Ah, consistency.
Is there even the slightest logic to the coalition's policy on Israel-Palestine? Last week William Hague, his mojo restored, stood up in the Commons and outlined how we would be abstaining on the recognition vote at the UN unless the Palestinians provided us with "assurances". Requested "assurances" were duly not provided, and so we abstained while a mere 138 voted in favour, including some of our major European allies.
Israel has since responded in the only way she knows how, by declaring that a further 3,000 new homes will be built, illegally, on the occupied West Bank. As a result, Foreign Office minister Alastair Burt summoned the Israeli ambassador to let him know our deep displeasure. Here's a thought: considering that one of the assurances we required from the Palestinians was that they drop preconditions to talks, their only one being that the Israelis declare a halt to all settlement building in the occupied territories, wouldn't it have made sense to vote in favour of their first step towards statehood when the threatened Israeli response was to, err, accelerate settlement building even further? Just who is it here that's in breach of international law? When are we finally going to recognise that there isn't going to be a negotiated peace when Israel has no intention of evacuating the West Bank settlements, the presence of which make a Palestinian state unviable? When, in short, are we going to start treating Israel as the rogue state it is?
Israel has since responded in the only way she knows how, by declaring that a further 3,000 new homes will be built, illegally, on the occupied West Bank. As a result, Foreign Office minister Alastair Burt summoned the Israeli ambassador to let him know our deep displeasure. Here's a thought: considering that one of the assurances we required from the Palestinians was that they drop preconditions to talks, their only one being that the Israelis declare a halt to all settlement building in the occupied territories, wouldn't it have made sense to vote in favour of their first step towards statehood when the threatened Israeli response was to, err, accelerate settlement building even further? Just who is it here that's in breach of international law? When are we finally going to recognise that there isn't going to be a negotiated peace when Israel has no intention of evacuating the West Bank settlements, the presence of which make a Palestinian state unviable? When, in short, are we going to start treating Israel as the rogue state it is?
Labels: Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition, foreign policy, Gaza, Hamas, hypocrisy, Israel, Israel-Palestine, Palestine, William Hague
| Permalink
Post a Comment