Пълен текст 
Пълен протокол на разискванията
XML 53k
Вторник, 24 ноември 2020 г. - Брюксел Редактирана версия

14. Геополитическите последици от Авраамовите споразумения в региона на Близкия изток (разискване)
Видеозапис на изказванията

  Il-President. – Il-punt li jmiss fuq l-aġenda huwa d-dikjarazzjoni tal-Viċi President tal-Kummissjoni/Rappreżentant Għoli tal-Unjoni għall-Affarijiet Barranin u l-Politika ta' Sigurtà dwar l-implikazzjonijiet ġeopolitiċi tal-Ftehimiet ta' Abram fir-reġjun tal-Lvant Nofsani (2020/2828(RSP)).

Nixtieq ninforma lill-Membri li, għad-dibattiti kollha ta' din is-sessjoni parzjali, mhux se jkun hemm il-proċedura ta' "catch-the-eye" u li mhux se jiġu aċċettati karti blu. Barra minn hekk, huma previsti interventi remoti mill-Uffiċċju tal-Kollegament tal-Parlament fl-Istati Membri.


  Josep Borrell Fontelles, Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Madam President, honourable Members, thank you very much for having this opportunity to address you today on a very important issue, an issue on geopolitical implications, which are the recent agreement between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and recently Sudan, and maybe many more in the future. On behalf of the European Union I have welcomed these announcements, for three reasons.

First, because we believe that these agreements help to establish new formal relations between countries that have decided to put their differences aside and to engage in a peaceful, bilateral cooperation. Secondly, we welcome these agreements because they can potentially enhance relations in areas such as technology, tourism, energy, trade, health, for regional cooperation. And third, because we believe that they could have a positive effect on other countries as well as more broadly on regional stability, which the European Union has consistently tried to promote. However, although these agreements bring positive developments, it’s clear that they all focus on the broader regional picture. Israel did commit in the context of the normalisation deal with the UAE to suspend its plans for annexation of occupied territory in the West Bank. This was a positive step and we celebrate it and we welcome it, but the agreements themselves do not address the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the Israelis’ annexation plans still need to be abandoned, not suspended temporarily. Abandoned, abandoned altogether.

We have always said there will not be sustainable peace and stability in the region without a comprehensive settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict and in particular the Israel-Palestinian conflict on the basis of a negotiated and viable two-state solution, built upon the internationally agreed-parameters. In this light, we should explore ways to apply the logic inherent to the normalisation process to generate a direct and positive impact on the situation on the ground and to create the conditions for a meaningful political process between Israel and the Palestinians.

In the last weeks we had informal exchange between the Palestinian Foreign Minister Mr al-Malki and the European Union Foreign Ministers by video conference. I stressed the importance of re-engaging in a meaningful political dialogue. I also emphasised this to the Israeli Foreign Minister, Gabi Ashkenazi, when we spoke by telephone yesterday.

Last week we saw the positive news that the Palestinian Authority will resume economic and security cooperation with Israel. We had actively encouraged this as the European Union, but at the same time the situation on the ground remains very worrying, notably due to continued advancements of illegal settlement construction and a significant spike in demolitions. The recent decision by Israel to open tenders to build a new settlement in Givat HaMatos, the first new settlement in occupied East Jerusalem in 20 years, is of huge concern, and yesterday in my phone conference with Minister Ashkenazi I expressed this concern and our condemnation of this initiative.

We must work urgently to find a way to rebuild trust and confidence between the two parties. We must avoid unilateral actions that undermine peace efforts. The launch of negotiations remains essential. We will therefore continue to work with members of the international community, including, I hope, with a new administration in Washington, to uphold international law, to end the conflict and to ensure equal rights for all. Only by working together will we be able to end the current dynamics of perpetual confrontation and mistrust.


  Antonio López-Istúriz White, en nombre del Grupo PPE. – Señora presidenta, señor Borrell, agradezco mucho sus palabras iniciales de apoyo a estos acuerdos. Lástima que en el 80 % del discurso se haya referido a los asentamientos, y a los conflictos entre Israel y Palestina, como me imagino que harán la mayoría de mis compañeros de izquierda en sus intervenciones. Espero que no.

Unámonos todos en la alegría del momento, el momento en que tenemos un acuerdo histórico entre naciones rivales que ni siquiera reconocían su derecho a existir. Entre los Emiratos Árabes Unidos, Israel, Baréin, Sudán y otros que se pueden sumar. Pongamos a la Unión Europea a la cabeza de esto. Estamos fuera de esto. Por eso, mi grupo ha querido que hablemos de estos acuerdos, por la falta, realmente, en algunas instituciones europeas, y sobre todo en algunos grupos políticos, de emoción por este asunto. Mientras estamos hablando, miles de trabajadores y de empresarios israelíes y emiratíes están volando y trabajando, contribuyendo a dar mayor prosperidad económica, a la creación de empleo, a crear seguridad. ¿Por qué no podemos unirnos a esto?

