Rapporti verbatim tad-dibattiti

L-Erbgħa, 12 ta' Diċembru 2012 - Strasburgu

14. Id-deċiżjoni tal-Gvern Iżraeljan li jespandi l-insedjamenti fix-Xatt tal-Punent (dibattitu)

  Elnök. − A következő napirendi pont a Bizottság alelnökének/az Unió külügyi és biztonságpolitikai főképviselőjének nyilatkozata az izraeli kormány határozata a ciszjordániai telepek kiterjesztéséről

  Erato Kozakou-Marcoullis, President-in-Office of the Council, on behalf of the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. − Mr President, honourable Members, as you will have seen, on Monday the Foreign Affairs Council issued conclusions on the Middle East peace process. No-one can have any doubts about the European Union’s position on this crucial issue. This is clear both in this week’s Council conclusions and in the declaration on behalf of the European Union issued on 29 November.

The resumption of direct Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, without delay or preconditions, is what the EU wishes to see now. Clearly this will require bold and concrete steps by both parties. But now, more than ever, direct and substantial negotiations are needed to achieve a lasting solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, ending all claims. Clear parameters outlining the basis for negotiations are key elements for a successful outcome. The European Union is ready to work with the United States and other international partners, including within the Quartet, with the common aim of substantive peace efforts in 2013. The European Union will also work with all those who are willing to join in such a quest for peace, stability and prosperity. The Arab Peace Initiative, in particular, provides regional support for a comprehensive Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement.

All parties must avoid acts which undermine confidence and the viability of a two-state solution. Since the 1980 Venice Declaration, the European Union has held that settlements are illegal under international law and constitute an obstacle to peace.

It should therefore come as no surprise that on Monday the European Union expressed its deep dismay and strong opposition to Israeli plans, announced after the UN General Assembly resolution of 29 November, to expand settlements in the West Bank – including in East Jerusalem – and, in particular, plans to develop the so-called E1 area. The E1 plan, if implemented, would seriously undermine the prospects of a negotiated resolution of the conflict by jeopardising the possibility of a contiguous and viable Palestinian state and of Jerusalem as the future capital of two states. The European Union stated that it would closely monitor the situation and its broader implications, and act accordingly.

In other words, the European Union has never been clearer than it was on Monday: implementation of such plans would not only have an impact on the prospect of a Palestinian state; it would also have an impact on EU-Israel relations.

In the same spirit, the EU expressed its commitment to ensure that – in line with international law – all agreements between the State of Israel and the European Union must unequivocally and explicitly indicate their inapplicability to the territories occupied by Israel in 1967. It also reiterated its commitment to ensure continued, full and effective implementation of existing EU legislation and bilateral arrangements applicable to settlement products.

The European Union also called on Israel to avoid any action which would undermine the financial situation of the Palestinian Authority. Contractual obligations – notably under the Paris Protocol – regarding the full, timely, predictable and transparent transfer of tax and custom revenues have to be respected.

Finally, the European Union called on the Palestinian leadership to use constructively the new status of non-member observer state granted to Palestine in the United Nations and not to undertake steps which would deepen the lack of trust and lead further away from a negotiated solution.

Just three weeks ago we discussed the latest hostilities between Gaza and Israel, which ended with a ceasefire later that night. Monday was also the first opportunity for the Foreign Affairs Council to take stock of the ceasefire and discuss potential EU support to ensure it is sustainable. The ceasefire has held well so far. It is vital that all parts of the ceasefire agreement continue to be implemented. The European Union is committed to facilitating the social and economic development of the Gaza Strip. Equally, the issue of smuggling weapons into the Gaza Strip must be immediately and effectively addressed. Fully recognising Israel’s legitimate security needs, the European Union reiterates its call for the immediate, sustained and unconditional opening of crossings for the flow of humanitarian aid, commercial goods and persons to and from the Gaza Strip. We have expressed our readiness to make use of its instruments in support of the parties’ efforts, including the possible reactivation, in the appropriate way, of the EUBAM Rafah Mission.

The European Union has repeatedly reiterated its fundamental commitment to the security of Israel, including with regard to vital threats in the region. The European Union will never stop opposing those who embrace and promote terrorism and violence.

The European Union has repeatedly reiterated its call for intra-Palestinian reconciliation behind President Mahmoud Abbas, in line with the principles set out in his speech of 4 May 2011, as an important element of the unity of a future Palestinian state and for reaching a two-state solution. Such reconciliation would also have a direct impact on the situation in Gaza, which is unsustainable as long as it remains politically and economically separated from the West Bank.

I thank you for your attention and look forward to the resolution that the European Parliament will adopt tomorrow.

  Michael Gahler, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Wir haben festzustellen, dass derzeit im Nahostkonflikt auf beiden Seiten bedauerlicherweise wieder die Falken die Oberhand gewinnen.

Wir stehen im Europäischen Parlament auf der Basis der internationalen Vereinbarungen, also einer Zweistaatenlösung. Die Lösung des Nahostkonflikts liegt nicht nur im Interesse der direkt Beteiligten. Die Lösung des Nahostkonflikts ist im unmittelbaren Interesse der Europäischen Union. Und daher dürfen wir nicht nur reaktiv agieren oder uns auf deklaratorische Maßnahmen beschränken.

Wir müssen zunächst all das, was dem Friedensprozess entgegensteht, benennen. Dazu gehört auf palästinensischer Seite der Beschuss Israels aus dem Gazastreifen und dazu gehören auch erneute Statements des politischen Führers von Hamas, Chalid Maschal, den Staat Israel weiterhin nicht anzuerkennen und sein Existenzrecht zu bestreiten.

