Check against delivery! 

Yesterday was a long Sunday, discussing about the situation in the Middle East.  

And today, it was as long, but talking about Ukraine, the Middle East and other issues. 

The last days have been horrible for civilians both in Ukraine and in Gaza, in both places. 

On both topics, we have been working to try to achieve a united European position, which is not always easy and certainly, much easier on the issue of Ukraine than on the issue of Palestine and Gaza.  

On Ukraine, as always, we had a videoconference with the Foreign Minister [of Ukraine, Dmytro] Kuleba who explained [to] us – and his explanations were supported by images – the Russian attacks against the population, specifically against a Kharkiv shopping mall on Saturday and also, the number of civilian casualties.  As I said, with some images that were quite shocking - as shocking as the images of the attack against a refugee camp in Rafah, yesterday night.  

With [Minister] Kuleba, we discussed about the needs of Ukraine to continue their self-defence, in particular – as you know – air defence systems, in particular more Patriots, and also the lifting of restrictions on the use of Western weapons against Russian military in Russia. 

This is a growing debate. More and more, we take very much into consideration the fact that Ukraine has to resist against attacks which have been launched against its territory from Russian territory, and some Member States have been lifting the restrictions for Ukrainians to be able to use their military support to respond to the Russian attacks from the Russian territory, and not only from the Ukrainian territory, occupied by Russian troops. 

One specific issue was the catastrophic damages of the electricity grid in Ukraine, which makes them to cut the power in some moments of the day. This is having a high impact, and unhappily it will [have] a high impact in the upcoming winter. We have to go through the summer, but the number of the electric stations and electric capacities destroyed by the Russians is growing. 

Putin is talking about peace negotiations, but his armies are launching another offensive against Kharkiv. They are shelling crowded civilian buildings, and try to undermine the upcoming Swiss Summit on Peace.  

We fully support this Summit organised by Switzerland, following a request from Ukraine. The objective of the Summit is to inspire a future peace process. We are working to ensure the broadest possible participation.  

In parallel, we adopted the legal acts for the use of extraordinary revenues from Russian immobilised assets. You know that this was politically agreed. Today we approved the legal acts and agreed on my proposal to use 90% of these revenues to [cover] the immediate military needs of Ukraine, through the European Peace Facility. 

I will not deny - because I am sure that you already know - that we have had an intense, even heated discussion on this military support for Ukraine, which is facing some obstacles to reach the necessary unanimity to make it effective. 

A wide majority of Member States demanded that all pending decisions – and there are quite a lot of pending decisions - to implement the new dedicated Ukraine Assistance Fund under the European Peace Facility, have to be approved soon. In particular, the one that could allow us to use the Russian [immobilised assets’] revenues. 

Our leaders gave the political approval to this Ukranian Assistance Fund already in March, and it is still not operational. We cannot let the European Union military support to Ukraine being taken hostages of other decisions, which have nothing to do with this specific issue, especially given the urgency of the situation. 

Ukraine needs the arms now, not next year. And we are already in a long delay which has a specific cause, which is the disagreement among Member States  - and, in particular, one of them -  [about how] to reach the necessary consensus. And today, there has been a strong debate about it. 

I hope that at the next COREPER [meeting], this can be solved. I understand they can have concerns and reasons, but the blockage of the decision has to be proportionate to the issue at stake. And in this case, providing military support to Ukraine is one of the most important issues – one of the most important commitments – that we have to fulfil. 

I hope that we will soon finalise our long-term security commitments to Ukraine, which will include, in particular, security and defence aspects.  

We adopted more sanctions against propaganda entities and individuals, and [we] adopted a new sanctions regime targeting the human rights abuses and repressions in Russia.  

We are also paying close attention to the Russian hybrid actions against the European Union and its Member States and look at what could happen in the next European elections. For sure, we will be a target of foreign disinformation and interference.  

Estonia reported about the latest border incident caused by Russian border guards - in Estonia, and in other Member States. We expect [from Russia] an explanation about the latest incidents and all Member States expressed their strong solidarity with Estonia and other Member States affected by these actions.  

Then, we went to the Middle East. You know that yesterday, we had productive meetings. Today, we were joined by Foreign Ministers from Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and the Secretary General of the League of Arab States.  