Hagámoslo de forma positiva, sin obviar los temas que han sido propuestos; nadie lo hace. Yo también saludo que se hayan sentado palestinos e israelíes de nuevo, que Israel esté volviendo a hablar con el Líbano, después de décadas, sobre las disputas territoriales. No solamente es la economía: también hay factores políticos positivos, que creo que nosotros, los europeos, tenemos que recoger, de estos acuerdos. Y espero que los grupos políticos se sumen a este esfuerzo y seamos todos positivos y tengamos a la Unión Europea a la cabeza.


  Tonino Picula, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, the signing of the Abraham Accords has indeed created a momentum for advancing relations between countries in the Middle East, as the current situation is unsustainable. Nevertheless, what the real impact will be remains to be seen. We cannot ignore the reservations of some other Middle Eastern countries, nor the voice of the Palestinians. But we need to support every agreement that is a step forward towards sustainable stability in the region as a whole.

We also take note that the Abraham Accords have been accompanied by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s commitment to suspend the planned unilateral annexation by Israel of occupied Palestinian territories in the West Bank against international law. However, we call again for these plans to be cancelled once and for all. Key objectives remain to put an end to the occupation of Palestine and achieve lasting peace between Israel and its Arab neighbours.

On a more general note, we must place the Abraham Accords into the broader context of geopolitical dynamics in the Middle East, in particular with regard to Iran, Saudi Arabia and Turkey. This is where the European Union should also use the momentum and take a more prominent role as a global leader in promoting peace and security, especially given the political change on the other side of the Atlantic.

Having said that, this might be one of the rare dynamics that should not be reversed from the Trump era’s legacy indeed but which should be managed in a different, responsible way with regard to both their geopolitical implications and their impact on Palestinians. Let’s use this opportunity to achieve more stability and prosperity in the region.


  Hilde Vautmans, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, Land for Peace! That was in 2002 with the Arab Peace Initiative, the condition of the Gulf Arab states for normalising ties with Israel. The Abraham Accords have changed the condition for normalised relations with Israel, without consulting the Palestinians. Land for Peace became Peace for Peace, but between countries who actually didn’t have conflict. Don’t get me wrong: in a region beset with conflicts, dialogues and closer ties should be welcomed. I always favour dialogue over silence. Yet we should not ignore the circumstance in which these deals were agreed. De facto annexation by Israel continues, not to speak about the demolition of Palestinian structures, including EU-funded structures. The Abraham Accords may affect the chances of reaching a two-state solution if they legitimise and consolidate the status quo, while the status quo we all agree on is not the solution to the conflict. That, colleagues, that is what worries me.

Dear High Representative, the two-state solution is close to being dead and buried. It’s time to do more than declaring we remain firmly committed to it. The Arab Gulf States and the EU must prevent the consolidation of the status quo and revive the two-state solution. We must act, you must act in defence of the two-state solution. You have our support.


  Lars Patrick Berg, im Namen der ID-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Hoher Vertreter! Zunächst einmal möchte ich meine Freude über die mit Israel abgeschlossenen Abkommen ausdrücken. Jeder Vorstoß, der Spannungen im Nahen Osten abbauen kann, ist zu begrüßen. Vielen arabischen Ländern fällt es überaus schwer, zu jeglicher Verständigung mit Israel zu gelangen, da die Palästinafrage stets im Mittelpunkt der Debatte steht. Mit dem Abkommen zeigt sich jedoch, dass die Beziehungen auch auf eine konstruktive Ebene gestellt werden können, sofern der politische Wille vorhanden ist.

Auch ich bin der Überzeugung, dass eine allgemeine Müdigkeit angesichts der kompromisslosen Haltung der Palästinenserführung eingesetzt hat. Zudem haben manche arabischen Länder eingesehen, dass Palästina nicht für immer der Fokussierungspunkt für die Ausrichtung ihrer Beziehungen zu Israel bleiben kann. Dies vorausgeschickt, scheint mir das Abkommen auch ein klarer Beweis für ein altbekanntes Sprichwort zu sein: „Der Feind meines Feindes ist mein Freund.“ Sofern wir diese Prämisse akzeptieren, dass der Iran eine entscheidende Macht in der Region darstellt, erscheint eine Allianz zwischen Israel und den Golfstaaten sowie dem Sudan politisch sinnvoll.

