Massive weapons shipment in full violation of UN resolutions

It's been five days since Israel seized a cargo ship reportedly carrying enough weapons and munitions for the Iranian-backed Hezbollah terrorist group to fight Israel for at least one month. And for the past five days, the United Nations has failed to take any action even though Iran was caught red-handed arming a terrorist group in full violation of binding U.N. resolutions.

The cargo ship originated in Iran and was headed for Syria. The Israeli army announced it found documentation showing Iran was the point of origin for some containers on the ship, with Syria as the intended destination.

Iran regularly attempts to send weapons to Syria, and from there the shipments are smuggled to Hezbollah bases in Lebanon, Israeli security officials said.

Israel last week put on full display its find of hundreds of tons of Iranian-supplied arms, including rockets – the largest-ever weapons cache captured by Israeli forces. Israel Radio reported that advanced anti-aircraft platforms were also on board, with Rani Ben-Yehuda, the deputy commander of Israel's navy, confirming the presence of "very advanced weaponry."

The Iranian arms shipment set sail in violation of U.N. Resolution 1701, a binding resolution which ended the Second Lebanon War of 2006 and prohibits the delivery of weapons to any entity in Lebanon but the Lebanese government. The shipment also breaks multiple international laws against funding and supporting terrorist organizations.

Israel's U.N. ambassador last week complained to the international body about Iran's blatant disregard for international law, but no response has been forthcoming from U.N. officials.

WorldNetDaily

Peace plan for the new President

Article I: Territory

Ever since Israel blitzed the Arabs in 1967's Six Day War—taking the Sinai and Gaza from Egypt, the Golan Heights from Syria and the West Bank from Jordan—"land for peace" has been the guiding principle of any comprehensive deal. It remains the only option. Israel has already withdrawn from Gaza; it must now pull out of the vast majority of the West Bank. Palestinians will establish their homeland in these two swatches of land. In return, the Palestinians and other Arabs will formally renounce their claims on the Jewish state and recognize its right to exist. But there will have to be some adjustments to the pre-1967 borders. Israel and the Palestinians should swap equal amounts of land, allowing a majority of the roughly 270,000 Israeli settlers now residing in the largest of the West Bank settlement blocks to stay where they are while remaining under Israeli sovereignty. Israel in turn would give up a land corridor connecting Gaza to the West Bank and allowing for the free flow of people and commerce between the two. There is one additional challenge that did not exist when Clinton laid out his original proposal in 2000: the Israelis have erected a security barrier that puts a full 8 percent of the West Bank on their side of the fence. It has already changed the way Israelis think about the borders of their nation. "The security barrier is creating new conceptual and spatial contours in the Israeli imagination," says Daniel Levy, a former Israeli negotiator and now a senior fellow at both the Century and New America foundations. But for any deal to succeed, the barrier would have to be torn down or, at the very least, moved.

Article II: Security

Back in 2000, this was the most straightforward of the issues to be worked out. Both sides generally agreed that the new Palestinian state would have to be largely de-militarized. Palestinian forces would be allowed to maintain light arms to enforce domestic law and order but would not have an offensive capability that could in any way threaten Israel. The Palestinians would have sovereignty over their airspace, but it would be limited to civilian aviation. Yet the violence of the last eight years—not only between Palestinians and Israelis but also between Fatah and Hamas forces—complicates the security equation. The Israelis are now more skeptical that Fatah is strong enough to assume responsibility for security. A more feasible approach would be to put a NATO-based international force in the West Bank that would later transfer control to the Palestinians. Obama might well go for this; his designated national-security adviser, retired Gen. James Jones, developed the idea while serving as Condoleezza Rice's envoy for Palestinian-Israeli security issues. As far as Israeli forces are concerned, they would be able to withdraw from the strategically important Jordan Valley over a longer period of time, perhaps three years. Israel would be allowed to maintain a number of warning stations on Palestinian territory. Finally, Israel would allow the Palestinians to have sovereignty over their borders and international crossing points. But these borders and crossing points should be monitored by an international presence.