Daneben ist es für mich als Freund des Staates Israels und seiner Bürger, der dessen Existenzrecht und seinen Charakter als jüdischer Staat uneingeschränkt bejaht, immer schmerzlicher, mit anzusehen, wie eine amtierende israelische Regierung zunehmend den Eindruck erweckt, dass ihr ihre internationalen Verpflichtungen egal sind, dass außer Lippenbekenntnissen nichts Substanzielles zum Fortgang des Friedensprozess beigetragen wird.

Der weitere Ausbau der Siedlungen steht dem Friedensprozess im Weg. Alle Siedlungen sind illegal, das ist unsere rechtliche und politische Überzeugung. Deswegen fordern wir einen sofortigen vollständigen und dauerhaften Stopp der Siedlungsaktivitäten.

Wir müssen klarmachen, wo wir stehen. Ich danke der Präsidentschaft für ihre klaren Worte, auch was die Einbehaltung der Zolleinnahmen der Palästinenser betrifft. Wir müssen Benchmarks für das setzen, was wir von beiden Seiten erwarten, auch von der israelischen Regierung, und bis zu welchem Zeitpunkt, und welche Maßnahmen wir ergreifen, wenn dies nicht geschieht.

Die israelische Regierung soll sich fragen, woran es liegt, dass es nur noch ein einziger EU-Mitgliedstaat war, der gegen die Anerkennung Palästinas als Beobachterstaat bei den Vereinten Nationen gestimmt hat. Da hat sich sicherlich nicht die EU verändert.

Wir können und sollten strenger darauf achten, dass die Einrichtungen in den besetzen Gebieten nicht von der Zusammenarbeit profitieren. Eine Hochschule etwa in Ariel kann nicht von den Privilegien aus der Zusammenarbeit zwischen der EU und Israel im Forschungsbereich profitieren. Das sind Dinge, die man konkret berücksichtigen kann und die auch hoffentlich von Israel rechtzeitig zur Kenntnis genommen werden.

(Der Redner erklärt sich bereit, gemäß Artikel 149 Absatz 8 GO auf die Frage eines anderen Mitglieds zu antworten).

  Paul Murphy (GUE/NGL), blue-card question. – Could I ask whether you voted in favour of upgrading trade relations with Israel two months ago in relation to the ACAA Agreement? Do you think that words of criticism by this Parliament are enough, or should something actually be done for once?

  Michael Gahler (PPE), blue-card answer. – With regard to the ACAA Agreement, I did not consider that an upgrade. That was a continuation of existing things. That was definitely not an upgrade. So I voted in favour.

And I agree, this Parliament is not the executive. I am calling on the Council, I am calling on the Commission, I am calling on the Member States, to act in line with what I said: set benchmarks, set a timeline, make concrete suggestions or demands, and if nothing happens, then let us react towards either the Palestinians or the Israelis.

I am really unhappy that the current government is not does not see the future of its country in the right perspective. I must say that, and it is a harsh statement. I am aware of that, but I am sadly saying that.

  Ana Gomes, em nome do Grupo S&D. – A ocupação israelita e a expansão de colonatos na Cisjordânia violam o direito internacional, mas o recente anúncio de planos para construir mais 3.000 habitações numa zona que corta a Cisjordânia é uma provocação grosseiramente retaliatória para a Palestina e uma verdadeira derrota que Israel se autoinflige porque visa impedir a retomada das conversações de paz, a única maneira de se alcançar a segurança a que Israel aspira. Isso passa por viver ao lado e em cooperação com um Estado da Palestina, um Estado que só pode ser responsável e funcional se for viável.

A Europa tem que agir junto de Israel, na ONU, onde for necessário. A ocupação e a colonização ilegal da Palestina têm que ter consequências nas relações de cooperação entre a União Europeia e Israel, tal como têm que ter consequências as anunciadas retenções de impostos visando comprometer a sobrevivência da Autoridade Palestiniana. Também para o Hamas, a União Europeia tem que ter uma mensagem clara: o Estado de Israel é um facto, não há retorno. As declarações de Khaled Meshaal, em Gaza, há dias são inaceitáveis, inflamatórias, e não contribuem para a paz, nem para acautelar os interesses do povo palestiniano, que passa pela construção de um Estado palestino ao lado de Israel.

  Annemie Neyts-Uyttebroeck, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, when we started preparing our various drafts for today’s resolution, we did not know yet the conclusions of your Council meeting that took place on Monday.

Nevertheless, when you compare even the initial texts and the texts of the Council conclusion, you will see remarkable parallels in our various approaches. We do, of course, very much regret the announcements made by the Israeli Government to build 3 000 extra housing units and further develop the plans in area E1 which, if implemented, would effectively make a contiguous state of Palestine territorially impossible. We regret the decision to withhold taxes, especially since both these decisions and announcements came just days after the vote in the General Assembly of the United Nations. It seems to us that, with these announcements, the Israeli Government is undermining the legitimacy of Mahmud Abbas – and by extension, such an undermining of his legitimacy can only reinforce the status of Hamas, which from the point of view of Israel is a rather paradoxical attitude.

We have welcomed – and I do welcome – the conclusions of the Council of Ministers, and I believe that the High Representative and her team have played a discreet but important role in coming to these conclusions. We should not forget that these conclusions have been approved unanimously by all the 27 Member States, and this is something that the Israeli Government should carefully ponder and consider, as they should carefully analyse the vote that intervened in the United Nations General Assembly.

