WE HAVE REACHED the third anniversary of Ireland’s Occupied Territories Bill (OTB) being jettisoned from the 2020 Programme for Government.
That this occurred despite it having majority support in both Dáil and Seanad was surely a slight on our democratic process. A greater loss was that the Bill promised scrutiny and a real possibility of relief, in areas of human deprivation.
If enacted, the Bill could potentially be applied to illegal occupations anywhere in the world. Amongst others, Palestine is a current example. It is on this tragedy that I wish to share some hopeful insights.
My interest in the Middle East started when growing up in Cork in the early sixties, close to a number of Jewish families. They brought a welcome flair to shops, dentistry, ballet and anything they did. However, by 1962 more and more were leaving, saying that only in Israel would they be safe.
I understood what they meant. Adolph Eichmann had just appeared on the front of the newspaper, expressionless in a bulletproof dock. Before that, the cinema would not allow us to see Anne Frank but on the street outside, pictures showed the soldiers towering over small children in the snow.
Twenty years later in a Manchester hospital residence, we were awoken by ever-loudening wailing and banging on the flimsy walls. It was the demure Palestinian families. News of a massacre was coming through at the Sabra and Shatila camps. They kept repeating “… it is the Christians, but the Israelis are letting them do it”.
They were correct, as later confirmed by UN and Israeli commissions. The refugee camps were in an area of Beirut controlled by the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF), which had invaded Lebanon earlier in 1982.
That my Jewish friends might now be in the IDF was an appalling thought, victims making victims of others, one that had to be followed and unravelled.
For over 75 years the United Nations (UN), has tried very hard, but failed, to bring peace to the Middle East. Great powers have had their diplomatic input too, but strategic self-interest always seems to win out. Relapsing wars are the consequence.
Standard diplomacy, alone, was never likely to produce peace in Palestine. Before and since Israeli independence in 1948, the Zionist philosophy was to “create facts on the ground”, regardless of negotiation and diplomacy. Interminable negotiating procedures have not served them well.
From the Romans in Jerusalem in AD 70 to the countries to which they were dispersed, envy and antisemitism have been their fate. In such situations, they have every reason to be wary of humankind.
In 1881, pogroms forced many Jews to flee Russia. Some journeyed to Palestine joining the 75,000 already living there. This coincided with the re-birth of Zionism, the ideal of the Jewish people returning to the land of their ancestors. A major boost for this came from Britain’s supportive Balfour Declaration of 1917. This coincided with the aspiration of the British government to have a dependable ally in the Middle East after the First World War, near the oilfields and the Suez Canal.
The British Mandate formalised Jewish colonisation in Palestine and favoured them over the indigenous Arabs. This was at odds with British undertakings, given in 1916 to Arab armies accompanied by Lawrence of Arabia. They were fighting the Ottoman Turks, on the understanding that victory would yield Arab self-rule.
The coming to power of Germany’s Nazi Government in 1933 collapsed Britain’s strategy. The systematic genocide of some six million European Jews, only 80 years ago, was unparalleled in its calculated cruelty.
The world, including Ireland, did not offer adequate refuge to Jewish people fleeing Nazi tyranny before and during the Second World War, or to Holocaust survivors after it.
Even the United States had a highly restrictive policy on Jewish immigration until 1950. For many Jews, Palestine was their only hope, even though they realised that it was occupied by a large indigenous population. The resulting Palestinian Israeli conflict was caused by others.
The world eventually showed empathy or guilt, towards the Jewish people. In 1947 the fledgling UN voted to partition Palestine and set up both a Jewish and Arab state. At the time Palestine’s J population comprised about 600,000, with 1.3 million Arabs.
However, Israel was allocated 55 per cent of the territory. The Arab-Israeli war broke out. Israel’s military skill and forced expulsion of Arabs were relentlessly employed. By January 1949 Israel controlled 78% of the territory, which had also been rendered predominantly Jewish. From an Israeli perspective, Jewish people now had a safe home. The Palestinian plight of scattered devastation deserved wise world counsel. The UN tried but failed or was allowed to fail. Israel’s tendency to prefer creating facts on the ground persists to this day.