Die Vereinigten Arabischen Emirate und Saudi-Arabien liefern sich im Jemen einen Stellvertreterkrieg gegen den Iran. Zudem teilen sie mit Israel die – außer in Europa – allgemein vorherrschende Skepsis über das mit Teheran unterzeichnete Nuklearabkommen. Deshalb sind die Abraham-Abkommen ein Vorteil für die Vereinigten Arabischen Emirate und Bahrain und indirekt auch für Saudi-Arabien – sie bringen mehr Sicherheit.

Ein letzter Punkt: Mit der Unterzeichnung der Abkommen erschließt sich allen Vertragsparteien womöglich ein besserer Zugang zu US-Waffen, was eine Abschreckung gegen den Iran bedeuten könnte.


  Hannah Neumann, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain have opened diplomatic relations with Israel. Yesterday, Benjamin Netanyahu – though not officially confirmed – visited Saudi Arabia. In a region that has been suffering from conflict and confrontation for decades, such a dialogue between former antagonists is a good sign, and yes, this region really needs such good signs.

Therefore, one could actually wholeheartedly welcome the Abraham Accords if – and that’s the thing – they would live up to their stated goal to build peace. But – and that is also true, Mr White – recent developments are worrisome. The UAE has advanced a major arms deal with the USA as part of the bargain, as if we needed more weapons in the Middle East. Israel has stepped up its settlement policy against Palestinians and the human rights violations in Bahrain continue rather unnoticed.

So a deal that only serves to build alliances against other neighbours or to arm the region even further is neither going to build peace, nor should it be supported by the European Union. But, on the other hand, every step that the UAE, Israel, Bahrain and hopefully many, many others take towards de-escalation and peace should have our full support.

So, very much in line with what you said, Mr Borrell, I think it’s time for a reality check. Let’s take the signatories at their word and use the new regional dynamic and the change in the US administration to initiate a new EU-led initiative to work towards an inclusive Israeli and Palestinian peace deal.


  Witold Jan Waszczykowski, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Wysoki Komisarzu! Latem mijającego roku pod patronatem dyplomacji amerykańskiej Izrael podpisał porozumienia normalizujące relacje z Emiratami, Bahrajnem, w perspektywie są porozumienia z Sudanem, Omanem, Komorami, Dżibuti, Mauretanią, być może nawet z Arabią Saudyjską. Towarzyszą temu porozumienia gospodarcze o współpracy lotniczej z kilkoma krajami. Wnioski nasuwają się same: konflikt izraelsko-palestyński przestaje być już głównym konfliktem postrzeganym jako źródło wszelkiej niestabilności, wszelkich konfliktów na Bliskim Wschodzie i w Zatoce Perskiej.

Wydaje się, że przynajmniej część państw arabskich nie jest już zakładnikami sprawy palestyńskiej. Czy my również możemy nie być zakładnikami tej sprawy? Przecież Palestyńczykom oferowano pół państwa Palestyny w 1948 r. i systematycznie od tamtego czasu odrzucają różnie porozumienia. Porozumienia Abrahama są sukcesem dyplomacji amerykańskiej i Izraela. Słyszeliśmy od pana Borrella słowa zachęty, ale gdzie działania Unii Europejskiej, gdzie geopolityczna Komisja? Jesteśmy częścią kwartetu, ale jaką rolę odgrywa teraz Komisja? Co inicjujemy na Bliskim Wschodzie? Jak zachęcamy Palestyńczyków do przystąpienia z powrotem do porozumienia, czy nawet negocjacji z Izraelem? Czy podejmiemy rozmowy z Amerykanami, z nową administracją, aby utrzymać te porozumienia, albo nawet je rozszerzyć?


  Manu Pineda, en nombre del Grupo GUE/NGL. – Señora presidenta, señor Borrell, le voy a hacer sincero: no entendemos esta alegría por unos acuerdos de paz entre el régimen israelí y las monarquías feudales del Golfo, países que no estaban en guerra entre sí. En esto le tengo que dar la razón al señor López-Istúriz. Nosotros no celebramos esto.

Si por algo destacan las partes firmantes de estos acuerdos es por su desprecio de los derechos humanos y por una política belicista, lo que se está traduciendo en una escalada del comercio de armas. Hablamos de países que bombardean Yemen o Libia y que se alían con el máximo responsable de la destrucción del pueblo palestino y de la guerra en la región.