It is significant, as my colleague Mr Gahler said, that only one single EU Member State chose to side with Israel, so to say, and the other ones either approved the Palestinian bids or abstained. If the Government of Israel continues to act as they do, they might end up completely isolated, and that would be a pity because it would make the search for a lasting solution even more difficult.

  Franziska Katharina Brantner, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, I would like to welcome Minister Kozakou-Marcoullis. The advancement of plans to expand settlements in the West Bank, including the E1 zone, is both legally unacceptable and politically offensive, making a future Palestinian state unviable.

Let me also mention another thing that happened yesterday morning. The Israeli army attacked the offices of three Palestinian organisations: the Women’s Union, the Palestinian NGO Network and Addameer as well as the umbrella organisation for Palestinian NGOs. Many of them are actually supported by European foundations or organisations. I believe this not only constitutes a threat to the peace in the region but is a really clear breach of international law and will harm the promotion of human rights in both countries.

The EU is currently extending its cooperation with Israel, as decided at the last EU-Israel Association Council in July 2012, with up to 60 concrete activities. I demand that any implementation of new areas of cooperation be frozen for the time being as a signal to the current Israeli Government that the EU does not accept Israel’s latest breaches of international obligations. Furthermore, I ask the High Representative to consider withdrawing the Head of the Delegation to Israel and Tel Aviv to send a strong signal to our Israeli counterparts that the EU follows words with actions. The EU needs to be clearer and also to take action on the illegal settlement products and to have proper labelling. This is not against Israelis – let me be clear – but is a reaction to the policies of the current government.

  Charles Tannock, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, while the ECR greatly sympathises with Palestinian frustrations, their successful effort to win observer status at the UN provoked justifiable anger in the eyes of the Israeli Government who have offered much evidence to support their claims of a material breach of the 1993 Oslo peace accords.

Nevertheless, the Israeli response in my view was counterproductive. My group, the ECR, has consistently opposed the construction of new settlements, expansion obviously being an obstacle to lasting peace and a viable two-state solution, and the latest Israeli announcements have not helped their cause.

Nevertheless it is vital to point out in Israel’s favour that the much-discussed E1 corridor is in a preliminary planning phase and the government did not announce any imminent construction work. They have also provided a robust defence for withholding Palestinian authority funds in order to pay Israeli companies, particularly the electricity company which is owed a lot of money.

This situation now, however, must be de-escalated before it becomes a full-blown crisis. We ask both the Israeli Government and the Palestinian authority to display courage, humility and wise heads and to return to the negotiating table without delay in order to have a two-state solution.

  Fiorello Provera, a nome del gruppo EFD. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ricordo che negli Accordi di Oslo tutti i contenziosi, inclusi quelli sugli insediamenti, dovrebbero essere risolti attraverso negoziati diretti tra le parti. La questione degli insediamenti non è la sola e principale causa del conflitto, tant'è vero che gli attacchi contro Israele sono iniziati più di cinquant'anni fa, proprio nell'area della Cisgiordania, quando non esisteva neppure un insediamento in Palestina.

Un problema fondamentale è il rifiuto, a tutt'oggi, da parte dell'autorità palestinese, dei terroristi di Hamas e della maggioranza degli Stati arabi, di riconoscere la legittimità di Israele a esistere come Stato ebraico. Senza riconoscere che il problema non è quindi soltanto territoriale ma di legittimità, non si arriverà a una pace stabile e duratura.

Sulla questione dei territori sarebbe interessante, molto interessante, organizzare un'audizione per ascoltare esperti e giuristi di entrambe le parti sulle loro diverse posizioni e avere quindi una maggiore contezza, una maggiore informazione su quel background storico, giuridico e quant'altro che sta dietro alla questione israelo-palestinese.

  Patrick Le Hyaric, au nom du groupe GUE/NGL. – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Ministre, l'Autorité palestinienne et Mahmoud Abbas utilisent les outils du droit international et de la diplomatie. Le gouvernement israélien a choisi une nouvelle fois la force, la violence et le viol délibéré du droit international.

Nos institutions – Parlement, Conseil et Commission européenne – ne peuvent tolérer plus longtemps qu'un gouvernement, un État avec lequel nous avons un accord d'association, le gouvernement israélien décide unilatéralement de représailles contre une décision très majoritaire de l'Assemblée générale des Nations unies du 29 novembre 2012, reconnaissant la Palestine comme État observateur.

Nos institutions européennes doivent devenir des rouages d'application du droit international, s'opposer à la décision de l'État d'Israël de confisquer les taxes des importations palestiniennes, de poursuivre la destruction des maisons à Jérusalem, et demander l'arrêt immédiat de la colonisation et la restitution des terres volées. Laisser poursuivre la colonisation, notamment dans ce qu'on appelle la zone E1, reviendrait à empêcher la construction d'un État palestinien, donc à renier le vote de l'Assemblée générale de l'ONU. Au contraire, nous devrions réaffirmer que la Cisjordanie, Gaza et Jérusalem font ensemble la Palestine.

L'État israélien est d'autant plus coupable qu'il est en contradiction totale avec la signature qu'il a apposée au bas de la Convention de Genève, en 1951, dont l'article 49 interdit l'implantation de populations nouvelles sur un territoire conquis à la suite d'un conflit. Je lis cet article: "La puissance occupante ne pourra procéder à la déportation ou au transfert d'une partie de sa propre population civile dans le territoire occupé par elle." Israël l'a signé. Nous devons nous-mêmes faire respecter ceci.

