A very belated happy new year to everyone.
A Statement on Gaza was repeated in the House of Lords Chamber on Monday, the day we all returned.
Ministerial Statements follow a specific procedure and are intended to inform the House rather than provide the opportunity for a debate. This convention is often ignored by participants who then find themselves being called to order.
The procedure is this – the relevant minister, in this case Lord Malloch-Brown, repeated an earlier Statement in the House of Commons delivered by the Foreign Secretary, David Miliband. Following the text the two oppositon leaders responded to the Statement, often highly critically but in the case of the Gaza Statement with sorrow and a degree of unity. The Minister then replies to the opposition leaders all within a time limit of 20 minutes.
Then there is a further 20 minutes allowed for questions from all sides of the House. Note that I have said questions. Some take the opportunity to make mini-statements themselves thereby limiting the time available for others’ questions. This is frowned upon and murmurs rising to stern demands for a question can be heard around the benches.
Predictably there were many, many more would be questioners than there was time. I was besieged afterwards by crossbenchers urging me to request time from the Government for a longer debate. This plea was expressed by all other groupings and the Government has now tentatively agreed to a 2-hour debate on Tuesday 27th January. So an example of the Government responding to heartfelt concerns.
I note that there has not been a huge amount on this blog about Gaza, the defining moment of our time? I can only imagine this is because the matter is of such huge import and such massive concern that none of us feels up to conveying the enormity or the possible consequences.
However, in chats here and there in the House since Monday it is clear that people have considered and valuable views which may not have any impact at all on the bombing but could be useful when the peace process must once again be resumed.
Who is able to identify the literary link in the heading to this post?
From Huxley’s Eyeless in Gaza, perhaps?
I am pleased the Lords are debating what is such a vital international issue. I wonder, though, how much influence they may have on the Foreign Secretary, and in turn how much influence he may have on the warring parties in Palestine.
The Times reprinted an article from 1951 with the same title. The situation depicted then had alarming similarities to the situation today showing the longevity of this tragedy….
Having been in a room discussing the debate with Arabs and non-Israeli Jewish people I am always amazed at the some of the more random calls and solutions to peace and diplomacy, one suggestion which I won’t reference (as his opinion is so idiotic I don’t want to give him the web hits) suggested immediately establishing a secular state for all Israeli’s and Palestinians! As if it was a matter of just getting religion out of the equation and everyone would get along suddenly!
Given the strength of feelings, emotions and pain involved in this issue, all the blood, fear and hate from even from a lay audience, I cannot even begin to guess the enormity of the challenge facing diplomats on either side.
Meanwhile the stories from Gaza of people burying families, if they are lucky enough to find the bodies, shows the tragic effects of this conflict on civilians, the same group of people who are also targeted by Hamas’ rockets…
How can one do justice in expressing the enormity of this tragedy?
Ken, spot on, Aldous Huxley in the late 1930s, I think.
I doubt that the planned debate will have that much influence, one is always here reminded of Harold Macmillan’s famous caution, ‘events dear boy, events’!That said I think it both important and helpful for views to be expressed and solutions debated. For example today I talked to one peer who said that a key factor in the coming together of the avowed enemies in Northern Ireland was Senator Mitchell who spent hours and days and weeks just listening to views from both sides in a room with both sides present.
Noodles, how depressing that so little has changed and how utterly tragic for those in the firing lines on both sides.
One cannot do justice to the enormity as you point out – but that perhaps is no reason not to discuss it at all?
Dear Lady D’Souza,
There certainly has not been much on this blog about Gaza. There has also not been much on this blog about Israel and the situation Israelis have faced for many years. Which other country in the world has to live knowing that there are people, and countries, elsewhere in the world who have declared they want to wipe it off the face of the Earth?
I am neither Israeli nor Jewish (but should declare I am pro- both) and don’t want to dwell on what is happening in the Middle East but I find a lot of the commentary and the coverage of the situation tinged with an anti-Semitism which sickens me profoundly.
What also sickens me, and makes me ashamed to be British, is the increase in attacks against Jews in this country, whether it is ‘Kill the Jews’ daubed on buildings and placards, damage to synagogues and physical abuse. British Jews are precisely that: British. Let us not forget that at the Rally for Israel in Trafalgar Square on Sunday, the national anthem was sung.
I hope these points will be covered in the debate and only hope it does not become a platform for the repetition of some of the delusional and downright disgraceful things we heard from our elected representatives in their exchanges on Monday’s statement.
Howridiculous.
Baroness: Its good that you feel you are able to publish views on this given the emotional undercurrents that it invokes.
Politicians in Israel have to take the popular position on what is required, after all they want re-election and it is the nature of ordinary people to move to the political right when they feel threatened.
Israel needs to act properly but I feel it cannot because of the shackles democracy places upon it. For instance if Israel was a dictatorship then said might have copied the same munitions design and launched missiles back at Hamas at the same frequency and to the same locations.
We would still have called this barbaric but it would have been a proportionate response. America would not support such a regime so it will never happen.