Curiosos acuerdos de paz que se nos venden como una mejora para el pueblo palestino, como un freno a la decisión de Trump y Netanyahu de anexionar a Israel una parte importante de Cisjordania, pero la realidad es otra. La sociedad palestina, a la que no se le ha consultado, pero está afectada, se ha opuesto a unos acuerdos que entierran cualquier aspiración de un Estado propio y, por lo tanto, el entierro de la solución de los dos Estados.

La anexión sigue implacable cada día. Este año se ha batido el récord histórico de nuevos asentamientos, desconectando de forma irreversible zonas como Jerusalén o Belén. Y a todo esto, se suma la extorsión a Sudán, que, para salir de la lista estadounidense de países que financian el terrorismo, tendrá que pagarles a los Estados Unidos 335 millones de dólares y firmar este vergonzoso acuerdo con Israel.

Señor Borrell, ante esta ofensiva diplomática es necesario defender con valentía la posición de la Unión Europea, reconociendo al Estado palestino, instando a los Estados miembros a hacer lo mismo, aumentando los fondos para la UNRWA —una agencia vital para los refugiados palestinos, con la que Trump y Netanyahu están intentando acabar— y promoviendo la conferencia internacional de paz en el seno de las Naciones Unidas.


  Fabio Massimo Castaldo (NI). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Alto rappresentante, gli accordi di Abramo sono stati definiti da molti osservatori come un'intesa storica, una svolta verso la pace, la sicurezza e la prosperità per l'intero Medio Oriente.

Questi accordi hanno enormi potenzialità per aprire la strada del dialogo nella regione, ma presentano un gravissimo limite: non danno alcun contributo per risolvere l'elemento che da più decenni la destabilizza, ovvero il conflitto israelo-palestinese. Questi accordi non costituiscono certamente un trattato di pace, che si stipula sempre tra parti in guerra; in realtà somigliano molto più a un'alleanza in funzione anti-iraniana, non quindi un'alleanza pro qualcosa ma contro qualcuno.

Per decenni molti paesi hanno usato le tensioni tra Israele e il mondo arabo per far avanzare la propria personale agenda geopolitica. Dal 1967 a oggi il mondo dovrebbe aver imparato che la situazione in Medio Oriente non potrà migliorare finché i palestinesi non vedranno i loro diritti riconosciuti.

Signor Alto rappresentante, il peggior nemico della pace in Medio Oriente è arrendersi allo status quo e all'educazione all'odio. Non permettiamo, come Europa, che le prossime generazioni palestinesi e israeliane siano vittime e non beneficiari di questi accordi.


  Gheorghe-Vlad Nistor (PPE). – Doamnă președintă, domnule Înalt Reprezentant, distinși colegi, Acordurile Abraham pot reprezenta un pas util în stabilizarea Orientului Mijlociu, o etapă a unui proces cuprinzător, menit să asigure cooperarea și, eventual, pacea în regiune. Statele Unite au jucat un rol esențial în acest proces și salut efortul lor constant pentru căutarea unei soluții negociate.

Potențialul pozitiv pentru cooperare regională există. Prin limitările sale însă acordul ar putea avea și efecte destabilizatoare. Dezvoltarea unor tensiuni între statele arabe nu poate fi exclusă. Există diferențe de abordare între țările care au fost în război deschis cu Israelul și cele care nu au participat direct în conflictele trecute.

Trebuie avut în vedere și conținutul inițiativei pentru pace din 2002 a Ligii Arabe, reactivate în 2007. Neincluderea Autorității Palestiniene în discuții este dăunătoare și nu doar pentru procesul de pace în ansamblu, dar și pentru echilibrul intra-palestinian Fatah-Hamas. Negocierile viitoare trebuie deschise către toate părțile implicate în confruntare, cu politica adoptată de Uniunea Europeană, ce are ca deziderat soluția celor două state.

Pentru a-și menține relevanța globală, Uniunea Europeană trebuie să renunțe la poziția eminamente reactivă, să acționeze strategic și asertiv în probleme geopolitice și să preia inițiativa, pentru a produce rezultate tangibile, în special, când este vizată regiunea din vecinătatea sa extinsă.


  Elena Yoncheva (S&D). – Madame la Présidente, les accords d’Abraham pourraient avoir le potentiel de promouvoir la paix au Moyen-Orient. Ils peuvent devenir historiques et j’espère qu’ils parviendront également à générer des réalisations concrètes dans le conflit israélo-palestinien.