C'est en ce sens que mon groupe de la Gauche unitaire européenne et gauche verte nordique appuie le projet de résolution commune, réaffirmant l'esprit de la justice et du droit contre les logiques de domination et de la force.

  Hans-Gert Pöttering (PPE). - Herr Präsident, Frau Ratspräsidentin, Herr Kommissar, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der Friede im Nahen Osten ist für Europa, für die Welt, ja für den Dialog der Kulturen von strategischer Bedeutung. Und der Friede im Nahen Osten muss eine Priorität unserer europäischen Politik sein.

Israel hat das Recht, in Sicherheit zu leben, und die Bundesrepublik Deutschland sagt sogar, dass die Sicherheit Israels zur Staatsraison Deutschlands gehört. Dem schließe ich mich ausdrücklich an.

Deswegen müssen wir schärfstens verurteilen, dass der Führer der Hamas, Chalid Maschal, gesagt hat, dass er Israel nicht anerkennen will. Das ist die eine Seite. Aber die andere Seite ist, dass Palästina das Recht hat, ebenso in sicheren Grenzen zu leben. Und deswegen ist es tief bestürzend, wenn Israel seine Absicht wahr macht, 3 000 Siedlungseinheiten zu bauen. Israel würde sich etwas nehmen, was ihm nicht gehört. Und die Begründung war ja sehr merkwürdig, man begründet es mit dem Gedanken der Bestrafung, weil Palästina von der UNO anerkannt werden wollte und dort eine große Zustimmung als Beobachterstaat bekommen hat.

Wenn also Israel so handelt, wie es angekündigt hat, ist dies auch ein Affront gegen die große Mehrheit der Staaten der Vereinten Nationen. Wenn die Siedlungen gebaut werden, dann würde die Zwei-Staaten-Lösung nicht mehr möglich sein und Israel würde mit einer solchen Politik einen verhängnisvollen Weg gehen.

Wir als Freunde Israels müssen unseren Freunden in Israel sagen, was wir für die Wahrheit halten. Freundschaft besteht nicht darin, dass man jemandem nach dem Munde redet, sondern dass man den Freunden gegenüber zum Ausdruck bringt, wenn man der Meinung ist, dass die Freunde einen falschen Weg gehen.

Die internationale Gemeinschaft darf es nicht zulassen, dass die Zwei-Staaten-Lösung am Ende durch den Bau der Siedlungen verhindert wird. Und wir müssen es auch zurückweisen, wenn Präsident Abbas und der Ministerpräsident Fayyad diffamiert werden. Wer diese beiden Persönlichkeiten kennt – und ich bin Präsident Abbas mehrfach begegnet –, der weiß, das sind Persönlichkeiten, die den Frieden wollen, und ich danke den Außenministern, dass sie auch die Rolle des Präsidenten der Palästinensischen Gebiete Abbas ausdrücklich in der Erklärung anerkannt haben.

Wir fordern eine Aussöhnung zwischen Hamas und Fatah, das ist wichtig, damit es eine Zwei-Staaten-Lösung geben kann. Und wir fordern Israel und Palästina auf, dass sie den Weg der Verhandlungen gehen. Wir bekennen uns zur Würde der Menschen in Israel, und wir bekennen uns zur Würde der Menschen in Palästina.

Und dass Frieden möglich ist, zeigt der Friedensnobelpreis, der der Europäischen Union vorgestern verliehen wurde. Und wenn der Wille zum Frieden bei den verantwortlichen Persönlichkeiten im Nahen Osten vorhanden ist, dann ist dort auch Frieden möglich, und wir sollten ihn unterstützen.

  Emer Costello (S&D). - Mr President, last month, as we debated the situation in Gaza, there was a collective sigh of relief here when it was announced that there was a ceasefire. We expressed our strong support for the Palestinian bid for UN non-member-state observer status and, following that strong UN vote, it was hoped that it would provide an impetus for the resumption of peace talks.

But the Israeli Government’s decision to retaliate with plans for 3 000 new illegal settlement units in the West Bank and East Jerusalem poses a real and immediate barrier to peace and is to be utterly condemned. This plan would completely destroy the two-state solution repeatedly endorsed by the EU and the international community. Moreover, the withholding of taxes due to the Palestinian Authority serves only to undermine the authority and position of President Abbas, who has constantly advocated non-violent means.

What is needed is clear. There should be an immediate and complete freeze of all settlement construction and expansion activities, and an end to evictions and house demolitions; the terms of the ceasefire should be fully implemented; the Gaza blockade should be lifted. Progress is also needed on internal Palestinian reconciliation but, most importantly, there is a need for the resumption of the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations without pre-conditions.

While I welcome Monday’s Council conclusions calling for bold and concrete steps towards peace, the EU and the Member States must be prepared to take those bold and concrete actions. We must be visible, we must be strong, and we must implement existing EU legislation and uphold international law. Otherwise I fear that our fine words and resolutions will be dismissed as just restatements of the usual platitudes. Strong words need to be backed up by strong actions.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 149(8))

  Nicole Sinclaire (NI), blue-card question. – Mr President, I would congratulate my colleague on her speech, which was very strong and meaningful. But when she talks about the peace process, would she not agree with me that one of the main barriers to the peace process is Hamas’s refusal to recognise the state of Israel? She failed to mention that at all. That is really the first step towards peace and a two-state solution in this matter. I invite her to call on Hamas to recognise the state of Israel.

