Recent months have demonstrated greater European willingness to play a larger part in the Middle East’s most protracted conflict, that of Israel and Palestine. But willingness doesn’t necessarily indicate readiness. For the European Union to be truly ready to take on a conflict of such magnitude and involvedness, it’s required to fully and clearly abandon the old ways of near complete subservience to America’s tilted and pro-Israel stances, and of refusing to treat Palestinians as equally deserving of the same rights and security that they gladly assign to Israel. In other words, Europe would have to function as a truly independent political body, and repudiate the detrimental principle that treated Israel with utter sensitivity, and perceived Palestinians, at best, as a people undergoing economic hardship.
True, Palestinian projects funded by the European Union are many and far reaching. However, while Europe has demonstrated a degree of generosity with the Palestinians, it never enjoyed a fraction of the leading role that the US had assigned for itself in the region. Part of that is that Israel mostly welcomes American involvement, and for long shunned a significant European role under various guises and logic, such as the claim that Europe is soft on terror, and that the continent is rampant with anti-Semitism. Israel is of course referring to the fact that Europe has been much more recipient to the idea of dialogue with Palestinians, even with groups which are dubbed terrorist. More, public opinion polls in much of Europe have for long reflected much greater sympathy for Palestinians, and regarded Israel as a danger to world peace. From Israel’s point of view, that qualifies as anti-Semitism.
Thus the nature and extent of any European role has always been delineated by the US and Israel. If the EU or a specific member of the organization dared to defy the specific role of which they were entrusted, Israel would immediately cry foul, and the organization would simply back off. Even when Israel bombed several projects that were fully or largely funded by the EU in Gaza and the West Bank, including Gaza’s electric generator, the EU failed to act in any consequential fashion, aside from a measly and ineffective statement, of course. While Gaza is currently being punished by Israel and others for electing Hamas, and as the EU gutlessly watches the unfolding human drama, it continues to be Israel’s largest trading partner.
There are many signs that reflect a clear shift in the EU’s level of involvement in the Middle East. Starting March 2008, several European heads of state traveled to Israel in highly touted and “historic” trips, including a visit by German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President Nicolas Sarkozy and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown. These appearances were followed up by equally important visits by European dignitaries, last of whom was French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner in early October. The number of official statements made by the EU, and the nature of these statements are all promising a different kind of European involvement. Yet again, so what? Some of those officials used their visits as opportunities to censure Palestinians on violence, terrorism and so forth. Some failed to utter a word of disapproval of Israel, as if the country that maintains a decades-long, and utterly oppressive occupation, as well as a long record of violating international law can do nothing wrong. That said, there is no denial that Europe has been more, if not much more sensible in its treatment of Palestinians and not only because of its many vital development projects dotting the occupied territories, but also, unlike the US, it doesn’t always view its relationship to Palestinians as an arrogant power with a list of uncompromising demands that have to be fulfilled or else. The US’ fundamentally erroneous approach to the Middle East in general and Palestinians in particular has harbored untold animosity toward the US, generating a lack of trust that will eventually undermine the US’ position in the entire region, a process that is well under way.
Europe on the other hand, still has a chance, and a good one. True, Sarkozy sang the Israeli tune like the “true friend of Israel” that he is, but he also dared to criticize its settlement policies in Israel’s own Knesset. Some European countries seemed willing to engage Hamas, inviting some of their top officials for “unofficial” dialogue. Various news outlets reported in April that Switzerland had invited then prime minister of the newly formed unity government Ismail Haniyeh for his first official European state visit. Norway and other European countries seemed willing to explore various channels of dialogue with the Palestinians.
It’s no secret that the EU is positioning itself to play a greater role, but little is known of what that means exactly. Is that new role orchestrated jointly with the US and Israel, or is it taking place in spite of both governments? The answer would certainly help determine the future direction and degree of the EU’s involvement. If the EU is there to supplement the US’ expected absence — economic crisis at home, endless wars abroad — then little change is expected. If Europe had indeed decided to tackle the conflict as an independent power, separate from the discredited US, then it’s an entirely different story.
