Proposition 52K1712

Proposition de résolution relative à la guerre entre Israël et le Hamas dans la bande de Gaza.

General information ¶

Authors

PS | SP André Flahaut, Patrick Moriau

Submission date

Jan. 8, 2009

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

Israel Palestine question Palestine UN Security Council peacekeeping humanitarian aid resolution of parliament war

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

CD&V LE PS | SP Open Vld MR

Abstained from voting

Groen Vooruit Ecolo N-VA FN VB

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

Discussion ¶

Jan. 15, 2009 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

The three draft resolutions on the Gaza Strip were discussed by our committee at its meeting on 14 January 2009.

The Committee adopted as the basis of its work the amendment no. 1 submitted by Mr. by Moriau, Mr. Flahaut, Mrs. Muylle, Mr. From Croo, Mr. by Baeselen, Mr. From Germany and your servant, replacing the whole of Resolution No. 1712/1 and the result of a consultation between the members of the majority groups.

by Mr. André Flahaut noted, during the discussion, that the majority had decided to rely on the proposal submitted first by himself and Mr. Flahaut. Moriau in order to amend it for the benefit of the widest possible consensus and in order to react as quickly as possible to the drama that is taking place in Gaza. The situation in the Gaza Strip is indeed urgent and continues to deteriorate, he stressed. by Flahaut.

He also stressed that the authors of Amendment No. 1, which replaces the text of the resolution he was the author of, have endeavored to remain objective, even though the horror of the events occurring in Gaza is unbearable on the human level.

However, the truthfulness of the information and images disseminated should be checked, and these should ⁇ be condemned more severely than is ⁇ the case in the amendment that served as the basis for our discussions.

by Mr. De Croo said that the authors of the amendment that served as the basis for the work of the commission have tried to stick to the current situation in order to be able to react as quickly as possible, especially since the UN Secretary-General is currently on the spot.

In the pursuit of consensus, efforts were also made to take into account the position adopted by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on the conflict in question.

Belgium’s commitment was also highlighted. In the original amendment, the words "injured children" were replaced by the words "injured children", which was necessary given that victims are not limited to injured children in the strict sense of the term, but also children in distress.

by Mr. De Croo also stressed that the authors of the amendment have endeavored to highlight both Israel’s and Egypt’s responsibilities with regard to the closure of the Gaza border, which contributes to the distress of the population.

The words "disproportionate response" that appeared in the original text were replaced by the words "scale of response".

by Mr. Baeselen and his co-workers submitted a sub-amendment to Amendment No. 1 in order to add to consideration F the words "since 2001" and to specify that Hamas' rocket and mortar launches on southern Israel began in 2001.

Mr Van der Maelen and consoorten have submitted a number of sub-amendments to amendment no. 1 to add points 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 to the resolution section.

Mr. Van der Maelen will surely come back later.

He stressed that he believes that Israel does not respect international agreements. He called for the suspension of the association treaty until Israel complies with international law.

Mr. Van der Maelen also believed that the federal government should point out to the West that they should be very careful in delivering weapons to Israel. He argues that the repeated violations by both parties to the conflict are the result of the impunity of their acts and is therefore in favour of persecution and punishment.

He points out that Europe has already invested in the reconstruction of the country that is now being destroyed again. He believes that the costs should be transferred to Israel.

He also called for an international investigation into violations of the law of war.

Your servant also insisted on the urgency of the situation and on the urgency for our Parliament to vote on a resolution. He stressed the fact that the compromise proposal that was on the table may seem incomplete to some, but that it constitutes a foundation that could be supported by many parliamentarians.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs said he had no objection to the resolution but asked to emphasize the fact that the Belgian humanitarian operation had begun well and that it was therefore not yet a matter of realizing it but rather to demand its continuation. by Mr. Flahaut and Ms. Vautmans therefore submitted a sub-amendment to point 4 of the arrangement to insert the word "continue" in relation to the humanitarian operation. The fourth point was: “to continue the humanitarian operation to evacuate children victims of the conflict in the Gaza Strip, to keep the B-Fast team stand-by and to insist on the parties concerned to allow its deployment as soon as possible.”

by Mr. Germany emphasized that it should first endeavour to ⁇ a ceasefire.

by Mr. Fouad Lahssaini also presented on behalf of Ecolo-Groen! a series of sub-amendments aimed at inserting a Q consideration referring to eight UN Security Council resolutions and two UN General Assembly resolutions. by Mr. Lahssaini is indeed of the opinion that the political dimension should be emphasized and that some historical perspectives that are important elements of the current conflict must also be recalled.

It also proposed: a sub-amendment referring to the roadmap for a sustainable settlement of the conflict; an amendment aimed at inserting a point 7 in the arrangement to suspend arms exports to conflict regions; an amendment aimed at inserting a point 8 in the arrangement so that the European Union suspends the enhanced cooperation with Israel until a solution is found, and a sub-amendment aimed at inserting a point 9 in the arrangement aimed at promoting humanitarian operations on the ground.

Amendment No. 1 of M. Moriau et consorts which aims to replace the whole proposal no. 1712 of MM. Moriau and Flahaut was therefore taken as a basic text by the Commission.

Regarding the vote on the amendments I have just mentioned, I refer you to the written version of my report that was deposited on your banks.

As amended, Amendment No. 1 Moriau et consorts, which replaces, I repeat, the whole proposal for resolution no. 1712 was adopted by 9 votes and 1 abstinence.

The Joint Proposals of Mr. By Vriendt and Lahssaini and by Mrs. Muylle, Claes and Mr. Deseyn becomes, therefore, without object.

The committee also agreed that an oral report of the discussion in committee be made in plenary session, which I just did.

I am now leaving my role as a rapporteur. I advocate that the House vote on this text as a whole, which, in my opinion, goes to the essence, emphasizes the need for a ceasefire and the need to allow humanitarian organizations to help the people of Gaza. This text also puts the different parties in the presence of their responsibilities. In addition, he stressed that the Belgian government has strongly condemned the violence and raised the responsibilities of both sides present.

Mr. Speaker, dear colleagues, first and foremost thanks to François-Xavier de Donnea, who not only presented the report of our work in a very fine manner, Mrs. Vautmans, but also was an element of cohesion in order to ⁇ the greatest possible consensus.

Mr. Speaker, colleagues, I am convinced that what we are discussing today may be much closer to us than we could ever imagine. Geographically, the Middle East is almost a neighborhood of Europe. Sentimentally, politics is something that moves us and that also makes us think. After a massive historical urge, Israel has found its own stake. For example, there was the Balfour Declaration of 1917 with the establishment of a state that is recognized and respected in all international institutions.

At the same time, there has been a popular displacement that has made the Palestinian people orphan in history. The Palestinian people who find no room to live normally, to stabilize themselves and to peacefully contribute to the future of their children. Even in the Arab world, this Palestinian group finds little solace. For example, I think of the brutal expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from Saudi Arabia, who worked and lived there, when Mr. Arafat chose the camp of Saddam Hussein. Some argue that the camps and misery for those people and for others is an element of geopolitics.

On the other hand, the influence of Israel is great, not only by the skill and commitment of its people, but also by the global solidarity it generates. It is obvious that part of the solution, or ⁇ the solution itself, is located on the territory of the United States where the influence of 5 million Jews – educated and influential – is much more important than that of 5 million Arabs who are also resident in this country.

We know of a conflict of two principles: the right to state security of a state that has had a particular difficulty with its people and where we in Europe are still a problem of conscience – and rightly! – about cultivating, and at the same time being the playball of a geopolitical environment that extends far beyond the conflict that unfortunately plagues that part of the world today.

The terrorism with Hezbollah in the south of Lebanon and Hamas in the Gaza Strip, is not alone. Certainly, it finds resources and support in a number of countries in the Middle East, where Iran can again be named. This perpetual conflict, this lack of soil that we face every day, this unbalanced, dramatic struggle between those who want to be secured in their possessions and goods on the one hand and those who need to not recognize this state and continue to fight on the other hand, has unfolded in the last days for once again in drama and human suffering.

This is not entirely strange to us. I note with a certain satisfaction that members of the Jewish and Arab communities in Antwerp advocate for reconciliation and rightly oppose the introduction of these conflicts to us. It puts many things in motion with our opinion and our people. The demonstrations – which have gone more or less quietly and peacefully – that we have seen in Antwerp and in Brussels show that this problem lives close to us, within our own borders.

