The paper was drafted by Brussels officials ahead of an Association Council meeting with Israel next week. It proves that the oppression of the Palestinians and the theft of their homeland are being accorded far less importance than topics regarded as more strategic.
A particularly telling fact – noted in the paper – is that the EU celebrates “the successful counterterrorism dialogues initiated with Israel in 2015.”
While such “dialogues” were still being held as recently as April this year, an “informal” working group on human rights has not met since 2016.
The real nature of the EU’s relationship with Israel can be deduced from these points.
The paper claims that the EU is “gravely concerned that the occupation of the Palestinian territory that began in 1967 continues to this day.”
It is impossible to take that claim seriously. The paper “strongly opposes” the boycott of Israel, thereby rejecting a call from Palestinians living under an occupation that concerns EU institutions and governments so “gravely.”
The EU’s paper subtly backs other initiatives aimed at distracting attention from the plight of Palestinians.
For example, it describes Israel as a “major partner” on LGBT rights.
By doing so, the EU has abetted the pinkwashing of Israeli apartheid. It must be pointed out nonetheless that – unlike most reputable human rights groups – the Brussels institutions have never denounced Israel for operating an apartheid system.
There are other big problems with the EU’s paper.
A reference to the Golan Heights of Syria fails to stipulate that it is under Israeli military occupation.
A criticism of administrative detention – imprisonment without charge or trial – rings hollow.
Israel’s public security ministry, which bears responsibility for the prisons where Palestinians are locked up, is a significant beneficiary of EU scientific research grants – something that the paper neglects to point out.
And the paper fails to demand an independent probe into Israel’s killing of the journalist Shireen Abu Akleh. Instead, it merely advocates a “thorough investigation.”
A wider unease is registered, too, about “the increasingly high level of civilian casualties as a result of actions inter alia by Israeli security forces.”
Such language suggests that the EU has no objection to state violence per se. It just wants Israeli troops to occasionally take their fingers off their triggers.
Yair Lapid, Israel’s prime minister, has been patted on the back by the EU elite for recently declaring his support for a two-state solution.
SOURCE: THE ELECTRONIC INTIFADA