Article III: Jerusalem

The sacred "City of Peace" is at the very heart of the 100-year conflict: how to divvy up rights to a holy place with too much history and not enough geography. In 2000, Clinton's deft diplomatic skills helped demystify Jerusalem. He asked Israeli and Palestinian mediators to come up with a list of 60 basic municipal responsibilities they could share, from garbage collection to mail delivery. There was remarkable consensus. By moving the conversation from the sacred to the mundane, the exercise isolated the practical issues of running a city from the abstract and emotionally fraught issue of sovereignty. Clinton's seductively simple notion was this: in occupied East Jerusalem, he said, "What is Arab should be Palestinian and what is Jewish should be Israeli." This is just as relevant today. So is the principle from Camp David that Jerusalem must be divided—but shared, and it must serve as a capital to both states.

One of Clinton's solutions will likely have to be dialed back. His concept of split-level sovereignty for the holiest parts of Jerusalem are too incendiary. Jews know the area as the Temple Mount, the site where the ancient temple once stood. It is revered by Muslims as the Haram al-Sharif, the place where Muhammad ascended to heaven on a white steed. Clinton proposed Palestinian sovereignty over the Haram and Israeli sovereignty over the entire Western Wall, part of which runs beneath the Muslim quarter of the Old City. Today, it is very unlikely that either side would accept such a division. But there are other creative solutions. One is a proposal in a new book by Martin Indyk, Clinton's ambassador to Israel at the time of the 2000 summit. Indyk recommends that the Old City be placed under a so-called "special regime," with Israeli and Palestinian governments sharing sovereignty over the territory. But the religious sites inside the Old City walls would remain under the control of the respective Muslim, Jewish and Christian religious authorities without any actual designation of sovereignty. Alternatively, Indyk suggests, the entire Holy Basin—the Old City and religious sites—could be placed under international supervision, with religious authorities controlling their holy places.

Article IV: Refugees

This may be the most difficult problem to solve. What will become of the Palestinians who fled or were forced from their territory in 1948, and their descendants? There are as many as 4 million refugees living in camps on the West Bank and Gaza and in Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. They are poor, stateless and angry. For half a century they have waited, believing that one day they will return to their homes. Throughout the years of negotiations, Palestinians have demanded a "right of return." But to Israelis, the notion implies an admission that they are responsible for the refugee crisis and the historical injustices leveled against the Palestinians. Israelis, offended at the suggestion that their country was born in sin, have drawn a clear line.

Israeli leaders have been willing to accept a partial solution: some refugees living in the camps would make homes in the newly established state of Palestine. A small, symbolic number would be permitted to move to Israel. For this to work, refugees living in camps in Syria and other foreign states would have to be allowed to stay if they chose, and be granted citizenship in their adopted countries—the Arab host countries could not demand that all of the refugees return to Palestine, where they would overwhelm the budding state. And the refugees must be granted a window of time—perhaps three to five years—to petition international courts for compensation for what they have lost, perhaps as part of a massive regional redevelopment plan.

But how to salve the wounds of Palestinian grievance? One intriguing solution is offered by writer Walter Russell Mead in an essay in the current issue of Foreign Affairs. Mead argues that though Israel must take some responsibility for the Palestinian tragedy, the entire nakba, or catastrophe, "cannot simply be laid at Israel's door." Israel must acknowledge its part in the events of 1948, but the international community must take "ultimate responsibility" for the 60-year-old crisis. In this way, the world would acknowledge that the Palestinians have indeed suffered a historic injustice, but obviate the need for Israel to bear full responsibility. "This is a way to confer dignity on the Palestinian people," says Levy—a crucial step toward securing an elusive peace.

(Newsweek)

2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict

Wikipedia article here.