Dramatically enough, the increasing number of victims unfortunately confirms this thesis. It grips us to how the value of a life for some has no importance in the balance of geopolitical influences. We are inclined to look at this from a distance. We get in our living room every day images or a relay of this situation and that provides a concept of a battle of David against Goliath.

In the Bible, it is David who won the battle.

Europe, which seeks to keep a distance between the rights and desires of one and the other, fails, despite great efforts of diplomatic allures and also of a financial nature, to create there the indispensable stability, not only for the well-being of the peoples, for the peace in that part of the world, but also for our own security, our own situation and in a sense the respect for our own values.

We are not strangers in the Middle East and the Middle East is not a stranger in our country, in our own Europe.

Mr. Minister of Foreign Affairs, I have listened more than once to your sober analysis, also in this field. I get noticed – and I say that in a place where one should be able and allowed to say his thought – that the leadership of Israel should pay attention. Given the circumstances and even if one wants to stop eight years of irresponsible attacks on the civilian population of Gaza in Israel, Israel must take care that the credit that has been accumulated and that is engraved deep in our hearts is not slowly but surely taken down by the images we see.

Next, I think that even the responsible in Israel, despite the difficult circumstances, should not do to others what was done to many of them. This country which within a few decades may no longer be inhabited by a majority of people of Jewish descent, but by Arab members of that State, cannot wait too long to see peace, balance and cooperation arise.

We have worked together to prepare a resolution. Some people rightly point out that this resolution does not extend far enough. I look at Mr. Van der Maelen.

My message is the following. What happens in that part of the world is not far from our bed. Therefore, we must make efforts. We have experienced in Europe itself, for generations, devastating civil wars, in 1914-1918 and 1939-1945, with terrible genocidal effects, more specifically for the Jewish population and other minorities. We must make every effort, given our a priori and, to a certain extent, even at the detriment of our well-being, to see there peace arise, not at any price but at a high price. It is in this spirit that I support this resolution.

First of all, I would like to thank Mr. President. Donnea for his report and for the efforts made to reach a text of consensus which, I hope, will be voted by the plenary assembly; a text that, as Mr. De Croo and probably other colleagues will tell this tribune, is balanced, which focuses on the following essential elements.

First and foremost, the return to peace, the end of hostilities and the return to political, diplomatic discussion in the first place: the remarks made, unfortunately, still recently by Hamas, evoking the desire for a truce that is not necessarily a lasting truce, do not necessarily allow for good news. This must not prevent us, in our parliament, from calling for this lasting peace.

Then, one of the demands concerns the human drama that is taking place for the civilian population in Gaza today. This application focuses on the transport and distribution of humanitarian aid.

A third element of the proposed resolution concerns the operations our government decides to conduct on the ground: from humanitarian operations for the benefit of the civilian population to the benefit of wounded children, often taken hostage and used as human shield by the terrorist organization Hamas.

We obviously support the deployment of medical and humanitarian resources on the ground, in Egypt, and, where necessary, the repatriation of the most severely affected children or civilian populations when they can be treated more usefully and more correctly at our home in Belgium, as has been done.

Finally, the resolution proposal intends to support – and how not to do so? – the initiatives of the United Nations, including the efforts of its Secretary-General, as well as the European Union for a lasting peace.

As stated by Mr. From Donnea and De Croo, everyone will not necessarily find themselves fully in this text. There is a minimum of consensus.

As far as I am concerned, I would like to emphasize a few elements. Sustainable peace will inevitably and necessarily pass by the end of Hamas’s rocket fire on Israel. However, this organization does not seem, at the moment, to wish for a lasting peace. I recall – we amended the draft resolution in this sense – that the rocket launches on the south of Israel began in 2001; I add that more than 8,000 launches have been carried out.

I often hear that these are handcrafted rockets, not very elaborate in contrast to the weapons used by Israel. Do you often hear the question of who, and especially why, these rockets were fired on the south of Israel? Unfortunately not ! On the other hand, the question of Israeli military objectives is often asked.

The resolution we will vote today does not consider the Israeli military reaction as illegitimate. It is the extent of this military reaction that is highlighted in the proposed resolution. The right of the State of Israel to defend itself and to defend its territorial integrity is not only recognized by many states, by the United Nations, but also implicitly by the text we vote for.

I will personally regret, but we could not have a text that satisfies everyone, that the text does not specifically state that Hamas is a terrorist organization. On the other hand, he clarifies well – this is an essential element – that peace negotiations are made difficult by the very fact that Hamas does not recognize the existence of the party with which it is brought to negotiate. And how to start a negotiation with a party that does not recognize your right to exist? Let us acknowledge that this is not necessarily easy for the State of Israel.

I mentioned previously the question of the extent of the Israeli reaction. Let us be clear, we must denounce and lament the many innocent victims who fall under the blow of the war. They refer to the debate on the so-called disproportionate character of the military reaction. Together with the Minister of Foreign Affairs, during the debate preceding the proposals for resolutions in committees, on the occasion of the parliamentary questions in committees, we talked about this issue of disproportionate nature. The Minister of Foreign Affairs issued an interesting comment: Is there a clean war?

What is the proportional character of an Israeli military reaction? Would it be sending back 8,000 rockets, anyway? Is this a proportionate response? This is a debate that ultimately does not have much place to be! In reality, we all know that in the conflict that today opposes Israel and Hamas, it is the civilian population that is taken hostage, ⁇ by this organization that hides its weapons, its explosives, its warheads among the civilian population, thus taking them as human shields. Many states and reports acknowledge this.

I will conclude my speech with one point that is not included in the draft resolution but on which we will all agree: the importance, at the level of public demonstration, of not importing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to us. Sometimes I have had the impression, not only by looking at the images but also after observing myself last Sunday’s demonstration in the streets of Brussels, that a number of movements import this conflict in us by manifesting in a way that is not acceptable for democracy through a number of statements and calicots. There is therefore also a political responsibility of the men and women politicians who manage our cities and our municipalities on the importance of not letting racist or anti-Semitic demonstrations slip away.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Minister, it is good that we were able to draw up a resolution that will be carried out by the whole majority and hopefully this evening will also be carried out across the chamber.

CD&V considers it important that a balanced text could be created. After all, the conflict that we are discussing now is too complicated and too historically loaded to be approached with sloganic language or simplified analyses. We know, colleagues, that such a conflict must be resolved through dialogue. There are of course antecedents. A lot has been done in the past to resolve the conflict sustainably. A road map has been drawn out and countless texts have already been discussed in various world forums and approved in various constellations.

With this text of consensus, we wanted to stay as close as possible to the actuality, to the present conflict, in order not to fall into hair clutter over past positions or decisions. The CD&V group advocates a peaceful and lasting settlement of the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians through the formation of an independent, politically and economically viable Palestinian state and a regionally recognised, safe state of Israel. Israel must understand that the current military action, which uses excessive force, which has caused many civilian casualties, will only incite extremism in the Palestinian territories and will not provide any effective long-term solution. That is the essence. We, as a country and as the European Union, cannot believe in the way one wants to resolve the conflict in the region.

We also believe that any peace process will only be likely to succeed when the violence is resolutely ended on both sides and when Israel’s right to exist is recognized. In this sense, it is regrettable that Hamas, despite its government responsibility – I insist on that government responsibility – has continued to refuse to recognize the existence of Israel and continues to advocate its complete destruction. Without that recognition, all peace negotiations are a priori meaningless. That is why we, together with our group, have called for that point to be clearly mentioned in the resolution.

Given the complexity of the conflict and the current humanitarian drama, we, of course, do not want to lose ourselves in a well-known game about who started the hostilities and whether the response from both sides was justified. To date, 1,010 people have been killed on the Palestinian side and 13 on the Israeli side. Among the 1,010 Palestinian dead, 292 were children, while another 1,497 were injured.

The Palestinians in Gaza and on the West Bank have the right to a stable society in which their security, political rights and socio-economic progress are guaranteed.

Indeed, the Israeli government has the right to protect its own citizens from missile attacks and terrorist attacks. If necessary, it can do so by military means.

We must realize – the colleagues who have been on the spot will ⁇ bear it – that we are dealing here with two traumatized societies. We can almost speak of several lost generations. To that extent, the fear is rooted on both sides. We see young Israelis standing at the checkpoints. They are faced with violence and do not know how to deal with this potential threat. On the other side, people are trapped in a near-medieval hostage, where we can hardly speak of any human-worthy existence.