For Ireland’s peacemaker John Hume, cornerstones in conflict resolution were non-violence and dialogue. Only with these could perspectives on anger, fears and hopes be identified. There must be an incentive for both parties to start seeking a solution. The huge gulf in bargaining power between Israel and the Palestinians is clearly a great obstacle.
In a precise, peaceful way the Occupied Territories Bill (OTB) can initiate a tilt back in this imbalance and help initiate dialogue.
The Bill is based on Ireland’s obligations under the Fourth Geneva Convention, to protect civilians in times of war. It can make it an offence in Ireland to, knowingly, import or sell goods, resources or services from illegal civilian settlements in occupied territories, as judged by international law.
More specifically, it would apply to those imports provided by civilians supported by the occupying power. Exports from the occupying state’s recognised home territory would not be affected.
Critics point out that this modest Bill would be futile and of little impact. However, scrutiny spreads notoriety and even great powers do not welcome the highlighting of their illegality. Ireland would not be alone.
Despite its size, Ireland occupies a remarkable humanitarian space in the world. Its gaining of independence in 1922 inspired other nations. Ireland also understands colonisation, famine and forced emigration. Importantly, we have had great writers and artists to share all this, as well as our mistakes, with the world.
In my opinion, the failure to enact the Occupied Territories Bill reflects badly on Ireland’s democratic process.
To recall, the Bill passed all stages in Seanad Eireann in 2018 and then in early 2019, Fianna Fáil successfully introduced it in the Dáil, with a vote in favour of 78 to 45. The General Election of 2020 intervened but the representation of parties and deputies who supported the OTB increased.
Even within the three parties who negotiated to form a government there remained a majority. Then, astoundingly, in June 2020 it became clear that Fianna Fáil, numerically the biggest party in the Dáil, had acquiesced to their Bill being vetoed by the smaller Fine Gael (FG).
Fine Gael justified its veto by citing Ireland’s obligation to act within the EU on trade matters and their Attorney General’s advice that it would be illegal, a point disputed by Palestinian rights groups. There were separate concerns about criticism from within the US Congress.
Fianna Fail’s position was disquieting, given its international renown for independence in Foreign Affairs. Initially, its justification for not supporting its own Bill was unclear. However, Fianna Fáil leader, Micheál Martin was later quoted in this publication as saying that the OTB would “definitely, not make any practical difference, if we’re honest, it’s more symbolic than having a practical impact”.
If the OTB were of such little worth, how could Fianna Fáil have devoted such care and skill in introducing it in Dáil Eireann and undertaken “to progress the Occupied Territories Bill” in their 2020 manifesto?
Surely, it is fair to recall another effort initially judged as symbolic, the refusal by Dublin workers to handle South African grapefruit in 1984. Years later, Nelson Mandela said this act demonstrated to South Africans that ‘’ordinary people far away from the crucible of apartheid, cared for our freedom’’ and helped him keep going when he was in prison. In time, it also had a practical impact.
Since 2020, the Irish government has tried to progress its diplomatic approach to the Middle East, including a two-year term on the UN Security Council. Hard endpoints such as violent deaths and humanitarian suffering show a deterioration over these last three years. In addition to diplomacy, Ireland needs to offer new thinking on the Middle East and other occupied territories. Enactment of the OTB is too urgently required to await a general election. The democratic basis of the OTB is already in place.
The Occupied Territories Bill is a modest proposal but a profound concept. It will allow the values of ordinary people to impact on inhumanity in our world, so often dominated by military power and compromises, for strategic or financial gain.
David Clinch is a consultant physician who grew up close to the Jewish community in Cork in the 1960s. In his medical career abroad, he has learned much from many Palestinian and Israeli colleagues, as well as their co-religionists.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
have your say