A very large number of Israelis are immigrants from the west. The state of Israel operates to ensure this is maintained and promoted. Israel is not a secular state. This places pressure on Israeli politics to expand its borders. This process is both insidious and hidden from the world.
The Jewish community suffers outside of Israel and some become very right wing with their political views. Its a sort of Stockholm Syndrome. This then gets imported back into Israel.
The same happens with the Palestinians, they get marginalised outside of Israel because nobody wants them and this gets fed back into the likes of Hamas.
Hamas knows Israel will over-react to attack because it has the military machine to do it and it has an electoral mandate to do so. Hamas has not been disappointed and the propaganda victory goes to the Palestinians this time.
Both Israel and the Palestinians play each other off politically seeking support from third parties, which they get. The victims are ordinary people caught up with a vanity that assumes one can defeat the other. It won’t ever happen!
This is a more considered post to that blocked by Lord Soley.
Ref: Population Growth Rate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Israel
Howridiculous: I’m sure you’re comment will stir a reaction and lead to more comments on Gaza!
I’m neither pro-Israel nor pro-Palestine, in as much as this is possible in the debate. I don’t support the Palestinian side, Hamas all but invited Israel to respond in this manner, while the mounting body count, especially of women and children, from the Israeli actions, makes me want to weep.
I completely accept that Israel is under attack from the Gaza strip and that certain Middle Eastern states have vowed to wipe Israel of the face of the Earth. However, Israel is no longer surrounded by states that wish to annihilate it. One only has to look to the frustrations of the Egyptian government at the breakdown of peace talks to see that situation has changed following Egypt’s recognition of Israel in 1977. State based conflicts with Israel are a thing of the past, its borderless terrorism that is the cause of the most recent conflict.
The Israeli army should defend Israel from attack, but look at effect of the tactics used in Lebanon. Hezbollah operated schools, orphanages and other social services in its name, in addition to its militant wing which went to war with the state of Israel. However, the side of the organisation ordinary Lebanese would know would be as the organisation that runs the local hospital, school etc not the organisation that staged a raid into Israel and killed three young soldiers patrolling the border. In response to the attacks on Israel, the IDF, levelled a lot of Southern Lebanon including civilian infrastruture.
The death toll in this conflict, started by Hezbollah with a cross border raid and murders of three Israeli soldiers, according to the Guardian was 1,200 Lebanese and 158 Israelis. Of these only 200 Lebanese were combatants in contrast with 117 Israeli soldiers who lost their lives. I want to make absolutely clear I am not in any way diminishing the tragic lose of life on both sides, but the figures show that in this conflict of the near 1,300 dead only 300 of them were combatants. Compared to the fact that over 1,000 civilians were killed in the cross fire… It shows how tragic conflict in the region is, and of the civilian casualties 95% were Lebanese.
If nothing else, surely when 3 non-combatant are killed for every 1 combatant, the forces responcible desire the ineffectual and non-binding international rebuke given by the international community?
Put the statistics from the current conflict into consideration and you have similarly horrendous civilian death tolls. The latest figures are some 1,000 Palestinians died. On the Israeli side there have been 13 fatalities, 3 of which were civilians. Of the Palestinian dead one third are children and half are women. I do not know of any other place on Earth where that many women and children can be killed and not attract universal and absolute condemnation from the entire international community.
Hamas is partly to blame, utilising the civilian population as a shield, but so is Israel for being willing to shoot through so many civilians to achieve its goals. No well spoken, well intended words can heal the wounds of the people of Gaza, and unfortunately Hamas will not be the ones blames for the dead.
Israel must be censured internationally for the effect its actions have on civilians, equally, if not more so Hamas must be censured for not seeking peaceful resolutions and for firing the rockets into Israel which started the renewal of violence. No one thought Israel would act other than it has done to the actions of Hamas and for the tragedy that has befallen the people of Gaza in this conflict Hamas are as much responsible as Israel is. If nothing else then the statement that Hamas thinks it can target Israeli children following the death of Palestinian children shows that this is not a well meaning organisation seeking peace and prosperity for all.
On the point of anti-Semitic slogans, they have no place in Britain, or the rest of the world for that matter. Equally though, our words would not be worth hearing if they didn’t speak firstly for the 1 million innocent Palestinian refugees, the citizens of Gaza, caught between the IDF and Hamas.
so lets see now, put politics and biases aside – THINK: . so far 1000 Palestinian dead for 13 Israelis – ya thats really cool. thats a really good example for all nations everywhere. kill kill kill (???) maybe thats how the police should behave too,see a suspect then go in and kill everyone around them.
you can justify that in many ways I am pretty sure, the problem is your enemy will have the same reasoning and justification,(because you are both extremists) and the killing will go on.
Huxley’s title Eyeless in Gaza is of course a quote from Milton’s Samson Agonistes. The same work offers its own bleak comment on the current situation in Gaza:
O dark, dark, dark, amid the blaze of noon,
Irrecoverably dark, total eclipse
Without all hope of day!