Growing trade in services and investment between EU - MPCs

The EU has been a driving force in trade in services with the Mediterranean Partner Countries (MPCs), which grew between 2000 and 2005 faster than trade in goods - 45% compared to 23% for exports and 77% compared to 37% for imports – according to a new publication from the MEDSTAT II project titled “European Union – Mediterranean countries: growing trade in services and investment”.

Regarding services, Europe is a dominant trading partner of Turkey, Egypt, Morocco and Tunisia. However, its importance as a trading partner is clearly lower in the case of Israel and Lebanon.

Foreign direct investment (FDI) flows from Europe have also accounted for a significant share of total FDI in this region for several years now, with Turkey in particular having attracted considerable investment in 2005 and 2006.

The publication, available in English, French and Arabic, is part of the Eurostat collection "Statistics in Focus" (SiF), presenting key data and limited analysis on a specific theme.

MEDSTAT II, funded by EuropeAid's Regional Programme, aims at strengthening the capacity of the Partner Countries' National Statistics Institutes and each country's own National Statistical System in order to provide updated, timely, reliable and relevant high-quality statistical data necessary for political decision-making and to ensure good governance.

Will this new union be anything more than a giant photo opportunity?

Some signs are promising. Far from the cameras, there was real diplomacy, promising real results. Even if the timing and details are vague, Assad and his Lebanese counterpart, Michel Suleiman, agreed to open diplomatic offices in the two countries for the first time. And even if Assad refused to shake Olmert's hand and left the room when the Israeli spoke Sunday, the two men communicated indirectly through Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey, who became a messenger in the ornate hallways of the Hôtel de Crillon.

In an attempt to keep the momentum going, the next meeting - of the 43 foreign ministers - is already scheduled for November. "This was not a one-off," said Eric Chevallier, a spokesman for the French Foreign Ministry. "This was an important moment and it will be followed by many others. We are determined to keep it going."

Not everyone is so optimistic. Squabbling over whether or not to call Israel a "nation-state" almost deadlocked the union's founding declaration Sunday. In the end, diplomats skirted the issue by referring to two conferences last November, one in Annapolis, Maryland, and one in Lisbon, one of which did and one did not make a reference to the term nation-state. Since no one could agree, sensitive decisions on where the union secretariat will be based and which country will provide the first secretary were postponed until the November meeting.

And even some of the successes, said Dominique Moïsi of the French Institute of International Relations, have more to do with short-term interests than long-term vision. Olmert's political future is in doubt because of corruption allegations at home, reducing his credibility to deliver on long-term promises. Assad, who has been itching to get out of political isolation, wants to return to the center of the Middle East peace process. And Sarkozy, deeply unpopular in France, is in need of a triumph. "The meeting was triumphant, but I am very skeptical about the long-term ramifications," Moïsi said.

IHT

Barcelona Process: Union for the Mediterranean

Projects to clean up the Mediterranean Sea, establish new sea routes and highways, and harness solar energy could be at the heart of new European efforts to engage with southern neighbors, according to the first set of concrete proposals published Tuesday.

Less than two months before the debut of a new Union for the Mediterranean, pioneered by President Nicolas Sarkozy of France, the European Commission sought to put its stamp on the plan with a series of recommendations.

While its call for big spending projects in the region will be welcomed in Paris, the document issued Tuesday also proposes a further dilution of Sarkozy's original aim of giving the European Union's southern states a bigger role in the venture than northern EU counterparts. ...

What is not disputed is the thinking behind the plan: that previous initiatives have largely failed. Since 1995 the EU has engaged with southern neighbors through the so-called Barcelona Process but with few tangible results.

The new document concedes that the Barcelona Process suffered from "weak visibility and the perception by citizens that little is done to tackle their daily problems and real needs." European diplomats hope the new organization, known officially as the "Barcelona Process: Union for the Mediterranean," will give southern Mediterranean countries a greater stake because they will be on a level of parity with the EU.

Critics point out that a central problem will remain: the diverse southern Mediterranean membership, which includes Syria and Israel.

