Strasbourg, 15/01/2009 (Agence Europe) - Shocked by the suffering inflicted upon the civilian population in the Gaza Strip, the European Parliament adopted, on Thursday 15 January (without a single vote against but with a number of abstentions) a resolution from all political groups (except the IND-DEM Group) on the situation in Gaza. This common resolution, which says nothing on a number of salient points raised in the debate the day before, is well balanced and has at least been made.
MEPs urge both sides in the conflict to comply with United Nations Security Council Resolution No 1860 and call for an “immediate and permanent ceasefire” to halt rocket attacks by Hamas and to put an end to Israel's military operations in Gaza. They thus call for withdrawal of Israeli troops, the permanent reopening of border crossing points and lifting of the blockade, as well as measures to counter the smuggling of weapons and munitions. The Parliament calls for a negotiated truce that should be guaranteed by a mechanism which could include the dispatching of a multinational presence with a clear mandate to restore security and ensure compliance with the ceasefire. In this context, special attention should be paid to controlling the border between Egypt and Gaza, which means that Egypt should assume an important role. The Council is invited to step up pressure in order to put an end to the current violence. MEPs make a very strong appeal to the Israeli authorities to ensure free access for humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip and for continued and sufficient transport of aid via the humanitarian corridor, as well as to authorise media access for monitoring events on the ground. The EU is, moreover, invited to adopt a firmer and more united political stance and to cooperate with the next US Administration in order to put an end to the conflict with an agreement based on the two-State solution. Stressing the importance of inter-Palestinian reconciliation, MEPs warn that only real progress on the path to peace and improvement of the situation in Gaza and the West Bank will strengthen the legitimacy of the Palestinian Authority.
The common resolution does not, however, consider the question of freezing the process of enhanced relations between the EU and Israel, although a pause in the process does seem to have been decided by both parties according to the European Commission representative in Israel. On 3 December 2008, MEPs had already decided to postpone the vote on increased Israeli participation in Community programmes (see EUROPE 9796 and 9795). Neither does the joint text mention the possibility of suspending the current EU-Israel association agreement under Article 2 of this agreement, which stipulates that relations between the two partners must be based on respect of human rights and democratic principles. Several MEPs are said to have wanted this, but only the GUE/NGL in its initial draft resolution had suggested activating the human rights clause. Some MEPs are highly critical saying one can wonder what the point of having such a clause is when an armed conflict that has already killed 1,000 persons has not even been mentioned.
An immediate and effective ceasefire, the opening of all checkpoints, guaranteed access to humanitarian aid - these are the minimum requirements for restoring peace in the Middle East, according to Council President Karel Schwarzenberg. A lasting solution, however, must cover the whole region and allow both states - Israeli and Palestinian - to live in peace with each other. “Only a viable Palestinian state will bring security to the region”, he said. In the meanwhile, it is necessary to remedy the political damage caused by Israeli attacks.
The chronicle of the troika's efforts in the region was drawn up again by Benita Ferrero-Waldner, who was visibly worried by the situation but also visibly determined not to neglect any possibility of finding a solution. A ceasefire lasting at least several hours is needed to allow the distribution of aid, the Commissioner said, trying to see a glimmer of hope in the summit of Arab countries which could be held in Qatar at the end of the week, and in the trip by the NATO secretary general to the region. Looking at the longer term, she pins some hope on the Obama presidency and is pleased to note Hillary Clinton's comments at the Senate hearing on Tuesday 13 January. Israel's image has been “dented” by the attacks over the past 18 days, Ms Ferrero-Waldener said, adding that the Israeli government should understand how much this goes against any hope of peace in the region. Speaking at the end of the debate, the commissioner mentioned unconfirmed rumours from an Egyptian source that Hamas has shown a certain degree of openness to suggestions made by Egypt.
