Q: Is the Government supporting a boycott of Israel?

A: The government opposes a boycott of Israel and of Israeli goods. We have a strong relationship with Israel, a close ally. Although we disagree on some issues, including illegal Israeli settlement expansion, our influence depends on being able to engage in frank dialogue. We do not believe that boycotts or sanctions would help engage or influence Israel, or lead to progress in the Middle East Peace Process.

Foreign Secretary 'dismayed' by calls for boycott.

Q: Will the UK push for a suspension of the EU-Israel Upgrade Agreement?

A: The EU-Israel Association Council reconfirmed on the 15 June the importance of the EU's relationship with Israel in light of the economic and security interests that the EU and Israel share. The EU also emphasised that an upgrade in the relationship must be set against the context of our shared interests and objectives, including progress on the Middle East Peace Process. At a meeting in June 2009 of EU Foreign Ministers, the EU proposed that the current plan should remain in place for the time being.

Q. What is the UK doing to discourage illegal Israel settlement in the Occupied Palestinian Territories?

A: It is the long-standing position of the Government that Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPTs) are unlawful under international law and that their expansion makes reaching a comprehensive peace even harder. The Prime Minister laid this out to the Knesset in July 2008, saying that Israel must both initiate a freeze on new settlements and withdraw from existing ones, and the Government has raised this with the new Israeli Government and urged it to adhere to previous agreements.

• Revenue and Trade Agreements

The EU/Israel Association Agreement, in force since 2000, provides for products from Israel to be imported into EU countries at a preferential tariff rate. The EU does not, however, recognise as part of the State of Israel territories occupied by Israel since 1967.

There is nothing to prevent such products from Israeli settlements being imported into the EU but, according to the European Commission, they should not benefit from preferential treatment under the EU/Israel Association Agreement.

Since 2005, there has been a requirement under a technical arrangement adopted by the EU-Israel Customs Co-operation Committee on 12 December 2004 that all imports from Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, should indicate the place of production and an accompanying post code. This is to ensure that the full rate of Customs duty is paid on any consignment which is indicated as originating in an Israeli settlement. Under the Interim Association Agreement between the European Community and the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), goods produced in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip are eligible for preference provided the exporter can obtain a certificate of origin from the Palestinian authorities.

HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) is immediately refusing claims to Israeli preferential rates of duty where the place of production and accompanying postcode, as shown on the proof of origin, is located in a Settlement. Since February 2005, HMRC has rejected some 529 proofs of origin and demanded some £338,000 in customs duty.

• Produce Labelling

We have taken a strong lead in produce labelling initiatives, which has been praised by the Palestinian Prime Minister, Salam Fayyad. The Cabinet Office held a discussion at the end of March 2009 with retailers, government departments and others. The meeting discussed how changes to labelling practices can provide consumers with improved clarity about the origin of products from the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPTs). Following this meeting, DEFRA is considering the next stages of consultation before finalising guidance on labelling best practice that complies with our European Commission (EC) and World Trade Organisation (WTO) obligations, to enable retailers to provide consumers with increased information on product origin.

• Palestinian Support

Overall we have pledged to provide £243 million over 3 years to support the Palestinians.  successful project, the UK government provided £116,000 last year, supporting a project which saved 200 Palestinian houses from demolition in East Jerusalem. This year, an extension of that project, with UK funding of £135,000, has already taken an important step towards creating the first new Palestinian neighbourhood in East Jerusalem since 1967, with an expected occupancy of 2000-2500 housing units. Also the project has prevented a further 177 Palestinian homes from demolition.

Q: Were UK weapons components used in Operation Cast Lead and will the UK impose an arms embargo on Israel?

A: On 21 April 2009 the Foreign Secretary issued a Written Ministerial Statement about UK exports to Israel which may have been used by the Israeli Defence Forces during the conflict in Gaza. This statement makes clear that all exports are subject to stringent controls. Applications are carefully assessed against Consolidated EU and National Criteria and a recent judicial review found no evidence to suggest that Her Majesty’s Government is not properly applying these criteria. As the Foreign Secretary said in his statement, he 'continues to believe that the Consolidated Criteria are amongst the strongest and most effective in the world'.

