> > POLICY BRIEF ISSN: 1989-2667 Nº 50 - JUNE 2010 Is the EU losing credibility in Palestine? Daniela Huber The Israeli attack on the Gaza Flotilla and the resulting diplo- >> matic reverberations have engendered clear international agreement on one subject: that the Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip has to be lifted. The EU’s foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton, was HIGHLIGHTS quick to condemn the attack and urged Israel to lift the blockade, call- ing it ‘unacceptable’ and ‘counterproductive’. This move would be a • The EU should actively first step to improving the deteriorating living conditions in Gaza. But it must be remembered that the Middle East Quartet contributed support a Palestinian to the current impasse through its political boycott of the elected reconciliation process, Hamas government and, perhaps more crucially, of the National Uni- resulting in elections without ty Government, which would have provided an opportunity for Pales- further delay tinian reconciliation. • The EU has lost credibility The divide in Palestinian society prevails. In 2009, national elections as a normative actor since originally scheduled for January 2010 were postponed to an unknown its political boycott of date. This postponement counted with the EU’s silent support. Now Hamas: it should re-energise President Abbas has also delayed the municipal elections planned for its approach to democracy July 2010. The elections had already been boycotted by Hamas and promotion, focusing on were to take place in the West Bank only. Palestinian civil society capacity building The postponement of the elections comes in the wake of the Flotilla attack with mounting calls for Palestinian unity to bring about an end to the blockade of the Gaza Strip. Fatah was afraid that elections • For Palestinians, democracy would compromise its credibility. In addition, divisions within Fatah promotion also means that have been deepening. The municipal elections were seen as an impor- the EU should be more tant test-run for the national elections, which now seem to have been assertive towards Israel even further deferred to a date in the unforeseeable future. The con- regarding occupation policies tinuous postponement of elections obviously subverts a precarious democratic process. IS THE EU LOSING CREDIBILITY IN PALESTINE? 2 >>>>>> The EU should now actively support a reconcili- prime minister; by fostering the rule of law with ation process, which must result in elections with- an independent judiciary and the call for the out further delay. This could provide a way out of abolition of the infamous state security courts; by the EU being limited to dealing with Fatah fighting corruption within the PA through the instead of an elected, representative Palestinian introduction of auditing mechanisms; by placing government – an important condition for any revenues under the auspices of the ministry of attempt to reinvigorate credible peace talks. finance; and through an attempt to enhance the oversight capacity of the Palestinian Legislative And, crucially, this must kick-start a re-energised Council. EU approach to building democracy in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT). I car- This approach was reversed after the 2006 elec- ried out a large number of interviews with Pales- tions, when the office of President Abbas was tinian politicians, civil society representatives, strengthened again relative to the office of Prime academics, activists and artists in the West Bank Minister Haniyeh. EU aid was once more distrib- and East Jerusalem in 2010: these show that the uted in opaque ways. EU is fast losing goodwill among key sectors of the Palestinian population. In addition, the majority of EU aid (approxi- mately EUR 530 million in 2007) is dedicated to short-term socio-economic relief, instead of sus- THE EU’S APPROACH TO DEMOCRACY tainable, long-term support for institution build- BUILDING ing. An even smaller amount is allocated to civil society capacity building. In recent years, funds The EU’s democracy building agenda in the for democracy have been modest and have con- Mediterranean started with the Barcelona Process centrated on fighting corruption in the executive and the establishment of the European Instru- (EUR 27 million from 2004–2008), election ment for Democracy and Human Rights support (EUR 20 million from 2000–2006), and (EIDHR). However, it experienced a slow start. on fostering the Palestinian judicial system (EUR Following the Oslo Accords and the establish- 8 million from 2004–2008). Bottom-up democ- ment of the Palestinian Authority (PA), the EU ratisation through civil society bodies receives a was willing to tolerate authoritarian rule and maximum of EUR 1.2 million per year through human rights violations by President Arafat for the EIDHR. the sake of keeping alive the peace process. This changed with the second Intifada, and the 9/11, London and Madrid terrorist attacks. Both the PALESTINIAN PERCEPTIONS Bush administration and the EU changed course. While the policy