  Emer Costello (S&D), blue-card answer. – I have always supported the EU position on the Palestinians’ right to statehood while at the same time supporting Israel’s right to live securely and freely within its borders.

I would call on the Palestinian reconciliation process to take account of that and I hope that we will see both Palestinian reconciliation and the resumption of peace talks with the Israelis without preconditions.

  Margrete Auken (Verts/ALE). - Hr. formand! Der er kun én ting, jeg synes, der virkelig skal slås fast i dag over for Rådet. Det er: "Gør noget!" I punkt 3 i den udmærkede erklæring fra i mandags står der, at man vil ”act accordingly”. Vi har hørt så mange ord; de har skiftet i styrke, men ingenting er sket, og det vi kan se, er at den israelske regering er fuldstændig ligeglad med EU! I går udtalte udenrigsministeren, at det, EU gør i øjeblikket, kan sammenlignes med Holocaust. Altså undskyld mig! Når vi kritiserer Hamas, vil jeg gerne deltage. Så synes jeg måske lige, at vi skal være opmærksomme på, at vores partnere dér er gået fuldstændigt ud over kanten, idet de ikke bare håner os men også Holocaust. Der kan gøres en hel masse. Jeg skal ikke stå her og remse det op, men nu må vi et skridt videre end til bare ord! Nu må vi i gang med at handle, for ellers går det galt. Alle vores venner i Israel beder os om at gøre noget. Der er masser af mennesker i Israel, der ved, at det er nu, vi har den eneste chance for at få gjort noget! I løbet af få måneder kan vi risikere, at det hele er tabt!

  Geoffrey Van Orden (ECR). - Mr President, the Israeli announcement was, of course, a most regrettable, unhelpful but not wholly unexpected reaction to the unilateral action in the UN General Assembly on statehood by the Palestinian Authority. That action flew in the face of the Oslo Accords on a negotiated solution. I do not remember any resolution of this Parliament condemning it.

I am sure many of us have expressed our deep concern and extreme frustration to the Israelis that they should act in the way that they have. We know that the security situation and the pressure of the elections early in the New Year led to statements and actions which would not be contemplated in calmer times.

Whether or not there is any construction on the E1 site (and I doubt that there will be) is really not the point. My concern is that the Israeli announcements distract attention from the real problems in the region. With Gaza as a cauldron for terrorism, the Palestinian Authority area remains divided, with Mahmoud Abbas currently having no say in Gaza and being absent from negotiations.

There is also a question mark over the extent of Hamas penetration of the West Bank, and with a Hamas ally now in power in Egypt are we now to start thinking about a three-state solution, I wonder? Our eye, of course, is being taken off the Iran threat.

May I just conclude by saying what the EU might usefully do? Perhaps act where it has real leverage – realistically, that means with the Palestinians. We have given over EUR 5 billion in aid, and I wonder what return there is on this investment. They need to come back to the conference table, and we should encourage them to do so.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 149(8))

  Margrete Auken (Verts/ALE), blue-card question. – Mr Van Orden, I did not believe my ears. Did you say that this Parliament should condemn the call for the UN bid? Should we not be in favour of the most multinational, the most established rule of law we have in this world? Should this Parliament condemn it?

  Geoffrey Van Orden (ECR), blue-card answer. – I am astonished by a lot of the things I hear in this Parliament, I have to say.

Of course, in this case the Palestinian action was deliberately politically provocative. It was unhelpful. It flies in the face of the Oslo Accords. We need a negotiated settlement. How was this helpful? We need to get back to the conference table. We need to exert pressure on the Palestinians to do just that.

The sort of stuff that we are hearing from here merely encourages them in an entirely different direction.

  Martina Anderson (GUE/NGL). - Mr President, the Israeli Government’s decision to expand the illegal settlements in the West Bank is a blatant retaliation against the Palestinian people after their recent success in the United Nations. This act of aggression, which continues that government’s disregard for international law, must be condemned at the highest level. In addition to this, the decision of the Israeli Government to withhold Palestinian tax revenues to the sum of USD 100 million only serves to disrupt the peace negotiations and endanger the fragile stability of the region.

Any genuine solution to the crisis will only be born out of mutual respect. The EU’s relations with Israel must be conditional on its respect for international humanitarian law. Therefore I urge the Council and the Commission to freeze any upgrading in relations until the situation shows tangible improvements.

  Marek Siwiec (S&D). - Panie Przewodniczący! Zgadzam się, nie podoba mi się osadnictwo na Zachodnim Brzegu, nie podoba mi się jednostronna polityka, ale osadnictwo to jest część polityki, która od jakiegoś czasu na Bliskim Wschodzie jest polityką jednostronnych działań ze strony izraelskiej i ze strony palestyńskiej. To jest czas konfrontacji. Izrael wykorzystuje te możliwości, jakie ma, choć one są nieprawne i pozaprawne. Ja byłem niedawno w Sderot i wiem, że od wystrzelenia rakiety, od ogłoszenia alarmu przeciwrakietowego jest 30 sekund, aby ludzie schowali się w schronach. Matka, która ma trójkę dzieci, musi wybrać, które dzieci weźmie ze sobą, żeby schować do schronu, bo inaczej rakieta może zabić ich wszystkich. Chciałbym, by ci wszyscy, którzy tak potępiają osadnictwo, potępiają decyzje, które nam się nie podobają, pamiętali, że są dwie strony konfliktu, żebyśmy dobrze rozdzielali to wszystko, co zasługuje na potępienie – jeżeli uda się doprowadzić do stanu, w którym będzie dialog, będzie postęp. Dzisiaj nie ma dialogu, nie ma warunków do dialogu, a przyczyną jest to, że Izrael narażony jest konkretną bronią i konkretnym atakiem i narażeni są jego obywatele.

