. Member that the Israeli Government are in no doubt about our views on this incident, and that discussions continue. She references a number of concerning reports that have emerged in recent days. I was in this House last Wednesday to discuss some of those in detail, as well as the wider position in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, and I am sure we will continue to have such discussions about what remains a deeply concerning situation.
I join my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed) in her thanks to the Minister and the Foreign Office. Since arriving home yesterday I have been inundated with support from MPs, hundreds of whom have written to me personally to express their solidarity. That outpouring of support has come from all parts of the House, and it has united us as British parliamentarians who stand together against this unprecedented treatment of our fellow MPs.
Since I came to this place, the war in Gaza and the violence on the west bank has remained one of the top issues that my constituents write to me about. Residents have shared with me their longing for peace, and it was on their behalf that I joined the delegation. As a former journalist, I understand deeply the significance of bearing witness, and I also understand the risks that that entails. Many Palestinian journalists have paid that price with their lives. Before going to the west bank I understood the risks of travelling to a region where violence is all too common. I did not, however, anticipate the risks of detention and deportation from a British ally. Now, as an MP, it is the honour of my life to bear witness on behalf of my constituents. My only regret is that I was not able to do so on this trip.
So far in this Parliament the conflict in Gaza has been referenced more than 1,000 times by British MPs, and I have made five of those references in this Chamber. If my experience has proved anything, it is that what we say in this Chamber matters, and I encourage other MPs to continue speaking on this issue. People around the world are listening to us. Our voice is powerful, and we must continue to use it without fear or favour. What can the Minister do to ensure that future delegations going to the west bank, including those who are about to depart this weekend, can do so without having to censor their remarks in Parliament?
My hon. Friend is a dignified and doughty tribune in this place. I know that all Members of this House will continue to speak without fear or favour from these Benches, and I would encourage them to do so. The right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton) referenced our travel advice, which sets out some of the risks, and I encourage Members of Parliament who are considering visits and wish to discuss that with the Foreign Office to do so.
This is obviously a deeply alarming development, coming as it does off the back of proposed financial penalties for foreign non-governmental organisations that are operational in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, which also bear witness to what is going on there. Will the Minister enlighten us about two things? First, it would be helpful for parliamentarians if, in his discussions with the Israeli Government, he could ask them for a comprehensive list of MPs who will not be permitted to travel to Israel from here on in, so that we get a sense of the scale of their objection to what we say in this House. Secondly, will the Government still be entertaining high-level military delegations from Israel on their premises?
On the right hon. Gentleman’s second point, we will keep such matters under review on a case-by-case basis. On the question of which MPs are now welcome to travel to Israel, I will have to revert to this House. To our knowledge, this is the first ever such incident. Colleagues from across the House with a whole range of views on the conflict in Israel and Gaza have travelled there, so we were dismayed to see the weekend’s events.
I call the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee.
As I look around the Chamber, I am proud to see so many Members from all parties who have come here to support our sister parliamentarians, but I am disappointed not to be able to include Members of the Front Bench of His Majesty’s Opposition in that. Our fury at this insult to our Parliament and to our country is tempered only by the fact that we must not forget why these young women went to Israel: they wanted to bear witness to what is going on in east Jerusalem and on the west bank. They were going to meet generations of a family who are living in a supposedly temporary refugee camp, but who have been there for decades and are still waiting on the promise of a Palestinian state. They were there to see aid workers and charities whose organisations are at threat of 80% tax, threatening their very existence and lifesaving work. They might even have met, as I did, a man who had been looked in the eye by Antony Blinken and told that his home was safe, yet we were standing in its rubble. What steps will my hon. Friend the Minister take on behalf of the Government to protect the right of MPs not just to see the tragic reality of the west bank and east Jerusalem, but to call that out without reprisal?
I will update the House once we have had further discussions with the Israeli Government on the question of MPs’ travel, as I said in response to the right hon. Member for North West Hampshire (Kit Malthouse). I encourage all Members of the House, whether they support the Government’s position or not, to continue to speak in the House with the frankness and integrity that Members would expect.
My sympathies are with my two colleagues, the hon. Member for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed) and the hon. Member for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang), for what they experienced over the weekend. However, we must remember that Israel is in a state of war against a terrorist enemy and it is—[Interruption.] At different times, this country has refused to admit elected politicians—they have wanted to come to this country, but they have been refused entry. It is Israel’s right to refuse entry to people who choose to call for boycotts or other elements against the state of Israel. Therefore, if colleagues wish to visit Israel, they need to be clear about the Foreign Office advice. By the way, the travel insurance advice is that if people do not follow that Foreign and Commonwealth Office advice, they are not insured.
I reiterate that nobody in the British Government is disputing the Israeli’s Government’s right to decide who enters Israel—that is clearly their right to discharge as they see fit. What was particularly surprising about this incident was not just its novelty—it is the first time of which we are aware that MPs have been stopped—but that they had entry clearance already and they were permitted to travel to the airport.
I thank the Minister for his statement. If this is how the Israeli Government treat the UK’s elected representatives, we can only imagine how they are treating the Palestinian people. Parliamentary delegations are how we in this House better understand the world and the issues that we debate. I returned from my recent visit to the region as a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee more committed than ever to working towards a lasting peace. Travelling to the west bank shows at first hand the fear and violence experienced by the Palestinians. Meeting with the Israeli hostages, walking through Hostages Square and meeting their families brings home their trauma and suffering. Does the Minister agree with me about the importance of parliamentary delegations, and that actions like such as this by the Israeli Government undermine long-term efforts for a lasting peace?
Many Members of this House have benefited from parliamentary delegations across the world. I agree with my hon. Friend, who has taken the effort to travel to many countries that the Foreign Affairs Committee considers in its deliberations. They are very important, and I would like to see them continue.
I remind the House of my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. This delegation was organised by the Council for Arab-British Understanding, and it is my enormous privilege to serve as the chair of that organisation. CABU has organised dozens of delegations of this sort over the years, and with the support of the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, if it is necessary, we hope to continue to do so in the future. The attack on the hon. Members for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed) and for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) is an attack on us all. I regret to say that that is why the position of the Opposition Front Benchers is so utterly regrettable. We know that Israel has closed off Gaza in recent years; if the treatment of the hon. Members is anything to go by, it now looks like it will do the same thing for the west bank. What will the Minister do to ensure that it is not allowed to do that?
I hope to see parliamentary delegations from CABU and others continue. The Opposition spokesperson, the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton), also asked me about delegations. I take this opportunity to clarify that while my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Central is a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, this was not a Foreign Affairs Committee delegation—no one on it has travelled recently—nor was it a delegation from an all-party parliamentary group. However, it was a delegation—in line with many such delegations that have been supported by CABU and many other organisations to ensure that parliamentarians can travel and see things for themselves—and I hope that they continue.
This whole House was and remains united in its condemnation of the horrific attacks by Hamas on Israel on 7 October and their disgusting treatment of the hostages ever since, but many in this House have also been appalled by the indiscriminate killing of tens of thousands of men, women and children from the state of Palestine. Ever since 7 October, their forced displacement and the blockade of aid on them has surely upset many Members of this House. Does the Minister agree that the treatment and the smearing of my hon. Friends the Members for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed) and for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang)—they are honourable, and I am proud to call them my friends—is part of a wider attempt to stop others, such as journalists, parliamentarians and the Israeli people themselves, from seeing what is really going on in the occupied territories?
I agree with how my hon. Friend described my hon. Friends the Members for Earley and Woodley and for Sheffield Central. They are my friends too. They were a bureau chief for the Financial Times and a lawyer before coming to this place. They are distinguished members of their communities and distinguished Members of this House.
Israel has forgone the opportunity to engage with two of its trenchant critics. Is this not a case of more fool it?
I agree with that length of question as well.
This is an unprecedented situation, and I pay tribute to both my hon. Friends the Members for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed) and for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) for the manner in which they have conducted themselves. I have visited Israel on many occasions, and I have had the opportunity to live there. While Members of this House may have disagreements with the current Israeli Government, does the Minister agree it is essential that we enable delegations to visit the region? That is the only way that we listen, learn and are exposed to a wide range of views and perspectives.
I agree. There are many friends of Israel in this House, many of whom are disappointed by the events of the weekend.
I express my own solidarity and the solidarity of my party with the hon. Members for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed) and for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang), who were detained at the weekend. That was a completely unacceptable set of circumstances. While there can be no doubt about the fact that our colleagues were denied entry into Israel because the Israeli Government were terrified of what they would witness, in the last week Israel has intentionally targeted 15 UN medical workers, burying them in a mass grave, and confirmed the indefinite expansion of illegal settlements in the occupied west bank. Last week, the Minister told this House that the Government take action when there is “a risk” that Israel is breaching international law. Does he consider that the targeting of UN aid workers and the confirmation that settlements in the west bank will be expanded demonstrates a risk that international law is being violated by Israel, and will the Government end Israeli impunity by condemning its indiscriminate attacks and suspending all arms exports?
We went through many of these issues in some detail last Wednesday, and I am sure that I will return to this House to do so again. My position remains as it was on Wednesday.
I have stood opposite the spokesperson for the Opposition, the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton), many times and engaged in the rough and tumble of political debate. It is not part of the rough and tumble of political debate to seek to justify the detention and deportation of fellow Members of this House. Does my hon. Friend the Minister agree that the position taken by Opposition Front Benchers poses a risk to all of us as parliamentarians?
My right hon. Friend speaks with force, and I condemn the position taken by Opposition Front Benchers. We have just heard from a fairly trenchant advocate for free speech; I thought that was the position of the Conservative party.
Like many colleagues, I have visited Israel, the west bank and Gaza, facilitated by the Israeli Government and the Palestinian Authority. I benefited greatly from those visits, and I hope that both the Palestinian Authority and the Israeli Government will facilitate future visits by parliamentarians. However, does the Minister think it was wise for the Foreign Secretary, in his remarks on X/Twitter, to try to conflate China and Israel?
The shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury, the hon. Member for North Bedfordshire (Richard Fuller), made an almost identical comparison shortly thereafter, so the right hon. Member may want to talk to his own party about that comparison.
For 13 years before my election, I worked as director of an organisation called We Believe in Israel, and I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. Part of my job was to lead study tours for British politicians to visit Israel—incidentally, every single trip I led also visited the west bank to hear Palestinian perspectives on the conflict. I commend my hon. Friends the Members for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed) and for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) for wanting to visit the region and see the situation for themselves. We probably disagree on aspects of the conflict, but they are moderate voices who support a two-state solution, and it is outrageous that they were detained and not allowed entry. Does the Minister agree that it is vital for hon. Members to visit Israel and the west bank and see the situation at first hand; that doing so helps people to arrive at an informed, nuanced and balanced view; and that anything that hinders this is to be deplored?
My hon. Friend is well known for his friendship to Israel, and his remarks have real force. I agree with them.