had hitherto been built on the Palestinians see the Western political boycott of belief that successful peace was a condition for Hamas as highly hypocritical, negatively colour- democratisation, this assumption was now ing their image of the EU and its democracy reversed. Subsequently, the democracy agenda agenda in the region. Although in the past received a boost with the introduction of the decade the EU constantly tried to disassociate Action Plans in the frame of the European Neigh- itself from American democracy promotion in borhood Policy (2004) and an upgrade of the the Middle East, it is perceived in a similar way EIDHR (2006/07). to the US. The new approach also meant a change of stance Indeed, there is a striking gap between the EU’s towards the Palestinian Authority. In 2002, the perception of itself as a ‘normative power’ and EU set out to limit Arafat’s presidential powers the Palestinian perception of the EU as a tradi- by urging the PA to introduce the office of a tional power, which – in the words of Saman POLICY BRIEF - Nº 50 - JUNE 2010 3 Khoury, General Manager of the Peace and Thirdly, many NGO representatives, including Democracy Forum – ‘deals with autocrats and Walid Salem, Director of the Center for Democ- dictators whenever it serves its interests’. Further- racy and Community Development, complain more, several of my interviewees claimed that that they receive ‘peanuts’ as the EU prefers to what really underlies the double-standard in the work with ‘the men in ties’. In addition, Hakim EU’s application of democratic values is a dis- Sabbah, Director of Project Hope, pointed out criminatory approach towards the Palestinians. that several grassroots organisations even prefer As Mustafa Barghouti, Founder and Director of not to apply for EU aid. Palestinians are general- the Palestinian National Initiative (Al-Mubadara) ly proud that they are building democracy by observed, ‘why do they not see us as equally capa- themselves. Mustafa Barghouti even claims that ble of being democratic?’ the bottom-up development of Palestinian democracy provides an inspiration for the entire Thus, if the EU is serious about building democra- Arab world. Many interviewees wonder why the cy in the Palestinian quasi-state, an honest encour- West does not acknowledge this achievement. agement of Palestinian national reconciliation Many Palestinians stress that they do not under- – including some kind of engagement with Hamas stand why their democratic achievements are – appears to be crucial. This would not only ignored, as they associate themselves with a com- support the EU’s democracy agenda and restore its mon heritage in the Mediterranean and feel close image, but also pro- to European values. Palestinians vide an important pre- condition for reviving This represents an important perception of own- do not understand peace talks and help- ership of Palestinian democracy, as well as a sense ing the conflicting of association with European values on the part of why their democratic parties out of the cur- civil society, which the EU should build on. A achievements are rent deadlock. bottom-up approach in EU democracy building would make Palestinian democracy more sustain- ignored by the EU Secondly, Palestinians able and turn the EU into a credible actor that barely distinguish de - works in partnership with Palestinians, instead of mocracy promotion from the EU’s general foreign imposing democracy from above, which is per- policy towards Israel and the OPT. Many intervie- ceived as ‘patronising’ (Sari Nusseibeh) and wees, including Sari Nusseibeh, Palestinian aca- ‘preaching’ (Saman Khoury). demic and Director of Al Quds University, claimed that they are living under an ‘unfolding Fourthly, many lean towards a tolerance-based reality of Apartheid’ and that the two-state solu- model of democracy. For example, Adly Yaish, the tion is on the verge of collapsing, which makes Mayor of Nablus, commented that, ‘Democracy European democracy promotion towards the PA for us means mutual respect and a harmonious all rather pointless. Palestinians expect the EU to coexistence of different religions’. Also repeatedly exert more pressure on Israel, particularly regard- invoked was the rule of law as a central aspect of ing the application of different laws towards set- democracy, as well as the demand for more partic- tlers and Palestinians (Israeli versus military law), ipatory models of democracy. Almost all intervie- the constraint on the freedom of movement, and wees stressed the importance of social justice and the holding of elections in East Jerusalem in accor- a more egalitarian or social model of democracy. dance with the Oslo Accords. Rami Hamdallah, This idea is perceived by some to contrast with Secretary General of the Palestinian Central Elec- the liberal model of democracy, which the EU is tions Commission, and many others, referred to seen as promoting in Palestine. As many of the the difficulties of carrying out elections under the European member states – such as the Scandina- restraints of occupation.