That is why it is so important that we emphasize that both parties must abide by international law and the Geneva Conventions and that some cases are unacceptable and must be persistently severely condemned. I think in this context of course also of the use of civilians as human shields and of the bombing of buildings of the international community. This evening, we could watch the images of the bombing of the United Nations building.

How can one distancing himself from any kind of consensus in the world forums that bow over the problem in question?

There is also the closure of humanitarian corridors. Even before the outbreak of the conflict, corridors were increasingly narrowed and people were cut off from their schools, from their education and from their source of employment. These are things that cannot be explained and for which security cannot always be invoked as an excuse. The above-mentioned excuse is also sometimes used too easily in the current conflict.

We ⁇ welcome the government’s humanitarian efforts. We therefore firmly and firmly support the evacuation of seriously wounded Palestinian children from the Gaza Strip and the deployment of B-Fast.

Of course, this happens in very difficult circumstances. Sometimes it is criticized. The question is why the operations are delayed or cancelled. It is clear that the government, which we support, wants all the logistical resources to be deployed and as many children as possible to improve their fate.

However, we also hope that Belgium will move forward. We also hope that the medical assistance to Gaza can be continued by sending medicines and medical equipment to the overoccupied Palestinian hospitals in the affected area. It is also important that we can respond to the call of Doctors Without Borders as much as possible.

Mr. Minister, CD&V wants to urge the government to use this momentum, the momentum that will be created by the entrance of the new American President. It would, of course, be wrong to think that the European Union can solve this conflict alone or should feel only responsible for intervening there. No, we must be able to make global alliances, we must be able to hand out the Israeli state and the Palestinian people. We believe that the EU should do everything in the coming months to bring the US to the table and thus reach a coordinated strategy.

Only a joint initiative by Washington and Brussels will be able to gain sufficient confidence from both camps and force both Israel and Palestine to make the necessary concessions. It is clear that from the European Value Framework but also from another reference framework, ⁇ from somewhat less close political connotations that accompany that debate, we will ⁇ have to put the agenda there on the world stage, that Europe and all its Member States have a prominent role to play there. When the U.S. president will address other topics, as expected – I think of Afghanistan and the situation in Iran – the situation in Israel and Palestine must be discontinued in that debate. Of course, it is clear that the explosive situation in the coming years will be very heavy on the international stage, precisely on the problematic situations in those countries in the region.

There are joyful signals when it comes to that trans-Atlantic cooperation, especially when we analyze the speech that Senator and future Secretary of State Hilary Clinton held in the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee in the United States. There are very important words and commitments. I think of the passages about the just and lasting peace, I think of real security to Israel but also of the right to exist of the Palestinian state and all the support that the Americans want to give exactly so that Israel and the Palestinians can reach those results.

It is also very important that the future team in the US has already taken a commitment. They said that this is in the interests of all of us. We must continue to emphasize that we all have to win or lose in this or that evolution of the dossier. It is more than a humanitarian mission, it is a matter that weighs on the world. In this sense, the humanitarian policy is inevitable. We therefore hope for widespread support for this resolution.

And yes, there is, of course, also the problem of the Association Agreement that we discussed in the committee. Yes, there is follow-up with international law and matters that will need to be resolved later, where guilty persons can be identified. These are discussions that will not be avoided later. In this resolution, however, we limit ourselves to the conflict as it is now occurring so that we can find a strong consensus text that is carried across rooms.

Yes, there is, of course, the very important Pegasus plan for which the European Union will have to commit itself hard. There is, of course, the Euro-Mediterranean cooperation. We see in the Euro-Mediterranean parliamentary assemblies and in the meetings between the heads of government of the European and Mediterranean Union that these issues are increasingly prominent on the agenda. We will also need to continue our commitment.

However, we decided with the majority to choose a number of outstanding matters. We focused on the conflict. We hope that all political groups can support this consensus proposal.

Dear colleagues, I would like to thank you too. Donnea and all colleagues of the commission for their work because I was unfortunately absent, held by water problems in the area of the Centre.

It is now more than 15 days now that the Israeli army is conducting a large-scale military offensive on the narrow territory of the Gaza Strip, with as recognized objective a significant weakening of Hamas to stop the rocket launches that threaten the population of southern Israel. While the State of Israel invokes the concept of legitimate defense stipulated in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, the extent of the offensive shocks our public opinion.

It is shocking because there are still many misunderstandings and questions. Can the enormous damage suffered by the Palestinian civilian population be justified by the direct military advantage expected by Israel, namely the cessation of rocket fire and the weakening of Hamas? Was there really no other way for the State of Israel to ⁇ this legitimate goal?

It is the principle of disproportionality, an elementary principle of international law, which some ignored or attempted to voluntarily empty its meaning. We should not even discuss it. We cannot accept violence as a tool for achieving goals, whatever they may be, simply.

Let us leave the semantics of going-in-war, where we no longer say victims but collateral damage, when we no longer say bombings but surgical strikes, the same ones that prohibit the press or the observers in order to distill their truth.

We are facing an asymmetric war, a war that opposes a regular army to an armed militia, and that leads to a confusion between civilians and fighters in a real urban guerrilla. This type of conflict is unfortunately the appendage of a few places in the world. Think of Iraq and Afghanistan. But regardless of the type of war, international humanitarian law must be respected by both parties to the conflict in order to alleviate the suffering caused by the war.

This suffering is ubiquitous. We are witnessing the deaths of women and children – always the same victims elsewhere –, the destruction of vital infrastructures yet already scarcely present on the territories of the Gaza Strip, the worsening of the humanitarian situation, not to mention the psychological suffering suffered by populations in fear of seeing a rocket fall on their home or school.

This is a destructive war on which all light must be made in the image of the commission of inquiry that had been established by the United Nations Human Rights Council on the war in Lebanon, war that has in addition many similarities with the one that is currently taking place on the Gaza Strip and that, knowing that condemning the abuses of some does not exempt others from their responsibilities!

The political and diplomatic approach must return to the forefront. The military option cannot be preferred at the expense of the diplomatic option. Israel will have to explain to its people how the end of this war can finally guarantee security and peace.

Some will ask themselves whether it was necessary to kill so many people.

Does not the achievement of a lasting, just, equitable peace ultimately risk being even more difficult to ⁇ today? Will this war bring greater frustration within the Muslim and Jewish communities and radicalize positions? Is this war not counterproductive?

These are all the questions that Israel will surely ask itself. It will have to try to answer it once the clashes are over because one can question the real will of Israel to make peace. A fortiori when we learn that just a few hours ago, the headquarters of the United Nations Refugee Agency was hit by Israeli artillery. There will be another human shield.

On the part of the Palestinian Authority, this war must lead it to initiate an intercommunity dialogue that would have the advantage of calming tensions and reassuring the Israeli government. It cannot remain in mutism and immobilism. We must make a reason: Hamas will never be eradicated. The international community, Israel and the Palestinian Authority are aware of this and equally condemn the actions of Hamas on the Israeli population.

As for the international community, it also has its role to play and we hope that the current steps of the UN Secretary-General will be successful.

All eyes are turned to the first nation in the world, they say. The statements of the outgoing president, George Bush, are clear: the United States will not take any initiative until the inauguration of Barack Obama. Then we will see!

The European Union, on the other hand, is still very weak in its persuasive power. It can only intervene at the end of the confrontations, pay and rebuild what it had built. Furthermore, in this regard, it would be useful to think about the concept of destroyer-payer.

The resolution proposal that my group submits today and which has been amended globally by the majority parties is a consensus proposal. It sounds the cry of alarm of all about the catastrophic humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip. She urges to let go of the weapons and supports our government in its current steps. This is his purpose, neither more nor less. But it is not bad already.

In this regard, I congratulate the action of the entire government and, in particular, the Minister of Health, so that our public hospitals can accommodate the first wounded children from the Gaza Strip. Since yesterday, Brussels public hospitals have treated six wounded children in Gaza and all Wallonia public hospitals have also offered their contribution to the operation launched by the Belgian government. We hope other countries will follow this example.

The purpose of this resolution is not to determine the responsibilities and the origin of the conflict. If it were interpreted in this way, it would be far from satisfying us. Moreover, it would be pretentious because for so many years, we all know how much the conflict in the Middle East causes a horde of very different opinions, perceptions, feelings that sometimes have a lot of difficulty in being reconciled. This resolution is simply an exhortation to peace.

I invite all parliamentarians to vote on it in this spirit of necessary, indispensable conciliation, even if our views do not clearly appear there but find themselves more in that of the European Parliament voted this afternoon and which we will propose to include in the considerations.

Dear colleagues, I invite you to remain vigilant on the evolution of this situation, dreaming of that spirit of peace that reigned after the Second World War and which led to the creation of the European Union.

There must be neither a winner nor a defeat.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Minister, colleagues, I would like to begin by thanking colleague de Donnea and the working group. They have done very good work. This proves that the system we have installed in our commission can really work. You remember that colleague De Vriendt asked for the urgency at the plenary session last week. We found it not necessary. We would treat it. Today we can put a compromise text here for vote thanks to his commitment and the efforts of the working group.

Mr. Minister, a class from Groot-Bijgaarden wrote you a letter this week. The children in that class have different backgrounds, but they agree on one thing, in particular that violence in Gaza is unjust and that it needs to stop. The population, including children, is the victim of this.

These students do not understand why violence is taken. They suggested that it should still be possible to talk about the problems. I understand the children’s letters very well. I understand their frustration and their powerlessness.

You answered that the influence of a country such as Belgium on those parties involved is limited, that we must engage within the European Union and within the UN to seek a negotiated solution. You said another thing that I think is very important, namely that, however, does not prevent us from doing something concrete about the humanitarian situation.

I would like to come back to that. Mr. Minister, I would like to thank you and all those who have collaborated with B-Fast. You and your department have demonstrated with the B-Fast coordination structure that it is possible to respond very quickly to a humanitarian drama.

This week the first children have landed in our country. We are the first European country to receive wounded children. Some have accused you this week that it was a PR stunt, that you announce things that are not realisable.

Yesterday we held the debate in the committee. You can react later. I just want to tell you that the children who are victims of violence are now being treated here in the hospital. It wasn’t a PR stunt. The Foreign Minister and B-Fast have done the right thing.

We had to negotiate with Egypt and Israel. If you go there, try to get them out of that conflict zone here. It has been our department and our government that have managed to get those wounded children here with their accompanyers and to capture and care for them. This is not a PR stunt, that is the reality.

Mr. Tuybens has the word.

I ask for the word for a personal fact.

Ms. Vautmans, I would like to express my appreciation here, first and foremost, for the fact that our country, at this moment alone, has taken this action. I thank the ministers Milquet, Onkelinx and De Gucht for making this action possible, and also the people of B-Fast, who have done great work on the ground. You were absent during the discussions in the Chamber Committee, because you were sick, I understood. You have and you will never hear me say, in any case, that will also be shown from the parliamentary documents, that this was a PR stunt.

Mr. Speaker, I accused yesterday in the Chamber Committee the fact that Mr. De Gucht last week on Thursday called on colleague Vautmans to ask a question in the plenary session for his honor and glory.

I ask for the word for a personal fact. Mr. Tuybens, I was not upgraded at all. I take the right to ask questions here.

Of course, although sometimes something else is said in the walks, Mrs. Vautmans, but this is completely aside.

In any case, the minister announced last week Friday that the first flight to Egypt would depart to transfer children, victims of violence, for medical care to Belgium. The problem I wanted to address was that the minister announced the flight of Friday on Thursday last week in those circumstances in the plenary session, without any written clearance due to Egypt. It is an example of the well-known announcement policy of the government.

Mr. Speaker, I think that he is my privilege – you will appreciate that – that I as a member of Parliament can control the government. I believe that such announcements raise expectations, while at the time of the minister’s announcement and at the time of my criticism there was no guarantee that those flights could continue, with all the potential consequences thereof.

The minister meant to call me, apparently, a scandalous disaster tourist, and yesterday in the Chamber Committee also a fool, for that fact. I do not know what concerns the minister is dealing with at this moment, but it testifies in any case – I quietly wick my words – of little inventiveness and courtesy and, if I did not wick and weigh my words, of a certain degree of agility.

Mr. Speaker, what Mr. Tuybens actually blames me is that I answered a question from Mrs. Vautmans on Thursday last week. I would, by the way, have promoted Mrs. Vautmans, I would not dare to be honest. By the way, those who know Hilde Vautmans a little better, I do not think would dare to do so. Mr. Tuybens, if you say such things, it means that you do not know Mrs. Vautmans.

So I answered a question that the government intended to set up a rescue operation in the Occupied Territories with the intention of repatriating seriously wounded children. Indeed, the government had this in its core. You can check it at the limit yourself. In the core, we have decided on the details of how we would do that. We want to try to bring children from Gaza to Israel through one of the transitions such as Eres, or to Egypt through Rafah.

On Thursday, I called my Egyptian colleague Aboul Gheit, who gave his principled consent. Since then, Mr. Tuybens, B-Fast has been constantly working to put that into practice. Even on the weekend, these people worked day and night to make this a ⁇ difficult operation. There is now a new request to “exfiltrate” five more children. We would bring them from Gaza to Belgium.

What are the difficulties in this regard? First, Israel can say that they can do it themselves and that they will take care of these children in Israeli hospitals if the children come to Israel through a transition. You can imagine that Hamas is very reticent to let children leave in that direction.

Second, the corridor to Rafah was constantly bombed and, by the way, it is only opened for three hours a day for humanitarian transport. I don't know if you've ever been to Rafah but it's a witch boiler to do exfiltrations there. In addition, Hamas takes a rather ambiguous stance.

Third, from Egypt itself, there is no problem with Belgium and France but this has a political connotation in Egypt. When exfiltrations take place through a Western country, this can also be requested by Arab or Persian countries.

There is only one such, but it is of course a non-insignificant player in the whole, namely Iran. This has made that during all those days our ambassador to Israel, Mrs. Frankinet, the consul-general in Jerusalem, Mr. Peeters, and our ambassador to Egypt, Mr. Daniel Leroy, have been involved in this. By the way, we only got the diploclearance at the last moment to fly effectively to Egypt. We have now, by the way, received the message that, if we wish to do further exfiltrations, we must notify 72 hours in advance.

I must add that Egypt is a country with a ⁇ loose bureaucracy. Therefore, there is absolutely no evidence to deal with this.

Mr. Tuybens, when I hear you say on the radio that you think I lied to Parliament, that I did a announcement policy, then I blame you for that. I have then said with full conviction – I would like to repeat it if you need it – that that was a form of scandalous disaster tourism.

I had thought that you would not say that again, that you would understand that you were totally next to it. Apparently you are not convinced of this. Yesterday in the committee you were not convinced of this. I have indeed told you that I thought you acted as a fool in that file. Since you repeat this again today, I still think so.

Mr. Speaker, I invite all members of the House to read the report of yesterday. The Minister of Foreign Affairs also indicated that there had to be no written clearance at all, that a simple phone call with his counterparty in Egypt was sufficient to start the operation. I have my concerns. I am informing myself about this. It does not appear to be so at all. I say this completely side by side.

I have been very kind to the Minister at the beginning. I remain with my position. The only thing I regret is that a competition between ministers in the government makes one minister want to pull the leaf to himself, which unambiguously happened on Thursday. The government cannot speak with one voice.

In any case, I find it important that at the time such an operation is announced, there is certainty about it, because if that clearance had never been there, then we would have created expectations with regard to Palestinian children and their families that we could not fulfill. I would have very seriously regretted that.

That seems to me hard to talk about, but it is not the essence of this important debate.

I give the floor to Ms. Vautmans so that she can continue her speech.

I wanted to conclude because I have already reached the core of my discussion.

For us, resolving the humanitarian situation at this moment is the absolute priority. I want this government to continue like this, and I assume that this will happen, I have just heard this from our Minister of Foreign Affairs. The situation in the Gaza Strip is, of course, much more complex than that school from Groot-Bijgaarden could imagine. They questioned whether violence serves anything. We all know the answer. Please continue to strive for a negotiated solution within the appropriate bodies and, in the meantime, do our job as a country and take care of wounded children.

Mr. President, ladies, gentlemen, gentlemen, colleagues, Mr. Minister, for many months, the Gaza Strip has been subject to an increasingly severe blockade by Israel. Social infrastructure and economic life are destroyed in this overcrowded portion of Palestinian territory. The population lives in what can be called the largest open-air prison in the world.