  María Muñiz De Urquiza (S&D). - Señor Presidente, quiero felicitar al Consejo por sus conclusiones firmes y valientes sobre la intención de Israel de extender sus asentamientos desafiando la solución de dos Estados. Condenamos el plan de extensión de los asentamientos en la zona E1 que, por una parte, rompen la unidad territorial de Palestina y, por otra parte, amenazan con desplazar a 2 300 beduinos, la mayoría de ellos refugiados y niños. Y seguimos condenando los asentamientos en la zona C, donde están en peligro proyectos europeos de infraestructuras, concretamente plantas solares, que son determinantes para el desarrollo del pueblo palestino. Y en el marco de la ayuda europea, por cierto, debería reactivarse la Misión EU BAM.

Y se ha hablado aquí del AECA. Bueno, pues, por coherencia de la acción exterior de la Unión Europea y por respeto a la legalidad internacional, todos los acuerdos entre la Unión Europea e Israel deben indicar inequívoca y explícitamente su inaplicabilidad en los territorios ocupados desde 1967: los Altos del Golán, Cisjordania —incluido Jerusalén Este— y la Franja de Gaza.

Y, señor Lieberman, el mundo no está dispuesto a sacrificar a Israel, no es esa la intención ni de las conclusiones del Consejo ni de la Resolución del Parlamento Europeo, pero tampoco está dispuesto a que usted sacrifique a Palestina.

  Pino Arlacchi (S&D). - Mr President, the Israeli Government’s announcement that, in response to the UN vote on Palestinian statehood, it is to expand the settlements in the West Bank sends the message that it has no respect for human rights and international law.

Settlement construction is the cause of forced displacement and a myriad of human rights violations. In addition, this new plan for settlements in the E-1 area could bisect the occupied West Bank, potentially cutting Palestinians off from Jerusalem and the Fatah movement and reducing their hopes for a contiguous state.

We must remember that Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits an occupying power from transferring its own civilian population into the territory it occupies. For this reason, I endorse the important Council statement of last Monday, according to which all EU agreements with Israel must unequivocally and explicitly indicate their inapplicability to the territories occupied by Israel in 1967, namely the Golan Heights, the West Bank including East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip.

  Sergio Gaetano Cofferati (S&D). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, volevo dire che sono rimasto ancora una volta sorpreso dal carattere, almeno in parte, della discussione di oggi e delle ultime discussioni che ci sono state dentro il Parlamento sui temi che riguardano i rapporti tra Israele e Palestina.

Noi siamo per la pace, abbiamo sempre esplicitamente dichiarato i nostri obiettivi, abbiamo sempre avuto grande rispetto per lo Stato di Israele e sappiamo quante volte è stato oggetto di aggressioni, di atti violenti nei confronti della struttura statuale esattamente come nei confronti dei cittadini. Però, di fronte ad azioni che hanno il carattere della messa in discussione dei rapporti già precari che esistono e dunque allontanano l'ipotesi della pace, non dobbiamo avere nessuna titubanza. Il nostro giudizio deve essere molto netto, di condanna e di contrarietà ad azioni come quelle che sono state oggetto della discussione di questi giorni. Il timore o una qualche titubanza non aiutano in alcun modo il processo di pace.

„Catch the eye eljárás”

  Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE). - Parabéns à Palestina pelo novo estatuto internacional. E, diante deste reconhecimento, Israel aprova o aumento dos colonatos e a realização de uma chantagem internacional? Os colonatos israelitas nos territórios palestinos são ilegais e, sobretudo, são imorais. Checkpoint, controlos, fronteiras, muros da vergonha, apartheid, bairros inteiros banidos do mapa, casas e negócios fechados, ruas proibidas com a desculpa da segurança dos habitantes dos colonatos. Sempre a segurança.

Israel, passando novamente de todos os limites. A segurança, senhores, não pode ser a desculpa para a paz. A Europa deve dar, neste momento, um sinal esmagador e responsável.

  Χαράλαμπος Αγγουράκης (GUE/NGL). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η καταψήφιση και η αποχή κρατών μελών της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης από την πρόταση στη Γενική Συνέλευση του ΟΗΕ για την αναγνώριση της Παλαιστίνης ως κράτους παρατηρητή μη μέλους του ΟΗΕ αποτελεί ατράνταχτη απόδειξη του ιμπεριαλιστικού χαρακτήρα της πολιτικής και των σχεδίων της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, των ΗΠΑ, του ΝΑΤΟ, του Ισραήλ, ενάντια στους Παλαιστινίους και στους λαούς της ευρύτερης περιοχής. Το Ισραήλ εντείνει την επιθετικότητά του με απειλές για την κατασκευή τριών χιλιάδων κατοικιών για εγκατάσταση ισραηλινών εποίκων στη ζώνη ανάμεσα στη Δυτική Όχθη και την Ανατολική Ιερουσαλήμ ως απάντηση στην πρόσφατη απόφαση του ΟΗΕ.

