ESSAY / Túlio Dias de Assis [English version].

Last December, the president of the United States, Donald Trump, surprised the world once again with a new declaration, which similar to previous ones was quite controversial. This time the subject in question was the recognising of the millenary city of Jerusalem as the capital of the only modern Jewish state, i.e. Israel.

Such an infamous announcement, in such a delicate matter, was widely criticized by most of the International Community. Nevertheless, there has been a small group of states supporting Trump's decision, and a few more have made ambiguous declarations. Among these, various sources claim some of these to be EU member-states. However, has there really been such a lack of internal coherence amongst its members?

Why does Jerusalem matter?

Before continuing further, we ought to analyze in detail this situation and the correct way to approach it is with this question: "Why is so important about this city?" There are many factors to be analysed in order to completely understand the reasons behind its importance, amongst which the following would be some of the most relevant: historical relevance, religious importance and geopolitical value.

Historical Relevance - First, it is one of oldest human settlements in the world, tracing its earliest origins back to the 4th millennium BC. Besides that, it is the historical capital of the region of Canaan/Palestine. Additionally, it is one of the many Jewish kingdoms established there during the 1st millennium BCE.

Religious Importance - Furthermore, it is one of the holiest cities of the three major Abrahamic religions, each one for its own reasons. For Christians, it is significant given Christ was crucified there. For Muslims, it is the homeland of many prophets - most of them shared in the other Abrahamic religions' beliefs - and a holy site of pilgrimage, it is also the city to which Muhammad made his night journey. And lastly, the Jews consider it the holiest city considering the sacred Temple of Solomon was built there, apart from historical reasons.

Geopolitical Value - Last but not least, its relevance additionally derives from its geostrategic position: its link between the Levantine Mediterranean Coast and the Jordan Valley. Thus, the owner of such a geostrategic position has many geopolitical advantages in the Levant region.

Considering the previously discussed, it is no wonder that the sovereignty over this city is of utmost importance and a source for disagreement in the peace negotiations. With that in mind, Trump's decision to move the US embassy from Tel-Aviv to Jerusalem was not of great help towards peace, on the contrary, it could be argued that it has done quite the opposite: For it has not only provoked reactions from the local Palestinians, but from the entire Arab World instead, thus managing to further destabilize the region. There were contrary reactions from Hamas, Hezbollah and several Muslim governments (including Erdogan's laic country). Hamas called for an "Intifada" - or uprising - against the Israeli authorities. These demonstrations and protests ended up leaving hundreds wounded and even a few dozen dead.

Europe, on the other hand, tries to maintain a more balanced and neutral position, oriented towards the final objective of achieving regional peace. Thus, the EU's mediation attempts in order to resolve the scenario is based mainly upon previous UN resolutions. These propositions, considered too Utopian and rather unrealistic by many Israelites, are grounded upon four basic points: the Two States, the refugees, security, and the status of Jerusalem.

The two-state solution: According to the EU, any solution attempting to maintain only one state would be contrary to both parts' interests, for it would impose one country's sovereignty over the other's. Therefore, Brussels considers that the two-state solution would be the most appropriate: each people shall have its own state and the borders thereof shall be based upon the ones in place on June 4th, 1967; before the Six Days War. Nevertheless, any other changes to these boundaries would be accepted, as long as both parties were willing and agreed on it.  

The refugee question: The EU believes that several long-lasting measures should be taken into account on the issue of Palestinian refugees in exile outside their home country (especially in neighbor countries such as Jordan and Lebanon) in order for them to return to their motherland.

Security: Another of the fundamental points for the EU would be the security problem. On one hand, measures should be taken to end the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land. On the other, something should be done in order to dissolve the local Palestinian terrorist bands.

Sovereignty over Jerusalem: Taking into account all the factors previously mentioned about the city's importance, Brussels considers that the best solution would be a resolution where the city's sovereignty would be divided between both parts. Furthermore, the holy city should also be the capital of both states simultaneously.

essay / Túlio Dias de Assis [English version].

The President of the United States, Donald Trump, surprised in December with another of his statements, which, like many previous ones, was not without controversy. This time the surprise topic was the advertisement of the opening of the US embassy in Jerusalem, thus consummating the recognition of the ancient city as the capital of the only Jewish state in the world today: Israel.

Trump's controversial advertisement , on an issue as controversial as it is sensitive, was criticized internationally and had little foreign support. Nevertheless, a few countries joined the U.S. initiative, and a few others expressed ambiguity. Among these, several European Union countries were singled out by the media. Has there really been a lack of internal cohesion within the Union on this issue?

Why Jerusalem matters

First of all, it is worth analyzing status in more detail, starting with a simple question: Why is Jerusalem so important? There are several factors that make Hierosolyma, Yerushalayim, Al-quds or simply Jerusalem so important not only regionally, but also globally, among which the following three stand out: its historical relevance, its religious importance and its geostrategic value.

Historical relevance. It is one of the oldest human settlements in the world, tracing its earliest origins to the fourth millennium BC. Apart from being the historical capital of both the region of Palestine or Canaan, as well as of the various Jewish kingdoms established throughout the first millennium BC in that part of the Levant.

Religious importance. It is a very sacred city for the three major monotheistic religions of the world, each for its own reasons: for Christianity, mainly because it is where the crucifixion of Christ took place; for Islam, apart from being the city of several prophets - shared in the beliefs of the other Abrahamic religions - and a place of pilgrimage, it is also where Muhammad made his well-known night journey; and obviously, for Judaism, for historical reasons and also because it is where the sacred Temple of Solomon was built.

