Connect with us

MIDDLE EAST

EU divided over defence funding

Published

on

Although increasing EU defence production has been on the agenda of EU leaders since the start of the war in Ukraine, the issue has been slow to gain traction.

The most sensitive issue is how to finance further defence investment in the future. EU leaders agreed on Thursday (21 March) to force the European Investment Bank (EIB) to ‘adapt its policy on lending to the defence industry and its current definition of dual-use goods, while maintaining its financing capacity’.

They also made progress on using proceeds from frozen Russian assets to help Ukraine within months, under a plan to use most of the money to buy arms for Kiev.

The European Commission had proposed that 90% of the proceeds from frozen Russian assets be used to finance Ukraine’s defence production and military aid, while the remaining 10% would be given to Kiev as budget support.

European Council President Charles Michel and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the idea of using the proceeds from frozen Russian assets to benefit Ukraine had broad support among EU countries.

Concerns of ‘neutral’ countries

But the use of this money to buy weapons is a problem for some countries, including militarily neutral states such as Austria, Ireland and Malta.

“For us neutrals, it must be ensured that the money we approve is not spent on arms and ammunition,” said Austrian Chancellor Karl Nehammer. Michel said Brussels could find ways to address their concerns.

“Russia must feel the real cost of war and the need for a just peace,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said, urging EU leaders to go further and use the assets themselves, a step the bloc has not yet considered.

Proposal for joint defence borrowing rejected

At the same time, EU leaders disagreed on a broader initiative for European financing of arms for Kiev, such as the ‘Eurobond for defence’ requested by Estonia and France.

Member states such as the Netherlands and Sweden are sceptical about joint borrowing on the financial market for defence purposes.

“The urgency of the issue means we have to consider options we don’t like,” an EU diplomat told Euractiv.

The leaders asked the European Commission to “explore all options for mobilising financing and report back by June”, a choice of words pushed by the Baltic states, Poland and Greece.

Leyen told reporters that the discussion was still at an early stage.

Fear of ‘power grab’

Although there is no coherent plan for new funding, the Commission has recently outlined plans for a European defence strategy.

These include Leyen’s idea of a new defence (industry) commissioner for the next term, more defence funding, an expansion of the bloc’s defence industrial base and the use of frozen Russian assets.

The plan even goes as far as the EU executive being prepared to place arms orders with member states to support joint arms procurement.

But this is where the controversy erupts. Leyen’s plan for a European defence industrial strategy is drawing criticism from some EU countries, including Germany, which supports strengthening the sector but fears the plan involves usurping national competences.

EU diplomats said there was considerable scepticism during Thursday’s summit discussions.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz told EU leaders that the bloc did not need ‘another state-like structure for defence’ or the creation of new powers that would amount to a power grab, two people familiar with the talks told Euractiv.

While Scholz stressed the need to develop the bloc’s potential for joint procurement, he rejected the idea of the Commission as a mediator that could slow down processes.

“She wants to be a war president but forgets that the EU is not a state,” an EU diplomat said of Leyen, suggesting that critics of her using the defence issue to win a second term were right.

Member states still opposed to investment programme

In recent months, many EU countries have raised concerns about the Commission’s intentions behind the European Defence Investment Programme (EDIP), the bloc’s ambitious framework for strengthening the military-industrial complex.

As the programme will give EU member states and the Commission the power to redirect industrial priorities, finance arms production and give the EU body an overview of production capacities and supply chains, often protected by governments for national security reasons, some measures are considered ‘sensitive’ by member states.

Presenting the text, internal market commissioner Thierry Breton said his organisation was not interested in a ‘power grab’ and rejected a loose interpretation of EU treaties prohibiting the transfer of EU funds to military operations.

To avoid this accusation, the European Commission based its industrial policy proposal on Article 173 of the EU treaty, which allows the bloc to work on industrial competitiveness.

The Commission’s directorate-general in charge of implementing the programme (DEFIS) recently sent envoys to prepare the ground with EU countries to avoid potential problems.

Despite concerns, EU leaders on Thursday instructed their ministers to examine the EDIP text ‘without delay’.

Negotiations on technical details are expected to start in early April, with the European Council due to adopt its position in June, before the new European Parliament convenes in the summer.

MIDDLE EAST

Katz’s statement on Hezbollah disarmament surprises even Halevi

Published

on

Israel’s new Defense Minister, Israel Katz, appointed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to replace the recently dismissed Yoav Gallant, has sparked surprise with a bold declaration regarding Israel’s stance on Hezbollah. Katz stated that one of Israel’s primary goals is to disarm Hezbollah, leaving Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi notably surprised.

As Israel advances into southern Lebanon, negotiations continue in Washington and Beirut over a possible resolution to the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hezbollah. However, Katz emphasized that Israel would not halt its efforts until all military objectives are achieved.

“We will not cease fire, we will not ease pressure, and we will not support any agreement that does not fully achieve the goals of this war,” Katz declared during a visit to the Northern Command alongside Lieutenant General Herzi Halevi.

Katz outlined these objectives as: “disarming Hezbollah, pushing them beyond the Litani River, and ensuring the safe return of Israelis in northern areas to their homes.”

In the accompanying video, Halevi appeared visibly taken aback by Katz’s mention of disarming Hezbollah as an official objective, as this has not been publicly stated as a government directive.

Katz further stressed Israel’s right to “implement any agreement independently and to act decisively against any terrorist activity or organization.” He added, “We must continue to strike Hezbollah with full force.”