It is my honour and privilege to serve on the Foreign Affairs Committee with the hon. Member for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed), and I put on record my support for her and my outrage at her treatment. Given that this is how the current Israeli Government act towards their allies, disregarding democratic and diplomatic norms, what steps will the Government take to help ensure that Israel enters into negotiations with its enemies towards a lasting peace and a two-state solution?
We will continue to work with the Israeli Government and all parties in the region to try to ensure that there is a return to substantive talks, and a return to the ceasefire that will lead to the release of hostages and an end to this terrible conflict in the region.
I listened to the Minister’s statement in detail, but what specific actions will this Government take against the Israeli Government for doing what they did to two of our colleagues? Secondly, Madam Deputy Speaker, back in 2021, Mr Speaker banned the Chinese ambassador for banning Members of the British Parliament from going to China. Is the same going to happen to the Israeli ambassador until these sanctions are lifted?
We consider the actions of the Israeli Government to be not just regrettable but counterproductive, for the reasons that Members on the Opposition Benches have stated. It is so important—as many on the Labour Benches have said—that parliamentarians are able to visit, to engage, and ultimately to seek to persuade others. The actions of the Israeli Government are deeply regrettable and unacceptable, and we have made that clear to them at the very highest level.
I take this opportunity to thank the Minister for supporting the hon. Members for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) and for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed), as well as any other Member attempting to make the same journey in order to acquaint themselves with the situation. Could he bring us up to date on what is happening regarding the supply of arms and weapons to Israel? Can he assure the House that the Government will suspend the sale of parts that make up the F-35 jets that are being used to bomb and strafe Gaza, kill so many people, and destroy schools and hospitals by targeting them? Will he also tell us exactly what RAF Akrotiri is being used for, and why there are so many flights from that base into Israel? Is it delivering weapons?
I have covered this ground recently, and it remains as it was. We took a principled position in relation to the suspension of certain arms licences in September, and that remains our position. We have discussed the position in relation to F-35 parts and the role of RAF Akrotiri on a number of other occasions. However, I am glad for the opportunity to correct something: when last the right hon. asked me a question, I referred to him simply as an hon. Member. No offence was intended, and it was a mistake on my part.
It is regrettable that the Israeli Government are now acting with impunity —they seem to be accountable to no international law. Enabled by the US President, they continue to bomb hospitals and schools, killing aid workers and thousands of Palestinian civilians. Today, Breaking the Silence reported further executions, as well as the destruction of homes by the Israel Defence Forces, and now this: banning Members of our Parliament from entering. I put on record that I wholeheartedly disagree with what has been said by Opposition Front Benchers and the accusations made by them. My hon. Friends the Members for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) and for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed) are our friends and our colleagues, and they have more dignity and strength in their little fingers than has been shown by Opposition Front Benchers.
My hon. Friend speaks with real force, and I agree with her condemnation of the Leader of the Opposition’s comments.
There is no question but that the hon. Members for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) and for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed)—who are sadly no longer in their places—had a difficult experience in Israel, and that is to be regretted. However, we are hearing today that that somehow makes criticism of Israel impossible in this place, but as we have heard time and again, that is simply not the case. We can speak out in Parliament, and we can continue to do so.
I do not think that anything I said indicated that I expected this House to be less critical in its position, so I am not sure that I accept the hon. Gentleman’s question.
It is our job in this House to speak out against what Hamas did, but also to speak out against Israel and what it is doing. Denying Members entry is a disgrace, and I am embarrassed by His Majesty’s official Opposition and the position they have taken—they should be ashamed, and should reflect on what they have done. Krishnan Guru-Murthy’s interview with the Israeli ambassador on “Channel 4 News” clearly showed that she was lying. Does the Minister agree that the way in which our friends have been treated is a snub to the UK?
In solidarity, Green party MPs share in the condemnation—which should be fully cross-party—of the Israeli Government’s shameful detention and deportation of our two Labour MP colleagues. In the context of the widespread evidence of war crimes, does the Minister agree that this demonstrates that international scrutiny of what is happening in Israel and Palestine is ever more important? Noting that the Foreign Secretary and the Minister have condemned the actions of the Israeli Government, may I ask him which of the many actions that I have previously challenged him to take, will he now take, to show that actions speak louder than words? How will he make our disapproval really clear?
Conscious of time, I will not relitigate the many points that the hon. Member has raised with me in the past. I will simply say that I stand by the remarks in the statement, and we have made our displeasure known.
The detention and the deportation raise some serious questions. What is Israel trying to hide? If Israel has not already crossed a red line, what more does it need to do for this Government to take some action? The alleged execution of the 15 humanitarian aid workers was bad enough. What are this Government going to do? Actions do speak louder than words.
This Government have taken action. We have taken action since the day we formed the Government. I would be happy to rehearse those things, whether it is the arms suspensions, the restoration of funding to UNRWA or the numerous other actions we have taken, but conscious of time, I think I will save that for another day.
I think we have seen a good example of faux outrage in this House today, as Members have condemned the Israeli Government. Would the Minister accept that, first of all, the Israeli Government have every right to decide to whom they give entry and to whom they refuse entry? Will he remind some of his colleagues that it was not so long ago that they were campaigning to get the President of the United States excluded from this country?
I am not sure how many more times I need to say the position about Israel’s right to control who enters its border, but I am happy to reiterate it one more time.
I have debated for many years with members of the Conservative party, and I have often disagreed with them, but I have never before been ashamed of them. Considering that Israel has for a long time now not been allowing journalists into Palestine and the west bank, and now seems determined not to allow parliamentarians to go to that country to build links and to see for themselves what is going on, is this the point where we need to consider what action we take going forward? Should that action be about talking to Israel, or does it need to be something slightly stronger?
As I said in answer to a previous question, we have taken action since we became the Government. We will continue to talk to the Israeli Government. They are, as many Members have said, a partner and an ally, and we are surprised and distressed, and we oppose the treatment of our MPs this weekend.
For 15 years, I have found it impossible to say anything on the subject of Israel and Palestine without it being completely unsatisfactory to either side of the debate, but I have to say, having got to know the hon. Member for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) pretty well on the Treasury Committee, that I was profoundly concerned by the decision of the Israeli Government to do what they did, although I respect the right that they have to do so. However, it is so counterproductive, because it is only when we fully express our views on all sides of this debate that we can find some edification.
That is a decent and honourable contribution, and I thank the right hon. Member for it.
Colleagues who were elected after 2024 may not know that in 2022, 287 of us parliamentarians were banned from entering Russia over our views about the Ukrainian crisis, including not just the right hon. Member for New Forest East (Sir Julian Lewis) and me, but the right hon. Member for North West Essex (Mrs Badenoch), the Leader of the Opposition. At that time, the House stood as one standing up to that intimidation. Today, from the Opposition, we get a dog whistle so loud—about our colleagues, who did nothing wrong apart from wanting to go and see for themselves what was going on—that it could be heard on the moon. What a disgrace. Does the Minister agree that this Government will always defend free speech and that defending free speech means defending the ability of people to go and talk about things that others may not want to talk about?
As I have said, these parliamentary delegations are very valuable, and I want to see them continue.
Many of us have raised serious concerns about the actions of the Israeli Government, and replies have rarely gone as far as most of us would want. I am deeply concerned that the state of Israel may be using this tactic to curtail Ministers from condemning Israel more strongly. What assurance can we have from the Minister that he will not be cowed by what has happened to his colleagues?
I have visited the Occupied Palestinian Territories a number of times, including Gaza, in years gone by. One of the purposes is to bear witness to what is happening on the ground. That is particularly important when aid workers, medics, journalists and civilians are being killed in large numbers. While I appreciate the Minister’s support for our colleagues, what will the Government do to ensure that in future Members of this House can visit with impunity?
It is the right of the Israeli Government to decide who visits. They can exercise that right as they see fit. I am sure they will hear from right across the whole House Members’ desire to continue to visit, which continues to provide a valuable function. Israel and Britain have a long relationship, whether Parliament to Parliament, society to society or people to people, and I want that to continue.
I thank the Minister for his statement, and I put on record my and my colleagues’ solidarity with our friends, the hon. Members for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed) and for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang). What are the UK Government’s precise red lines that, when crossed by Israel, will trigger a full arms embargo and comprehensive economic sanctions against Israel? Furthermore, when will the Government publicly articulate and enforce those red lines to ensure accountability and to uphold international law?
I have talked about the importance of international humanitarian law, as has the Foreign Secretary and many other Ministers of this Government, at this Dispatch Box, at some length. Conscious of time, I refer the hon. Member to my answers last Wednesday.
I thank my hon. Friend the Minister for all the help he gave to my hon. Friends the Members for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) and for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed) over the weekend. The British Jewish organisation Yachad has suggested that this occurrence of detention is symptomatic of an attempt to silence criticism within Israel and outside. Is my hon. Friend sympathetic to that view and, if he is, is a business-as-usual diplomatic relationship with this current Israeli Government still possible?
My hon. Friend, who is so committed to these issues, has been discussing them with me and others for many years. He is right to highlight the important work of Yachad, which has also provided delegations to Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories. I refer him to my previous response in the statement.
I was on one of those delegations that the Minister has just spoken about, and unlike my friends on the Government Benches, we were able to visit the area without a problem from the Israeli Government. However, we did have an incident with Israeli settlers. Is the Minister concerned, and what will he do about this sliding from what is supposed to be a democratic country, undermining the rule of law and stopping British politicians from seeing what is happening in the occupied territories?
I know that my neighbour, the Father of the House, the right hon. Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh), has also been on such a delegation. Like the hon. Member, he reported an incident with settlers. I refer the House to my previous statements about the expansion of settler violence and illegal settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
The power of bearing witness, as my hon. Friends were attempting to do, was shown at its most extreme in recent days by the paramedic Refat Radwan, who filmed the recent attack on 15 aid workers by the IDF before losing his own life. Does the Minister agree that in this case there must be accountability and not a cover-up?
I do believe that wherever there are incidents against humanitarian workers, including the one that my hon. Friend mentions, there must be full accountability.
I welcome the Minister’s statement. These discussions are sometimes very polarised, but let me say now that this is not just an affront to the House and every Member in it and not just an affront to the Government, but an affront to the British public who put us here. Thousands of British citizens travel to Israel to make their way to the third holy site, Masjid Al-Aqsa, and hundreds have been refused entry on arrival. What reassurance can the Minister give them when our own MPs seem not to be able to get there?
The Foreign Office and the embassy in Tel Aviv, and the consulates in Jerusalem, will give support to all British nationals seeking to travel. They supported our colleagues on Saturday night, and in recent weeks they have supported British pilgrims in an incident similar to the one that the hon. Gentleman has described. They will continue to provide that support.
I know that the Leader of the Opposition is not here, but I would say to her gently that she should agree with the whole House and recognise that her comments may inflame the situation, and that they are not just wrong but counterproductive in respect of the work that the Government are doing.
I commend Opposition Members who have spoken truth to power, and I express my solidarity with our two colleagues as well. Their treatment was very concerning, and the fact is that this a worrying trend: we have seen aid workers being denied access, and we have seen vital journalists being denied access. We know that atrocities are often committed in darkness, when people have something to hide. Does the Minister agree that the Israeli Government must stop shutting themselves off from the eyes of the world?