The commission said the new union should hold summit meetings every two years, but avoided endorsing any location for its headquarters. Tunis, however, has emerged as a prime candidate. The commission called for two parallel sets of co-presidencies - to be held by France for an initial six months on the EU side. Thereafter this would be held by the new president of the European Council or high representative for foreign affairs - posts established under the new Treaty of Lisbon.

The document released Tuesday called for improved maritime and road infrastructure, including new sea routes and upgraded port facilities, and a new road to link the Arab states of North Africa - Mauritania, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Libya.

The new body should reinvigorate a plan approved in 2006 to clean the Mediterranean Sea of pollution, a 2007 program to develop solar power, and a proposal for a Euro-Mediterranean free trade zone by 2010, the document said.

IHT

Report: Syria bracing for Israeli attack

VIDEO - Is Syria preparing for war? Qatar's al-Watan newspaper reported Monday that political and media sources in Damascus expressed concerns that war may breakout between Israel and Syria before long.

According to the report, the nationwide emergency drill held by Damascus in response to a similar drill held by Israel last week, is one of the preemptive steps taken by Syria, which is supposedly responding to reports of Israel holding strategy meeting with the US in an attempt to devise an attack on both Syria and Iran.

Israel, claimed the report, is eyeing the period between the end of May to mid June as a possible window of attack; and the proof, as a senior Syrian official told al-Watan, is in the fact that the Israeli drill covering the Golan Heights was closely monitored by a high-ranking American general.

This close cooperation, added the source is evident that the two wish to send a message to the "resistance" in the area, namely Syria, Iran, Hizbullah and Hamas, the US is aware of the fact that any American strike against Iran may entail the latter bombing Israel and launching two new fronts against Syria and Lebanon.

Though titled a readiness drill against natural disasters, the Syria-crossing drill, added the report, has raised public concerns of a Mideast war pending in the summer.

Egypt starts controversial gas exports to Israel

Egypt has started exporting gas to Israel in accordance with a 2005 deal, an Israeli source told AFP on Monday, with the move set to irk the country's powerful Islamist opposition. "Egyptian gas has been flowing to Israel since last week but it has not yet been integrated into the Israeli network for procedural reasons," the source said, adding that the pipeline would be fully integrated "in a few days."

The new underwater pipeline runs 100 kilometres (63 miles) from the Egyptian Mediterranean city of El-Arish to the Israeli port of Ashkelon, supplying gas pumped from a gasfield in the north of the Sinai peninsula. The Egyptian side has remained virtually silent on its progress since a memorandum of understanding was signed in 2005.

The MOA provided for the export by an Egyptian-Israeli consortium, East Mediterranean Gas (EMG), of 1.7 billion cubic metres (60 billion cubic feet) of gas a year over 15 years for a total of 2.5 billion dollars.

AFP

FEMIP finance contracts in Mediterranean Partner Countries

Finance contracts worth 6,957,707,957 euros were signed between FEMIP and Mediterranean Partner Countries in the last five years, according to the latest figures from the European Investment Bank. A country-by-country breakdown, updated today, is available on the Bank’s website.

Algeria 255,498,958
Egypt 2,067,312,240
Palestine 55,000,000
Israel 395,000,000
Jordan 215,896,759
Lebanon 575,000,000
Morocco 1,221,000,000
Syria 715,000,000
Tunisia 1,379,950,000

Regional - North Africa 10,000,000

Mediterranean Countries 68,050,000

Merkel Slams Sarko's Med Union Scheme

The German Chancellor warns Sarkozy his proposal for a Mediterranean union of European, North African, and Middle Eastern nations would hurt the EU
German chancellor Angela Merkel has warned that French plans for a Mediterranean Union risk splitting the EU. Speaking at a conference in Berlin on Wednesday (5 December), Ms Merkel indicated that if French president Nicolas Sarkozy pushed ahead with his proposals for a union of countries from Europe, the Middle East and North Africa the "core" of the European Union would be threatened.