Au cours des dernières décennies, l’approche de l’Union a consisté à séparer le conflit israélo-palestinien du contexte régional et à se concentrer sur les relations bilatérales. Maintenant, les accords nous donnent l’occasion de repenser notre politique et je suis fermement convaincue que l’implication de l’Europe dans le renforcement de la normalisation régionale d’Israël n’implique pas le retrait de la solution à deux États. Au contraire, c’est un facteur pour renouer le processus de normalisation. Dans les mois à venir, il sera crucial de maintenir les pourparlers encourageants entre toutes les parties. Par conséquent, au lieu d’observer de loin, l’Europe devrait commencer à prendre la tête de l’effort pour promouvoir cette dynamique régionale.


  Frédérique Ries (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, bienvenue à ce perchoir, trois accords de paix signés en six semaines entre Israël et des pays arabes. La séquence est historique, le mot n’est pas galvaudé. Les Émirats arabes unis, donc, le Bahreïn et le Soudan saisissent la main tendue par Israël pour installer la sécurité, la prospérité et, au bout du chemin, la paix bien évidemment dans la région. Et ce pari, cet espoir, doit se poursuivre, doit poursuivre cet effet domino vertueux. On observe déjà des frémissements au Liban, à Oman, au Koweït et, bien entendu, en Arabie Saoudite où Benyamin Netanyahou s’est rendu ce week-end, ou pas, mais l’on sait qu’il a discuté avec le prince héritier ben Salmane.

Des accords en trois dimensions: politique, économique et sociale, avec une réalité déjà qui s’observe sur le terrain: des lignes directes maritimes de transport entre Haïfa et de Jebel Ali, près de Dubaï, des premiers plans d’un oléoduc entre Eilat et Ashkelon pour acheminer le pétrole émirati vers l’Europe, l’échange de bonnes pratiques, notamment environnementales, la question de la désalinisation de l’eau pour affronter ensemble des défis partagés, tout cela alors qu’une trentaine de vols hebdomadaires quadrillent déjà le ciel entre Tel-Aviv, Abou Dhabi et Dubaï.

Les accords d’Abraham sont une réponse à ceux qui prônent la détestation et le boycott. Une inversion de la logique, un changement de paradigme. Contourner les conditions, les blocages, les surenchères pour construire la paix avec les Palestiniens, mais plus seulement d’abord avec eux.

Pour conclure en citant le Premier ministre émirati: c’est un nouvel élan pour la solution à deux États. Cette occasion doit être saisie par les Palestiniens qui, c’est une bonne nouvelle, sont revenus à la table des négociations et par les Israéliens qui doivent tenir leurs promesses et cesser effectivement les annexions en Cisjordanie.


  Jordi Solé (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, the Abraham Accords will no doubt have some consequences for the Middle East. But the key question is what effects they will have on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which greatly affects stability in the whole region. And I am afraid they won’t be positive.

In a moment when there is no real peace deal in sight, and when the harsh reality of the occupation of Palestinian territories intensifies, this move might be another incentive for Israel not to really engage in a lasting solution to the conflict. For the truth is, Israel consolidates ties with some Arab nations without making compromises on the Palestinian front. And if it were true that preventing the formal annexation of the West Bank was the counterpart of the agreement, well, let’s remember that there is a de facto annexation with grave consequences on the daily lives of many Palestinians and which hinders the possibility of a settlement based on the two-states solution.

And to conclude, it is not that the EU should disregard these new developments in the region, it’s rather about taking them as an opportunity to re—engage with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a more vocal and active way. Hopefully, we can do that with the new Biden Administration.


  Bert-Jan Ruissen (ECR). – Voorzitter, de Abrahamakkoorden maken één ding wel heel erg duidelijk, namelijk dat Europa in het vredesproces vooralsnog geen enkele rol van betekenis speelt. Het was immers de VS die de kar trok. En wat doet de EU? Doorgaan met eenzijdige kritiek leveren op Israël. Veel lidstaten gaan daarin zo ver dat ze Israël zelfs het recht ontzeggen om de Tempelberg gewoon de Tempelberg te blijven noemen. Ook mijn eigen land, Nederland, doet daaraan mee. Ik zeg het met plaatsvervangende schaamte.

De eenzijdige kritiek moet echt veranderen. Weg met dat belerende vingertje! Laten we eens meer oog hebben voor de complexe situatie waarin Israël zich bevindt. En laten we aan de Palestijnse Autoriteit duidelijk maken dat het nu toch echt hun beurt is om het bestaansrecht van Israël te erkennen en aan de onderhandelingstafel te verschijnen. Dan zouden er mooie dingen kunnen gaan gebeuren, én voor de Joden én voor de Palestijnen én voor de hele regio.

