(Click to enlarge)

Christofer Fjellner is a Swedish centre-right MEP, Marek Siwiec is a Polish centre-left MEP, Sarah Ludford is a British Liberal MEP, and Charles Tannock is a British MEP from the European Conservatives and Reformists group.

The European Parliament was this week to have considered a practical issue for European citizens: a trade agreement that would facilitate the import of high-quality and affordable medicines into Europe. Many might reasonably think that the Parliament would be eager to ratify an agreement with clear benefits for European patients; the agreement has, instead, been politicised and the legislative process stalled for the past two years.

The protocol agreement on Conformity Assessment and Acceptance of Industrial Products (ACAA) with Israel is a technical trade agreement that would simplify Israeli exports into Europe. At present, the only products covered by the agreement are pharmaceuticals. If this ACAA were approved, EU patients would have access to a broader range of essential generic and branded medicines, and European pharmaceutical manufacturers would gain access to new markets. ACAA would, likewise, reduce the regulatory burden of certification procedures for national competent authorities, and translate into cost savings for stretched state healthcare budgets. These savings could be passed down to consumers by pharmaceutical firms, which would no longer be hampered by unnecessary conformity-assessment procedures.

The provision of effective and less costly medicines is highly relevant in the current economic climate, and will be even more so in the future as Europe's population continues to age rapidly. The significance of increased EU-Israeli trade in pharmaceuticals, which totalled approximately €1.1 billion in 2010, is thus essential for Europe's better health and well-being. The EU has adopted a strategy to trade itself out of the financial downturn. To do so, we must identify opportunities and capitalise on them. The ACAA agreement is one such occasion. This is a win-win situation too important to overlook.

The problem is that some members of the Parliament seemingly do not share these values and are delaying the ratification of ACAA, and, by association, access to quality medicines for patients throughout Europe.

What began as a technical trade agreement negotiated by the European Commission and signed by the Council of Ministers in May 2010 has been politicised in the Parliament's committees on international trade (INTA) and foreign affairs (AFET). This politicisation is directly responsible for the considerable delay in ratification, a delay that raises serious questions about transparency and democracy in the Parliament.

AFET's rapporteur on the issue, Belgian Socialist MEP Véronique De Keyser, has called for the Parliament to issue an interim report on ACAA, which would in effect further postpone a decision on the dossier. INTA's rapporteur, Portuguese Socialist MEP Vital Moreira, has called for the Parliament to postpone judgement on the text for two years. In two years' time, new elections to the Parliament will take place. Is the rapporteur recommending that the current Parliament avoid its responsibilities and pass these on to newcomers in 2014? That, surely, is not the opinion of the INTA committee as a whole. As an ex-officio rapporteur, Moreira should reflect the views of the majority of members of his committee, not his own political position.

It is regrettable that some MEPs are using this technical agreement to prevent EU citizens from gaining access to high-quality and affordable medicines. We believe that members should be given the opportunity to debate and vote on ACAA, to fulfil the Parliament's hard-won responsibilities for oversight of European policy. This should take place without delay. The EU should be taking steps to strengthen our relationship with all our neighbours, including Israel, and by association build on our influence in the Middle East peace process. Stalling the ACAA agreement is not getting us any closer to this objective.

To read the full article that appeared in the European Voice on April 26, 2012, please click here.

(Click to enlarge)

The Government of Israel views the bilateral track with the Palestinians as the only way to reach a sustainable solution, based on two states for two peoples.

In the first three quarters of 2011, Palestinian economic growth slowed, as real GDP in the West Bank rose by 5.8%, while growth in the Gaza Strip continued to climb, with a 25.8% increase in real GDP. Unfortunately, the PA faces a financial crisis, caused primarily by the shortfall in foreign aid, growing arrears to suppliers and reaching the lending limit that the domestic banking system can sustain. Another primary factor was the lack of significant development in the private sector coupled with an inability to increase income from internal resources, while the public sector remains the largest employer in the West Bank. The current fiscal situation raises doubts about whether the PA will be able to reduce its dependency on foreign aid in the coming years.