The chancellor said that "cooperation between some member states has to be also open to the rest and it has to be approved by all member states." It cannot be that some countries establish a Mediterranean Union and fund this with money from EU coffers, said the German leader. "This could release explosive forces in the union I would not like," she said, according to news agency DPA.

Mr Sarkozy floated the idea for such a union during his presidential campaign earlier this year. Since becoming president in May, he has elaborated on the proposal saying in October that "in the Mediterranean will be decided whether or not civilisations and religions will wage the most terrible of wars...whether or not the North and the South will clash".

Under the plans, the group would tie southern Europe with Northern Africa as well as Israel and its Arab neighbours and tackle topical issues such as counter-terrorism, immigration, energy, trade, water and sustainable development. Just seven EU states -- Cyprus, Greece, France, Italy, Malta, Portugal and Spain -- are envisioned to take part.
Mr Sarkozy's Mediterranean Union idea -- he suggested on Wednesday that France and Algeria be the main axis of the Union -- has also raised eyebrows in Brussels. The European Commission fears it will undermine the 12-year-old Barcelona process, aimed at promoting dialogue between the EU and ten countries on the southern and eastern shores of the Mediterranean.

There are also fears that it is a ruse to enmesh Turkey – which would be a member – into the process and detract from its current EU negotiations, with Mr Sarkozy being strongly opposed to Ankara's EU membership bid.

Business Week

Annapolis peace conference

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice organized and hosted the conference. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, and U.S. President George W. Bush attended the meeting. A partial list of over 40 invitees was released on 20. November 2007, including China, the Arab League, Russia, the European Union and the United Nations most of whom have accepted the invitation. Syria, Saud Arabia and Egypt participated on ministerial level.

The goal of the conference was to produce a substantive document on resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict along the lines of President George W. Bush's Roadmap For Peace, with the eventual establishment of a Palestinian state.

The conference on November 27, 2007, took place approximately 30 years after Anwar El Sadat, president of Egypt, visited Israel on November 19, 1977 to sign a peace agreement and appoximately 60 years after the newly-created United Nations approved the UN Partition Plan (United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181) on November 29, 1947, dividing the country into two states, one Arab and one Jewish. Jerusalem was to be designated an international city – a corpus separatum – administered by the UN to avoid conflict over its status. The Jewish community accepted the plan, but the Arab League and Arab Higher Committee rejected it.

Abbas stated that a clear agenda was necessary for the conference, and affirmed in early October that only a Palestinian state comprising the West Bank and Gaza Strip in their entirety would be acceptable, with any permanent Israeli control of land beyond its 1967 borders subject to discussion on a one-to-one basis. He further demanded that all six central issues be debated at the conference: Jerusalem, refugees and right of return, borders, settlements, water and security.

In October 2007, Prime Minister Olmert indicated that he would be willing to give parts of East Jerusalem to the Palestinians as part of a broader peace settlement at Annapolis, drawing considerable criticism from right-wing Israeli and foreign Jewish organizations and Christian Zionists. Knesset members from within Olmert's own ruling coalition have also been trying to stop such plans.

Prior to the conference, President Bush met with Israeli and Palestinian leaders in the White House. After meeting with Olmert and Abbas, President Bush read from a joint statement, signed by both parties, "We agreed to immediately launch good faith, bilateral negotiations in order to conclude a peace treaty resolving all outstanding issues, including core issues, without exception," and that, "The final peace settlement will establish Palestine as a homeland for the Palestinian people just as Israel is the homeland for the Jewish people."

Wikipedia

MEP's visit Palestine

Members of the European Parliament who visited the Palestinian Territories recently have reported that the delegation was “deeply shocked by the unprecedented humanitarian crisis it witnessed” there. They urge the European Union to take immediate action to stop what they call “the collective punishment against the Palestinian people inflicted by the Israeli authorities which deprives them from building a viable economy, impedes the delivery of humanitarian assistance and the implementation of development aid projects.”