I have already spoken about the importance of parliamentary delegations, and I hope that they continue. I hope, too, that the free press of Israel—and, indeed, the whole international press—are able to operate within the Occupied Palestinian Territories. I have been deeply saddened and concerned to see that so many journalists have been killed in Gaza. As for the comments of the Leader of the Opposition, I should say to the House that I did inform her office that I intended to make some observations, so I am disappointed not to see her today to answer for them.
I thank the Minister for his statement. As a general principle parliamentarians should be entitled to travel, but there is an understanding that sovereign nations across the globe have the right to decide who can enter. I personally am barred from China and Russia, as are other Members, but I have not heard anyone speak about that. Does the Minister not agree that sovereign nations have a right to prevent entry if they believe that it would have an adverse impact, and that we, as our own nation, should support the right of other nations to make their own rules for what they believe to be for their benefit? Each nation should have that sovereign right.
I do indeed accept, as do the British Government, that every Government have the right to control who comes in. More fool Russia and Belarus for taking the position that they have taken in relation to the hon. Member.
Does the Minister agree that the counterproductive and concerning actions of the Israeli Government in this regard, and the contemptible response from the Opposition Front Bench, have one thing in common, namely that neither will command the support of the British people?
I do agree. The public expect that their MPs will go and see for themselves. This was an important delegation, and I am sure that the constituents of my two colleagues would have welcomed the fact that they were taking the time and making the effort to try to ensure that they had the best possible understanding of a situation about which I know so many constituents feel so strongly.
I have had the privilege of visiting the Occupied Palestinian Territories with two delegations, one with the Council for Arab-British Understanding and Medical Aid for Palestinians and the other with Yachad. During those visits we met people working in schools, hospitals and clinics, we saw the operation of the Israeli military courts, we met Palestinians whose villages had recently been destroyed by settlers, and, during the last visit, we met Israelis who had lost loved ones on 7 October. Such visits enrich our understanding. They ensure that our debate in this place is informed not only by what we think we know, but by lived experience—by having looked in the eye people whose day-to-day reality consists of the issues that we discuss in this place. Can the Minister assure the House that he will continue to seek a commitment from the Israeli Government that such delegations will not be prevented in the future?
I hope that such delegations will continue in the future, and I will talk to the Israeli Government to that effect.
May I put on record my thanks to the Minister and the Foreign Secretary for their support for our two colleagues, who, since their election, have spoken so bravely about many issues, including what is happening in Palestine? May I also remind the House that Israel is an occupying power, occupying Gaza as well as the west bank? Over the past year the Israelis have consistently not allowed people into Gaza, and we know now what they have been doing to it and to the west bank. It seems that what Israel really wants to do is hide its atrocities.
The British Government do consider the west bank and the Gaza strip to be Occupied Palestinian Territories.
The Israeli Government’s justification for this action seems to have been the statements that my hon. Friends made in the House against their policies. On that basis, they detained, denied entry to and expelled two elected Members of the Parliament of their democratic ally on legitimate parliamentary business. Let me repeat the question that I asked my hon. Friend on 20 March. I know that these matters are complex, but can he tell me at what point we change our posture towards the Israeli Government?
I am sure that we will have an opportunity to discuss events in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories in further detail. I thank my hon. Friend for his dedication and commitment to these issues, and I do not doubt that we will have further discussions in the Chamber in due course.
My hon. Friends the Members for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) and for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed) have borne their detention and repatriation with great fortitude, courage, dignity and, indeed, grace, which makes the attack on them from the Opposition Front Bench all the more disgraceful. It is an attack on all of us. Their detention occurred at the same time as it came to light that Israel’s version of the terrible killing of 15 aid workers was not true. Does the Minister agree that lying about actions in occupied territory, preventing the entry of humanitarian aid and journalists and barring British parliamentarians undermine Israel’s claim to be an open and transparent democracy?
I agree with my hon. Friend’s characterisation of the grace and dignity with which the two Members have comported themselves over what has been a trying 24 hours, and I am sure we will discuss the other matters that she has raised in due course.
Israel is supposed to be an ally of ours. Does the Minister agree that its treatment of our hon. Friends is not only an affront but a further indication of the Israeli Government’s desire to show no transparency in respect of their actions, and not to respect human rights?
Israel remains an open society with a vibrant press, who were reporting on this incident as it happened. I hope that this proves to be an aberration, and that Members of this House will be able to go back to travelling to Israel with no thought of detention or being returned.
For me, the most important aspect of our country is not our flags or even our institutions, but our people, and our people—the elected representatives of thousands of British people—have been treated with contempt. My understanding was that we are Britain and you do not do this to us. There is, at least, consensus on this side of the House that this is not how we should expect to be treated by our allies.
While I welcome the Minister’s statement, I still cannot understand where our red lines were when thousands were slaughtered, when aid was prevented from entering Gaza, or when international law or the ceasefire was broken. Can he explain where those red lines are, and how, when Britain and Parliament have been insulted, we can continue to sell arms to Israel?
I have talked about the position relating to arms sales, and I will not rehearse the arguments that were heard in the Chamber so recently. I agree with my hon. Friend that we all represent communities across the United Kingdom. I believe that in travelling to Israel those two hon. Members were trying to reflect the earnest concerns of their constituents, and I encourage all hon. Members, whenever they are able to do so, to travel to the places where their constituents cannot.
I thank the Minister for his statement. I join him and most fellow Members—sadly, not all of them—in fully supporting my two hon. Friends over the shocking treatment that they have faced. Does the Minister agree that such an utterly disproportionate and counterproductive decision by the Israeli authorities, at a time when the situation in the middle east is already deteriorating so badly, can only do damage to the Israeli Government’s reputation here and in the wider world?
I rise in solidarity with the hon. Members for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) and for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed)—two sisters of this House—and I am disgusted by their treatment at the hands of the state of Israel. However, all too many of my constituents have suffered similar treatment when they have tried to visit Al-Aqsa in Jerusalem and other holy sites around the country. Mr Tassadaq Hussain and Suhan Hoque have recently been denied entry. What will the Minister do to make sure that British passport-carrying citizens are not denied entry to Israel?
It is for Israel to decide whom it grants entry to, but any British national travelling overseas, regardless of their faith, can expect consular assistance from the Foreign Office.
I thank the Minister for his statement. I applaud the dignity with which my hon. Friends have responded, and the solidarity from many Members of different parties. I commend the statement made by my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes), who spoke so powerfully about the importance and impact of parliamentary delegations. Does the Minister agree that democracy is weakened if parliamentarians cannot undertake such visits and duties at a time when the need for scrutiny has never been greater?
The detention and deportation of my hon. Friends the Members for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed) and for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang) by the state of Israel is disgraceful, and it smacks of racism—we cannot ignore the fact that they are women of colour. They were visiting not Israel, but the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Let us remind ourselves that the International Court of Justice recently found that Israel’s treatment of Palestinians constitutes “systemic discrimination” on the basis of
“race, religion or ethnic origin.”
The fact is that white hon. Members on recent delegations who have made similar comments about the conflict are not treated this way. Will the Minister summon the Israeli ambassador over this issue, and over what it now seems was the execution of 15 PRCS paramedics and those who went to rescue them in Gaza?
I have told the House the stated basis that my two hon. Friends were given for their refusal, and I will not pass further comment on what might or might not be behind that. As I say, the written reason was the prevention of illegal immigration considerations, as unlikely as that may seem to those in this Chamber.
On the deeply concerning reports about further deaths of humanitarian workers, this Government have expressed on a number of occasions our condemnation of the lack of a deconfliction mechanism to ensure the safety of humanitarian workers who conduct essential work.
I echo the comments from my hon. Friend the Member for Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy (Melanie Ward), and I find it deeply troubling that the only Members who were detained and deported at the weekend are not white. Will the Minister express in the strongest terms his concerns about these events in any future Government discussions on peace and trade?
I am conscious of the time. We have expressed our concerns about this incident in the way that I described, and I expect to have further discussions with members of the Israeli Government to that effect.
I travelled to the west bank in November, and I heard from UN agencies and non-governmental organisations about their international staff being denied entry, restricting their aid efforts. That was alarming enough, but the appalling treatment of our brilliant colleagues is a new low, as it seems that it is not just the support to Palestinians that is being denied, but the right to scrutinise whether that support is getting through. Does the Minister agree that future access to the Occupied Palestinian Territories for aid and scrutiny must be protected?
I have spoken already about the importance of the free press, safe travel for journalists and, indeed, parliamentary delegations.
I thank my hon. Friend for his strong statement in defence of parliamentary democracy. Does he agree that transparency and accessibility are key to parliamentary democracy, and that obstructing the visit of two elected representatives of an allied nation can only raise troubling questions about the current health of Israeli democracy?
As I have said, one of the appealing elements of Israeli democracy is its free press and vibrant debate, and I know that many Members of this House have benefited from vibrant exchanges with their counterparts in Israel, as they have said already. I regret that that has not been the case this weekend.
The response of this House to what happened to our colleagues at the weekend should be united, because it affects us all. Does the Minister agree that any equivocation from Members of this House risks sending a green light to other countries that wish to interfere in our activities and parliamentary delegations? Perhaps the Leader of the Opposition and those on the Opposition Front Bench could give that long and hard consideration.
As I have said, the Opposition should give this issue long and hard consideration. It should not be a complex question for this House, given the circumstances of events this weekend.
Had this been the right hon. Members for Salisbury (John Glen) or for New Forest East (Sir Julian Lewis), I would have stood in support of them, as I am sure many colleagues would have done too, because this issue affects us all. I therefore find the Leader of the Opposition’s comments extraordinary. We must not forget that my two hon. Friends were granted visas to enter the country by an ally. Does my hon. Friend agree that this was a showcase event that was designed to intimidate, threaten and silence this place?
To be clear, they were granted entry clearance, rather than a visa. The distinction may seem academic to this House, given that both would have permitted my hon. Friends to travel to the airport. Clearly, it was not a surprise to the Israeli authorities that they arrived.
I share the anger of most Members of this House. It is completely unacceptable that two Members of this House were denied entry to the occupied territories in the west bank by the Israeli authorities. Does the Minister agree that more than ever, now is the time to be united and show solidarity across the House with our parliamentarians, whose only mistake was to do their jobs by representing their constituents without fear or favour in this House and holding Israel accountable for its actions?
I can confirm that I would like to see unity across the House on such matters, and that any parliamentarian, of any political party, would enjoy the support of the Foreign Office under such circumstances.
I pay tribute to my hon. Friends, who are currently not in their places. They are the kindest and most thoughtful people I know, and the fact that the Leader of the Opposition has tried to damage their reputation is disgraceful. I urge the Minister to continue to have conversations with the Israeli ambassador to the UK. What additional dialogue is he having with international partners to ensure that there is access to aid for Palestine?
My hon. Friend speaks about our colleagues with real warmth, which I know is felt right across the House. That has been referred to not just by those on the Government Benches, but by those on the Opposition Benches, and I am grateful. I can assure my hon. Friend that I will continue those discussions.