Let’s hope the world comes to its senses first.
Howridiculous
One can note that a country lives with terrorist extremists on its borders and still also note that it’s immoral to slaughter imprisoned children with bombs. Unless, of course, you subscribe to the notion that all things are permissible in the defense of the nation.
One does wonder what the Israelis seek to gain from this, defense-wise. As a nuclear power with the full and unequivocal military backing of the USA any supposed “fear” about some ragtag group of militants with rockets wishing to wipe them off the map is surely at least a little overblown. More to the point, if we take the stated goals of the Israeli political establishment at face value this particular military adventure, by solidifying support for Hamas in Gaza and weakening Fatah, is a failure. It seems to me that Israel must either continue to bomb, bomb, bomb until there is nobody left at all, or admit defeat at some point and step down its own military adventurism while rockets still fall on Sderot. A more counter-productive strategy may be impossible to ever achieve.
Baroness: After a long search I found that my post WAS published under ‘Palestine & Israel’ 12/01 by Lord Soley and so was the post on Georgia & Russia 31/08 so no blocked posts it seems:
Please offer him my apologies on this. I was convinced I posted under his blog ‘Tyranny in the modern world’ clearly I did not.
Perhaps the title of the editorial, e.g. Palestine & Israel should be entered under the bloggers handle and date to highlight orphan posts in the event of?
I am now finding the blog difficult to navigate. There is not a hierarchy tree as in a conventional blog although the new subscribe to thread has helped enormously. There is no facility to edit or preview a post; spelling and grammar typos can be particularly embarrassing. The lack of a preview means one cannot test HTML embedding either should you want to use it.
The misunderstanding has come about because no one-line banner is posted as a permanent fixture stating the post awaits moderation; the present arrangement has a transient banner. I am not at all happy about this and would have Hansard change this.
I know the blog has been a success but as a prototype things could be better especially in terms of blogger vs blog feedback interaction. My comments to Lord Norton on a blog constitution is down to the blog engine in the end and not words.
Hansard, will there be progress?
McDuff, one can not help but think that there is a deeply sinister agenda at play behind this unbelievable bombing campaign. especially when one looks back at similar operations/reactions throughout the history of that conflict.
Hi Senex – we look into all user generated suggestions for improvements to the site and make them where possible.
In future, it would help if you could use formal feedback mechanisms to record your concerns (e.g., fill in the evaluation survey, but try to limit yourself to one (listing all your recommendations)).
Our role is to evaluate the site; in part, we use your feedback for this, but may only happen upon suggestions that you make when responding to particular posts – as occurred in this case.
Meanwhile, please note that you can search for posts by topic and by author using the scroll down menus at the top of the screen.
Laura Miller – Hansard Society.
Samuel Ben Hood
Do you have any specific ideas in this regard? I assume you are talking about the Israeli side, it being unlikely that Hamas ever had the luxury of ulterior motives or nuance. I don’t doubt that both parties were playing a domestic propaganda game, but I’d suspect that if we were looking for more complex dark cynicism on the strategy side only the Israelis have the capacity.
Nonetheless, it’s one thing to note that the Israeli political elite stands to gain (as do all authoritarian state authorities) by the continuation of a conflict even as it eats at the heart of the nation like a cancer (one of the many problems with bad incentives within a democratic system). It is another to suggest that this implies a calculation on their behalf.
There is a general rule that one should not ascribe to malice what can be explained by incompetence. History tells us with depressing consistency that human beings elevated to positions of significance within a state almost invariably believe their own propaganda, especially when it comes to ascribing motives and behaviours to an enemy that they would feel were ludicrous and insulting oversimplifications of their own side’s motives. “They” are evil barbarians who only understand the language of violence and are only interested in death and destruction, and must be soundly beaten with no remorse until they see sense and surrender. “We” on the other hand are noble and enlightened creatures unfortunately pushed to dark acts by the brutality of our enemies. If they attack us we will hit them back, and even if we cannot win we will resist them to our last breath since that is the only honourable thing to do. Unfortunately, the other side always seems to get it wrong, believing themselves to be the wronged victims or the noble warriors civilising the savages. And of course we can’t be the savages – would savages have guns this shiny? – so they must be mistaken. It’s all so very, very predictable, and unfortunately it means that you can explain pretty much everything about this recent conflict by relying on the same tribalist ignorance that explains 90% of all other warfare in history (except of course for the wars fought by the British, who have always been enlightened and entirely on the side of Good).
When governments do things that seem ludicrous on their face and contradictory of their stated motives there is always a question: are they lying to us about their motives, are they so utterly stupid as to make your face hurt just trying to think down to their level, or are they simply astoundingly bad at their jobs? The answer is, of course, all the above, but the balance between them is where the devil and his trickster’s bag of details lives. I don’t dispute that there are many possibilities for cynical conspiracies and lies on the part of the Israeli government, I just don’t know how likely any of them are.