Meneer Borrell, bent u het met me eens dat het mooi zou zijn als de EU daarin wél een serieuze rol zou spelen?


  Kinga Gál (PPE). – Madam President, thank you and good to see you in your new position.

Az Ábrahám- egyezmény szeptember15-i aláírása teljesen új fejezetet nyithat Izrael és a közel-keleti arab országok közötti viszony dinamikájában. Esélyt teremt arra, hogy a béke végre átvegye az ellenségeskedés helyét a régióban. Az egyezmény következtében – számos banki és befektetési megegyezés mellett – létrejöhetett az első vízummentességi megállapodás Izrael és egy arab ország között, amely valóban történelmi esemény. A megállapodást az ENSZ és az Európai Külügyi Szolgálat is rendkívül pozitív áttörésnek értékelte, hiszen két arab ország is normalizálta kapcsolatát Izraellel. Nagyon hosszú ideje nem volt ilyenre példa.

Sajnálatos, hogy itt, a Parlamentben csak ennyi idő elteltével vettük napirendre ennek a témának a megtárgyalását. Az EU részéről ideje a térségben a pozitív együttműködésre fektetni a hangsúlyt az eddigi passzivitással szemben. Az EU nem engedheti meg magának, hogy súlytalanabb szereplővé váljék a térségben, hiszen csakis a Közel-Kelet békéje és stabilitása akadályozhatja meg újabb migrációs hullámok elindulását Európa irányába.


  Evin Incir (S&D). – Madam President, I would like to thank the High Representative for his statement. I’m a firm believer in dialogue and cooperation. The creation of the EU is a concrete example of how we built peace in a region torn in pieces because of wars and conflicts. Looking at the Middle East, we see the urgent need of more cooperation, more dialogue for the sake of the people. However, all cooperation and agreements must be assessed through the lens of building peace and bringing prosperity. At the first glance I welcome the agreement between Israel and the UAE and Bahrain, but it is as important to look at the content, because only then we know if the ingredients for a wider peace are there.

First and foremost, there is no reference to ending the occupation through a two—state solution between Israel and Palestine based on the internationally-agreed parameters. Secondly, the deal includes, to a greater extent, the matter of weapons sales. The people of the Middle East do not need more weapons; they desire more peace, democracy and prosperity. So ‘yes’ to cooperation and deals in all its glory, but let us not fool ourselves by claiming that the current Abraham Accord will bring peace to the region without adequately referring to one of the longest ongoing occupations we know: the occupation of Palestine.


  Nicola Beer (Renew). – Frau Präsidentin! 2020, in einer Zeit, die im Schatten der Pandemie durch Isolation und Rückschläge beherrscht wird, geht der Blick der Vereinigten Arabischen Emirate, Bahrain und Israel nach vorn – Richtung Innovation durch Kooperation.

Schien ein Schulterschluss bisher unmöglich, wurden mit dem Abraham-Abkommen alte Blockaden durchbrochen. Der Fokus liegt endlich auf Gemeinsamkeit. Potential und Kreativität werden in eine Waagschale geworfen. Ein gemeinsamer Tourismussektor, Kooperation in Energie und Sicherheit, gemeinsame Forschung zum Corona-Impfstoff: So geht Zukunft.

Gut auch, dass sich hier nun eine Allianz des Widerstandes gegen den Iran bildet, Herr Kollege Castaldo, das Land, dessen Regierung seine Fühler stetig nach mehr Einfluss ausstreckt, das versucht, auch Europa zu unterwandern. Das ist gleichzeitig ein Anlass, die Menschenrechtslage im eigenen Land zu überdenken und die Zivilgesellschaft bei Reformen mit einzubeziehen.

Das sage ich auch, lieber Herr Borrell, mit Blick auf weitere Abkommen mit dem Libanon, Marokko, aber auch – und gerade – Saudi-Arabien. Bei diesem Prozess baue ich zukünftig auf eine starke Rolle der Europäischen Union, fest an der Seite Amerikas und der beiden Regierungen für eine Zweistaatenlösung.

Ich schließe nicht ohne zu versichern, dass das Europäische Parlament palästinensische Interessen nicht minder wahrnimmt und weiter an einer fairen Lösung für alle Beteiligten im Israel-Palästina-Konflikt festhält. Der Weg dorthin aber – raus aus der momentanen Sackgasse – fordert auch die Mitarbeit und aufrichtiges Engagement der Palästinenser.

Lassen Sie uns doch schon einmal in den Delegationen dieses Hauses anfangen, im Geiste des Abkommens einen Schritt aufeinander zuzugehen, wenn auch momentan erst einmal online.