I associate myself with the comments made about my hon. Friends. Does the Minister share my horror, outrage and anger at the killing of 15 paramedics in Gaza, and can he assure me that we are doing everything we possibly can to demand that all those responsible are held to account?
Accountability is vital, and I am indeed outraged by the reports.
The detainment of two hon. Members of this House is shocking, and the killing of 15 Palestinian paramedics in Gaza by the IDF is deeply distressing. At a time like this, it feels as though peace is further away than ever, so can the Minister set out what more we can do to make sure we get back in place the ceasefire we so badly need?
We will continue to work with the Israeli Government and all relevant partners in the region to see the ceasefire restored, which is vital not simply to the Palestinians and the Israelis, but to all in the region.
What has happened to our two amazing colleagues —my hon. Friends—is appalling, but it is part of a pattern of behaviour from Israel of disdain for diplomatic relations with allies, disdain for democratic norms and disdain for human life. Does my hon. Friend agree that this pattern is worrying, and will he correspondingly toughen the UK’s diplomatic posture so that my constituents feel secure that our Government are standing up for their values?
I thank my hon. Friend for his question, and for his commitment to these issues even before he was a Member of this place. This incident over the weekend was novel. It is the first time we are aware of that MPs have been refused entry in this way. We are making clear our views about that to the Israeli Government in the way that I have set out. On the other issues, I hope that my hon. Friend can reassure his constituents that we have taken action since becoming the Government, whether with the suspension of arms, in multilateral forums or with the restoration of aid to Gaza.
Can I put on the record my comments about our two hon. Friends, alongside those of everyone else in the House, apart from the Conservative Front-Bencher, who I do not think said any words about them in her commentary?
We are rightly talking about our two hon. Friends, but this incident shines a much wider light not just on our rights as parliamentarians, but on the rights of journalists, charity workers and others to enter Israel and the west bank. We have talked a lot about their being refused entry to Israel, but this is actually about their entry in order to gain access to the west bank through their only entry point into it. What more can the Minister do to ensure that the learning, the sharing and the visits to the west bank will continue if the Israeli Government are embarking on a system of shutting people out?
Does the Minister agree that this whole debacle—the whole sham we have seen in the last few days—has been a distraction from and made much harder the real job we need to do, which is to take on the crimes of Hamas, get the hostages out, get a ceasefire done and speak up for the innocent Palestinians who are suffering day by day because of the actions not being taken by the Israeli Government?
My hon. Friend speaks forcefully about the importance of focusing on the hostages, the restrictions on aid and the death of innocent civilians on both sides of this conflict. As I have said a number of times this afternoon, I do want parliamentary delegations to continue to Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, including the west bank, and I hope this incident will prove to be an aberration.
I thank the Minister for his statement.
(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberUrgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
(Urgent Question): To ask the Foreign Secretary to make a statement about the Israeli Government’s announcement that they are expanding their military operations in Gaza.
We are deeply concerned about the resumption of hostilities in Gaza. The UK does not support an expansion of Israel’s military operations. Continued fighting and more bloodshed is in nobody’s interest. All parties, including Israel, must observe international humanitarian law. We urge all parties to return to dialogue and ceasefire negotiations, ensuring the return of all who have endured unimaginable suffering. It is clear that this conflict cannot be won by bombs and bullets, but by diplomacy.
Aid should never be used as a political tool. Israel must restart the flow of aid immediately. Blocking goods supplies and power from entering Gaza risks breaching international humanitarian law, and it should not be happening. We are doing everything we can to alleviate that situation. Gaza is also the most dangerous place in the world to be an aid worker. Over 400 aid workers have been killed since the start of the conflict. Despite renewed fighting, the United Nations and humanitarian organisations must be able to deliver their vital work.
A year on from the appalling attack on World Central Kitchen aid workers, lessons have not been learned. We are appalled at recent attacks on aid workers, which include the attack on a United Nations Office for Project Services guest house and the killing of at least eight Palestinian Red Crescent medics. Our thoughts are with the victims and their families. Those responsible must be held accountable. The Government of Israel must urgently ensure that there are effective deconfliction mechanisms in place to enable agencies to deliver their impartial mandates safely.
On 28 March, the UK and France called an urgent UN Security Council meeting to discuss the risks facing humanitarian aid workers in Gaza. Since the hostilities resumed, the Foreign Secretary has spoken to Secretary Rubio, special envoy Steve Witkoff, the Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar, the Israeli Minister for Strategic Affairs Ron Dermer, the EU high representative Kallas and the UN emergency relief co-ordinator Tom Fletcher.
A return to a ceasefire is the only way we will bring the conflict to an end and return to negotiations for a lasting peace in the region. That is the only way to deliver the two-state solution that we all want to see. Both Israelis and Palestinians have the right to live in peace and security.
The Israeli Government’s brutal decision to expand their military operations in Gaza is not about security; it is about domination and erasure. It comes on top of 18 months of collective punishment, including, since 2 March, the longest aid blockade since the war began. I welcome the Minister’s confirmation that the UK does not support the Israeli Government’s expanded military operation in Gaza. Will he now finally name what is happening as genocide and undertake a structural investigation into genocide and other crimes under international law committed in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories?
To ensure that the UK is not complicit in Israel’s ongoing genocide, illegal occupation and system of apartheid, will the Minister immediately suspend the direct and indirect supply, sale or transfer—including transit and trans-shipment—to Israel of all weapons, munitions and other military and security equipment? Will he immediately suspend the provision of training and other military and security assistance and recognise that, otherwise, there is a clear risk of contributing to the commission of serious violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law, including crimes under international law?
As the Minister mentioned, the UK is a significant provider of humanitarian aid to the region. What assessment has he made of the impact of today’s reports on the humanitarian crisis? Although he touched on this lightly, given the UK’s level of influence with Israeli authorities, will he confirm that he will use his position to actively oppose current and planned attempts by Israel to establish a permanent military presence in Gaza, and to oppose moves to alter Gaza’s borders and demographic make-up or to shrink its territory, including through any expanded buffer zones and construction of permanent checkpoints?
The hon. Lady asked a series of important questions. As I have said to the House on a number of occasions, determinations of breaches of international law are for competent courts and we support those courts in their work.
On weapons, I want to be clear that we continue to stand by the assessments that we made soberly in September and the suspension of licenses that that involved. The hon. Lady asked about the UK’s view on a permanent presence in Gaza. I am happy to restate our policy now. We welcome the proposal by Arab nations, called the Arab initiative, which would allow for a reconstruction of Gaza, the safe return of Palestinians who have been displaced, and for those remaining in Gaza to rebuild their lives without forced displacement, which we oppose.
We have had several urgent questions and statements on Gaza over the last few months. Each time, I have come to the Chamber and asked the Government: what is plan B? What is plan B when Israel ends the ceasefire, which is what has happened? What is plan B when Israel’s far-right Government choose their survival over the lives of the remaining hostages, which is what seems to have happened? What is plan B when annexation of either the west bank or Gaza is not just threatened but actually happens, which is what is happening now? My question is this: what are the Government doing to turn our allies’ heads from American trade wars and towards the tragedy unfolding in the middle east, to do whatever they can to restore a ceasefire and the road to peace?
My right hon. Friend, who has been pressing on these issues for some time, is right to raise those questions. She asks whether there is a plan B. In all of my experience, there can be no plan B in Israel-Palestine; there is only one route, which is widely understood by our allies in the region and beyond, and it must be a two-state solution. The route to a two-state solution must involve compliance with international humanitarian law.
It is clear even from the short exchange that we have already had in the Chamber that the British Government’s policy and the Israeli Government’s policy differ. They will continue to differ until we return to a pathway to a two-state solution. There is no plan B. Our plan A is for a two-state solution, and we will work with our allies in the region, on the Security Council—as we did on Friday—and closer to home in order to pursue those arguments.
Thank you for granting the urgent question, Mr Speaker. This is clearly a difficult and dangerous moment for the middle east. A way must be found through the dreadful impasse that has led to the breakdown of the ceasefire agreement.
As has been said time and again, the key to a sustainable end to the conflict is the release of the remaining 59 hostages so cruelly held by Hamas terrorists since the atrocities of 7 October. Their continued captivity is intolerable. The British Government should be able to bring their influence to bear, and the Foreign Secretary should be directly involved in all efforts to find a way through, working with Israeli counterparts, the US and key regional players and mediator countries. We said that in the Chamber yesterday.
The Minister stated yesterday, as he has today, that the Government are
“in regular contact with all those involved in negotiations.”—[Official Report, 1 April 2025; Vol. 765, c. 147.]
That includes the Foreign Secretary, who spoke to his Israeli counterpart last week. Will the Minister inform the House what direct Minister-to-Minister discussions have taken place about the current military operations? Were Ministers informed in advance, and have they been given any information about the objectives that Israel is seeking?
Every week we come here to ask questions of Ministers, and it is unclear exactly what level of influence the Government have. What is the Government’s plan? What is their vision of a way through? What discussions have they had in recent days with vital interlocutors?
On humanitarian aid, does the Minister feel that he has made any progress in his efforts to try to unblock the current aid access situation? We have spoken about this many times. Will he update the House on what has been happening to British aid while the restrictions remain? Where is that aid?
It was the Conservatives’ position when in government, as indeed it is now the position of the Labour Government, that there can be no role for Iranian-backed Hamas terrorists in Gaza’s future. Will the Minister be proposing to our critical partners a road map for how this will end and how that future will become a reality?
These are important questions that the right hon. Lady has asked. The Foreign Secretary has been directly involved in Minister-to-Minister contact. I, too, have been talking with all those affected. I very much welcome her comments about the hostages. Of course, the whole House wants to see them all released, and I am sure that many of us will be thinking of Avinatan Or—he has a British mother—who has been held, almost certainly in terrible conditions, ever since 7 October. I know that the whole House will continue to think of those hostage victims.
The right hon. Lady rightly asked about humanitarian aid. I accept that our efforts in recent days to try to prevent the blockade from continuing in Gaza have not been effective. In the first part of this year, we saw a very welcome increase in aid going into Gaza, including UK aid. Even during that greater flow, there were still unwelcome restrictions on the nature of the aid going in, which made reconstruction, shelter, tents and sleeping bags hard to get into Gaza when they were desperately needed. So there were improvements, and we can see a route by which we might see a significant increase in the amount of aid getting into the Gaza strip, which is desperately needed. But at the current time the reports are extremely depressing; we discussed some of them yesterday.
The right hon. Lady asked about our plan for reconstruction and what discussions we are having with others. We have discussed the Arab initiative with those involved closely. We think it is a plan with real merit. It must not allow Hamas to have a role in government—we are absolutely clear on that point, and I think Arab partners are very much of the same view. That is the basic idea from which we must work.