These are woeful results said José Salafranca (EPP-ED, Spain), demonstrating his group's support for the efforts made by the Commission and the Council to put an end to the cycle of hatred, vengeance and destruction that has cast a shadow on any prospect of lasting peace in the Middle East. Israel is an ally state and this debate is therefore very difficult, said German Socialist Martin Schulz pointing out the right of every state to defend itself, but also the need for each state to ask itself whether the means it employs to do so are proportionate. “A military solution? It doesn't exist”, exclaimed Mr Schulz, saying, yes, one needs to talk with terrorists, too. Arafat was considered a terrorist, but received the Nobel Peace Prize sharing it with Israel, he said. “What was possible then should also be possible now”, Martin Schulz maintained. Annemie Neyts (ALDE, Belgium) took the view that “the day will come when everyone should talk with everyone else”, insisting on the need to improve the situation in the West Bank. “If we deliver the Palestinians from Israeli occupation in the West Bank, they will deliver us from Hamas”, exclaimed Daniel Cohn-Bendit of Germany on behalf of the Greens/EFA. He added that Israel wanted to teach Hamas a lesson but this kind of “black pedagogy” goes nowhere and Israel's goal of greater security has not been attained, quite the contrary. In its strategy “does Hamas need killing?”, he asked. The Palestinians themselves are the only ones that can counter this strategy if they are given a chance of life, he said. There are many in Parliament who support dialogue, including Johannes Swoboda of Austria (Socialist Group). He noted bitterly that time has been lost in refusing dialogue, saying: “I do not like Hamas, among other things because of its fundamentalist approach … but it is not a question of sympathies. It is a question of finding a solution”.
A number of elected representatives looked at the consequences of the last few weeks. Chris Davies (ALDE, Britain) in particular considers Israel's conduct is not the “proportionate response of a civilised power”. Mr Davies expressed surprise that criticism of Israel was not backed by action, mainly in the context of the cooperation agreement with this country. “Upgrading” has even been decided, bemoaned Luisa Morgantini (GUE/NGL, Italy), while welcoming the fact that the Commission representative in Tel Aviv had said in recent days that upgrading could wait. First of all a ceasefire must be sought and then the decision concerning upgrading can be put to the Parliament for opinion, said Miguel Portas (GUE/NGL, Portugal). Belgian Socialist Véronique De Keyser affirmed that the Union must ensure compliance with the clause on respect of human rights in the cooperation agreement with Israel. “Justice must be done for all these crimes”, Ms De Keyser pounded out, supported by French Green member Hélène Flautre, as well as Kyriacos Triantaphyllides of Cyprus, who calls for an inquiry into Israel's action. Israel, said Pasqualina Napoletano (Socialist Group, Italy), must understand that this massacre only weakens Palestinian authority and hence those that would possibly be willing to negotiate. This massacre, his compatriot Giulietto Chiesa (Socialist Group) went on to say, has well and truly been aimed at preventing the creation of a Palestinian state. History will want those who have been accomplice to crimes in the region, including crimes of omission, to explain their action, said Spanish Socialist Miguel Angel Martinez Martinez. Tokia Saifi (EPP-ED, France) for her part sounded a more general note of warning saying that Israeli action has caused a negative reaction not only in the Arab world but also in the Muslim world, and Europe should face up to this by encouraging dialogue between the civilisations.
For the very first time, Israel seems to be contemplating the possibility of intervention by an international interposition force recommended by the Palestinians, said Philippe Morillon (ALDE, France), but first of all an agreement is needed between the parties involved and this mission will “call for complete impartiality”. A mission of interposition is not enough, said British Conservative member Geoffrey van Orden, calling for a real Marshall Plan for the region with the setting in place of a decent civil administration. Mr van Orden is reticent about opening dialogue with Hamas, as is Cristiana Muscardini (UEN, Italy), who fears that dialogue with terrorists will create a precedent.
The Council president seems to agree as Karel Schwarzenberg clearly said that the European institutions cannot have “official contact” with a terrorist organisation. “Being an old man”, he said, “I have seen many terrorists become more or less responsible”. However, the time is not ripe and “we must be adamant about this”. As for “upgrading” the agreement with Israel, this was decided by the Council in June and can only be changed by the Council, whatever the Commission representative in Jerusalem says. In any case, it is too early to speak of that now, he said, adding: “There are more urgent questions to solve”. Finally, what can be done to stop Israel? “Frankly, not much”, is Mr Schwarzenberg's verdict. He points out that the Union can but speak openly and honestly with the Israelis but “has no power or means to say 'Stop!'”.
British Conservative Christopher Beazley said he has been a member of the European Parliament for the past 25 years and that this was the most important debate he has ever taken part in. Mr Beazley said in earnest that he hoped the Commission, unlike Mr Schwarzenberg, would consider that the Union has the possibility of exerting moral influence. He said he believed the Israelis, a people that has suffered so much, would understand a decision to suspend the cooperation agreement until there is an effective ceasefire. (L.G./A.B. ./transl.jl)