The Prime Minister’s recent official visit to Israel and Palestine was both a political and a business mission.  It had the political objective of reiterating Malta’s views on the Middle East Peace Process to the highest Israeli and Palestinian authorities and to the Quartet Representative, stressing the direct link between this conflict and peace and security in Europe and the Mediterranean.  It also served the more  mundane and pragmatic objective of attracting business to Malta and of seeking to benefit from closer cooperation with Israel in areas like heath, energy, water conservation, tourism and agriculture.

The Prime Minister's advisers seem to have carefully timed the visit.  In Prime Minister Muscat's own words to Prime Minister Netanyahu, “After 50 years of Malta's Independence, this visit from the Prime Minister of Malta was well overdue”. It was time for Malta and Israel to establish this high level contact in order to dissipate lingering mutual misunderstandings arising from Malta’s alignment with the Palestinian cause, and move on to deeper and wider bilateral cooperation.

The timing was good because the visit took place while the Israelis and the Palestinians were once more engaged in US sponsored final status negotiations. With the international community expecting progress, and with America's reputation as the only viable peace broker between the Israelis and the Palestinians at stake, the start of the negotiations last July in Washington brought a lull in the confrontation at least at the diplomatic level if not on the ground. This lull may have facilitated the organisation of Prime Minister Muscat's visit, and allowed for due attention to be given to his demarches by both Israeli and Palestinian political leaders.

The timing was well chosen also because in the current political manoeuvring and upheaval in the region, Israel is seeking to mitigate its isolation among the countries of the Middle East and the Mediterranean. A good handshake with Malta auguring closer cooperation would fit in Israel's calculations.

In this political context, the Prime Minister wisely put economic and technical cooperation at the top of his agenda. He told President Simon Peres, “We are taking our relationship further than just a diplomatic one, to one of strong cooperation which will lead to an improvement in the quality of life of the citizens of the two countries”, meaning that Malta is ready for detailed negotiations on specific projects and the conclusion of business deals.

To convince his hosts that economic and technical cooperation with Malta would also be to their advantage, Prime Minister Muscat, as he had already done elsewhere, produced the trump card of Malta’s role as member of the European Union. He told President Peres, “Malta wants to help Israel to strengthen its relationship with Europe’.  He repeated the offer during his meeting with the Speaker of the Knesset, Mr Yuli-Yoel Edelstein, “We can be honest brokers within the EU’. Mr Edelstein took the hint and declared, ’Malta is a good friend, represented in the European Union, and we are happy to work in cooperation together.” (All quotes taken from DOI Press Releases)

In order to assess whether these are purely political statements, without much factual and practical content, or whether they can lead to concrete forms of cooperation in which Malta's membership of the EU can play a determining role, one has to examine the current state of the relationship between Israel and the EU.

Israel established diplomatic relations with the then European Economic Community (EEC) in 1959, and its first trade agreement with the EEC entered into force in January 1970, before Malta's 1971 Association Agreement. The 1970 Agreement was concluded under Article XXVIII(4) of the General Agreement in Tariffs and Trade (GATT), the precursor of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), and paved the way for free trade between the two parties.

The legal basis governing the current relations between Israel and the EU is the Association Agreement signed in 1995, which entered into force on 1 June 2000. The Agreement reflects the general principles of the association agreements concluded with Southern Mediterranean countries within the framework of the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership.  However, it contains provisions specific to Israel since, unlike the other Mediterranean countries, Israel is considered by the EU as a developed country. It is a comprehensive cooperation agreement, providing for the free movement of goods, services and capital to reinforce the free trade area, for the reciprocal liberalization of the right of establishment and of public procurement, for cooperation in science and technology, and for cooperation in various other sectors, including industry, agriculture, financial services, information technology, transport and tourism. The Agreement provides a framework for political dialogue allowing for the development of close political relations, and contains a human rights clause, recognized as an essential element of the Agreement.

In addition Israel and the EU have concluded agreements on scientific and technical cooperation, on the reciprocal liberalization of agricultural and fisheries products, on Conformity Assessment and Acceptance (CAA) of Industrial Products, and on security procedures for exchanging classified information, though the latter agreement has not yet entered into force.

These agreements indicate the extent and diversity of the relations that Israel has established with the EU. The two sides have built a solid trade and investment relationship, developed intensive scientific cooperation, and reached a high level of cooperation in most areas covered by these agreements.

The friction that exists between Israel and the EU arises from the EU’s stand on the Middle East Peace Process which conflicts with that of Israel, particularly on the core issues of borders, settlements, and the status of Jerusalem.  The EU's position, like Malta's, is for a two-state solution with an independent, democratic and viable Palestinian state within borders based on a withdrawal by Israel from the territories it occupied in 1967. Consequently, the EU considers the expansion of Israeli settlements on occupied territory, including East Jerusalem, to be illegal under international law, and threatening the viability of a two-state solution.

The dispute over settlements has lead to serious obstacles in the implementation of the Association Agreement and the other EU – Israel agreements, because the EU considers these agreements as applicable to the State of Israel and not to the occupied territories. This position was stressed by the Foreign Affairs Council of December 2012, which declared that, “all agreements between the State of Israel and the European Union must unequivocally and explicitly indicate their inapplicability to the territories occupied by Israel in 1967, namely the Golan Heights, the West Bank including  East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip.”  Furthermore, in July 2013, the Commission adopted guidelines which disqualify Israeli entities in the occupied territories from EU funded projects.

It seems, from the current state of Israel – EU relations, that the most sensible and beneficial approach for Malta would be to exploit the provisions of the EU – Israel agreements, and follow an agenda of cooperation in those sectors where Israel can offer expertise, markets and finance. It is at this level that Malta can be an “honest broker” for Israel in the EU.  

Tarcisio Zammit is a former Ambassador to Belgium and Malta’s representative to the EU’s Political and Security Committee