On 30 March, the first day of Eid, Israeli attacks on Gaza killed dozens of Palestinians, adding to the death toll since Israel breached the ceasefire agreement. Israel is now in the process of enacting the largest forced displacement, ordering hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from Rafah. How will this end? Israel cannot and will not stop. Is the goal ethnic cleansing? We are witnessing that. Is the goal the complete destruction of Gaza? We are now witnessing that. Is the goal the permanent occupation of Gaza and the west bank? We continue to witness that. Is the goal a complete end to the two-state solution? Israeli Ministers have made their intentions clear. Will the Minister unequivocally condemn their actions for what they are: war crimes and crimes against humanity?
My hon. Friend has been fearless and persistent on those questions. I do condemn the comments of Israeli Ministers which amount to forced displacement or the annexation of Palestinian territories. We recognise international humanitarian law and call on all our allies, including Israel, also to abide by it. The scenes in Gaza in recent days have been hard to watch, and we will continue to make those points to the Israelis with all the force that my hon. Friend would expect.
Israel’s expansion of military activity in Gaza, including a strike on UN medical facilities, displacement of civilians and the Defence Minister’s new proposal to seize large swathes of territory is gravely disturbing. It seems that international humanitarian law is being violated. This week’s reports that the Israel Defence Forces killed and buried 15 humanitarian workers in a mass grave is also appalling. The ceasefire must be restored. Israel must immediately end its illegal blockade of humanitarian aid into Gaza to bring desperately needed relief to 2 million people who have suffered enormously. Hamas must also release the remaining hostages immediately and unconditionally.
Will the Minister update the House on the conversations he is having with Israeli, American and middle eastern partners regarding the restoration of the ceasefire? All sides must recommit to a political process. He says that there is only one route, so I ask him once again: will this Government now recognise a Palestinian state, giving hope to millions of Palestinians? Will he also outline what the UK is doing to hold those who attack aid workers in violation of international humanitarian law accountable and to protect those aid workers who remain in Gaza?
Those are important questions. Let me start with humanitarian aid workers. The whole House will have heard the Prime Minister respond to my hon. Friend the Member for Truro and Falmouth (Jayne Kirkham). We of course want to see accountability when humanitarian workers are struck. We particularly expect accountability when British nationals are affected. My thoughts are with the families of all those affected by the World Central Kitchen incident. What do we want to see next by way of accountability? We want to see the Israeli Military Advocate General going through the investigation at a proper speed—it has been a year—coming to proper findings and answering the question of whether criminal charges should now be laid.
This House has discussed questions on the recognition of a Palestinian state many times. We will recognise a Palestinian state as part of a contribution to a two-state solution. We are all watching the events in the Occupied Palestinian Territories at the moment and seeing how distant a functional Palestinian state looks under these circumstances. Our first efforts must be to restore the basic functioning of Palestinian life, in both Gaza and the west bank, where it is also under threat.
I recently visited the Occupied Palestinian Territories with the Foreign Affairs Committee. I travelled to Area C in west bank and saw at first hand the settler violence that Palestinian men, women and children are facing day in, day out. They are living their lives in constant fear. In this House we all support a two-state solution, but that is being undermined daily by the actions of the Israeli Government, especially in the west bank; we are seeing it being annexed in real time. The Minister says that we will recognise the state of Palestine when the time is right, but I fear there may be no state left to recognise. Will the Government look again at stopping all settlement goods coming into the UK?
Those are important questions. The UK considers settlements illegal under international law. We are clear that settlement goods must be properly labelled and they do not benefit from the trading regimes that would otherwise apply to both Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories. My hon. Friend’s question is the right one. We need to ensure that there remains a viable path to a two-state solution. There is no other path to peace in the region, and all our efforts are focused on that outcome.
When I was the Minister responsible, the current Minister was then an outstanding official in the Department. He will therefore know that when I presented an egregious list of complaints to the Deputy Prime Minister of Israel, as well as to the chief negotiator, he simply stormed out of the meeting, leaving the ambassador with his head in his hands. I therefore ask: what leverage do we actually have?
The right hon. Gentleman is kind about my service. I know that he raised some of the issues with some force, as he says, during his time in this ministerial role. That underlines the hard truth here, which is that the Israelis must be persuaded to relent from a course of action that both the Conservative and Labour parties, as well as the other parties in this Chamber, have seen is totally undermining the long-term stability of the region, which is important not just for Israel and for Palestine, but for the UK and our friends and allies in the middle east.
The poor people of Gaza are trapped between Hamas, who refuse to release the 59 hostages, and Defence Minister Katz, who is now threatening the “total destruction” of Gaza. Does the Minister share my despair at the lack of leadership committed to peace? Will he also talk about what diplomatic efforts we are making, as well as through aid spending, to try to create moderate leadership in the region that can establish the long-term circumstances for peace and reconciliation?
My hon. Friend has done much work over the years on questions of peacebuilding. We, too, are committed to playing our part in trying to build up the connections between the two societies that could allow for the kind of moderate leadership at the most local level that is so necessary for making peace—we saw that in our own experience of Northern Ireland. Many in this Chamber have rightly pressed us on the proposals from the Alliance for Middle East Peace, and we look forward in the coming period to setting out what we will do to support peacebuilding efforts. I watch with dismay, as does the Foreign Secretary, the many civilians asking for peace on both sides; the many civilians protesting both in Israel and in the Occupied Palestinian Territories for a return to a ceasefire. That is what we want to see.
We have heard Ministers refer many times to the risk of breaches of international humanitarian law. On the one occasion, on 17 March, when the Foreign Secretary admitted that withholding aid to Gaza was
“a breach of international law”—[Official Report, 17 March 2025; Vol. 764, c. 41.],
he had to retract the admission and refer again to a risk of breaches. If the recent attacks on aid workers constitute a further risk of breaches, will the Minister outline what would constitute an actual breach?
The Foreign Secretary has clarified his comments on the occasion to which the hon. Gentleman refers, and he will know well from his own background that a long-standing policy of Governments of all kinds is that it is not for Ministers to act as courts. There are competent international courts that make such determinations.
The resumption of the conflict in Gaza is incredibly tragic, and it is especially heartbreaking for the hostage families and all those brave people we have seen protesting in Israel against their Government and in Gaza against the death cult that is Hamas. Does the Minister agree that the conflict today could end if Hamas released the 59 hostages and left Gazans to live in peace and security? Will he update us on plans for the international plan for peace for Israelis and Palestinians?
My hon. Friend is right: the hostages must be released, and Hamas can play no role in the future of governance of Gaza. Their role, which was correctly described by the shadow Foreign Secretary as being supported by Iran, has been malign. It has been malign for the Palestinians, for the Israelis, for the UK and for the region.
On my hon. Friend’s question about the proposal for the international peace building fund, we will come back to the House with further details of our approach. As the situation continues to evolve, we want to carefully consider how best we can contribute to peace building, in the way that I described in answer to a previous question.
I thank the Minister for raising, in his answer to the shadow Foreign Secretary, the plight of Avinatan Or, who I am proud to be twinned with. He was brutally captured by Hamas terrorists 544 days ago. In March, his family received a sign of life for the first time, and in that same month a number of colleagues heard in Parliament from his mother—Ditza, a British citizen—her moving story in Parliament about her continued fight for her son’s release. Does the Minister agree that Hamas could end the war now by releasing Avinatan and all the remaining hostages, and will he assure Ditza that all avenues are being pursued by this Government to make that a reality?
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for mentioning Ditza. I too met her, and Avinatan’s sister, recently. Those two incredibly strong women are doing absolutely everything that they can for their loved one, and I can assure them from this Dispatch Box that we are doing everything we can to secure his release.
I associate myself with the Minister’s remarks about the killings of the British World Central Kitchen workers by Israel in Gaza, and I extend this sentiment to Palestinian aid workers too. It is almost a year since I was last in Gaza, and not a day goes by when I do not think about what I saw. Does the Minister agree that what Israel is doing in Gaza is reaching new and uncharted territory, in its level of danger both to Palestinians and to the prospects of a two-state solution ever being realised? Does he further agree that it is past time for fresh, co-ordinated international action to stop this? When will he be able to come to the House to outline what this action will be?
My hon. Friend has seen events in Gaza with her own eyes, and I know from all her work before she came to this place how committed an advocate and an actor she has been for those suffering some of the most unimaginable pressures and horrors. I agree that they continue to suffer those pressures and see those horrors. We took the step of calling the UN Security Council to session on these questions on Friday solemnly and soberly. We will work with our international partners on these questions because they are an egregious threat to the life of Palestinians, to a two-state solution and to the stability of the region. I will come back to the House to give her further updates, as my hon. Friend would expect.
We need a ceasefire now—again—because the situation on the ground is as bad as it has ever been, if not worse. I spoke to my friend whose family are in Gaza and he told me that last week their home was bombed multiple times while they were sheltering in the basement with no food or water. They are now barely surviving, surrounded by destruction, terrified and without aid for over a month. He said:
“This is not self-defence. This is the destruction of families like mine.”
If this Government do not support this escalation, where are the consequences? We do have leverage. Why have they not suspended all arms sales to the IDF—not because of a risk of it hitting civilians, but because we have principles and will show intent?
I am grateful to the hon. Lady for sharing that story in the Chamber. I know that many Members of this House have received similar stories over the last few days, and indeed have been doing so for the 18 months that this conflict has been running. I have set out our position on arms a number of times in this House, and I would like to say that the decisions taken in September were decisions of principle and they remain decisions of principle. The two principles that underline our position in relation to arms licences for sales to Israel are that we are concerned about risks of international humanitarian law and that we will continue to defend Israel against threats to its security and safety, including from Iran. We have suspended weapons that could be sold to Israel, and we have flown the RAF in its defence when Iran threatened to strike it with missiles. The world is incredibly complicated, things are moving very quickly, and I recognise the strength of feeling in this House on the question of arms. Our position remains the same, and it is one of principle.
What we are witnessing in Gaza is the weaponisation of starvation. With the ongoing blockade of food, water, medicines and shelter now in its second month, there is also the heart-wrenching, despicable discovery of the killing of a further 15 aid workers found in a mass grave, and large-scale hostilities have now restarted. This must stop. Given that it is clear that the Netanyahu regime is not listening to the UK Government and will only listen to President Trump, what pressure are our Government putting on the US to ensure that the Israeli Government finally end their aid blockade?
As you would expect, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will confine my comments to the discussions that we have, rather than the policy of other allies. But my hon. Friend, who has raised these issues many times, is right. I have said it at this Dispatch Box, the Prime Minister said it at Prime Minister’s questions earlier and the Foreign Secretary reiterated it yesterday: we want the aid blockade to end immediately. It should not have been put in place. Palestinian civilians are suffering, and we expect urgent action. We of course discuss these issues with Secretary Rubio, with Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and with a whole range of our counterparts in the US system. We work closely with our American colleagues on the middle east and in a whole range of national security fields, and we are clear about our policy with them, as we are with the Israeli Government and the Palestinian Authority.
Can I ask the Minister to bring a sense of urgency to this? The people of Gaza are starving. Every bakery is closed. There is insufficient water. There is no power. No schools are open. No hospitals are fully functioning. It is an utterly desperate situation, yet I believe we are still allowing RAF Akrotiri to be used as a staging point for Israel and still supplying parts for F-35 jets, which are bombing the people of Gaza and bombing the rubble there. What are the Government doing to ensure that Israel stops the bombing and that food aid gets through very, very urgently for the people of Gaza, merely to help them survive?