Τώρα είναι επιτακτική η ανάγκη να εκφράσουν έμπρακτα οι λαοί την αλληλεγγύη τους στον παλαιστινιακό λαό για ανεξάρτητο, βιώσιμο, κυρίαρχο παλαιστινιακό κράτος στα σύνορα του '67 με πρωτεύουσα την Ανατολική Ιερουσαλήμ· να σταματήσουν οι ισραηλινοί εποικισμοί στην Ανατολική Ιερουσαλήμ και σε όλα τα παλαιστινιακά εδάφη, συμπεριλαμβανομένων των Υψωμάτων του Γκολάν και της περιοχής Σεμπά στο Νότιο Λίβανο· να αποχωρήσει ο ισραηλινός στρατός κατοχής και οι έποικοι από όλα τα κατεχόμενα παλαιστινιακά εδάφη· να αρθεί ο αποκλεισμός της Παλαιστίνης· να απελευθερωθούν άμεσα όλοι οι Παλαιστίνιοι και να επιστρέψουν όλοι οι πρόσφυγες έτσι όπως προτάσσει ο ΟΗΕ.

  Ivo Vajgl (ALDE). - Moram reči, da verjetno takšne razprave niso primeren čas niti primerno mesto za neke vrste osebno izjavo. In jaz bi vendarle rad dal takšno izjavo v tej razpravi.

Namreč jaz sem nekaj časa... nekajkrat bil v zadnjem času v Izraelu in vedno sem pri sebi kultiviral svoje bazično izhodišče, da želim biti prijatelj ene in druge strani. Da želim biti nekdo, ki mogoče lahko tudi posreduje kakšne znake dobre volje eni in drugi strani.

Zdi se mi, da je temeljni problem izraelsko-palestinskega odnosa ta... pomanjkanje dialoga, pomanjkanje interakcije ljudi dobre volje v politiki. Ona funkcionira, ta odnos funkcionira na nivoju civilne družbe. So krasni ljudje, ki se med sabo razumejo, ki lahko nekoč ustvarijo tisto vizijo, ki jo je opisal Amos Oz v svoji knjigi, da bi se Izraelec, Žid in Palestinec lahko usedla skupaj in popila kavo. To je enostavna perspektiva.

Mislim, da je temeljni defekt izraelske politike to, da noče dat prednost, da noče popustiti tistim, ki želijo pogledati v bodočnost, ki želijo videti svojo bodočnost, ki jim ni mar samo jutri, ampak hočejo živeti v miru tudi pojutrišnjem, takšne vizije pa trenutno v izraelski politiki ni.

  Vytautas Landsbergis (PPE). - Mr President, over the years I have followed not only the tragic events on the spot but also the debates of politicians – debates conducted at a distance, and often in rather abstract terms – and the formulas and wording used concern me. I wish to ask, since there is so much talk about Palestinians and Palestine: what Palestine, and what Palestinians, are we talking about? Geographically there are at least two Palestines now, with two ruling representative forces or personalities.

If they are legitimately authorised to represent sections of the Palestinian people, who represents Palestinian refugees? Maybe it is time to sit round the table and get an evaluation rather than play with words along the lines of ‘Palestine is recognised, Palestine is this or that’.

Which Palestine? Hamas’ Palestine? Abbas’ Palestine? Does Hamas’ Palestine recognise Abbas as a legitimate president? Let us consider the issue in a realistic light.

  Paul Murphy (GUE/NGL). - Mr President, the representative of the High Representative informed us that the message from the EU has never been clearer. But let us look at what the message from the majority in this Parliament and from the European Council actually is. It is only two months since this Parliament voted to upgrade trade relations with Israel. Tomorrow it will pass a resolution criticising some of Israel’s actions. The clear message seems to me to be the same as always. To the Israeli Government: do not worry, we will criticise you in words but will never actually do anything about it.

It is simply not good enough. There should be an immediate suspension of all EU-Israel Agreements. With the building of these settlements surrounding East Jerusalem, you have an attempt in reality to destroy any possibility of a viable Palestinian state. You see a picture of what the two-state solution on the basis of the continuation of the rule of imperialism and capitalism means: it means Bantustans for the Palestinians.

It underlines the need for a new mass popular struggle from below, the redevelopment of an intifada of the Palestinian people under democratic control, fighting to defeat the right-wing Israeli establishment and linking up with Israeli workers and poor. Only on that basis can the national oppression of the Palestinians be ended and a really just solution be found with a socialist Palestine and with a capitalist East Jerusalem alongside a socialist Israel.

  Johannes Cornelis van Baalen (ALDE). - Mr President, much has been said today, but let us be honest. From the day it came into existence, the state of Israel has been confronted with terror and war – a war Israel did not seek itself. Today, Hamas in the south and in the Gaza Strip, and Hezbollah in the north, are engaging in terrorism. That is bad for the Palestinians, but what can Israel do but react? I do not believe that extra settlements are the right reaction. What we, the European Parliament, should do is tell Hamas to stop this terror now, to recognise Israel and to sit at a table together with their Palestinian authority. We should tell them to stop now.

  Νίκη Τζαβέλα (EFD). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, θα ήθελα να υπενθυμίσω σε όλους ότι οι νέοι οικισμοί δεν γίνονται σε καινούργιο έδαφος, γίνονται σε έδαφος για το οποίο είχε υπάρξει συμφωνία –ήταν στο territorial swap– από τότε με τον Πρόεδρο Κλίντον. Δεν είναι λοιπόν κάτι καινούργιο και κάτι παράνομο.