Deep concern was expressed about Israel’s decision to interrupt the provision of essential services, such as electricity and fuel to the Gaza Strip. The visiting MEPs said that a lasting and just peace in the area can only be realised if the obstacles which make daily life impossible for Palestinians be removed now.

N Korean ship 'linked to Israel's strike on Syria'

A suspicious North Korean freighter that re-flagged itself as South Korean before off-loading an unknown cargo at the Syrian port of Tartous is at the centre of efforts today to investigate Israel's recent airstrike on Syria.

An Israeli on-line data analyst, Ronen Solomon, found an internet trace for the 1,700-tonne cargo ship, Al Hamed, which showed the vessel started to off-load what Syrian officials categorised as "cement" on Sept 3. This was three days before Israeli jets attacked a site in the north eastern desert of Syria, not far from its border with Iraq.

Since leaving Tartous, one of Syria's main ports on the Mediterranean, the ship's trace has disappeared and it is not known whether western intelligence agencies are tracking the vessel. "I became suspicious after the first reports from Syria about the attack so I traced all traffic into Syrian ports in the days prior to the incident," Mr Solomon said.

"There were five ships but the interesting one was the one with a connection to North Korea - the Al Hamed." He said he cross-referred to other maritime databases to establish the ship was not a regular visitor to the Mediterranean but had come through the Suez Canal in late June. It had registered itself for the Suez transit as a South Korean vessel but Mr Solomon said this was standard procedure for North Korean ships seeking to avoid international constraints on North Korea.

Records showed the vessel docked at Tartous on July 28 before going back to sea and then returning to the port on Sept 3. "Since then there is no trace so I have no idea if she has gone up into the Black Sea or is still in the Mediterranean or whatever," Mr Solomon said.

Last week, US officials suggested that North Korea had sought to export some of its nuclear technology and equipment to Syria but the Israelis had been tipped off, so they arranged a pre-emptive strike on a sensitive shipment.

Mr Solomon said the Al Hamed was owned by a North Korean business until a few months ago when ownership changed hands to an as yet unidentified new owner.

MEDSTAT II meeting

General Directors of the Mediterranean Partner Countries' National Statistics Institutes were in Brussels on September 6-7, 2007 at the invitation of EuropeAid and Eurostat for the first Partnership Group Meeting organised within the framework of the MEDSTAT II regional programme.

The aim of the meeting was to bring together all those involved in the project for a frank discussion about the results achieved so far and future challenges, as well as to start a dialogue on future statistical cooperation in the Euro-Mediterranean region.

Euro-Mediterranean statistical cooperation began in 1996 through the regional programme MEDSTAT. Ten years later (January 2006), MEDSTAT II, a three-year, €30 million programme, was launched with ten partner countries (Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, the Palestinian Authority, Syria, Tunisia and Turkey). It deals with statistics in nine thematic sectors (Trade, National Accounts, Social Statistics, Energy, Agriculture, Environment, Tourism, transport and Migration) and three horizontal sectors (Training, Information System and Dissemination). The programme’s main objective is to strengthen the capacity of the partner countries’ National Statistics Institutes and each country’s own National Statistical System.

CNN: Israeli gov't 'very happy with success' of IAF strike on Syria

The CNN television network reported Tuesday that Israel is happy with the results of an alleged Israel Air Force strike last week in Syrian territory. Quoting sources in the United States and the region, CNN said, "The Israeli government is very happy with the success of the operation."

European diplomats quoted Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem as saying Monday that the IAF warplanes that violated Syria's airspace fired missiles at targets on the ground, but did not cause any damage.

According to the CNN report, the sources said the IAF indeed carried out a strike on a target in Syria, adding that the operation "may have also involved Israeli ground forces who directed the air strike."