I hope the House is under no doubt about the urgency with which myself, the Foreign Secretary and the whole ministerial team treat these issues. I think I have already answered the question in relation to arms in this session. The humanitarian need has been on terrible and vivid display over the last few days. We are aware of the reports to which the right hon. Gentleman refers, and we raise these issues with the urgency they demand.
The Hostages and Missing Families Forum in Israel said this morning that it was horrified to wake up to the news of the expanded military operation, and that is because it knows the risk that this poses to its loved ones. But it is the loved ones of Palestinians who have already suffered so much that are most relevant today. They themselves know that the annexation and the forced displacement of men, women and children is simply unacceptable, so can the Minister tell me exactly what he and this UK Government have done to make representations to Israel, both about that Israeli aggression and about the 13 new expanded settlements in the west bank, which are deliberately designed to suffocate any future state of Palestine?
I can assure my hon. Friend, who has been a doughty campaigner on these issues, that we have raised both the risks of returning to war and indeed the settlements he refers to directly with the Israeli Government, and we will continue to do so.
I welcome the Minister’s reply to the urgent question, but I am sure he will forgive me when I say that we have heard all this before. There is a sense of hopelessness in this place at the downward spiral we seem to be on, but it must be nothing compared with the hopelessness being felt by the Gazans and also the Israeli population. The Israeli regime is not listening to us or to its own population, who are protesting and simply want the hostages home. The region needs some hope, and it has already been suggested that if we are to go down the route to a two-state solution, we need a breakthrough. That breakthrough might come if this Government recognise Palestine as a state.
I recognise the hon. Lady’s remarks. The sense of hopelessness must be acute in Gaza, and I say to all those watching in the region that the UK will continue to do everything it can, no matter how hard it is, to try to return to a ceasefire. I have addressed the question about the recognition of a Palestinian state. There must be a breakthrough. We need to get back on the path that both sides were on before if stability is to return to the region.
I thank the Minister for coming to the House and the hon. Member for Bristol Central (Carla Denyer) for raising the matter. I concur with the comments of my right hon. Friend the Member for Islington South and Finsbury (Emily Thornberry) in that we have been here before. We keep getting the same responses. Our constituents continue to write to us about this—they want hope. The reality is that over a thousand Palestinians have been killed within the last fortnight. Today marks a month since Israel broke that ceasefire, blocking critical aid into Gaza in defiance of international law. I ask the Minister—I know he and the Foreign Secretary are working hard—what more it will take before we as a UK Government take a different course of action, because Israel is not listening to warm words any longer.
My constituents in Lincoln have strong views about the horrors they see, and I know many constituents right across the country are writing to their Members and strongly expressing their views. I would not describe our policy as “warm words” and I think many of our friends in the region would not describe it as such either. We have taken concrete action since becoming the Government. We have restored aid to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency. We have taken the arms suspension measures that have been discussed. We have sanctioned settlers. We have continued to use our position at the UN Security Council to try to bring attention and action to some of the most egregious areas of concern, and we will continue to do so. I cannot promise this House that I will be able to return next time with something different to say. The fact that my remarks may seem repetitive indicates that the problem is difficult and the solution feels distant, but we must continue to work on the path that this whole House knows we must get back to, which is towards a two-state solution.
Last week, the Foreign Secretary was unequivocal in saying that both sides—Hamas and Israel—were guilty of committing atrocities. Does the Minister agree with the Foreign Secretary that that is the case?
I think the hon. Gentleman is trying to return to the question asked by the Liberal Democrat Member. To be clear, on the determination of crimes, we leave that to courts. On the determination of risk, we take action.
As affirmed by the International Court of Justice in its advisory opinion, Israel is violating the peremptory norms of the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination, the prohibition against racial discrimination and apartheid, and the prohibition against unlawful use of force. Its occupation of Palestine is illegal and must end as soon as possible. Will the Minister acknowledge that the UK has a duty to suspend all military co-operation and trade with Israel—a duty that stems from a wide range of intersecting international obligations—in the face of grave illegalities committed by the state of Israel?
My hon. Friend asks me about the advisory opinion of the ICJ. We accept that the Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories are illegal and have been clear about that policy position. I am afraid that we will take some time yet to return to this House with a full response to the ICJ’s advisory opinion, which has a number of novel elements of international jurisprudence, and we are considering it with the seriousness and soberness that it requires. We agree on the fundamentals: the settlements are illegal and must be brought to an end.
Recent polling suggests that over 60% of Israelis will support any deal that brings the remaining hostages home. If that can be achieved, the likelihood is that peace and rebuilding can be achieved, especially if Egypt can be involved, along with finance from Saudi Arabia and the Gulf. Will the Government please push for that?
I can confirm that we want to see all the hostages returned and a reconstruction plan for Gaza based on the Arab initiative, with the full involvement of the region—a reconstruction plan that can allow Palestinians to remain in their homes.
I was devastated to hear of the expansion of military operations in Gaza this week, alongside the aid blockade in the region. That is a clear breach of international humanitarian law. The Minister has said that he urges Israel to respect IHL. If Israel continues to ignore the international community on that, what concrete steps will we take to hold it accountable?
My hon. Friend has served both in our military and as an aid worker. He knows well and feels strongly, as do many in this House, the agonies of what we are seeing. We have determined that there is a serious risk of breaches of international humanitarian law by the Israeli Government. We will continue to press them on those points. I will not issue further comment on sanctions, which I think was underlying some of his question, as to do so could reduce their impact.
While no one wants to see the continuation of war in Gaza, under the terms of the ceasefire agreement Israel has the right to take action where there is an immediate threat. We have seen that Hamas have refused to release hostages and are now firing rockets into Israel. They are planning further attacks and, indeed, attacking and murdering their own citizens who protest against them. Is it not reasonable in those circumstances for Israel to take action to defend its own country? Should it not be the priority of this Government to ensure that Hamas release the hostages whom they are cruelly and cynically holding, and to ensure that UK aid is not used to prop up Hamas and help them to reassert their authority?
I agree with the right hon. Gentleman: of course Israel has the right to legitimate self-defence consistent with international humanitarian law. Concerns about the risk of a breach of international humanitarian law underpin our concerns. He is absolutely right that Hamas are a threat not just to Israel but to their own people, and I have been absolutely clear on that question on numerous occasions at this Dispatch Box. Where there are any reports that Hamas are benefiting from aid going into the Gaza strip or anywhere else, we take serious action in response.
If the rule of international law is to mean anything, we must uphold it, so just as we recognise that taking hostages is a breach of international law, we must recognise that killing aid workers is a breach of international law. My constituents will be listening to the Minister, recognising the work being done but completely perplexed as to why we are not doing more to uphold international law in practice. He is right to argue that the courts need to be involved. He said that he wanted this issue to be dealt with by the relevant competent court and talks about novel elements of jurisprudence delaying our ability to do that. Can he explain to my constituents what more it would take for the United Kingdom, through the auspices of the UN Security Council, to make a referral to the International Criminal Court given what we are seeing and to uphold international human rights law directly?
My hon. Friend asks an important question. I recognise that, for constituents in Walthamstow and elsewhere, questions of international law may seem very arcane when we are faced with the kinds of images that we are all seeing this morning and have been seeing for months, so let me clarify. She refers to the ICJ advisory opinion. That advisory opinion, long in gestation, refers to the presence of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. It pre-dates the 7 October attacks. She also refers to the ICC, which has heard referrals in relation to conduct on both sides of the conflict since the 7 October attacks. We respond in the fullness of time, as required by the ICJ, which has taken some time in its complex determinations about the status of the Occupied Palestinian Territories. We have responded on the ICC to the timelines required—we did so late last year.
We can all see the discomfort of the Minister in having to embroider language, referring merely to the risk of the breach of international law and not speaking as plainly on behalf of our country as many Members would wish him to speak. Of course, we all want the hostages to be freed, just as we want the 2 million hostages in Gaza being held hostage by the murderous IDF, which is treating them with disdain and starving them, to be freed. If the Minister is not prepared to make the statement that many of us wish for him to make, will he at least admit that the actions of the far-right Israeli Government can no longer be described as self-defence?
I have been accused of many things, but not of embroidering, so if there is any doubt, let me be clear: the position to which I stick at the Dispatch Box on the determinations of law is one that has been held consistently by both parties in government for a long time. There is a good reason why we would not want people to stand at the Dispatch Box making determinations of law, and it is why we have courts and an international legal order that this country has a proud history of establishing and maintaining. We have determined that there is a risk of those breaches. We are not making a determination; we are looking to our own laws—passed, in fact, by those now on the Opposition Benches—and following them through thoroughly and vigorously. In the discharge of our duties, we have said that we think there is a serious risk of breaches of international humanitarian law. That is the same as saying that we think there is a serious risk that Israel is not simply acting in its own legitimate self-defence. That is why we have taken the steps that we have.
Last year, I raised the concerns of a constituent whose family member was stuck in Gaza without food and water. The situation has worsened since the aid blockade. I am particularly worried about the escalation of hostilities impacting most on women and girls. Supplies of female hygiene products are at critical lows, women are giving birth on hospital floors, and doctors are performing C-sections without adequate medical supplies. May I ask the Minister, on behalf of the hundreds of constituents who have written to me, what the UK Government are doing to end the aid blockade? Will he reassure me that the Government have communicated the sheer urgency on the ground to the Israeli Government?
I am grateful for the opportunity to comment on particular cases involving constituents in Gaza. My hon. Friend works incredibly hard for her constituents, as do many other Members. Where I am in direct correspondence with Members about the fate of constituents and their relatives in Gaza, I will not provide a running commentary from the Dispatch Box, but the Foreign Office will do everything it can to ensure that British nationals in distress, and their loved ones, including in Gaza, are able to get to safety. I can confirm to her that we have raised the urgency of these matters with the Israeli Government.
Another day, another statement, another day of predictable and depressing answers. Nothing is more predictable and depressing than the statement, “We are doing everything we can.” Are we really doing everything we can when we do not call out genocide and ethnic cleansing as we see it happening in real time? Are we doing everything we can when we have not imposed bilateral economic sanctions? Are we doing everything we can when we have not even called in the ambassador to express our concerns? If we are indeed doing everything we can, why have the Government just sold £9 million-worth of technology for Israeli submarines that are being built to house nuclear weapons?
We are doing everything we can. I recognise from the commentary of many Members how unbearably frustrating they and their constituents find this situation. I have been calling for a ceasefire ever since I have been a Minister. It is also deeply depressing for me to be in this situation today, as I have been so many times in the House. We will continue to do everything, in accordance with the measures I have laid out this afternoon, to bring the conflict back to a ceasefire.
