SPEECH/06/457
th
Frankfurt, 14 July 2006

Professor Dr Weidenfeld,
Your Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Thank you for this kind invitation to talk to you and the excellent hospitality - foreign policy has many drawbacks, but they do not include malnutrition! By holding the
Kronberg Talks and providing us with its excellent report the Bertelsmann Stiftung is also nourishing us intellectually. Much of the European Commission’s thinking is echoed in your report, and we will certainly look at your recommendations carefully.
This is not a happy moment to be talking about the situation in the Broader Middle
East.
As Shimon Peres once said of the Middle East Peace Process, “A philosopher took up his lantern and went out into the dark night in search of the truth. Someone stole his lantern.”
I jest, but unfortunately, there is little cause for humour. I am an optimist by nature, but the situation in Iraq, the stand-off with Iran, and above all the sharp escalation of violence in the Palestinian territories, Israel and Lebanon makes this one of the least auspicious moments in recent years to be discussing the broader Middle East.
****
I had wanted to talk to you about some of the broader trends facing the region and their strategic significance. But as so often and so tragically happens in this region, its long term development is yet again compromised by crisis.
I do not use that word lightly. Today we are again facing one of the most serious situations in the region for many years.
Let me talk first about Lebanon and then Israel-Palestine.
1) Lebanon
This time last week I was in Beirut. Indeed only five days ago I flew home from
Beirut airport.
As part of my visit I addressed a university graduation ceremony, talking about the importance of hope for the region, about the contribution that youth could make to creating a better world. I fear the last few days will have taught those students a different lesson.
I am greatly alarmed at the escalation of violence between Israel and Lebanon. The
EU has condemned unreservedly the taking of two Israeli soldiers by Hizbollah.
They must be released safely and without delay.
Of course Israel has the right to self-defence, but it should use its force in response to Hizbollah attacks in a way which is proportionate and measured and corresponds to international humanitarian law.
The imposition of an air and sea blockade on Lebanon seriously aggravates the situation of civilians, and should be lifted.
I am shocked by the scale of violence on both sides: the loss of life including of children, as well as extensive damage to Lebanese infrastructure.
2

Every effort must be made not to harm civilians: actions which are contrary to international humanitarian law can only aggravate the vicious circle of violence, and cannot help protect a nyone’s security.
On the other hand, it is urgent that the Lebanese Government does everything within its power to prevent further Hizbollah attacks and to extend its control over all
Lebanese territory as required by UNSC Resolution 1559.
The Commission calls on all parties to make every effort to put an end to the attacks and to fully respect the Blue Line. All sides must now exercise maximum restraint to prevent further escalation and should reflect on their responsibilities.
A further escalation cannot serve the interests of either side and could lead to a conflagration of the whole region.
I have, of course, been in regular contact with the Finnish Presidency. I am glad that the High Representative, Javier Solana, is going to the region tomorrow and will speak to all the parties concerned in the name of the European Union. UN
Secretary General Kofi Annan is sending a special mission with Terje Roed-Larsen, his special representative for Syria, and others. And I wholeheartedly support the
UN’s efforts to arrange as quickly as possible a ceasefire and the release of the abducted soldiers. On Monday the EU’s foreign ministers will meet: together we will review the situation in the light of those visits and decide on the further course of action to find a way out of the present crisis.
We will do everything in our power to assist, and to prevent the situation escalating still further. We cannot allow a return to the circumstances of 20 years ago, the world must show itself to have moved on. Those students I addressed must be given a brighter future.
2) Israel-Palestine
The last three weeks in Israeli-Palestinian relations have plumbed new depths. All sides need to consider their responsibilities extremely carefully. All sides must abstain from actions in violation of international law. And all sides must do their utmost to bring the current crisis to a peaceful resolution.
If both sides do not step away from the brink this crisis could become worse still.
The EU has repeatedly called for the immediate and unconditional release of the abducted Israeli soldier. The Palestinian government must bring violence and terrorist activities to an end. We condemn the extremist groups responsible for these acts and all those who jeopardise the prospects for peace.
We also call on the Israeli government to exercise utmost restraint and avoid disproportionate action. And the detention of elected members of the Palestinian government and legislature raises particular concerns.
Our chief problem at this moment is the impact of this crisis on civilian lives, and on the infrastructure which sustains those lives. The humanitarian situation for the
Palestinian population has deteriorated rapidly from an already grim level.
Even before the latest events we were looking at a 30% fall in income, unemployment at 40%, and 67% poverty levels.
But now the air strikes against Gaza’s only power station have deprived hundreds of thousands of Palestinians of electricity and have had serious humanitarian consequences – on hospitals, food production facilities, water and sanitation systems.
3

