The United States and the European Union (EU), which have been strategic allies over decades, have shown rather different attitudes towards the conflict in the Middle East.
Soon after the US government unveiled a long-awaited proposal on June 24, to jump-start the stalled peace process in the Middle East which called for removal of Yasser Arafat from the Palestinian leadership, the EU did not hesitate to express its cautious welcome, but stressed its persistent stance that it would continue to support whoever would be democratically elected by the Palestinians.
At the just-ended Summit of the Group of Eight in Canada, the United States publicly pressed for the removal of Arafat from the leadership by warning that aid to the Palestinians would be cut off if they reelect him as their leader, a move only echoed with an equally cold reaction from the EU.
The EU's cold response to the US call demonstrates that the EU opposes the replacement of Arafat. The union has made it clear on many occasions that the international community should respect the rightful choice of the Palestinians. In fact, the EU has never stopped its support for Arafat and the Palestinian National Authority (PNA), and has provided a huge amount of economic assistance to them.
As the escalating conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians persists, the EU condemns both the suicide bombings with Israeli civilians as targets and the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory, the siege of Arafat's premises in particular.
Recognizing that armed confrontation between the two sides would lead the peace process nowhere, the EU stepped up its diplomatic efforts there and increased its funding for the reconstruction of the damaged infrastructure on Palestinian soil to save the faltering peace process.
It is widely seen that the EU is pursuing its own approach to the Mideast issue for the following reasons.
Firstly, the geographic position of the Middle East is of greatimportance to EU's stability. Any prolonged insecurity and instability in the region could spill out to Europe, thus posing agrave threat to the peace and prosperity on the continent. A lasting and peaceful solution to the conflict between Israelis andPalestinians would surely be conducive to the realization of the EU's ambitions of integration and enlargement.
Secondly, solution to the conflict in the Middle East could guarantee a secure source of energy for Europe and keep the EU's economy safe. In general, half the EU's energy supply depends on imports. The dependence would grow in the next 30 years and about 70 percent of its energy consumption would be met by imports at that time, analysts said. To have a stable Mideast region is to have a secure source of energy for the EU.
Thirdly, the EU needs to keep a safe distance from the US so asto be independent in its policies and to play a bigger role in theinternational arena. With the advancement of its economic and political integration, the EU has demonstrated a bigger and stronger role in international affairs. Presently, it is striving to grow into one of the few influential powers in the world. To help achieve peace in the Mideast would provide an unprecedented gain for EU diplomacy.
The EU's staunch efforts have proved indispensable for the containment of conflict deterioration and communication between the two peoples in the region at all levels. The eventual solutionto the recent crisis at the Church of Nativity in Bethlehem is a case in point. While the situation was worsening and spilling out of control, the United States was watching with indifferent eyes. But EU stepped in to help the region avert a serious crisis by agreeing to accept the Palestinians within the church.
The union's praise worthy move earned its support and respect from the international community, especially from the Arab world. This in turn created more space for EU diplomacy in the region.
(China Daily July 3, 2002)