The Minister has been generous with his time, not just today but over the past few months, both in the House and in private meetings, but every time we meet, the situation is bad and getting worse. As the hon. Member for Oxford West and Abingdon (Layla Moran) said, it is now as bad as it has ever been. Does the Minister agree that unless we in the international community take firmer immediate action to force change as a matter of urgency, nothing will be different and there will be no point talking about peace or a two-state solution, because those opportunities will be lost not just for now but for the foreseeable future, and the consequences for those in the region, particularly the people of Gaza, will be unimaginable?
I thank my hon. Friend for his kind words. In the time that we have been in government, we have seen the situation deteriorate, but we have also seen it improve. I hope to be able to return to the House with the news that we are back at a ceasefire. I recognise how distant that feels at this moment, but a ceasefire would be not just a vital step towards a two-state solution and an enormous contribution towards getting aid into Gaza, but the step change required for international diplomacy to bring stability to the region.
Some 400 aid workers have been killed in Gaza over the past 500 days, and we are now a year and a day on from the awful attack on the World Central Kitchen. How many British aid workers are in Gaza, and what tangible action will the Government ask Israel to take to guarantee their safety?
I do not believe that I am in a position to confirm the current number of British nationals in Gaza as aid workers, but if I am, I will write to the hon. Member.
Those at the Hostage and Missing Families Forum, which represents most of the captives’ families, said that they were horrified to wake up this morning to the Israeli Defence Minister’s announcement about expanding military operations in Gaza. They also said that the Israeli Government have an obligation to free all 59 hostages from Hamas captivity, and to pursue every possible channel to advance a deal for their release. Hostages have been released only when there has been a ceasefire, so a ceasefire is paramount for the release of hostages. If we believe that Israel should stop bombing Gaza, we need to stop supplying it with parts for bombs. If we believe in a two-state solution, it is about time that we recognised Palestine.
I have already commented on the question of recognition. I assure my hon. Friend that we are not providing parts for bombs. We have set out the provisions on arms suspension. There is a question about the global supply chain for F-35 parts where those parts are going indirectly to Israel, on which I have elaborated in the House on a number of occasions. That remains our position.
Nearly 24,000 women and children have been killed in Gaza since 7 October 2023. In the light of evidence submitted to the UN Human Rights Council showing Israel’s use of starvation as a method of war, the denial of human rights and humanitarian assistance, and a concerted policy of destroying Gaza’s healthcare system, will the Government take immediate and tangible steps to demonstrate the UK’s commitment to upholding international law by ceasing provision of military support to Israel, suspending all export licences and imposing a two-way arms embargo?
I set out our position on arms suspensions earlier in this urgent question.
Let me try to approach this in another way. It is obvious that Israel has been emboldened by the explicit and implicit support of the US Government for what it is doing—that has been a fundamental change. The US Government have ruled out a two-state solution, as I understand. What has the Minister been doing, or what can he do, to work with our colleagues in the European Union, and with the Arab states, to develop a clear plan for a two-state solution, and a clear timeframe for all countries recognising a Palestinian state?
As you would expect, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will not seek to characterise the foreign policy of others; they can set out their policy themselves. On co-operation and co-ordination, we have been in extensive dialogue with those involved in the Arab initiative, and we have worked with Germany, France and Italy, and made joint statements on this and wider issues recently. I expect that in June we will join an important international conference about a two-state solution, where we will discuss that with our partners.
Time and again we have heard Ministers at the Dispatch Box say that they are doing everything they can, and talking about the diplomatic levers that they are trying to pull. We all know that since the ceasefire was broken because of the Israelis not complying, 1,100 people have been killed, mainly women and children, and 15 aid workers assassinated—we know they were assassinated because some of them had their hands tied behind their back. The Minister knows that there are only three actions we can take: stop trade; sanctions; and recognising Palestine. Those are the only actions that this Government can take to prevent Israelis causing more damage. Which one will he take?
As the hon. Gentleman knows, I was a diplomat before, and ultimately it is diplomacy that will resolve this conflict. That is the lever to which we must most vigorously apply ourselves.
Just suppose that we closed our airbase in Cyprus. Just suppose that we applied greater sanctions, and withdrew export licences. Just suppose that we recognised the state of Palestine. Would the Minister be making the same statement? What analysis has he made of that?
It is hard enough to respond to the facts as they are. I will not be drawn by my hon. Friend into such a complex chain of hypotheticals.
I thank the Minister very much for his answers, and for his understanding and honesty. Hamas are terrorists, murderers, rapists, and child killers. They hide their AK47s and their weaponry in children’s beds. They hide their missiles in their schools, hospitals and houses. What steps have the Minister and the Government taken with the UN to bring all the kidnapped hostages home alive, rather than in the coffins that were paraded around by Hamas terrorists—murderers—at the last hostage handover? What steps are they taking to underline the point that the Israelis would not be intensifying their plans to strike were the murderous Hamas not content to hold hostages and fire rockets into Israel daily?
We have worked with our partners in the region, the Israeli Government, the US, and many others to try to secure the safe release of all those with UK links who have been held hostage. Of course we want to see all hostages released, but it is on British nationals and those with links to the UK that we have turned the focus of our efforts. This has been heartbreaking for me, and for so many in this House. It has been so joyful to see British nationals escape from the clutches of Hamas alive, and a heartbreak when British-linked nationals have returned deceased. I know that the whole House will be hoping for Avinatan Or, and all others who are being held, to be returned alive and well soon.
The killing of innocent Palestinian civilians, many of them women and children, by Israeli forces is simply heartbreaking. The Minister knows that I have been raising my concerns, and those of my constituents, with him since I was elected to this House last July. I am grateful for and appreciate the steps that he and the Government are taking on aid and arms, yet here we are. What more can the Government do to stop the killing of innocent Palestinian civilians, ensure the release of all remaining hostages, and ensure that aid gets to those who so desperately need it in Gaza?
I thank my hon. Friend for his question and his persistence on these issues. So many colleagues on the Labour and Opposition Benches have raised the plight of Palestinian civilians and of hostages with real force and urgency, ever since we came into government, and I am sure they will continue to. We will continue to take the steps I have outlined to try to effect a change, and we recognise the greater urgency for us all as military activity intensifies. I hope to return to this House in due course with updates on our diplomatic efforts.
Under the convention on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide, to which the UK is a signatory, states have an obligation to prevent and punish genocide. That obligation to prevent involves acting immediately, so will the Minister outline what the Government are doing, and say what steps they are taking to ensure that genocide is prevented in Gaza?
The hon. Member will have heard my previous comments about determinations. I will answer the question that I think he is asking, which is about what we have done since we came into government to try to reduce the suffering in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, and indeed in Israel. We have taken firm and far-reaching steps—on the suspension of arms, on the restoration of funding to UNRWA, by using our role on the Security Council, and by raising these questions forcefully with the Israeli Government and all relevant regional partners. We are working night and day to try to ensure that those in harm’s way are no longer at risk. I recognise today, as we have done almost every day since we came to government, that there is yet more to do.
Since Hamas’s war crimes of 7 October, we have seen multiple flagrant breaches of the rules of the international order. This week, 15 Palestinian paramedic Red Crescent workers were found in a mass grave alongside their abandoned emergency vehicle. That comes on top of a four-week total aid blockade. What are our red lines about how this war without end, in which ceasefires and signed agreements can be tossed aside, is being conducted?
Our position on the conduct of war is that taken by international humanitarian law. We have set out the risks and our concerns about breaches, and we continue to take actions that are in line with our assessment.
More than 300 Palestinian children have been killed since Israel’s new offensive began. What worries me about the Government is that they do not seem to have any red lines that Israel must not cross. We need robust action, not words. The two-state solution, which is on its knees, is not a by-product of peace; it is the route to peace. If the time for recognition is not now, then when is it? What will the Government’s response be when Israel permanently occupies part of Gaza, as its Defence Minister seems to be insinuating it will?
My hon. Friend has a long commitment to these issues, and I know that she has travelled to the region. She is right to say that the two-state solution must be central to this. She asks about annexation; I can be clear once again from the Dispatch Box that we want a resolution that provides for the Occupied Palestinian Territories to be Palestinian, as is consistent with relevant Security Council resolutions.
I commend the Minister for the care and concern with which he updates this House, but we keep coming back to the same point and situation. This morning’s announcement by the Israeli Government about more incursions is condemnable. We all know where this leads. Over the past year and a half, we have seen mass displacement. It leads to suffering, and to hostages not being released, and it takes us close to the abyss. Will the Minister join me in making it clear that any forceful transfer of Palestinian civilians, and any annexation of Palestinian territory, is unacceptable and would be a breach of international law?
My hon. Friend remains deeply committed to these issues, and I am pleased to reassure him that we do not support the expansion of military operations by Israel announced this morning. We continue to oppose forced displacement of the Palestinians. Palestinian territory must not be reduced in the conduct of this war.
In the past few days, the worst extremist, Ben-Gvir, has rejoined the Israeli Government; Red Crescent medics have been killed by Israeli forces; and Israel has started a fresh ground invasion, killing hundreds of women and children, with the specific intention of annexing Palestinian territory. After every atrocity and illegal act, the Foreign Office expresses its concern, and then things get worse. Has the Minister considered what steps the Government should take to make things better on the ground for Palestinians and Israelis?
Of course. That is the thought in our mind every day as we see the imagery, and are sent it by our colleagues and our constituents. Every day, this Government see with our own eyes the horror in Gaza, and every day we ask ourselves what we can do to try to ensure that this goes in the direction of our policy, and not in the direction that it has done—the direction of the end of the ceasefire. That led to far too many hostages continuing to be detained, and aid restrictions have continued long after I and others have called for them to end. As my hon. Friend would expect, every day these questions haunt us.
We are back here again—aid workers shot dead and dumped in a shallow grave; hunger used as a weapon of war; hospitals bombed. Now there are new plans to seize large areas of Gaza. All that has come in the past few days. Israel is carrying out war crime after war crime. On 29 December, the Foreign Office issued a press release rightly referring to Russian war crimes, so I do not see why there is reticence here. I am afraid that expressions of concern are not enough. When will the Government act, treat Israel as they have rightly treated Russia, and impose serious sanctions?
I have set out the steps we have taken and the sanctions we have issued, and I will continue to return to this House with further updates.
I recognise what the Minister has said about what has been done, but given the desperate situation, what more could be done through diplomatic efforts to ensure that Israel allows in humanitarian aid at speed and at scale, and to support the Arab initiative, so that Gaza is rebuilt as part of a recognised, viable Palestinian state?
We will continue to work with our partners who are party to the Arab initiative, and indeed our partners in the United Nations Security Council, where we have called sessions and issued statements. We will continue to work along those lines in the way that my hon. Friend would expect.
I have a simple question, and am looking for a very simple answer. Do the Government recognise Israel’s plan for large-scale forced evacuations in Gaza as ethnic cleansing? If not, why not?
I put on record my sincere desire to see the Israeli hostages returned as soon as possible. The International Development Committee recently spent time in Geneva as part of its inquiry on international humanitarian law. We discussed at length the way that countries increasingly conflate the legality of resorting to war with the legality of conduct in war. We see aid being blocked and land being annexed without, it seems, legitimate justification, or even significant condemnation. Will the Minister please explain what the Government are doing to ensure that international humanitarian law stops being openly broken, and is given the respect it deserves?