In a time of regional political uncertainty and instability, the global economic slowdown now hinders the capability of international donors to assist the PA, and the PA enjoys very limited Arab financial support. Thus, after three consecutive years of impressive economic growth in the West Bank, PA financial stability is now challenged.

In 2011, Israel continued to implement its policy of support for economic growth in the West Bank, inter alia by removing additional check points, upgrading commercial crossings, approving projects in Area C, increasing the number of permits for Palestinian employment in Israel, and pushing forward an agreement to build four electricity substations in the West Bank to increase the amount of electricity available for further economic development.

Israel maintained bilateral dialogues with the PA aimed at supporting the upgrade of Palestinian infrastructure, including: financial and customs services, water and sewage infrastructure, the agriculture sector, and the electricity network. Israel worked closely with the international community in order to support projects, facilitate trade and contribute to improved Palestinian governance and economic capacity.

To read the full report, click here.

By Yacov Hadas-Handelsman, Ambassador, Mission of Israel to the EU

The situation in our part of the Middle East does not appear to make much sense at first glance. Israel has declared that it supports the establishment of two states for two peoples - which includes a Palestinian state. The Palestinians say they want a state. So why do two seemingly identical positions not lead to the expected outcome? The answer is simple - both sides hold opposing views on the means to reach this goal.

Israel believes that a Palestinian state should be achieved as the result of a comprehensive and genuine peace process. Negotiations remain the only means to reach agreement on the complicated issues that surround the establishment of a new state.

However, the Palestinian Authority (PA) is attempting to bypass talks and create a state without making peace with Israel. This is the motivation behind their refusal to participate in serious negotiations for nearly three years, as well as their decision to turn to the UN for recognition.

There is an unbridgeable gap between a state with peace and a state without peace. The future of the relationship between Israel and the Palestinians lies in that difference. Will the Palestinians have a country from which they launch further attacks on Israel or will they build a country which will live in peaceful coexistence with their neighbour?

Instead of negotiating, the Palestinians are assailing Israel with diplomatic warfare. They have orchestrated a recognition bid at the UN, in direct violation of the Oslo Accords the PA signed with Israel, which specifically forbid unilateral action to change the status of the West Bank and Gaza.

It has become increasingly clear that the Palestinian Authority is not very interested in peace negotiations. This unfortunate turn of events is demonstrated by the ever growing list of preconditions the Palestinians have set for the resumption of negotiations.

The first precondition laid out by the PA was an end to settlement activity. They then proceeded to ignore the 10-month moratorium on West Bank building initiated by Israel, deciding to negotiate only after nine and a half months had passed. After six hours of talks, they abandoned negotiations once again. Then they demanded that before talks begin, Israel must surrender to their demands and recognize the 1949 cease-fire lines (erroneously referred to as the 1967 borders) as the borders of a future Palestinian state. Now there are press reports that a third precondition is on its way - a release of convicted Palestinian terrorists from Israeli jails.

Furthermore, as part of their strategy of avoiding direct negotiations they have chosen to disregard the urgent appeal issued by the Quartet, in which the European Union plays a crucial role, on September 23rd: "to overcome the current obstacles and resume direct bilateral Israeli-Palestinian negotiations without delay or preconditions.

To see the full article as it appeared in the EU Observer, click here.

(Click to enlarge)

Photo: IDF Spokesperson

Over 30 rockets and mortars have been fired from the Gaza Strip at Israeli communities since Saturday. Rockets and mortars struck Ashdod (population of over 200,000), Ashkelon (population of 113,000), Gan Yavne (population of 19,000) and the Eshkol Regional Council, killing one person and injuring approximately 20, most suffering from shock. Several buildings, including a school, were damaged in the attacks.

The latest escalation began after a Gaza rocket hit Ashdod on Wednesday, October 26. In a joint IDF and the Israel Security Agency, IAF aircraft attacked a cell of terrorists preparing to fire long-range rockets from the southern Gaza Strip. This same terrorist cell was responsible for the rockets fired at southern Israel last Wednesday. A commander of the Islamic Jihad and four of its munitions experts were killed.

To read a statement by HR Catherine Ashton, click here.

To read the full story, click here.