2012年-CEPS欧洲政策研究中心_The_Widening_Gap_between_Rhetoric_and_Reality_in_EU_Policy_towards_the_Israeli_36页_825kb

Summary of "The Widening Gap between Rhetoric and Reality in EU Policy towards the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict"

Core Content

This working paper by Nathalie Tocci analyzes the growing discrepancy between the EU's stated goals and its actual conduct in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The EU has consistently supported a two-state solution, the respect for human rights, and adherence to international law. However, the paper argues that the EU's credibility problem in the region is not due to a lack of instruments or internal divisions, but rather from the inconsistent and selective deployment of those instruments.

Main Goals of the EU

• Two-State Solution: The EU advocates for the creation of a democratic, viable, and independent Palestinian state living in peace and security within internationally recognized borders, primarily along the 1967 lines.
• Human Rights and International Law: The EU has condemned violations of human rights and international humanitarian law by both sides, especially Israeli settlements and the separation barrier, as well as Palestinian suicide bombings and violence.
• Democracy and Good Governance: The EU emphasizes the importance of democratic reforms within the Palestinian Authority (PA) as a prerequisite for a peaceful and stable state.

Key Instruments of the EU

Diplomatic Instruments

• The EU has played a multilateral, bilateral, and transatlantic role in the peace process.
• It has been involved in the Quartet (with the US, Russia, and UN), promoting the Road Map for peace.
• The Barcelona Process and European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) are central to EU diplomatic efforts in the region.
• The Special Envoy was appointed in 1996 to promote compliance with interim agreements and democratic norms.

Contractual Relations

• The EU's Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP) and Association Agreements with Israel and the PA are key instruments.
• The "human rights clause" in these agreements allows for political conditionality, but its application is limited due to legal and political constraints.
• The ENP offers Israel a path to socio-economic integration with the EU, including free movement of labor, goods, and services, and participation in European networks.

EU-Israel Relations

• Israel has been a long-standing partner of the EU, with trade agreements dating back to 1964.
• The EU is Israel's largest trading partner, with significant economic ties.
• Despite political tensions, Israel values its relationship with the EU, especially in terms of political legitimacy and belonging.
• The EU-Israel Association Agreement aims to enhance economic and political cooperation, with potential benefits for Israel in terms of trade and integration.

EU-Palestinian Relations

• Relations with the PA began later, due to the absence of a state and the humanitarian situation in the occupied territories (OTs).
• The EU has provided substantial financial and humanitarian aid to the PA, particularly since the second intifada.
• The Interim Association Agreement signed in 1997 under the Barcelona Process includes conditionality linked to human rights and political reform.
• The EU's support for the PA has been critical to its survival, especially after the 2000-03 period.

The Conflict Since 2000

• The second intifada, triggered by Ariel Sharon's visit to the Haram el-Sharif/Temple Mount in 2000, marked the end of the Oslo Process and a deepening of violence.
• The EU's diplomatic efforts have not effectively curbed the cycle of violence or moved the peace process forward.
• The EU's focus on conditionality and reform has been undermined by the lack of progress on the ground.

The Deployment of EU Instruments in Practice

• The EU's diplomatic efforts have been largely symbolic and have not translated into concrete peacebuilding.
• Conditionality has been used more effectively with the PA than with Israel, due to the latter's stronger economic ties with the EU.
• The EU has supported track-two initiatives like the 2003 Geneva Accords, but these have not led to a viable solution.
• The separation barrier has been repeatedly condemned by the EU as illegal and harmful to peace.

Policy Avenues for the Future

• The EU should revise its goals to align more closely with its practical actions.
• It should seek greater consistency in the use of its instruments, particularly in terms of conditionality and support for reform.
• The EU needs to strengthen its role in promoting a two-state solution and ensuring that both sides adhere to international law.
• Enhancing diplomatic engagement and conditionality mechanisms could help restore credibility and effectiveness in EU policy.

Conclusion

The EU's declaratory diplomacy has remained consistent over the years, but its practical implementation has been inconsistent, leading to a widening gap between rhetoric and reality. The paper suggests that the EU must improve its strategic coherence and instrumental deployment to be more effective in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Key Information

• The EU supports a two-state solution based on 1967 borders.
• The EU's human rights clause is a key legal tool, but its use is limited due to the nature of its agreements.
• Conditionality is more effective with the PA than with Israel.
• The ENP offers new opportunities for EU influence, particularly with Israel.
• The second intifada has severely impacted the peace process and the EU's ability to mediate.
• The EU's security strategy recognizes the importance of peace in the region for its own security interests.

Annexes

• Annex 1: Israel's Barrier/Wall – A major point of contention and a symbol of the EU's criticism.
• Annex 2: Israel's Disengagement Plan – A policy that has had mixed implications for EU policy and regional stability.