My hon. Friend and east midlands colleague is right to raise the issue of the deterioration of the application of international humanitarian law. There are too many places in conflict where there is a very serious risk of breaches of IHL in the conduct of hostilities. We are doing all we can in Geneva and New York, and on the ground in places including Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, to ensure that the risk of breaches of IHL does not continue.
I thank the Minister for coming to the House to respond to questions.
(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberI am deeply concerned about the resumption of hostilities in Gaza. The Foreign Secretary and I are pressing all parties to return urgently to dialogue and to implement the ceasefire agreement in full. Since the renewed outbreak of hostilities, the Foreign Secretary has spoken to Secretary Rubio, Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar, EU High Representative Kallas and the UN emergency relief co-ordinator, Tom Fletcher. We have also been working with our French, German and Italian partners in support of the Arab plan for the reconstruction of Gaza as part of wider peace building efforts.
It is often said that actions speak louder than words. The Government have repeatedly condemned what is happening in Gaza and the west bank, yet Israeli settler violence, Israeli settlement expansion, the unlawful demolition of Palestinian homes and violence in Gaza are continuing. Given that UK diplomatic efforts and condemnations are being so roundly ignored, will the UK now take action and ban the importation of products from illegal settlements on illegally occupied land, to give the signal that Israel cannot break international law with complete impunity?
The hon. Lady will know the importance that we have placed on international law since we came to power in July. We have been clear throughout this period that we want to see a ceasefire in Gaza. We regret that, at this point, we are still in disagreement with the Israeli Government, and we regret the scenes of the last few weeks in relation to the west bank and to Gaza. In relation to settlement goods, as the Foreign Secretary said earlier and as I have said before, different provisions exist for illegal settlements, which we consider to be illegal and which do not benefit from any of the provisions that would otherwise cover goods from Israel.
Over the past week, I have been in touch with medical colleagues on the ground in Gaza and also with representatives of hostage families in Israel. In Gaza, they corroborate the worrying UN reports of a shallow grave containing the bodies of 15 paramedics and rescue workers, seemingly shot one by one by the Israeli army, some of them still wearing the surgical gloves that they were using to save the lives of others. In Israel, hostage families feel increasingly distant from their own Government and abandoned by them. Hamas is a terrorist organisation, but Israel is an ally. As a critical friend and ally, what further steps can we take to reinforce our message that the Israeli Government’s current trajectory is destructive for peace and, indeed, for their own interests?
My hon. Friend is right to ask this question. I know that he, himself a surgeon, has been closely engaged with the medical situation in Gaza and the incredible bravery of those who provide that assistance. As I said in answer to the hon. Member for North Herefordshire (Ellie Chowns), the scenes in Gaza in relation to aid workers and, of course, the Gazan civilians themselves are absolutely horrific. It is why with France we called a special session of the UN Security Council on Friday, and we will continue to press with all diplomatic levers to see an improvement.
What assessment have the Government made of reports that Iran is considering pre-emptive strikes against American B-2 Spirit bombers that have recently been forward-located in Diego Garcia?
As the House will understand, I will not provide a detailed commentary on that reporting, but we remain deeply conscious of the potential threats from Iran, both in this country and in the region. We continue to have dialogue with the Iranian Government—the Foreign Secretary spoke to his equivalent just last week. We treat these matters with the utmost seriousness, as the right hon. Member would expect.
Like many, I was extremely alarmed to hear the Israeli Defence Minister, Israel Katz, threaten the “total destruction” of Gaza. The UK and its allies are committed to a two-state solution, but that only works if there is a state left standing for Palestinians. Will that Minister ever be sanctioned, and will our Minister set out what role he sees the UK playing in the long-term reconstruction of Gaza?
I thank my hon. Friend for her question; I know how attentive to these issues she has been. The Foreign Secretary has condemned in this Chamber the comments of Defence Minister Katz, and this Government are clear what the path to reconstruction in Gaza must be. We have engaged closely with our partners in the Arab world, we welcome their plan for reconstructing Gaza, and we will continue to do all we can to see that as the path to reconstruction, with dignity for the Palestinian people of Gaza.
Today is the anniversary of the killing of the 33-year-old ex-Royal Marine James Henderson, who was killed by the Israelis among seven aid workers with the World Central Kitchen. A year later, as the hon. Member for Glasgow South West (Dr Ahmed) has mentioned, mass graves have been found with eight bodies of those who worked for the Red Crescent and the Red Cross. That comes two weeks after eight aid workers from the Al-Khair Foundation were killed. It is believed that 1,500 aid workers have been killed. Does the Minister believe that it is illegal under international law to kill aid workers and, if so, what is he prepared to do about it?
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving me the opportunity to comment. Today is indeed the one-year anniversary of the appalling strike on the World Central Kitchen convoy, which killed seven people, including British citizens John Chapman, James Henderson and James Kirby. I would like to pay tribute to their bravery and remember again the appalling tragedy of that day. I, alongside the Foreign Secretary, met their families in November. They are determined to see justice for their family members, and I know that the whole Chamber will be united in that determination. Israel’s Military Advocate General must quickly and thoroughly conclude their consideration of the strike, including determining whether criminal proceedings should be initiated. As the hon. Gentleman has said, Gaza is now the most dangerous place in the world to be an aid worker. This cannot continue.
As others have said, today is the anniversary of the deaths of James Kirby, John Chapman and James Henderson—three former servicemen. We further heard about the 15 aid workers who were killed last week. UN Under-Secretary-General Tom Fletcher has described them as having been killed one by one and buried in shallow graves alongside their clearly marked ambulances, fire trucks and UN vehicles. I thank the Government for calling a UN Security Council meeting on the protection of aid workers. Will the Minister update us on the outcome of that meeting and the further steps we will take to protect aid workers in Gaza?
The meeting on Friday considered those questions. There was agreement across the Security Council on the importance of preserving the space for humanitarian action. As I have said this morning, we regret deeply that there have not yet been further improvements, and we will continue to use all available diplomatic steps to ensure that aid gets into Gaza, aid workers are protected, and the horrific scenes described by the emergency relief co-ordinator are not repeated.
Our thoughts continue to be with the hostages held in Hamas captivity in Gaza and with their families. What recent contact has the Minister had with counterparts in Israel, America and our partners in the region to secure their release and broker a way through this impasse? What steps are being taken across Government to address the threats to stability posed by Iran? How does the Minister envisage the removal of Hamas from the governance of Gaza?
On the shadow Foreign Secretary’s important first point, we are, as she would expect, in regular contact with all those involved in negotiations. The Foreign Secretary spoke to the Israeli Foreign Minister last week. I have been in regular contact with the Qataris, who are doing important work in this file. As she would expect, we continue to be in touch with the hostage families, whose concern I know the Chamber continues to share.
On the threats posed by Iran, we speak to the relevant players in the region and to the E3. As I said in response to an earlier question, the Foreign Secretary spoke to the Iranian Foreign Minister last week and underlined that we continue to support a diplomatic resolution to the tensions with Iran. We do not want to see Iran secure a nuclear weapon. We believe that a diplomatic solution is the best way to achieve that, but we will hold the snap-back of sanctions, and indeed many other measures, under review until we are satisfied.
Aid should never be used as a political tool. As the Foreign Secretary made clear to the House on 20 March, blocking humanitarian aid into Gaza is appalling and unacceptable. Israel must allow aid into Gaza immediately. The Foreign Secretary made that clear to Israeli Foreign Minister Sa’ar on 21 March and issued a joint statement with his French and German counterparts on 5 March. Gaza is the deadliest place in the world to be an aid worker. More than 400 aid workers have been killed in the conflict. Restoring the ceasefire remains the best chance to see hostages released, allow a surge of humanitarian aid and bring this bloodshed to an end.
It is clear from the Chamber this morning that we all despair at the recent breakdown of the ceasefire agreement, the resumption of hostilities and the blockade of aid into Gaza. We now have warnings of an unprecedented humanitarian disaster in the Gaza strip, which is hard to imagine after what we have already seen there. The Minister mentioned the conversations that have been had with Israel. First, can he assure me that we are making it clear that the only way we will achieve a lasting peace is through a two-state solution, which will not achieved by subjecting people to such hardship? Secondly, what conversations are ongoing with allies about restoring aid drops directly into Gaza?
I can confirm that we say regularly to our Israeli counterparts, and indeed to all others in the region, that the only route out of these horrors is a two-state solution, an outcome that provides for the safety, security and dignity of both peoples. We are talking with our partners about what might be done to try to ensure aid gets into Gaza through whatever means are at our disposal, but at the core, Israel must relax the restrictions and allow aid into Gaza. That is the way to get the scale of aid that is required into the strip. During the ceasefire, we saw a massive increase in aid, and that is what we want to do.
With continued aerial bombardments impacting the flow of aid into Gaza, will the Foreign Secretary confirm whether UK-made F-35 parts have been used to enable air strikes in Gaza since 18 March?
To clarify my previous answer, the Foreign Secretary spoke to Foreign Minister Sa’ar on 5 March, not 21 March.
In response to the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman), we will continue to press these issues with the Israeli Government. It is clear to the House that we have not succeeded, over these long months, in ensuring the level of aid into Gaza that we would like to see, or had the protections for humanitarian workers that we want to see. Deconfliction, with humanitarian aid workers, is a vital part of ensuring their security, and we are pressing the Israelis to do so.
Whether in Gaza, Turkey or elsewhere, it is essential for journalists to be able to do their job. We are incredibly proud of the BBC and all the other UK outlets overseas that play a vital role in holding power to account, and we will continue to support them.
On 23 March in Gaza, eight medics in the Palestinian Red Crescent, five responders from the civil defence and a UN staff member were killed by the IDF while responding to casualties. Their bodies have been returned today. International humanitarian law is clear: medical personnel, ambulances, humanitarian relief workers and civil defence organisations must be respected and protected. International humanitarian law is not something for debate. The Foreign Secretary understands the importance of upholding the law and holding to account all who breach it, including our friends, so why is Israel seemingly allowed to act with impunity when it comes to the protection of medics, humanitarian workers and civilians?
On this day, the one-year anniversary of the World Central Kitchen incident, I want to be clear that nobody has impunity and that we expect full legal processes to be followed, including in Israel. The Foreign Secretary and I have both spoken about the important role the Military Advocate General will play in that. On my hon. Friend’s wider question, it is clearly deeply problematic that deconfliction does not exist in Gaza and that aid workers continue to be in such peril, as she described. We will continue to use all methods at our disposal to try to improve the situation.
On 17 March, the Foreign Secretary told the House that there had been
“a breach of international law”
by Israel in blockading aid getting into Gaza.—[Official Report, 17 March 2025; Vol. 764, c. 41.] If he takes international law seriously, will he tell us what sanctions are in place as a result of that?
We have announced to this House a series of sanctions in relation to the risk of breaches in relation to the attacks on aid workers, which I have covered a number of times in this session. [Interruption.]