CNN quoted the sources as saying the strike, which possibly targeted an arms transfer from Iran to Hezbollah through Syria, "left a big hole in the desert." The CNN report said U.S. government and military sources have confirmed the airstrike, and said that "they are happy to have Israel carry the message to both Syria and Iran that they can get in and out and strike when necessary."

Also Tuesday, Syria lodged a formal complaint with the United Nations about an "aggression and violation of sovereignty" over the incident, the country's ambassador to the UN said Tuesday.

IDF: Syria's antiaircraft system most advanced in world

Israeli military source says that after studying IAF's performance during Second Lebanon War, Damacus has purchased most advanced ground-to-air missiles from Russia. IDF fears Assad's arms race may be sign of possible conflict with Israel.

In a bid to respond to the Israel Air Force's supremacy, Damascus has been exerting great efforts in the past few years to improve its ability in terms of ground-to-ground and ground-to-air missiles.

According to the military source, as part of these efforts the Syrians have purchased the most advanced ground-to-air missiles from the Russians, considered the cutting edge in aircraft interception technology.

The EU's policy toward Syria: a costly wait and see approach

Comment By Ruth Hanau-SantiniEUOBSERVER / COMMENT
Given the lack of a coherent and comprehensive EU approach to Syria and its role in the Middle East, it would be useful to look the costs and benefits of developing a proper policy towards Damascus.

In 2004, the EU total assistance aid allocated to Syria reached €55 million. It was mainly for technical assistance, institution-building and democracy promotion. In the same year, after eight years of negotiations, the EU and Syria finalised an Association Agreement.

The sanctions imposed by the US against Damascus in May 2004, however, influenced some member states' willingness to sign the agreement. The UK, Germany and the Netherlands' insistence on inserting an additional clause dealing specifically with chemical weapons blocked the overall process. The deal was called off and economic relations continue to be ruled by a 1977 Co-operation Agreement. So despite Syria being a partner in the Barcelona process, it does not benefit from the European Neighbourhood instruments.

While the EU remains Syria's first trading partner, the relationship's intensity has significantly decreased in the aftermath of the US embargo. Far from being passive, Syria has diversified its economic and political relations with third countries. Ankara, already Damascus' second trade partner, has been particularly privileged, as symbolized by the opening of a Free Trade Area at the beginning of 2007.

In the coming years, Turkey could become Damascus' largest trading partner: its exports to Syria have already nearly tripled in the past 10 years, rising from roughly USD 270m in 1997 to over USD 600m in 2006. In addition to that, Turkey has become a political and military ally, the two having signed a military agreement in 2004 aimed at countering the danger of potential spill-overs from Iraq's Kurdish areas.

By acting in an un-coordinated manner, the EU has diminished its overall capacity for influence. Acknowledging this risk, in the spring of 2007, national capitals informally agreed to be represented by the EU High Representative, Javier Solana, towards Damascus. In reality, this has never materialized and foreign ministers have kept visiting Assad without offering either an EU- coordinated long-term strategic vision or real carrots.

The consequences of the US ban have been far-reaching: on the one hand Syria has reinforced political and economic ties with third countries, thereby limiting the potential leverage of the EU. On the other, the sanctions have caused an internal split within the Union with some member states afraid to alienate the US Middle Eastern project. This has had its downside, namely the indefinite postponing of the establishment of an EU comprehensive vision of the region.

To conclude, the costs of envisaging a common approach to Syria's potentially beneficial role in the region would cause irritation in Washington, as well as in Israel, with whom the EU is struggling to improve the tone of the relationship.

A shift from a wait-and-see approach to a pro-active one, on the other hand, would entail significant benefits, both politically and economically.

Economically, Syria is an important gateway for European trade in the Arab world. Politically, reaching an association agreement with Syria remains the main channel through which the EU can hope to influence democratic forces and modernization impulses within the country, by setting clear benchmarks associated to further economic involvement.