6 Israeli soldiers killed

Meanwhile, as Israel presses forward with its ground invasion of southern Lebanon, six more Israeli soldiers were killed in a clash with Hezbollah forces. This incident, one of the heaviest single-day casualties for Israel since the invasion’s onset, highlights the intensifying nature of the conflict.

According to a statement by the Israeli army, the soldiers, all from the 51st Battalion of the Golani Brigade, were killed in fire exchange with at least four Hezbollah fighters inside a building in a southern Lebanese village.

Continue Reading

MIDDLE EAST

Sexual harassment investigation targeting ICC Chief amid controversial prosecution

Published

on

The International Criminal Court (ICC) has enlisted independent investigators to examine allegations of sexual harassment against Prosecutor Karim Khan.

The accusations against Khan surfaced as the ICC evaluated Khan’s request to issue arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant over alleged war crimes in Gaza.

Finnish diplomat Päivi Kaukoranta, who leads the ICC’s oversight body, stated that an external investigation was initiated after reports surfaced that Khan had acted inappropriately toward a female colleague. Normally, such matters are managed by the court’s internal audit, but Khan personally requested that the Independent Supervisory Mechanism (ISM) oversee the case. Kaukoranta explained, “In light of the case’s unique circumstances, the ISM’s victim-centered approach, and the potential for conflicts of interest, the ISM agreed to the exceptional use of an external investigation.”

Khan denied the allegations, stating, “I have previously called for an investigation into this matter and welcome the opportunity to participate in this process.”

The investigation coincides with the ICC’s deliberation over Khan’s request to issue warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity related to Israel’s actions in Gaza.

While Khan’s move was supported internationally, it drew criticism from the Biden administration and U.S. Congress. The U.S. House of Representatives recently passed legislation that sanctions individuals affiliated with the ICC, including judges and their families, underscoring the U.S. policy of opposition to ICC jurisdiction over Israel.

Reports have also surfaced regarding Israel’s alleged threats toward ICC officials. In May, The Guardian revealed that Khan’s predecessor, Fatou Bensouda, was pressured in “a series of secret meetings” with Mossad chief Yossi Cohen, a close ally of Netanyahu. Cohen reportedly advised Bensouda to “drop the war crimes investigation,” allegedly warning her, “You don’t want to be involved in anything that could endanger your safety or your family’s safety.”

Khan has since noted he faced pressure before submitting his application for the arrest warrant.

Continue Reading

MIDDLE EAST

Trump will conditionally support West Bank annexation

Published

on

Former Trump aides have cautioned Israeli ministers not to assume Trump’s unconditional support for West Bank annexation in a potential second term, according to The Times of Israel.

At least two officials from Donald Trump’s previous administration advised Israeli ministers to temper expectations about Trump’s support for Israel’s annexation of the West Bank. Sources close to the discussions indicated that while annexation is not off the table, Israeli leaders should avoid viewing it as a “foregone conclusion.”

The message was delivered in meetings and discussions held in the months leading up to Trump’s recent presidential victory. However, some far-right cabinet members remained undeterred. On Monday, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich declared that 2025 would mark “the year of sovereignty in Judea and Samaria [the West Bank]” following Trump’s re-election. Last week, National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir also asserted that “the time for sovereignty has come.”

On Friday, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu announced Yechiel Leiter as Israel’s next ambassador to the United States. Leiter, a former settler leader, is known for his support of West Bank annexation and opposition to a Palestinian state.

In a statement to The Times of Israel, an anonymous Israeli official said Trump’s former advisers have not ruled out his potential support for annexation. However, they indicated it could jeopardize Trump’s broader foreign policy priorities, including countering Iran, competing with China, and ending the war in Ukraine. Trump would likely need the support of key Gulf allies—notably Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE)—to achieve these goals. Unconditional support for Israeli annexation, however, could risk backlash from these regional allies.

In 2020, Trump’s peace plan proposed annexing all Israeli settlements while leaving open the possibility of a Palestinian state in other areas of the West Bank. Although Prime Minister Netanyahu had hesitations, settler leaders and officials like Smotrich celebrated Trump’s recent victory as a chance to realize annexation plans.

A former Trump adviser told an Israeli minister that Trump’s support for Israeli sovereignty would likely come with more conditions than in 2020. After the Palestinian Authority rejected Trump’s “Peace to Prosperity” proposal in 2020, the Trump administration and Israel began planning a partial annexation of the West Bank. However, this initiative was set aside when the UAE agreed to normalize relations with Israel.

The U.S. commitment to the UAE to delay Israeli annexation efforts expires at the end of 2024. Still, a former Trump official told The Times of Israel that a major shift in U.S. support for annexation should not be expected. “If any shift happens, it would need to be part of a process,” the official commented.

Jason Greenblatt, Trump’s former Middle East envoy, reinforced this message, stating:

“I think it’s important that those in Israel who are celebrating President Trump’s victory do so because of his strong support for Israel, as evidenced by many historic achievements during his first term. Some Israeli ministers are assuming that expanding Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria is an automatic done deal and will happen as soon as President Trump takes office.

I suggest they take a deep breath. If I were advising these ministers, I would strongly urge them to focus on working closely with Prime Minister Netanyahu to strengthen U.S.-Israel relations and address the significant threats facing Israel. The time for discussions around Judea and Samaria will come, but context and timing are crucial.”

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey