Hansard

I begin in the spirit of the consensus that the First Minister achieved in his speech, during what is unequivocally a desperate and tragic situation. It is worth stating at the outset that there are broad areas of common agreement within the Scottish Parliament—more than many would admit to. I listened very carefully to the First Minister, and I found it very difficult to disagree with almost anything that he said in his measured and eloquent speech. There is a difference of opinion about a ceasefire but, that aside, there is a wide area of commonality.

Our amendment would retain and repeat much of the Scottish Government’s motion. There is near universal condemnation of the atrocity that occurred on 7 October. The details that have emerged since the attacks on innocent civilians by Hamas have been horrific: several thousand rockets were launched into Israel, killing at least 1,200 people, and a reported 242 hostages were taken, most of whom remain as hostages at the time of this debate. Operation al-Aqsa Flood, as Hamas termed it, will be forever remembered for the savagery and violence that was inflicted on innocent Israeli men, women and—most grievously—children.

In turning to how people in Scotland reacted to this appalling event, it is important to acknowledge two things. First, I note the comments of Angus Robertson, who became the first Scottish Government minister to publicly and unreservedly condemn the attacks.

Secondly, I applaud the actions of the First Minister, who at a time of acute personal anxiety, given the fact that his family were at that stage trapped in Gaza, visited a synagogue in Giffnock and both prayed and grieved with the families of one of the victims of the Hamas attacks, Bernard Cowan. That will never be forgotten.

It pains me to make this point but, regrettably, those commendable actions contrast with how this institution—the Parliament—reacted, because the Parliament failed to do anything meaningful at that point. The European Parliament, the UK Parliament and countless other legislatures around the world exhibited the Israeli flag in solidarity with the Israeli nation, but we did nothing. We said nothing. We did not even lower a flag. That would not have been about taking sides or being partisan; it would simply have been about acknowledging the devastating and tragic loss of life that resulted from a terrorist attack.

I turn to some other issues. As our amendment notes, we welcome the emergency funding that has been promised by the UK and Scottish Governments to provide vital aid to innocent civilians on the ground. Both those packages will provide essential items and services including food, water and emergency shelter. It is important to note that those aid packages will be spent via trusted partners including United Nations agencies and that the UK Government is explicit in saying that such funding undergoes rigorous oversight.

There is, as I have said, one major political difference between our position and that of the Scottish Government, and that is on the question of demanding an immediate ceasefire. We do not agree with that. We believe that our position is a mainstream one that is shared by the President of the United States of America and the leadership of the Conservative and Labour parties at the UK level.

Like any sovereign state, Israel has a right to defend itself against terrorists, but every precaution must be taken by the Israeli Government to protect innocent civilians from harm. As the Scottish Government does in the motion, we abhor

“the loss of innocent lives”.

We see, looking back over the last month, that we have all been asked to support the cause for a ceasefire by many different individuals and groups. Most of them are well-intentioned and have the aim, rightly, of ending the violence and encouraging the Israeli Government and the Palestinian authorities to engage in dialogue with each other. We all want peace in the middle east, including for ordinary Israelis and Palestinians, and the only way that that can be possible is through meaningful and respectful dialogue.

However, a ceasefire requires that both opposing sides support it. Regrettably, it has been clear for some time now that Hamas will not respect a ceasefire. Hamas does not even respect the right of Israel to exist, let alone work towards peace. The comments from a senior Hamas official that were aired on the Lebanese Broadcasting Corporation International channel on 24 October were as stark as they were frightening. Ghazi Hamad said:

“We must teach Israel a lesson, and we will do this again and again. The Al-Aqsa Flood is just the first time and there will be a second, a third, a fourth”.

Those are not the words of a group that will settle for peace, but the words of a group that many believe will use a ceasefire to regroup and advance its brutal aim of destroying the state of Israel. That is why we support the right of Israel not just to defend itself but to target Hamas and its resources. In doing so, we also agree that that must be done in accordance with international law. It must be done in a way that ensures that innocent civilians are not deliberately targeted and that does its utmost to minimise civilian casualties.

We recognise that the reality is that Hamas is a terrorist organisation that embeds itself in civilian populations and has positioned itself and its infrastructure in schools, hospitals and residential areas. That has undoubtedly created significant complications and has resulted in loss of innocent life. When that is the approach from the leadership of Hamas, there is no hope that a full and meaningful ceasefire would work, at this stage.

Equally, it is clear that events of 7 October have set back by a significant degree the cause of achieving a two-state solution. That is why diplomatic interventions from western liberal democracies remain critical, as does the important role that many of the surrounding Arab states will play in defusing tensions.

While the conflict remains on-going, we support the calls for humanitarian pauses. That carries risks, but we believe that it is the most realistic means of ensuring that UK nationals can leave Gaza, that hostages are released and extracted from Gaza, and that humanitarian aid can get into Gaza. The UK Government has consistently called for those things, but they will be achieved only through diplomacy.

It is through many diplomatic efforts by several international actors that the Rafah crossing point was opened, which has allowed humanitarian aid into Gaza, as well as having allowed up to 500 foreign nationals and injured civilians into Egypt. More can and must be done to extend those pauses so that the UN and aid charities can intervene on the ground in order to prevent further loss of life. As I speak, we are awaiting news of whether an agreed truce can take place in relation to hostages and the careful diplomatic efforts that are on-going. If that succeeds, it will, potentially, be a model to follow.

This is a complex and deep-rooted conflict that many of us will never be able to fully comprehend. I acknowledge that the debate will be passionate, but I hope that, in the spirit of the First Minister’s comments, there are some things that every member in the chamber can agree on—that Hamas’s attack on Israel on 7 October was a despicable act of terror, that all hostages who were forcibly taken from Israel into Gaza must be released, that innocent civilians on all sides must be protected, and that aid must reach everyone who needs it.

I hope that we can also agree that the ultimate goal for achieving peace in the middle east is the delivery of a two-state solution that works for Israel and Palestine.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, I hope that we can all agree to oppose antisemitism and Islamophobia wherever they present themselves and to stand with our Jewish and Muslim constituents here, in Scotland, at this most difficult of times.

I move amendment S6M-11342.2, to leave out from “further agrees” to end and insert:

“believes in Israel’s right to defend itself against terror; supports calls for humanitarian pauses to deliver aid to Gaza safely and in a sustained way; welcomes the UK Government’s increased aid contribution of £30 million to Gaza as well as the Scottish Government’s aid contribution of £750,000; reiterates its solidarity with Scotland’s Jewish, Muslim, Israeli and Palestinian communities and condemns antisemitism, Islamophobia or any other form of hatred, and reaffirms that a credible, lasting and sustainable peace can only be based on the two-state solution through reinvigorated diplomatic and political efforts in the Middle East Peace Process.”