(BRUSSELS) – When one hears the comments made by Jose Manuel Barroso, the European Commission’s President, during his first visit ever to Israel and Palestine 8-10 July, one may have the feeling that time has stopped: “We, in the EU, are committed to a viable, independent Palestine;” “Our goal is a two-state solution: an independent, viable, democratic Palestinian state living side by side with Israel;” “The two parties should refrain from acting in a way that undermines the viability of a two-state solution.”… How many times in the last twenty years did European leaders make similar statements? They feel like a simple copy and paste of previous comments, repeated over and over again, like a scratched record. European leaders hardly ever translate them into concrete political action though. Some call that “empty rhetoric.”
It was no different this time. True, the European Commission has hardly any power in foreign policy, which to a very large extent remains the competence of the 27 member states of the Union. But as the executive branch of the EU, the Commission manages a massive aid budget and a series of policies, including trade relations. As such, it has the means to react to at least some of the issues that clearly pose a problem in the framework of EU-Israel relations.
One of them is the destruction by Israel of numerous EU-funded projects. Indeed, besides sustaining the Palestinian institutional apparatus and contributing to the UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency), which provides education and jobs to thousands of disenfranchised Palestinians, European countries also finance countless technical projects in Palestine, including water-cisterns, water sanitation facilities, solar energy systems, agricultural structures, schools and medical centers. After repeated reports on the destruction of such projects by the Israeli military, British MEP Chris Davies made an inquiry to the European Commission, who subsequently released a document on the subject: It’s a table that lists EU-funded development projects that were destroyed or damaged by the Israeli military, together with the Member States that provided the money for each, and the date of the attack (from May 2001 to October 2011). Total losses are put at €49.1 million ($60 million), with €29.3 million ($35.4million) attributed to EU funding. Chris Davies subsequently published the document on his Web page, where he stated that the list was “the most detailed response I have ever received from the European Commission.”
Hundreds of millions of European tax-payers’ money are being spent by the EU to improve the disastrous humanitarian situation in Palestine and to sustain Palestinian refugees in U.N. camps. These projects can apparently be destroyed by the Israeli military without Israel being held accountable for it. Not to say anything about the fact that these expenses are legally meant to be paid by Israel. Hence, one may wonder to what extent, by covering the costs to maintain the Palestinian National Authority, Europe is not paying for the continuation of the Israeli occupation.
A second recurrent question is that, for years, Israel has been circumventing the Israeli-EU trade agreement by exporting products from the settlements, which are in principle excluded from EU preferential import tariffs. These products clearly should not be labeled “made in Israel,” thereby confusing the consumers in Europe about the real origin of the products. Last May, EU foreign affairs ministers had warned that they would take a tougher approach to exports originating in illegal settlements on Palestinian land.
“Settlements remain illegal under international law, irrespective of recent decisions by the government of Israel. The EU reiterates that it will not recognise any changes to the pre-1967 borders including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties. The EU and its Member States reaffirm their commitment to fully and effectively implement existing EU legislation and the bilateral arrangements applicable to settlement products.”
For his part, the Irish foreign minister, Eamon Gilmore, has evoked the possibility for Ireland to propose an outright ban on settler products during its presidency of the Council of the European Union early 2013. But finding an agreement between those EU member states willing to take action against Israel and those who are decidedly opposed to it remains one of the biggest challenges.
The European Union is the first trading partner for Israel, with total trade amounting to €29.4 billion in 2011. Negotiations to further extend the EU-Israel trade agreements are currently underway. Therefore, the EU has the means to put some pressure on Israel to respect bilateral arrangements and international law. It should ensure that the EU-Israel Association Agreement is not used to allow the export to the EU of products manufactured in illegal settlements. It should also press for conditions allowing the full implementation of the EU–Palestinian Association Agreement, which provides opportunities for Palestinian products to access European markets, including pushing for an end to Israeli restrictions on the movement and transport of goods.
But despite having a clear political basis, the European Commission’s president last week chose not to say anything during his visit to Israel. Instead, he signed an agreement on scientific and technological research cooperation in the framework of which the EU and Israel will expand their collaboration on the development of sustainable energy and water ventures; and he declared, “I am looking forward to deepening our cooperation between Israel and the EU in all fields.” He also received an honorary doctorate at the University of Haifa. In short, business as usual. In the end, one cannot but have the feeling that European leaders are content with largely symbolic statements destined to appease the general public and NGOs that have been denouncing the double standards for years; apart from that, the EU is willing and even eager to deepen its relations with Israel regardless.
The European Union often says it wants a balanced approach toward the Middle East. By not taking action, by failing to translate its statements into concrete political action, it ignores the plight of millions of Palestinians who live in dire conditions. European leaders may do well in remembering that the issue here is not about statements but about human beings that desperately hope for a better life. And the fact is that Palestinians’ living conditions have only further deteriorated in the 20 years of EU empty statements. This is definitely not a balanced approach.