  Margrete Auken (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, recently the EU and most of this Parliament were alarmed about the plans of de jure annexation that, I quote: ‘could not go unchallenged’. But then Netanyahu signed the Emirates deal without a mention of Palestine. Since the deal, Israel has advanced 6 200 new settlement units, accelerated demolition of Palestinian homes as well as EU-funded schools and structures, and while the Trump administration effectively recognised Israel’s de facto annexation, no protest came from the Emirates or others.

But annexation must not be normalised. The EU is rule-based; we must respect international law. The EU and the EU governments are complicit in violations of human rights as long as we don’t act in order to stop Israel’s apartheid policy. Stop romanticising this agreement, enforce differentiation policy, review all EU agreements with Israel, and push for Palestinian elections as soon as possible.


  Domènec Ruiz Devesa (S&D). – Señora presidenta, gracias, también, al alto representante por su presencia y por su declaración, que el Grupo Socialista apoya, y yo mismo.

Yo creo que existe —muchos compañeros de la Cámara lo han expresado también— una cierta ambivalencia ante la firma de estos acuerdos. Por un lado, es positivo que dos Estados árabes, enemigos tradicionales del Estado de Israel, hayan establecido relaciones con el Estado hebreo. Al mismo tiempo, objetivamente, debilita la causa palestina y la solución de los dos Estados, porque claramente había la iniciativa árabe, que, como recordaréis, ceñía el reconocimiento de Israel a la solución de los dos Estados y a la resolución del conflicto palestino-israelí.

Por tanto, la Unión Europea debe hacer un esfuerzo adicional —se ha dicho—, necesitamos una iniciativa europea de paz en Oriente Medio, con el apoyo de los estadounidenses, tal vez una segunda conferencia de paz en Madrid, para llegar a la solución de los dos Estados lo antes posible.


  Reinhard Bütikofer (Verts/ALE). – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Borrell! Auch ich begrüße die Abraham-Abkommen Israels mit einigen arabischen Ländern, denn sie konsolidieren die Sicherheit Israels.

Auf arabischer Seite handelt es sich bei diesen Abkommen um einen Kurswechsel. Früher hieß es gegenüber Israel: „Einigt euch mit den Palästinensern, dann finden auch wir zusammen“. Diese Verbindung zwischen den zwei Elementen wurde nun gekappt, aber damit verschwindet nicht die palästinensische Realität.

Israel, das nun gestärkt ist, hat jetzt zwei Möglichkeiten: entweder triumphieren und die Siedlungspolitik vorantreiben oder auf Annexion verbindlich verzichten und doch den Ausgleich suchen.

Wir Europäer werden weiter für die Zweistaatenlösung investieren. Wichtig wird dabei auch sein, die Palästinenser zu der nötigen demokratischen Erneuerung zu bewegen.


  Pierfrancesco Majorino (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la ricerca della pace e della stabilità in Medio Oriente è un'operazione difficile e delicata, in cui abbiamo purtroppo imparato a non dare nulla per scontato.

La definizione degli accordi di Abramo è certamente un passaggio significativo in cui cadono diffidenze storiche, si sancisce una evidente convergenza di obiettivi economici e politici tra Israele, Emirati Arabi, Bahrein. La costruzione di ponti e di alleanze penso vada sempre salutata positivamente e ciò deve avvenire anche in questo caso.

Credo che vadano però aggiunte due considerazioni: la prima è che questi accordi non devono farci in nessun modo perdere di vista la questione palestinese, l'enorme difficoltà in cui si trovano oggi i profughi palestinesi e la necessità che non passi in secondo piano la soluzione dei due popoli-due Stati e il pieno riconoscimento di uno Stato in Palestina.

La seconda considerazione è che gli accordi e i processi di pacificazione sono positivi se non si trasformano in alleanze contro e l'Unione europea non può limitarsi a guardare quello che accade in Medio Oriente. Serve un nuovo e rinnovato protagonismo che aiuti a compiere passi difficili e mai scontati nella giusta direzione.


  Mounir Satouri (Verts/ALE). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Haut-représentant, cet accord offre une double victoire à Israël. D’abord, parce qu’il renforce ses relations internationales, mais aussi parce qu’il consacre le plan Trump et sa volonté d’enterrer toujours plus la possibilité d’un État palestinien viable. Ne nous voilons pas la face, la mention de l’arrêt de la colonisation dans cet accord n’est là que pour permettre aux Émirats arabes unis de présenter une victoire à sa population rendue muette. La colonisation ne s’arrête en aucun cas dans les faits.

