A future of security in the Middle East

Sarah Ludford MEP, GLA member Sally Hamwee and London Mayoral candidate Simon Hughes MP at Barnet's Holocaust memorial sculpture

My first contact with Israel was 26 years ago. I went on a Wyndham Deedes scholarship from the Anglo-Israel Association to research Israel's (then) trade agreement with the European Community.

My broad conclusion in 1978 was one of optimism for the potential of Israel not only to benefit from EU trade and cooperation (though in high-tech rather than oranges) but also to lead creation of a Middle Eastern common market linked to the EU. That belief still has to make long-term sense.

Given that background and my Liberal convictions about the importance of communication, it was natural that I would oppose in the European Parliament efforts to boycott Israel. As for calls to cut academic links, I never heard anything so ridiculous! I ensured that the votes of Liberal Democrat MEPs were decisive in rejecting by 8 votes last autumn a proposal to cut off the EU-Israel Association Agreement.

But I have equally resisted moves to eliminate EU funding for the Palestinian Authority. I welcome the call of Palestinians themselves for a clean-up of its corruption. But Israel cannot make the necessary negotiated peace without a partner, and the sub-Saharan poverty level of many Palestinians would be even greater without EU support.

I joined the Liberal Friends of Israel - excellently led by Cllr Monroe Palmer - after I joined the party in the early 1980s, and have been a member ever since. As an MEP I have visited Israel 3 times in 3 years, firstly with the Liberal Democrat Friends of Israel, then as part of a European Parliament delegation to Jenin in 2002 (where I did not support use of the term 'massacre'), and lastly in October 2003 when I was part of a big group of parliamentarians from all over Europe organised by a new MEP-led organisation 'Medbridge'.

It is easy to be discouraged about the prospects for co-existence of a secure Israel and viable Palestinian state side-by-side, but that is the only real solution. I am absolutely committed to the existence of Israel as a Jewish homeland and state (one in which Arab Israelis have full equal rights) and to its right to live in peace and security within recognised boundaries. My dismay at the occupation is not only about the misery of ordinary Palestinians but at how the role of colonial occupier is damaging the soul, as well as the economy, of Israel.

I condemn all terrorism against Israel, and I do not see suicide bombers as purely the product of desperation among Palestinians, real though that desperation is; there is also exploitation of young people and a despicable culture of Jihadist martyrdom in a perversion of Islam. I was shocked to see in Jenin hospital not only (presumed Israeli-made) bullet holes, but also posters glorifying the deaths of AK47-touting militants.

But the Bush-Sharon policy of military defeat will not assure Israel's security. Hamas is a dangerous and uncompromising organisation dedicated to Israel's destruction, but the recent illegal assassinations of its leaders simply create more bitterness and recruits for terrorism, and a boost for the prospect of a link-up of local with international terrorism.

We must hope that Tony Blair is right when he claims that Ariel Sharon's plan for unilateral disengagement from Gaza while annexing the largest Jewish settlement blocs on the West Bank can be a step on the 'road map'. The wall/fence could be justified if it was on the Green Line. I happen to agree - as the negotiators of the Geneva Accord accepted - that there can be no Palestinian 'right of return' to Israel. But the Quartet must seek to disprove Sharon's claim that his plan constitutes a 'critical blow' to the Palestinians that could defer their goal of statehood for years.

I am deeply worried about the rising incidence of anti-Semitism and take a strong interest in combatting it, as well as other kinds of racial or religious prejudice. The EU's Monitoring Centre should not have published three reports on Islamaphobia while failing to produce one on anti-Semitism. Their delay in producing timely work on the threat to Europe's Jewish communities naturally fed suspicions about bias. There should be renewed vigour in exposing and rooting out anti-Semitism, and establishing the dividing line between legitimate criticism of the policies of the Israeli government and demonisation of Jews.

I understood the shock that Israelis must have felt at the poll last year in which 59% of Europeans considered Israel a threat to world peace; it is clearly ludicrous to say that Israel poses more of a threat than North Korea. I'm convinced that many respondents read the question as being about the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians but it was still deeply unhelpful to pose it in an unbalanced way.

That said, I do believe the result was a wake-up call. A more intense EU-Israel dialogue is needed to allow Israelis to explain the threats they endure while Europeans convey their protest - shared by many Israelis - about human rights breaches in the occupied territories. It is actually a tribute to Israel being the only true democracy in the Middle East that criticism and comment flow so easily, even though it may seem a back-handed one at times.

Related Links

• Search this site for more on Israel