Opinions of Peter Belmont
Speaking Truth to Power
| If UNGA requested sanctions toward removal of Israeli settlements, could individual EU members comply? |
|
by Peter A. Belmont / 2013-04-21
Imagine, as I like to do, that the UNGA resolved that its members should be encouraged to apply sanctions on Israel with the purpose of, again as I imagine it, persuading Israel to comply with international law and agreements to the extent of removing all settlers from, dismantling the wall inside, and dismantling the settlement buildings inside the territories Israel captured in the 1967 war—and ending Israel’s siege on Gaza. Eminent former EU officials are now talking about EU action on Palestine. They seem to contemplate action by the EU-as-a-whole. That would we wonderful, but politics may either prevent joint action or allow no more than watered-down action. My concern, here, is with action by EU member states.OK, Belmont wants sanctions. The precise sanctions are not the issue here. Imagine them as you will. Perhaps removal of embassies, cessation of commercial air-flights, restrictions on trade, reciprocal removal of citizens. My question is this: could an individual EU member state impose such sanctions without an OK from the EU as a whole? My understanding is that on some foreign policy issues, the EU’s rules demand that the EU act as a blok and that all member states must be in agreement to do (or to stop doing) something before any member state may so act. Of course, my understanding is not well informed, and I invite my friends to educate me on this point. At issue—apart from the question of whether any EU member state would, in the first place, wish to embark on such a sanctions program—is the question of whether such state’s “undertaking” as a High Contracting Party to the Geneva Conventions has been erased or made contingent by the agreements subsequently made which created the EU and its foreign policy arms. Of course, over the years since 1949 and especially since 1967, the nations have shown no tendency to comply with (or to fulfil) their “undertakings” to “ensure respect for” the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 “in all circumstances” as regards Israel’s too-long occupation(s). These undertakings have been treated as if, as regards intention, they were empty words. Of course, since the USA has assumed a quasi-royal power in the world and has opposed the fulfilment of these undertakings, it is possible that the nations have held back due to American duress rather than from lack of intention. But even if EU members’ hands are tied as far as trade sanctions might go, for instance, they might nevertheless retain power—within EU agreements—to impose other sanctions. I, for one, would welcome it if one or more of these countries began public discussions about such sanctions—perhaps as prelude to presenting a draft UNGA resolution—even if such discussions went nowhere. Why, such discussions could start outside government—in the Oxford Union for example. Or in a discussion within the Board of Deputies of British Jews. For a journey of a 1000 li begins with a single step. |
Comments:
| Harry Law 2013-04-24 | |
| Dear Peter, Regarding you essays, can I refer you to the recently updated comments in Mondoweiss dated the 21St April 2013. I had to take a crash course at Bletchley park(national codes and cypher centre) to to post a comment on your site! Even my son who is an absolute wizard on these things had difficulty. Regards Harry |
Submit a comment, subject to review:
|
123pab.com | Top
©2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 www.123pab.com |