Movement and access are key, at a minimum for the safe passage of humanitarian aid and basic products to Gaza.
All this is a huge humanitarian challenge.
Therefore we are determined to press ahead urgently with the Temporary
International Mechanism, which the Commission set up in response to the Quartet’s request, to give immediate relief to the Palestinian people and ensure basic services are provided.
Earlier this week the TIM delivered its first results, providing fuel to hospitals in
Gaza hit by the destruction of the power plant. This took place under the second of the TIM’s three windows. And we hope the final details for window 1, an allowance to health service providers, will soon be agreed. Other actions will include, in close coordination with the World Bank, measures designed to alleviate the suffering of sections of the population in need.
This was a real success for European diplomacy – the negotiations over the precise contours of the mechanism and to bring all partners on board were not easy.
We urge all the parties to facilitate by every possible means the operation of this mechanism. No party should have on their conscience the further worsening of the situation for civilians.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is hard not to reach a rather sober conclusion on a subject such as this. Where will the present situation lead us in 10, 20, or 30 years?
In spite of the current crisis, my vision is still for the Palestinians to be masters of their destiny and at peace with their neighbours. The area has enormous economic, social and cultural potential, yet the Palestinian people have for too long been treated as a pawn in others’ strategic games.
The current situation is simply not tenable. But responsible politicians cannot give in to frustration. We are doing all we can to assist the parties in the region to resolve this crisis. And to convince the two sides of the necessity for negotiations. Conflict takes us further away from the just and lasting settlement we all want to see.
Without a political perspective for the Palestinians the situation will not improve.
Similarly for the people of Lebanon there must be an end to the insecurity and fear which stifles their ability to fulfil their full potential.
And Israelis need a lasting solution to their legitimate security fears.
The present situation does nothing to resolve any of these issues.
The parties to the conflict bear the greatest burden for resolving it. Unilateralism does not solve the problems of a bilateral conflict. Only a negotiated peace is sustainable.
But although the international community cannot deputise for the parties to the conflict, it can help a solution emerge. For that we need to remain united around clear objectives.
That’s why my message has to be more engagement not less. Not only is that a moral obligation, but it’s a matter of self-interest. We should be realistic in accepting that the broader region’s problems would not disappear if we resolved this conflict, but it would make a tremendous contribution to peace in today’s world.
4

We all know the arguments about the region’s strategic importance. Conflict, exploding populations, poor governance and natural resource wealth make for a potent cocktail. But it has particular significance for Europe, given our proximity.
Every country is different. Yet certain trends are common to the region. I want to mention three which are particularly important to understand, yet frequently misinterpreted.
1) First, although the whole world is struggling to adapt to globalisation, the broader
Middle East has particular difficulty. We are all grappling with migration, health and environmental risks, and breathtakingly fast modernisation. In all our societies we must reconcile old and new values, demographic and economic changes, and find jobs and opportunities for the young.
But the broader Middle East’s history means it is dealing with all this in a highly compressed timescale, significantly multiplying the impact of societal and economic changes.
In addition, many countries are rentier states, and beyond the natural resources sector economic growth has stagnated for some time. This makes responding to its rapid population growth all the more challenging.
2) Second, we cannot deny the deep-seated resentment, anger and frustration felt towards the West. Nor can we ignore the increasing attraction of more radical strands of Islam.
The relationship between those two phenomena is complex and we must be very careful not to minimise the impact of either.
We need to invest more in understanding the political and religious currents in the region. We need to recognise that just as the West is not monolithic, nor is Islam.
And we need to be clear: this is not a clash of civilisations, if anything, it’s a clash of ignorance.
3) Third, despite the democracy deficit identified by the UN’s human development report on the Arab world, there is clear evidence that the people want political reform and democracy.
Democracy is only sustainable when it is home-grown and reflects the specificities of a country. The basic principles are, of course, universal, but it is totally misguided to transfer a model from one country to another and expect it to work.
What is needed is a domestically manufactured momentum for democratic reform.
That momentum is building. Outsiders should recognise their proper place – to encourage, to share experiences, but not to impose. Insiders should recognise that the old power structures have a limited life span - oil and gas money cannot maintain stability forever. And all of us must recognise democracy may, in the short term, conflict with stability, if the transition is not handled carefully. In Victor Hugo’s words: “You can stop the invasion of armies, but not the invasion of ideas”.
We must also remain ambitious and keep frustration at bay, as Samuel Johnson put it, “Nothing will be attempted if all possible objections must be overcome first.”
So let me leave my remarks at that, and I look forward to our discussion.
5