Thank you, Chair and members of the committee, for the opportunity to address this critical discussion.

My name is Shimon Fogel, and I'm the president and CEO of the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, which represents more than 150,000 Jewish Canadians through Jewish federations across Canada.

CIJA is a national non-partisan organization committed to preserving and protecting the quality of Jewish life in Canada through principled advocacy.

Today we address the committee's study on Canada's advancement of a two-state solution. This topic carries far-reaching implications for Canada's foreign policy, for Israel's security and for stability in the Middle East. While CIJA supports a peaceful two-state solution, this outcome must be achieved through direct negotiations.

Your committee has heard and will be hearing from many witnesses who reflect a broad cross-section of perspectives on the issue, and that's as it should be. However, I offer one word of caution: While the Jewish community, like so many others, is not monolithic, on the issue of support for the Jewish state there is almost universal consensus. We submitted to the clerk two independent research projects that underscore this point. To put it bluntly, there are more Canadians who believe in flat-earth conspiracy theories than there are Jews who oppose an independent Jewish state in our ancestral homeland.

The studies confirm that only 3% of self-identified Canadian Jews reject Israel's legitimacy. It would be misleading to attach significance to such a marginal view and conclude that from a Jewish community perspective, there exists any meaningful ambivalence about the place of a Jewish state within the family of nations.

It's important to remember that Palestinian statehood is not an absolute right. According to UN Security Council resolutions 242 and 338, statehood is conditional, requiring first the recognition of Israel's security and the legitimacy of the Jewish state in our ancestral homeland. The resolutions mandate direct negotiations to achieve these terms before statehood can be conferred on Palestine by the international community. Premature recognition contradicts this foundational formula, creating a destabilizing precedent.

Another vital component is Palestinian agency. Currently there is a worrying lack of accountability within Palestinian leadership. Statehood cannot be treated as an entitlement; it must come with the obligations of responsible governance. Recognizing a Palestinian state without first establishing structures for effective governance would risk creating a failed state from the outset. This would not help Palestinians. It would not help them achieve a better, more stable future, but rather doom them to ongoing instability.

Statehood also requires that essential issues such as borders, water rights, the electrical grid distribution, the status of Jerusalem and the Palestinian demand for the right of return be resolved first. Recognizing a state without addressing these core matters through direct negotiations not only overlooks practical functionality but also condemns both parties to enduring conflict. Without negotiated agreements on these points, the envisioned end of conflict is unattainable. A unilateral approach would leave all these issues unresolved, with no mutually agreed-upon mechanisms to address them.

Canada has historically maintained a balanced approach to this conflict, supporting peace processes grounded in negotiation, mutual recognition and security guarantees. To depart from this approach by endorsing a unilateral path risks emboldening rejectionist elements and reinforcing the idea that peace can be achieved without compromise. By supporting direct engagement, Canada upholds its values of fairness, security and commitment to true peace.

In conclusion, Mr. Chair, CIJA believes that Canada must remain committed to a fair, negotiated resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

One day, we hope there will be a vibrant, democratic state of Palestine, but to pretend that there is a viable Palestinian state today is inaccurate, irresponsible and based on harmful half-truths. Only a true two-state solution, achieved through direct negotiations, can ensure lasting peace, security and stability in the Middle East.

Thank you for the opportunity to share my thoughts. I'm more than happy to answer any questions in the discussion.