Israel and the Palestinian authority have recently begun direct talks to arrive at a two states solution to a century-long dispute. Painful concessions are required of both sides. And incentives to make such concessions are certainly needed.


A Role for the EU

As of now the main, if not the only, outside policy that Israel encounters is diplomatic pressure. It originates in the Quartet and its four component members. But to convince the government, and especially the right wing parties, to make concessions that go against their most fundamental beliefs, what is needed is a "carrot" more than a "stick". The same applies to the Palestinians and their radical factions.

Here is where action by the EU would be very useful. Suppose that the President of France and the Chancellor of Germany made a Joint Declaration that upon the conclusion of a peace agreement between Israelis and Palestinians they will press other EU member countries to consider possible membership of Israel (recently admitted in the OECD) and Palestine in the EU. Such a move would certainly be welcomed by the US. All that provided that both the Copenhagen and Maastricht criteria are fulfilled.

While Palestine can choose to belong to the Arab League or to the EU, Israel’s only reasonable membership is in the EU. Close relations with the US are assumed to continue and flourish. And within the EU, Israel will be a force advocating an Atlantic free trade area.

For the EU, admitting Israel holds certain advantages as well. Israel is a technological powerhouse, able to create inventions and put them in practice; it is a modern and vibrant economy, and helpful to the economic integration of the transition economies, including those in the EU's neighborhood. With a free economy, Israel has been able to weather the last global recession, to minimize its budget deficit, and balance its foreign trade account. As such, it would be a net positive contributor to the EU budget. Finally, such an act will constitute a substantial infusion of Jewish cultural and scientific contribution to the European enterprise, which was basically uprooted in WWII.

As for Palestine, free mobility of goods, services, capital and labor within Europe, will obviate the need for European financial assistance."Trade, not aid" will contribute more to the well being of Palestinians, in line with their potential comparative advantage. To soothe European and Israeli sensitivities, a long transition period for the free movement of labor would be provided for as in past EU enlargements.

The value of membership to Israel and Palestine is obvious, not the least of which is a contribution to the solution of the refugee problem. The choice for many Palestinian refugees will be broadened from just return to the Palestinian state to being absorbed by the vast European continent. For Israel, belonging to a strong economic block holds both economic and security advantages. It would also strengthen the democratic features of Israel, which would have to introduce a few legal reforms before accession, to guarantee some separation between state and religion.. Most of all EU membership would bring a “new vision” for Israel which can galvanize reforms.


Possible Solution for the Temple Mount site

While the EU can be helpful in solving the problems of security and refugees, it cannot help in cracking a tough nut: the issue of the Old City of Jerusalem and in particular the Temple Mount (for the Arabs Al Haram Al Sharif; for the Jews Har Ha Bait). Dividing the Old City of Jerusalem is not practical, and neither party is likely to welcome internationalization (as decided in 1949). Here we have a separate idea to offer. Leave Temple Mount (and the Old City) in the hands of Israel with full access to all religions. On Temple Mount, in the square between the Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque ,construct a multiple-level structure to house the Embassies to Israel of Palestine, Egypt, Jordan , Saudi Arabia and any other Arab country so interested. That way the entire area would be of shared sovereignty, as embassies possess extra-territorial status.

While this article offers certain novel ideas to tackle the issue of Middle Eastern peace, we are certain that other ideas exist, and their airing should be encouraged. They should come to light, despite unavoidable controversy and opposition from certain political segments of the countries concerned. There is no perfect solution. But only by adjusting ideas to achieve compromises can the negotiations be advanced.


Mordechai Kreinin, University Distinguished Professor of Economics, Michigan State University

Alfred Tovias, Walter Rathenau Professor in European Economics and Jean Monnet Chair, Department of International Relations, The Hebrew University