Geostrategic value. At the geostrategic level it also has a great relevance, since it is a crucial point that connects the Levantine Mediterranean coast with the Jordan Valley. Therefore, its owner would have under its control a great geostrategic advantage in the Levant region.

It is not surprising, then, that the status of this city is one of the main points of conflict in the peace negotiations between the two peoples, as is well known. Hence, Trump's intervention has not been of great financial aid help in resuming the peace process; rather, it could be argued, it has been quite the opposite: it has provoked an outcry not only from the local Palestinians, but from the entire Arab world, thus further destabilizing the region. There have been counter-reactions from Hamas, Hezbollah and also from several Islamic governments in the Middle East (among them even Erdogan's, despite the fact that the Republic of Turkey is de jure a secular state). Hamas called for an intifada against Israel: the multiple demonstrations in the Palestinian territories ended with several hundred wounded and a dozen dead, due to clashes with Israeli police forces.

Europe's position

Europe, for its part, is trying to maintain a rather more neutral and balanced position, aimed at achieving regional peace. The European Union's willingness to mediate mainly takes into account the resolutions passed by the UN on this problematic issue topic. The European declarations, considered somewhat unrealistic and utopian from the perspective of many Israelis, are based on four essential points: the two states, refugees, security and the status of Jerusalem.

The existence of two states. According to the EU, a one-state solution would be contrary to the interests of both parties, since it would impose the sovereignty of one of the peoples over that of the other. Therefore, Brussels believes that a two-state solution would be more appropriate: each nation would have its own state and the borders between the two would be based on those in force on June 4, 1967, before the Six-Day War. Even so, changes to these sovereignty boundaries would be allowed, provided both sides so desired and approved.

The refugee issue. The EU believes that durable measures should be taken on the issue of Palestinian refugees outside their homeland (especially in neighboring countries such as Lebanon and Jordan), with the goal that they can return to their country.

Security. Another key issue for the Europeans would be the question of security, for both sides: On the one hand, measures should be put in place to put an end to the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories. On the other hand, the problem of Palestinian terrorism in the area should be tackled with effective measures.

Status of Jerusalem. Taking into account the importance of this city, Brussels considers that there would be no better solution than a resolution in which there would be shared sovereignty between the two hypothetical states. In addition, the holy city of the three religions would also be the capital of both states simultaneously.

However, as previously mentioned, the position of several member states was mistrusted, even to the point of suspecting possible support for the American decision. This was inferred from states such as the Czech Republic or Hungary, due to some statements taken out of context or poorly explained, which made it appear that the dissidence between Brussels and Visegrad continued to grow. However, if there is one thing that stands out in the European response, it is unity and internal coherence.

The Czech government did no more than recognize West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, just as it will do with East Jerusalem once Palestine regains sovereignty over its territory. The Magyar government did not contradict the European positions either, as its only statements were that Europe should not have to pronounce itself on US diplomatic actions. Subsequently, the Hungarian prime minister clarified that the EU should stand firm on the policy it has defended so far and that this is de facto the Magyar position on the matter. Furthermore, French President Emmanuel Macron, during his meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, already mentioned that France did not support Trump's decision on Jerusalem, and likewise Federica Mogherini, the High Representative for Foreign Affairs of the European Union, spoke to him, maintaining the neutral mediating stance that the EU has assumed so far.

Therefore, neither the EU nor any of its member states have shown any sign of support for the unilateral American decision. Europeans remain united in their diversity, quoniam "In varietate concordia".

Bibliography

European Union External Action, Middle East Peace process, 15/06/2016 - 12:32

European Council on Foreign Relations, EU backed into a corner on Israel-PalestineCommentary by Hugh Lovatt, 12th December, 2017

Politico, EU dismisses Netanyahu's Jerusalem prediction, by Jacopo Barigazzi, 12/11/17, 12:29 PM CET

EU Observer, Two EU states break ranks on Jerusalem, by Andrew Rettman, 7th Dec 2017, 16:36

Website of the Hungarian Government, Hungary has successfully represented its position on the issue of Jerusalem, December 15th, 2017

France Diplomacy, Israel/Palestinian Territories - Relations with the European Union

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic, Position of MFA to Issue of Jerusalem, 06.12.2017 - 20:00

European Union External Action, Netanyahu realised there is full EU unity on Jerusalem, Mogherini says after EU Foreign Affairs Council, 12/12/2017 - 18:06

European Union External Action, Middle East: EU stands by two-State solution for Israel and Palestine; Iran nuclear deal, 05/12/2017 - 18:22

European Union External Action, EU won't give up on peace in the Middle East, says Mogherini, 19/09/2017 - 18:33

The Guardian, Death toll rises to 12 in violence after Trump's Jerusalem recognition, Associated Press in Gaza, Sun 24 Dec 2017 18.55 GMT

El País, Hamas announces a third intifada over recognition of Jerusalem as Israeli capital, Madrid 7 DEC 2017 - 17:49 CET

Le Parisien, Trump sur Jérusalem : "C'est une nouvelle nouvelle humiliation inflicée au monde arabe"., International, par Myriam Encaoua, 08 décembre 2017, 9h47

Radio France Internationale, Vives reacts to Trump's announcement on Jerusalem, 06-12-2017

BBC, Muslim nations urge recognition of East Jerusalem as Palestinian capital, 13 December 2017