Si les pays signent avec Israël, c’est qu’ils ont choisi le fort face au faible, la force face à la justice. Cela n’a jamais été le choix de l’Union européenne dans ce conflit et j’espère que ce ne le sera jamais. À nous, Européens, de continuer de choisir le droit, la lutte contre l’occupation illégale, contre les annexions, contre les emprisonnements politiques, pour une paix juste et durable. À nous de jouer notre rôle et d’arrêter de laisser bafouer les solutions que l’on défend. À nous de porter un processus de paix basé sur le droit qui fait et doit continuer de faire notre ADN.


  Josep Borrell Fontelles, Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Madam President, thank you, and I would like to thank all of you for this exchange of views. You know, this complex reality can be perceived in different approaches, but for the European Union, the normalisation of relations between Israel and the countries of the region is, all in all, a welcome development which represents a positive hope for the future. But as I said, and I repeat at the same time, a just and lasting peace in the Middle East will require also progress in relation to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and there, further actions will be involved.

Our role is to continue reaching out to the parties in the region. Yesterday in my conversation with Minister Ashkenazi, when the Foreign Affairs Minister of the Palestinian Authority came to the Foreign Affairs Council, we encouraged both to re-engage and have also signalled our willingness to move ahead in our bilateral relations with both.

We continue thinking that a two-state solution is the only viable – difficult, but the only viable – solution, and a lot of work is still required in order to bring, at the same time, security to Israel, freedom to the Palestinians, and peace and stability to the region as a whole.

These deals and the normalisation of their relations have to be considered in the complex reality of the zone. Well, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain have never been, technically, at war with Israel, so to call that a peace agreement without having had a war may be an exaggeration. But as I said, in any case it’s a positive approach that reflects a somewhat transactional rather than transformative approach, and it has to be understood in the context of the growing strategic rivalry between the Emirates and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Turkey, and the wider tension in the Eastern Mediterranean, and maybe this strategy will reflect a deeper polarisation in the Arab world, where mostly Sunni Arab states consider Iran, along with political Islam, as the more serious threats in the region and are thus likely to engage in a deeper cooperation with Israel.

In this context, a new regional paradigm has been emerging, where a peace deal is no longer a precondition to normalisation, and both the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Emirates have developed a narrative which describes normalisation as a driver in the Israeli-Arab confidence-building process, creating a more conducive environment for a two-state solution.

On the other hand, it is clear that this normalisation comes after other strategic considerations, such as gaining military (F-35 fighters for the Emirates) or economic advantages, economic deals with the Emirates and Bahrain, or for Sudan, a major gain to get out of its international isolation by being taken off the list of state sponsors of terrorism, which is a major win for Sudan. Its economy is on the verge of collapse and badly needs outside investment. All these things, for sure, have been taken into consideration in these kinds of agreements.

About the demolition by Israel of Palestinian structures: yesterday I had the opportunity, as I said, to talk about it with the Foreign Affairs Minister of Israel. For sure I didn’t convince him, and he didn’t convince me with their arguments and reasons, but we have reiterated that we consider these activities illegal from the point of view of international law. We reiterated our call on Israel to halt such demolitions. This confirms a regrettable trend of confiscation and demolition since the beginning of the year, which constitutes, for sure, an impediment towards the two-state solution but also to the improvement of the bilateral relations between the European Union and Israel.

I am working on the prospects of holding again meetings of the Association Council that has not met in the last eight years, but for many Member States, these kinds of activities – demolitions, settlements – are strong impediments to this meeting taking place. Israel knows very well the position of the European Union, and I reiterated it yesterday in my talk with the Foreign Affairs Minister.


  Il-President. – Id-dibattitu ngħalaq.

Stqarrijiet bil-miktub (Artikolu 171)


  Adam Bielan (ECR), in writing. – I welcome the Abraham Accords signed on 15 September 2020 between Israel, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. This is a fundamental step for the stabilisation of the Middle East, the Red Sea region and the Horn of Africa. In this context, I also welcome the United States’ efforts to facilitate a solution and help restoring peace in the region.

I think we all welcome Israel’s commitment to suspend plans to unilaterally annex parts of occupied territory in the West Bank. In the complex reality of the region, it is equally important to pursue a negotiated and viable two-state solution to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. We should use this momentum to work on this fundamental issue.

I call on European diplomacy and on the international community to remain committed to the resolution of the long-lasting conflicts in the region. We should keep advocating for a two-state solution and more actively pave the way for dialogue and cooperation in the region and, if necessary, by rethinking EU’s strategy.

Последно осъвременяване: 16 март 2021 г.Правна информация - Политика за поверителност