Without justifying them, this desperate situation is undoubtedly one of the explanations for the rise of violence and the breaking of the truce by Hamas. Since December 27, 2008, Israel has been conducting a military offensive against Hamas, an operation called "Harded Lead". Israel then invokes Hamas’ rocket launches to justify its offensive.

However, this response is completely disproportionate. Israel uses sub-munition weapons, weapons of impoverished uranium; phosphorus-containing bombs are dropped by Israeli aircraft. The use of such weapons, it must be recalled, is formally prohibited.

After twenty days of conflict, the number of victims reaches more than 1,000 killed and more than 4,850 wounded. Therefore, one should once again question the disproportion between the military goals pursued by the Israeli army and the damage suffered by the civilian population in the Gaza Strip.

These populations are taken hostage, forming a real human shield in the face of the military attack, while they are already suffering from the blockade imposed by Israel. Repeated attacks on Gaza aimed at ending rocket launches from Palestinian territory did not seem to have served to destabilize Hamas so far.

But Israel also uses humanitarian weapons in violation of international humanitarian law. In addition to the virulence of the fighting, the inhabitants of the Gaza Strip are daily confronted with the lack of access to health care, basic infrastructure, clean drinking water, electricity and so on. European Commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aid, Louis Michel, mentioned that – I quote – “preventing access to people who suffer and who die is a violation of international law.” I am referring to the article published in "La Libre Belgique" a few days ago.

I will not overpriced on these statements made today following the bombing of the United Nations facilities. I think the time is not for overpricing but rather for choosing one of the clearest and strongest options.

Similarly, it is the work of journalists that is hampered, which makes the perception of reality even more difficult. Freedom of the press and the right to information are added to the list of many fundamental rights not respected by Israel in the context of this conflict.

Whether it’s Israel, Hamas or the international community, it’s time for the actors to take responsibility and put a definitive end to the kneeling of the Gaza Strip. Belgium and the European Union must also take their responsibilities and take a stronger position with respect to the protagonists than what the resolution that is on our banks wants to make sound.

Dear colleagues, if we can only applaud the decisions made by our government in terms of humanitarian aid for the unlocking of the 500,000 euros of food aid and for the reception of wounded Palestinian children, we remain not less much concerned by reading this text. I will refer you to the European Parliament resolution which was adopted a few moments ago and which mentions a set of elements that we do not find at all in this statement. It would not be enough, Mr. Moriau, to add them in the considerations: if they are not taken up in the text, they will remain dead letter.

In fact, many essential elements are lacking, whether it is an explicit reference to all the resolutions of the Security Council and the United Nations General Assembly on the situation in the region, the importance of free access and free movement of goods and persons on the Palestinian territories, the disproportionate Israeli response, the revaluation of the relationship between the European Union and Israel or even Israel’s use of weapons whose use is formally prohibited by international texts and conventions.

We have at least two essential leverages that are not found in the text that is submitted to us. The first concerns the revaluation of the political relationship between the European Union and Israel. The decision of the Council of Ministers in favour of this increase was all the more surprising that a few days earlier, the European Parliament decided to postpone the vote on the Protocol allowing a greater participation of Israel in European Community programmes, due to the known circumstances. So we submitted an amendment asking you to return to reason and support it because it fills this first gap.

A second leverage concerns the export and transfer of weapons to and from Israel. The press is still taking it up today: Belgium and in particular the Bierset airport have become a turning point of this traffic. by Mr. The Minister confirmed in the Foreign Affairs Committee that Belgium had a leverage of action through the Code of Conduct on Arms Export. I assume that you will not see any inconvenience in the adoption of this amendment, Mr. Minister.

Finally, all the democratic actors and leaders we are today must mobilize not only to put an end to the Israeli attacks on the Gaza Strip but also to avoid the exacerbation of tensions between the different communities in Belgium.

We must take a position consistent with our own values in order to stop the massacre of civilians and help those in need, because that’s exactly what it’s about.

Note that a member of the Liberal Party, in the person of Commissioner Louis Michel, has adopted a much more balanced position regarding the situation and the parties to the conflict than the members of the majority in this document. Therefore, we are submitting an amendment that I hope will be supported by the MR group in order to give more echoes to the statement of the European Commissioner. We also submit other amendments that I have already mentioned and that my colleagues will come to explain to you here. Dear colleagues, I thank you for your attention.

Mr Van der Maelen, you have the word on behalf of the Group of Socialists and Progressives. I had forgotten “other.” (Laughing to)

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Minister, colleagues, I have a heavy déjà vu feeling. Soon, the majority here will approve a resolution that, if one replaces a few words of place, is actually the same as that of 2002 about the jet bombing of Jenin or that of 2006, after the war in Lebanon. The resolution “calls,” “insists,” “points,” “hopes,” and so on. There is not much to be against this resolution. However, we find that this succession of conflicts forces us to think about whether we, with Belgium or with Europe, can do something more to have some impact on the problem in the Middle East.

My group has submitted a number of amendments that I will discuss immediately so that this does not have to happen again. These amendments are a proposal for the contribution of Belgium.

In a first amendment, we want to use, from the federal level, the powers we still have in the field of arms trade. There is a cooperation agreement between the regions, which means that there is a list of ⁇ sensitive countries. Israel is definitely one of them. We have an amendment in which we propose that the federal government use that power and sit at a table with the Provinces to engage in a dialogue on arms deliveries to Israel. It may sound radical, but it is not radical at all. Anyone who has followed the current situation today knows that even the United States today has decided to recall a ship that was on its way to Israel with weapons. We regret with our group that the majority would not accept this amendment. However, it was carefully formulated. We simply suggest that the federal government would use its powers to engage in dialogue with the West and reach agreements. The majority did not want that.

A second contribution we could make is based on respect for international law.

I personally believe that respect for international law should be the cornerstone of our policy. It can also be the basis for a solution.

There is no respect for international law on the Palestinian side. Sending suicide terrorists to densely populated or densely populated areas, such as cafes and shopping malls, cannot. It does not go. This is contrary to international law. There is no need for international law. Sending a few thousand missiles since 2001 – I just heard about 8,000 missiles – targeting the civilian population is not possible. It does not go.

That said, we must also look to the other side.

Colleagues, the way the State of Israel has behaved in Jenin, IDF – Israel Defense Forces –, the way it has behaved in Lebanon and the way it now behaves, that cannot. Have you followed the actuality? Phosphorus bombs are dropped on the UN building in Gaza. That happened today. Phosphorus bombs are dropped in such a densely populated area. This is clearly contrary to international law!

The way Israel prevents the humanitarian aid that the local population needs is contrary to international humanitarian law.

Colleagues, using cluster bombs in an area three times the size of Hasselt and where one and a half million people live, can’t. It does not go.

Therefore, in our amendments we propose the following.

First, there must be an end to the impunity with which both parties behave. First, there must be an international investigation into the behavior of Hamas and the Israeli army. What they have done must be considered under international law, humanitarian law and war law.

We believe that anyone who has violated that international law must be legally accountable for it before an existing international court or an international judicial body to be established.

There is also an unacceptable destruction of infrastructure. I am convinced that infrastructure has now been destroyed in Gaza, for which no military explanation can be found. It is probably also infrastructure that the European Union has already paid two or three times. It is the money of our taxpayers that is stopped in it.

What was destroyed? Schools were destroyed. Even the Palestinian parliament in Gaza was destroyed. It is financed by the European Union, with our money.

I also think we need to end the impunity in this area. I believe that the payment of what has been destroyed, contrary to international law, should be requested from the party that caused this damage.

I don’t know if you remember it, but in 2006 a million cluster bombs were dropped in Lebanon. Our troops are still there to clean them. I don’t know the numbers, but in Gaza, hundreds of thousands of cluster bombs will also be dropped.

Should we pay to clean it? Should the international community pay to clean it up? Should the person responsible for dropping those bombs not be given an account for it? We think yes.

Finally, there is a final amendment. Israel is lacking in Europe. What we say, what we do, they don’t take the ball into account. So one needs a lever to discipline Israel and the Palestinians somewhat. Our group would like to participate in this. For Israel, however, we ⁇ do not consider an upgrade of the Association Agreement. Why do we not dare to suspend the Association Agreement? More than 1,000 people died there.

