Two additional questions about the Middle East

After the agreement on Iran´s nuclear programme, there are two additional questions related to the Middle East that should receive the same amount of attention. They are both related to peace and security in the region. As such, they are vital for a geopolitical space that has known decades of conflict and remains the major focus of international instability.

One of those questions is about fighting violence. What can the UN Security Council and the countries of the region do to bring peace to Syria and Iraq as well as to Yemen? In different words, can we launch a regional conference on peace and security in the Middle East? This is a very central question. It has to be raised and we have to call on the international leaders to take up their responsibilities and dare to initiate such a process.

It cannot be just about peace in country A or B. In this very volatile part of the world we need to look at the future from a regional perspective. The country by country approach has a very limited impact.

The second question is about the Palestinian crisis. The Quartet is not producing any tangible results. The Palestinian issue is just not being properly addressed. We need to ask ourselves what can be done to change the trend and be in a position to initiate a true process that can lead to a durable solution. 

Here, I see a much greater role for the EU. The EU should take the lead. And it has a chance to do it, now that Tony Blair has moved out of the picture. It has also the moral responsibility, to compensate for all the years we have lost with Blair pretending to be around.

Sad news from the Middle East

The electoral victory of Israel´s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is another piece of bad news for the Middle East. It adds fuel to the existing many crises. The EU and the international community have lost leverage in the region. Tony Blair´s mediation job has been a disaster. The new EU envoy, the Italian diplomat Fernando Gentilini, will have almost no room for manoeuvre. His appointment serves the High Representative’s personal agenda of appointing people loyal to her but brings no political leverage and no hope. In many ways, it is a silent recognition that there is very little the EU can do in the region. I do not see Netanyahu losing any moment of his time talking to the envoy. I actually do not see anyone at this stage able to establish any kind of bridge in the region.

Israel's intentions

As Israel announces that 1,200 new homes will be built in the occupied territories, it came to my mind that I have yet to meet a leader in Western Europe that believes in the new round of peace talks John Kerry has been pushing for. Everyone I talked to and every opinion I have read show that in this part of world the current government of Israel is perceived as not really interested in the talks. Moreover, there seems to be little patience left to deal with Prime Minister Netanyahu.

And, by the way, people have forgotten that there is one Mr Blair that is supposed to be doing something out there, as “Representative” of the Quartet. If you mention is name, the reaction is: “Oh, dear! I thought he had left”.

He might be the only European that does not give up the Israel-Palestine business!

Kerry's efforts

John Kerry, the US Secretary of State, has spent most of his time, during the last two weeks or so, trying to resuscitate the “final status negotiations” –that’s the official expression to name the talks between Israel and Palestine on border issues, security arrangements, and the fate of the Palestinian refugees.

Today it seems that his efforts are bearing fruit. We might see both countries back at the negotiating table, after five years of interruption and stalemate, next week. This is great news. I think it is important to recognize Kerry’s efforts.

And encourage him – and above all, President Obama – to continue along the same line, notwithstanding every bit of resistance Prime Minister Netanyahu will try to raise. At the end of the day, the key to very complex situation that defines the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is as much in Washington as it is in the region.