The statement sets out clearly the detail of UK components in equipment that may have been used in Operation Cast Lead. UK equipment was not exported for specific use in Operation Cast Lead and export licences were issued based on all the evidence available at the time they were granted. Future decisions will take into account what has happened in the recent conflict. We do not grant export licences where there is a clear risk that arms will be used for external aggression or internal repression.

We do not believe that the current situation in the Middle East would be improved by imposing an arms embargo on Israel.  Israel has the right to defend itself and faces real security threats. This said, we consistently urge Israel to act with restraint and supported the EU Presidency statement that called the Israeli actions during operation Cast Lead 'disproportionate'.

Q: Will the UK push for an inquiry into alleged war crimes committed by both sides during the recent Gaza conflict?

A: We are concerned gravely by allegations of war crimes committed by both sides during the recent Gaza conflict. From the outset, we have called for allegations of abuses by both Hamas and Israel in the conflict to be investigated promptly and credibly. There are currently several strands of investigation at various stages of completion.

We, along with our EU partners, have been clear that a comprehensive and balanced report into all alleged violations is the only way to address all human rights violations in the Gaza strip. On this basis, we urge both Israel and Hamas to co-operate with the Human Rights Council Fact-Finding Mission, headed by Justice Richard Goldstone, and will consider carefully the results of this alongside the other on-going investigations.

The UN Secretary-General set up a Board of Inquiry on 12 February to investigate incidents in the Gaza Strip affecting the UN. We are deeply concerned by the findings of the Board of Inquiry. The inviolability of UN installations should be universally respected. We understand that the UN Secretary-General has not called for a wider investigation. With this in mind, the Foreign Secretary made clear to the UN Security Council on 11 May that it is important that Israel investigate each of the incidents cited by the Board of Inquiry.

The primary burden for investigating allegations against its forces rests on Israel itself. There are still some aspects of the Israeli investigations being carried out and we continue to urge the Israeli authorities fully to investigate the allegations made against their forces. Once the outcomes are clear we will consider the results very carefully and assess whether we judge further action is necessary.

Q: Why is the UK government prepared to hold discussions with Hizballah but not Hamas?

A: Our objective with Hizballah remains unchanged: that they reject violence and play a constructive, democratic and peaceful role in Lebanese politics. We believe that occasional and carefully considered contacts with Hizballah’s politicians, including its MPs, will best advance this objective. These will take place on a case by case basis. We are interested only in serious dialogue with Hizballah about issues of national importance to Lebanon and the region.

We have no illusions about Hizballah and have already signalled our firm opposition to Hizballah’s support for terrorism by proscribing its military wing in July 2008. We are only interested in talking to those that value the political process, not those that seek to undermine it.

Our policy on Hamas reflects the very difference situations in Gaza and Lebanon; the situations are not comparable. We do not believe it is productive to talk to Hamas directly. The military wing of Hamas is proscribed in the UK as a terrorist organisation, they fire rockets at innocent civilians and put ordinary Palestinians in harm's way. We believe that to talk to Hamas directly at this time would simply undermine those Palestinians who are committed to peace. The Arab League has mandated Egypt to communicate with Hamas. We are in regular contact with both the Arab League and Egypt.

Q: Is the UK deliberately hindering the efforts of groups of lawyers/doctors attempting to enter Gaza?

A: The UK does not control access to Gaza over the Rafah crossing - Egypt does, nor does the UK control access to Gaza through the crossings on the Israeli boarder - Israel does. We have continually urged Israel to open the crossings into Gaza, particularly for humanitarian aid, and have already raised this issue with the new Israeli Government. However we advise against travel to Gaza, while recognising the importance of humanitarian workers and independent reporting of developments.

We have, in exceptional cases, provided letters reiterating our travel advice to some individuals. They showed these letters to the Egyptian Authorities and were subsequently allowed into Gaza.

The idea that there is a determined effort not to enable witnesses to get into the Gaza Strip is not true and is inconsistent with the assistance we have provided to journalists and humanitarian workers.