I also regret the twenty to twenty-five – I don’t know exactly how many – Israeli killings. Each of those dead is one too many.

Ladies and gentlemen, this cannot continue! Therefore, our group will not approve this resolution. We will remember. We welcome the adoption of a resolution in Parliament, but we believe that the time has come to look a little further and ⁇ dare to act a little further.

Mr. Speaker, dear colleagues, first of all, I would like to thank the Chairman of our Working Group as well as the authors of the first proposed resolution for enabling a quick work, a consensus work on a topic that is indeed infinitely sensitive. It was important for us to be able to vote on a resolution in time, that is, extremely quickly.

More than 1,000 dead in Gaza, according to the latest counts of the Palestinian relief services and thousands of wounded. Among them, many women and children were murdered forever. Dozens of victims are also on the Israeli side. On both sides, terror, anger, hatred, violations of the law of war and contempt for civilians! This war, this new Israeli-Palestinian battle is the final tragic phase of the long conflict in the Middle East that has lasted for sixty years, sixty years with a few brief periods of calm. This war must be stopped urgently. It is our duty to all of us, Europeans, to put an end to this! There is no point in adding dead to the dead, wounded to the wounded. The flood of fire that has hit Gaza must stop immediately.

It seems obvious that the two protagonists have long prepared this new conflict. Hamas wanted to do this; Israel was looking for the right time to attack this terrorist movement that has harassed it with its rocket launches for so many years. Everyone knew, as Bernard Kouchner recalled a few days ago, that when Hamas refused to meet with the Palestinian Authority last November, it would be war. Everyone knew it!

Beyond all the responsibilities of each other in the Middle East, beyond the responsibilities of Hamas and Israel in the outbreak of this conflict and the terrible price paid by the population, I would like to first recall Iran’s permanent shadow on the recent conflicts between Israel and its neighbors. I recall the extreme danger of this Iranian regime, which blows up, funds terrorism, seeks to acquire the nuclear bomb, and calls for the annihilation of Israel. This permanent threat weighs heavily on the possibilities of finding a just and lasting peace in the Middle East.

Iran must know that if it wants to one day join the community of frequented nations, it must stop its anti-Semitic diatribes, its support for Hezbollah and Hamas, its efforts to acquire the atomic bomb. It should be reminded that we will not transact on this.

The [...]

I don’t know if you are a promoter of the Iranian regime, Mr. Nollet, free to you!

We must also tell the Israelis that it is not by desperating the Palestinians, by bombing their population, by crushing Gaza, by shooting at UN buildings or on ambulances that they will obtain peace and security!

We strongly condemn these random bombing, including the bombing of emergency services. We call for an international investigation into these unacceptable abuses.

We must urgently demand from Israel the results of the Annapolis process. Israel must respect the Sharm El Sheikh agreement of June 2007, when Ehud Olmert had promised to Mahmoud Abbas to stop the colonization and permanent grinding of the West Bank, to increase its viability, to ease the countless controls inside the West Bank itself. A convincing response is needed to the bitterness of Leila Shahid, who said he has achieved nothing in 18 months of negotiations with Israel in the framework of Annapolis.

As for Hamas, it should be remembered that it does not want peace with Israel, and even less its security, that it took power in Gaza following a bloody coup on June 15, 2007 and that it brings little interest, this is an euphemism, to the fate of the Palestinian population. Israel is not the only country that has put Hamas on the list of terrorist organizations. In addition to Europe, many Arab countries have done the same, the first of which is Egypt.

Beyond these few retrospectives, today, the urgency is that the flood of fire, the bombing, the rocket launches are stopped and that humanitarian aid can be deployed immediately and completely, safely. The wounded must be rescued, the diplomacy must regain its rights and the Security Council resolutions must be implemented.

The urgency is also that an international peacekeeping force, with a European contribution and, I hope, a Belgian contribution, is rapidly deployed to stabilize borders and protect populations. This is the subject of our resolution.

The resolution also calls for the continuation of the operation for the transfer of heavy wounded to Belgian hospitals. I congratulate the government for this operation and I am delighted that the CDH’s proposal to carry out this operation has been implemented so quickly.

The [...]

Mr. Mayeur, this is the reality. I did not interrupt your colleague when he said that Mrs. Onkelinx...

The [...]

I didn’t wait for the PS. I made this proposal to the political office ten days ago. It was retrieved and transmitted at a press conference. But that is not the main thing!

You are unfortunate, Mr Mayeur. You are the one who makes the recovery. Belgium is the only European country that has opened its hospitals.

I ask for the word for a personal fact.

Mr. Dallemagne, I do not understand why you use the insult. This is not a contribution to this debate. What I have dared to recall is that for years, we have taken care of both Palestinians and victims of other conflicts in our public hospitals, and that frankly, you who were sitting in the city of Brussels at a certain time, you know this very well! Therefore, making this proposal as if the action did not exist is somewhat ridiculous!

Mr. Speaker, I feel the CDH very nervous to claim this action. There is a real SMS campaign through which thousands of people have told me their desire to become a host family. For me, we are not busy handling this matter serenely, when it deserves it.

These children are not toys that should be driven into families. They must be welcomed decently. These are shocked children and families and the way the CDH tries to recover the situation is totally unacceptable!

I remain with what I just said. It would adorn the Chamber to seek as serene and broadly as possible consensus in this matter, with respect for each other’s convictions.

I let Mr. Dallemagne finish his speech.

I just say that we made this suggestion as part of the kern. It is a reality. And we are pleased that the hospitals of the city of Brussels have been able to welcome these wounded. I do not see any controversy in this initiative. It is also quite astonishing that such a humanitarian action can create a controversy. I take note of it.

I invite you to continue, Mr. Dallemagne.

The Belgian diplomacy has been very voluntary in this matter. She demonstrated that in addition to indispensable political action, she could make concrete gestures to alleviate the suffering of the victims.

Belgium is the only European country that has opened its hospitals to the wounded in Gaza. This humanitarian operation of our country must continue. I know from experience that this style of operation is never easy to conduct. There are many obstacles and instrumentalizations are never absent. But this operation must continue to show our solidarity, to save human lives, because these wounded remind us of the horrors of this war and our duty of interference.

We must say that we stand with all the victims of this conflict. We must tell their families our active friendship, our sorrow, but also our determination to what prevails in the future, a logic of peace rather than a logic of war.

The resolution that we will vote for now is formally addressed to our government and the parties to the conflict. It also addresses our public opinion. In this regard, I would like to say that it is intolerable to import to Belgium the hatred and violence that prevails in the Middle East. Frustrations, political struggles can in no way justify the spread of violent actions, depredations and especially anti-Semitic attacks.

Europe is aware of its history, this recent history at the origin of two terrible world wars, the Holocaust and colonization. Deeply marked by this brutal history, it systematically seeks peaceful and diplomatic solutions to world tensions. It must remain this continent that offers anything other than violence and hatred.

Let us work together for Israelis and Palestinians to live side by side in two states where their security and prosperity are finally assured, and for law to prevail over force.

Let us be careful, dear colleagues, that religious intolerance and hatred of others do not spread among us.

Mr. Speaker, colleagues, I once asked the Secretary of State added to the Minister of Foreign Affairs what the value and impact of a resolution in the international society. Are they being listened to or not? He answered me that its influence is as great as the deining caused by the paring dance of two sardines in the Atlantic Ocean.

When I look at this resolution today, I get, like colleague Van der Maelen, a déjà vu. We have made a lot of resolutions about Israel. When it built a wall, we made a resolution. There is no stone broken down. We talked about Lebanon. They just continued and we did nothing. Indeed, you are right, Mr. Minister, when you say that the only one that can solve it is the United States. Indeed, Mr. De Croo, you said there are five million Jews living in the United States. They have more influence than the Jews in Israel. That is so. Israel is the 51st state of the United States.

In essence, however, it is not about that. I saw something beautiful on TV. There was a protest in London and what did I see on TV? I saw there an Orthodox Jew, picked out of “Fidel on the robbery.” That man said fantastic words, which we do not dare to say, because we are still with a sense of shame from eighty years ago. This is mainly about Gaza. I hear a lot of colleagues say they have been in Gaza. I am also with the happy or unhappy who have been in Israel many times, in very great sporting times. What did that man, that Orthodox Jew say? “I am ashamed. My parents died in the Warsaw ghetto. What I see in Gaza is a ghetto."Whoever has been in Gaza knows that it is the largest open air prison in the world. It is a piece of coastline of 42 kilometers on 12 kilometers, with a clean beach. You can’t just sit on it or you’ll be shot down. This situation has lasted for years.