Εκτός αυτού θα ήθελα να απευθυνθώ στο Κοινοβούλιο, λέγοντας ότι θα πρέπει να βλέπουμε με κάποια νηφαλιότητα την πολιτική αντίδραση του Ισραήλ. Το Ισραήλ με την κίνησή του αυτή θέλει να υπενθυμίσει στην Παλαιστίνη ότι ο διάλογος δεν έχει σταματήσει και πρέπει να συνεχιστεί. Θα έλεγα μάλιστα προς όλους μας ότι καλύτερα θα ήταν να ασχοληθούμε με τη διαμάχη μεταξύ Χαμάς και Φατάχ και να μας ανησυχεί, παρά με το γεγονός ότι το Ισραήλ, πράγματι, αντέδρασε έτσι όπως έπρεπε να κάνει, για να στείλει ένα μήνυμα ότι ο διάλογος ακόμα συνεχίζεται.

  Marek Henryk Migalski (ECR). - Panie Przewodniczący, dziękuję za możliwość wypowiedzi. Pan Murphy wychodzi, a przyznam, że to on sprowokował mnie do tej wypowiedzi, dlatego, że znam pana Murphy'ego, który jest bardzo zaangażowany w sprawy kazachstańskie. Bardzo cenię tę aktywność, chociaż nie podzielam ideologicznego bagażu, ale wiem, że Pan angażuje się w sprawy łamania praw człowieka w Azji. Zastanawiam się, dlaczego lewica europejska jest tak bardzo antyizraelska. Jest to zjawisko od dłuższego czasu zauważalne, że dzisiaj w Europie najbardziej antyizraelska, antyżydowska jest lewica europejska. Zastanawiam się, dlaczego w tej debacie było to widać. Skąd pomysł na to, żeby dzisiaj wszystkim co złe na Bliskim Wschodzie obarczać akurat ten jeden naród czy to jedno państwo. Uważam, że te razy rozdawane zwłaszcza przez naszych kolegów z lewicy są nierówno rozdawane.

  Elmar Brok (PPE). - Herr Präsident! Ich bin durch die Bemerkungen provoziert worden, die von der äußersten Linken kamen. Es ist uns klar, dass wir eine Zwei-Staaten-Lösung auf der Ebene der Grenze von 1967 haben wollen und dass es ein breites Verständnis ist, dass wir dabei helfen wollen, dass es einen sicheren Staat Israel gibt und einen lebensfähigen Staat Palästina, dass dies geschehen muss, dass schnell Verhandlungen stattfinden müssen und dass die Europäische Union sich daran zu beteiligen hat.

Aber hier zu fordern, dass ein sozialistisches Palästina der einzige Weg ist, wenn Hamas in der letzten Woche gefordert hat, dass Israel vom Erdboden beseitigt werden soll, und dies nicht einmal zur Kenntnis zu nehmen – ist das Ihr Sozialismus, dass Menschen und Nationen ausgerottet werden, und das als Beispiel dafür anzusehen, wie Staaten aufgebaut werden und zusammenleben sollen?

Hören Sie endlich auf mit Ihrem kommunistischen Hass gegen alles andere, was nicht sozialistisch ist, denn dies ist der Ansatz der Menschenrechtsverletzungen von der linken Seite her, wie es der Ansatz der Menschenrechtsverletzungen von der rechten her ist.

  Γεώργιος Τούσσας (GUE/NGL). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, αντιλαμβάνομαι ότι ο κ. Brok και ορισμένοι άλλοι κύριοι έχουν χάσει την ψυχραιμία τους και φεύγουν από τη σκληρή πραγματικότητα που βιώνει καθημερινά ο παλαιστινιακός λαός. Οι δολοφονικές επιθέσεις του Ισραήλ και η γενοκτονία ενάντια στον παλαιστινιακό λαό είναι γεγονός. Εμείς έχουμε ξεκάθαρη θέση: στη Μέση Ανατολή μπορούν να επιβιώσουν και οι δύο λαοί ως πλήρη ανεξάρτητα κράτη. Να σταματήσουν αυτές οι δημαγωγικές κορώνες εδώ και τώρα!

(Ο Πρόεδρος διακόπτει τον ομιλητή)

(„A catch the eye” eljárás vége.)

  Erato Kozakou-Marcoullis, President-in-Office of the Council, on behalf of the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. − Mr President, I think the conclusions of the Foreign Affairs Council of last Monday are very clear, firm and unequivocal.

Taken together with the conclusions of May 2012, I think they send a very strong message to all actors in the region regarding the European Union position on the resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This is why I am not going to repeat what the EU position is. It is very clear and it is in the conclusions that I have just mentioned.

It is in the fundamental interest of the European Union to support peace and democracy in the entire region, and a strategic priority is to see an end to this longstanding and tragic conflict, which will continue to undermine peace and security along the EU’s southern borders as long as it remains unresolved. There will be no sustainable peace until the Palestinians’ aspirations for statehood and sovereignty and those of Israel for security are fulfilled through a comprehensive negotiated peace based on the two-state solution.

The European Union repeats its call of 29 November to Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Abbas to work towards a settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with renewed purpose. Both have previously stated their willingness to enter into direct negotiations without preconditions. We urge both of them to do so and will work with both of them, with the US (including through the Quartet) and with others in the international community in the region to help bring about this lasting solution.

  Elnök. − Hét állásfoglalásra irányuló indítványt⁽¹⁾ juttattak el hozzám, melyeket az eljárási szabályzat 110. cikkének (2) bekezdésével összhangban nyújtottak be.

A vitát lezárom.

A szavazásra csütörtökön, 2012. december 13-án kerül sor.

(1) Lásd a jegyzőkönyvet.