Secondly, the same card should be used to forge a common strategic vision over the means the Union is ready to deploy in order to increase Damascus' stakes in developing an autonomous foreign policy in the area, resisting Teheran's influence.

Brussels should not wait to have fully-fledged economic relations before adopting an overall strategic policy towards Syria, but should strive to develop both simultaneously.

US funds allies against Iran

The US has announced military aid worth more than $43bn to Egypt, Israel, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states in an effort to boost its Middle East allies against Iran.

Egypt will receive $13bn in aid over 10 years while $30bn will go to Israel over the same period, Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, said on Monday.She also said that an unspecified defence aid package was allocated for Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states.

The Saudi package is expected to upgrade the country's missile defences and air force and increase its naval capabilities, a defence official said on Saturday. Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf countries are likely to receive as much as $20bn over 10 years, he said. Rice made the announcement hours before leaving with Robert Gates, the US defence secretary, for a joint trip to Egypt and Saudi Arabia to seek the support of Arab nations in stabilising Iraq.

"This effort will help bolster forces of moderation and support a broader strategy to counter the negative influences of al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran," Rice said.

Al Jazeera

Arab-Israeli peace talks

BBC

The two Arab countries with ties to Israel have paid an historic visit to the Jewish state to "extend the hand of peace" on behalf of their fellow Arabs. The Egyptian and Jordanian foreign ministers' visit was to present a peace plan backed by the Arab League, which has no diplomatic ties with Israel.

The proposal envisages the recognition of Israel if it leaves occupied Palestinian land. Israel's prime minister has said the Arab plan contains positive elements.

"We are extending a hand of peace on behalf of the whole region to you, and we hope that we will be able to create the momentum needed to resume fruitful and productive negotiations," said Jordan's Abdulelah Khatib.

Israeli-Palestinian negotiations have not seen progress for seven years, a period in which more than 5,000 people have died in violence, the large majority of them Palestinians. Mr Khatib said Israel needed to agree on a precise timetable "not to waste this historic opportunity".

The visit comes a day after the maiden mission of new envoy Tony Blair, the former UK prime minister, and is part of a flurry of diplomatic efforts.

'Common ground'
Mr Khatib and Egypt's Ahmed Aboul Gheit are presenting a long-standing Arab League initiative that was readopted at a meeting in Saudi Arabia recently.

The plan first adopted by Arab League in 2002 calls for

• "full Israeli withdrawal from all the Arab territories occupied since June 1967" ,
• Israel's "acceptance of an independent Palestinian State, with East Jerusalem as its capital".
• All Arab states would establish "normal relations... with Israel" and "consider the Arab-Israeli conflict ended"
• Calls for a "just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem"

The initiative offers Israel normal ties with all Arab states in return for a full Israeli withdrawal from territory it occupied in 1967, the creation of a Palestinian state and a solution to the Palestinian refugee problem.

Envoy Blair holds West Bank talks

Olmert: Israel cannot meet Syria's demand on Golan

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has said Syria was setting an "impossible threshold" for peace talks by demanding Israel commit to withdraw fully from the occupied Golan Heights before negotiations resume. Meanwhile, Iran on Sunday dismissed as a "media game" recent reports of a secret arms deal with Syria allegedly made in return for an agreement that Damascus would not hold peace talks with Israel.

Assad said earlier this week that Syria would resume peace talks in the presence of an honest broker if Israel first provided a guarantee that it would return the Golan Heights.

In remarks broadcast on Saturday by Israel's Channel 10 television, Olmert said Israel was ready to withdraw from the Golan. "Of course we will have to make concessions but can I make commitments even before the beginning of negotiations and promise that I will withdraw from the entire Golan Heights?" He said Assad's demand "creates conditions that set an impossible threshold for the start of negotiations."

Assad had also said that a third country recently offered to serve as a mediator with Israel. Olmert said any talks with Syria must be direct. "I want to make peace with all Arab states and I want to do so through direct negotiations, as was the case with Egypt and Jordan."