You have to dare to say what it is about. We do not dare to do so. I would like to give you a very beautiful statement by the French philosopher Alain Badiou. We often dare not to speak the essence, for whom could we hit in the chest? Alain Badiou said, in his "Portées du mot Juif": "We must today essentially dare to say that some Israelis and Jews, with the Holocaust as a moral shield, are perpetrators, bombard innocent victims and civilians, terrorize Palestinians and scatter cluster bombs."

Once I say this, I will most likely be placed in the camp of the Palestinians and Hamas. I refuse that. I will not approve of any action by Hamas. I talked about it with a colleague this afternoon. Since 2001, so many missiles have been fired, 22 people have been killed by the Kassam missiles. That is 23 too many, it will be your child, your husband or your wife.

Should we continue to tolerate what is happening today in the world’s largest open-air prison, with one of the highest rates of illiteracy in the world, with an ill-health, with a 90% unemployment rate, with people imprisoned for life without a future, who are discriminated by an apartheid regime that discriminates on the basis of faith and origin, or dare we today say that this is no longer possible?

We dare to say that today we have to pay a debt to the Palestinians. They pay today the toll for what we spotted with the Jews here in Europe eighty years ago. Today, the Palestinians are paying the toll for it.

Will we dare to say that and not hide again because votes could be lost in Antwerp or elsewhere? I agree with Sp.A. who today says we need to do something. The last apartheid regime, South Africa, has disappeared thanks to an economic boycott. I would cancel the Association Agreement.

We must tell the truth. I am not for Hamas. It is a terrorist movement, but democratically elected. It is the only government in the Arab world that has been democratically elected. The Palestinians are the cats. Have you been to Lebanon, have you been to Sabra and Shatila?

Decades after Sabra and Shatila, the Palestinians today live in an Arab country where they have no rights. In Lebanon they have no property rights. They do not even have the right to a passport or work. They cannot even evacuate to Egypt because they are driven back into the tunnels.

I have compassion for this people. Today it is locked up and being mercilessly bombed. If you look at the number of victims – 1 in 100 – you have to realize that something is going on.

I will end with a piece of someone the Dutch speakers will remember. Johan Anthierens wrote a beautiful piece in 1979. I will read it. You may be able to think about it. We are now thirty years later. Johan Anthierens wrote these prophetic words: "The Jews, worshipped and sprinkled, welcomed and gasped, and so on, now have a land, Israel.

They have greatly exploited that, to the disappointment of the Arabs, to the outspoken anger of the Arabs who are the bulldozers of history, who have to pay the German league, who turn up for the European shaker and swallow with Jewish men.

We, Europeans, struck the Jewish inlet of horror elements and sent Isaac to the Palestinian Treasury for compensation. At the time of the establishment of the State of Israel, a new type of Jews was born, the Palestinian Jew. What remained to the less talented Muslims was the non-noble art of terrorism. The Israeli religious state that treats the Palestinian neighbor as a wicked pest. Palestine is a crap cat, a crap cat in the close, a cat with bald spots in the fur, a lucky desert cat, ugly, false, unreliable, cast out by the worldly opinion. For such a shy beast, I have in my heart a bowl of milk prepared. No one will ever make me so cowardly that I point my finger to the disabled Jew of today, the Palestinian.

Jews are not gods, Palestinians are not pigs. I don't believe in good and bad, I don't believe in black and white, I prefer to walk the nobody's land between those two poles. I like to stumble over the truth that lies in the middle.”

I have heard a lot of things with which I agree, but also a lot of things with which I disagree. We can continue to discuss it, but that of course risks to become a welles-nietes game.

The Flemish Belang stands behind many intentions and recommendations of that resolution, including behind the utility programmes and more. We also hope from the bottom of our hearts that there will be a lasting peace in the Middle East as soon as possible. Nevertheless, we believe that this resolution is still unbalanced. Among other things, not enough attention is paid to the questionable abuse that Hamas makes for propaganda purposes of the presence of their own people, their own people, their own men, women and children, their own Palestinians in the streets of Gaza.

We would also like to draw attention to the fact that already too many circles, immigrant circles here in Flanders, have tried to export the conflicts in Gaza to the streets and squares and even to the Jewish districts of Antwerp and Brussels. They do not serve their affairs. We will remember.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to start with a small anecdote that I would like to share in connection with the last intervention. I was sitting last week in Antwerp in a debate with Mr. Filip Dewinter. Mr. Filip Dewinter who unilaterally, without any attention to the grey in this story, chose entirely on the side of Israel.

He did not bring the nuance you put here and, contrary to what you say, he made very clear that the Flemish Interest absolutely fully endorses the disproportionate violence that Israel uses. Let me correct that here.

Dear colleagues, millions of people today, together with us, watch with indignation, shock and even anger how daily dozens of people, trapped between hammer and hammer, are killed by a war between inequalities. The population here and everywhere in the world feels powerless by what is happening there on that strip with a length of the Boomsesteenweg between Antwerp and Brussels, three kilometers along both sides, with a population density of Brussels. Those people are all wondering why government leaders all over the world react so loudly and so slowly to this collective punishment of a people who have been increasingly oppressed since 1948. The UN resolution after the UN resolution is violated, so many peace plans are ignored, so many stocks are broken again.

The Gaza Strip, dear colleagues, has been under the grip of an increasingly tight Israeli blockade for several years. In that overpopulated part of the Palestinian territory, the infrastructure and economic life are simply destroyed. It is an open air prison. I have not been there, but whoever receives the emails day after day and follows the press releases, or whatever more or less independent reporting can exist in that region where even journalists can no longer enter, who can draw the conclusions for themselves. The conflict, which now lasts almost three weeks, has claimed more than a thousand deaths and several thousand wounded. The population is being held hostage, not only by Israel, let me be very clear, but also by Hamas that uses them as human shields, and that I equally reject. That is the argument against those who condemn what Israel always does: Hamas, Hamas and again Hamas. It is a valid argument, but it does not in any way heal the type of violence, the continuing economic, human, social and physical oppression that is taking place there, in that part of the world.

The attacks on Gaza, aimed at ending the rain of rockets that, as colleague Dedecker just made clear, do not always target – but every goal is too much – have only strengthened Hamas and further radicalized the population. I saw, and that deeply struck me, following the start of the offensive, a video of a child who was there when family members were deadly wounded – children are the best propaganda tool, so naive I am not – and said after that attack: “Israel, United States, when I grow up, I will wipe you all off the map.” This is what we today as the world allow to be grown in that region.

The Palestinian people can hardly choose other than extremes. There is no longer room for the peace voices that were effective in Tel Aviv at the start of this offensive. It rarely came into the news, only for those who were looking for it. Only those people have heard the voices of peace, which also came from Israel. Healthcare, basic infrastructure, electricity, education, it’s all gone.

The occupation is a nightmare. While a portion of Israel’s population on Parash Hill, near Sderot, on the Gaza border, is now engaged in watching what is a spectacle for them – rightly called the hill of shame – while that propaganda is celebrated on Israeli television and in the press, journalists can only follow from that hill how the offensive proceeds. They are hindered in their independent work. Access is denied to them. Thus, the violation of the freedom of the press is added to the list of the numerous fundamental rights that are undermined.

Despite the lack of journalists on the ground, it becomes clear today that after the numerous bombardments of basic facilities, firing on ambulances, hospitals and schools, Israeli troops today also attacked a headquarters of the UN aid organization for the Palestinians. UN President Ban Ki-moon is rightly angry. I think our country should immediately condemn this shooting.

Colleagues, I can understand that some in this story often defend the side of Israel, because rocket attacks effectively have a psychological effect on people. But I again point out to them the facts and the disproportionate nature of what is happening. History also has its rights. It is very unlikely that Hamas fighters have fired missiles from the UNWRA headquarters or infiltrated Israeli troops. There is no explanation why the Israeli army would attack that headquarters, why that could be a military target. Nevertheless it has happened. That has finally allowed the European Parliament to call today for an immediate ceasefire, an immediate and permanent ceasefire in which Hamas stops firing rockets and Israel withdraws its troops.

I can imagine the liberals cheering at the fact that, in the meantime, various civic groups and NGOs are calling for an economic boycott.

They find that demonstrations, petitions and other forms of non-violent action are undoubtedly very meaningful but after all those years no longer produce any effect. Economic pressure, like during the apartheid regime in South Africa, is the only way to bring about the necessary change.

They also want to end the flow of wounded children that we now rightly receive in our country to care here. If one wants that flow of killed and wounded women and children to really stop, dear colleagues of the Vld, then we must also dare to take a stand and dare to be firm with regard to the situation in the Gaza Strip, just as we are with regard to situations in Central Africa.

We may also have to think about financial pressure. Yesterday, in the Flemish Parliament, the link was laid between Dexia, in which the government is also a shareholder, and the investments in several illegal Israeli settlements. Dexia Bank Israel allegedly financed illegal Israeli settlements on the West Bank.

Colleagues, it is this form of colonization that makes any sustainable solution impossible in advance. The occupation is contrary to UN resolution 446, the Geneva Convention, which states that an occupier must never transfer its own population to the occupied territories. I share the view that this type of investment, as Dexia Bank has done in Israel, is absolutely unethical. I expect a signal in that sense from the government.

It is also unethical that our country is the fifth exporter of weapons and military equipment to a country that uses cluster bombs against innocent civilians, weapons with impoverished uranium and even phosphorus bombs, weapons that will cause suffering and misery in those regions for decades.

Mr. De Gucht, I heard you when you called on the regions to take a different policy on the matter. I expressly thank you for this.

It is also our soldiers who must then clean up the cluster bombs. It is also their lives that are put at risk afterwards.

It is even more regrettable that this question has not been included in the majority resolution while our resolution called for an end to arms exports. I find this incomprehensible.

Colleagues, recently, Jean Bricmont, a physicist but also a member of the Brussels Tribunal, rightly stated that the most important question for us today is what foreign policy we really want for our country.

An arbitrary policy, one of two sizes and two weights? I think of strong statements, rightly, about Central Africa, but weakened resolutions for these conflict hardships.

In the meantime, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has indeed acquired global significance. It is about the basic issue of respect for international law. If we cannot obey them, if we do not knock hard enough on the table for Israel to obey them, they lose their influence.

Our resolution was aimed at restoring that respect. It calls for an immediate ceasefire and condemns violence on both sides. Both Israel, Hamas and the international community must bring peace back to the Gaza Strip, for the people. All democratic actors and institutions must work for this, not only to put an end to the current Israeli attacks and the missile attacks, but also, I would also expressly say, to prevent tensions between the different communities, both in Europe and elsewhere, from being further spiked. It only takes us further away from a solution.

We therefore today call on the Belgian Government to make all the arrangements necessary to end the unnecessary bloodshed and to obtain a ceasefire from both sides. The weakened majority resolution does this insufficiently in my opinion. The initial resolutions were much more complete.

We will submit amendments to correct this. We hope that you will take action on this and that you will further strengthen the signal, and this in the interest of all stakeholders. You can make sure that these are not words in the wind this time.

The floor is yielded to Mr Van Campenhout, the last speaker in the general discussion.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Minister, I have heard many nuanced and balanced statements today. I have also – fortunately to a limited extent – heard presentations that were less balanced and less nuanced. Balance and nuance are now just needed to resolve the conflict in the Middle East sustainably.

This week, violence in the Middle East was often unilaterally and selectively condemned. A democratic rule of law like Israel has the right to defend itself against terrorism. The necessary condition for a sustainable solution is an economically viable Palestine.

One aspect has not been addressed. Antwerpers are often accused of having special feelings about the conflict in the Middle East. This is quite obvious. We live relatively close to communities that have close experiences or feelings of what is happening in the Middle East. One aspect that has not been addressed today is the finding that the conflict in the Middle East also makes anti-Semitism in Europe, in particular in Antwerp, again felt and again – literally – flare up. Three weeks ago there was a fire in a Jewish house in Antwerp. Fortunately, the fire continued without much effect.

Nuance and balance are needed. The resolution presented today is a very balanced resolution. They are seeking rapid humanitarian intervention. Indeed, the State of Israel may be asked to play a leading role in the provision of humanitarian aid. It is a great mistake of the State of Israel that this does not happen.

The resolution also calls for a lasting and stable solution to the conflict. This is what we can hope after the dramatic events of the last few weeks, namely that everyone has grown the awareness that a stable, sustainable solution must be sought.

A colleague of the MR has rightly pointed out that there is fear on both sides. Of course, what is happening on the Palestinian side is dramatic and every child victim is one victim too much. However, the fear exists on both sides.

Every year in Antwerp host families receive Jewish children from Israel. Do you know what is the first question that the aforementioned children ask their host families in Antwerp? They ask where the shelters are. Six or seven-year-olds travel to Europe, are taken in Antwerp and ask the first question where the shelters are. I would like to point out that violence is felt on both sides.

The resolution accuses the scale of the counter-attacks and Israel’s disproportionate violence. That is a strange, bizarre notion. What is disproportionate violence? The Commission is also not out of the question of what is disproportionate violence. What is disproportionate violence versus 8,000 rockets? How can we respond disproportionately to terrorism? That is a difficult notion. I understand, of course, that the events are dramatic.

The key point in the resolution is a call for an immediate but above all lasting ceasefire. Europe and our government can play an important role in this area, indeed together with the United States – Obama will not be able to keep hiding – in order to find a lasting solution. That solution means that the Arab states recognize the existence of Israel and that there will be an economically viable Palestine. Let us hope that the dramatic events will inspire everyone to pursue a stable solution.

As Mr. De Croo said, there is hope. The signal also came from Antwerp, where prominent representatives of the Muslim and Jewish community called for a ceasefire and a stable solution in the Middle East.

“Eye for eye, tooth for tooth” is the motto of the Israeli army. But, for a month since the war has ravaged the Palestinian territory, one could believe that they have changed their currency and, from this biblical formula, they have made a tooth all the mouth.

I am talking about a war. No, it is not really a war: the forces present are quite disproportionate and I regret that this word was wanted to be removed from the declaration. We have, on the one hand, an army using missiles, helicopters, combat aircraft, fighter-bombers, heavy tanks and, on the other hand, a few thousand weakly armed Hamas militias. Among the fighters is an abandoned population, the main victim of the fighting.

Thousands of dead, including many children, lie in the ruins of Gaza. It is against an entire population, against one people that Tsahal conducts its operations.

Some will replicate that Hamas is a terrorist organization that fires rockets on Israeli soil. It is true. Hamas is partly a terrorist movement, but Hamas is also a political party that won a historic victory in the 2006 parliamentary elections. Norway, Russia, and Brazil do not consider this organization a terrorist organization.

I remind you that Hamas was encouraged and financed at its inception in 1987 by the State of Israel, concerned with undermining the influence of Yasser Arafat and Fatah. As for the famous rocket launches, which I condemn, they have made only a limited number of victims on Israeli soil – it seems there are 22 and I also mourn those 22 victims – while in Israel, for years, Palestinians are killed every week by police or military strikes. The rocket launches do not justify in any way the "cleaning" of Gaza or the use by the Zionist entity of ammunition containing white phosphorus.

On Monday, January 12, 2002, as the third week of the Israeli offensive against Gaza began, the Human Rights Council meeting in Geneva adopted a resolution condemning this military operation. The Council also denounced massive human rights violations in the narrow coastal strip. Israel supporters will answer that there can be no question of criticizing the only true democracy in the Middle East, especially on the eve of early elections scheduled for February 10 next year. But I read in the newspaper “Metro” of January 13 that the officials in charge of organizing the said elections have banned Arab political parties from appearing at this election. To undermine freedom of expression, this is even stronger than the sanitary cord set up in our country by other alleged Democrats.

Belgium must force the State of Israel to respect human rights. I ask that Belgium suspend its economic relations and especially its arms deliveries until the day when peace and serenity will return in the Gaza Strip. Israel must negotiate with all Palestinian components and not use brutal force.

Regarding today’s proposal for a resolution, although I agree on the essentials (saving children, the desire to establish peace in this country), I will abstain because I fear that this resolution opens the door to the creation of an international peacekeeping force involving the participation of the European Union. This solution would once again designate our country to Islamist terrorism and put in danger our soldiers trapped between Hamas’ fanaticism and Israel’s inhumane methods.