Just the fact that this meeting takes place – I think – is an important event. Bringing together to the Foreign Affairs Council, five representatives of the Arab countries and the League of Arab States is an important push in order to increase the cooperation between Europeans and Arabs towards a political solution to the conflict, and increasing humanitarian support for the people in Gaza. 

I want to insist, I issued a tweet early this morning about the horrifying news coming out of Rafah, on the Israeli strikes killing dozens of displaced persons. The last figure seems to be around 40 people [killed], including small children being burned. I condemn this in the strongest terms.  

It proves that there is no safe place in Gaza. These attacks take place immediately after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ordered to stop all military activities in Gaza.  

Just immediately after, the consequences have been [on the] one side Hamas attacking and launching rockets, and on the other side the intensification of bombing against Gaza. A place where there is no safe place. Attacking refugees camps and killing and burning more than 40 people, among them many childrens.  

You can imagine how horrified we are – all of us – for these sad events. They are more than sad.  

Our discussion with the Arab[partners] was a way of understanding their position. They presented us their peace plan. And [we went on] to discuss about how to reinforce our cooperation. 

The aim is to work towards a political solution of the conflict. And one of the suggestions and the proposals that the Arab [partners] made us today was to consider the possibility of an International Conference with the title of “How do we implement the Two-state solution?” 

Yes, this should be the purpose. Not to discuss any more about the Two-state solution - “yes or no” - because this has been discussed enough, but how to implement it. 

This proposal could be merging with the request of the mandate of the European Union Council to hold an international peace conference. We could try to merge the mandate of the European Council with the proposal of our Arab partners. 

For the time being, the most important and urgent issue is support to the Palestinian Authority; support to UNRWA; and increasing humanitarian support. It is clear that humanitarian support has been impeded; humanitarian support is blocked at the border. It does not go in.  

In some cases, when it goes in, like for example through the [floating] pier – the artificial pier built by the United States – it is being stopped at the pier, because there is no way of distributing it. There is no capacity to distribute it.  

So the humanitarian situation is becoming – I am saying that every time I talk to you, but it is true - I cannot imagine how worse it can still become, but it is worse than ever.  

We have to intervene and the only thing we can do – we, the European Union – is to participate on the reactivation of the opening of the border in Rafah.  

We have been asked for that, I proposed it to the Ministers [for Foreign Affairs], [that] they give me the political green light to reactivate EUBAM [Rafah], our control mission border in Rafah which has been sleeping for years, [so] not active. This could play a useful role supporting the entry of people into Gaza. Enter, in and out.  

But this has to be done in accordance with the Palestinian Authority, the Egyptians, and obviously Israeli authorities. We are not going to do that alone, we are not going to be the outsourcers of the security in the border. We are not a security company. We will do that in a clear political understanding of which is the role of the Palestinian Authority in that.  

Let’s start preparing our capacity to do it if the political conditions are met.   

Ministers agreed on reiterating our demand on Israel to implement the International Court of Justice orders, to stop blocking the funding to the Palestinian Authority, and to avoid declaring UNRWA a terrorist organisation and consequently, to prohibit UNRWA to work in Gaza and in the Palestinian territories. These three requests have been expressed in the strongest possible terms, demanding Israel to implement – because the ruling of the Court was putting on Israel some duties, to implement these requirements from the International Court of Justice.  

I am not talking about the International Criminal Court, which has still not [pronounced] a ruling, but a demand from the Prosecutor; but the International Court of Justice which is a core entity of the United Nations’ system. 

The ICJ is the highest court of the UN system. All members of the United Nations have the obligation to comply with these decisions, and we cannot disregard the rules-based world order that we claim every day, that we support and promote everywhere. 

We, at the European Union, have been built from the ruins of the Second World War and have always been strong supporter of the International Court of Justice. This is the occasion to emphasize how important it is that the rulings of the Court are implemented. 

But as important as this, is to stop the freeze of the tax revenues for the Palestinian Authority. Otherwise, we could melt down the Palestinian Authority, lacking the financial resources to keep a minimum order in the West Bank. 

The West Bank is a boiler, and we are not interested in melting down the Palestinian Authority. On the contrary, we have to support the Palestinian Authority, in particular now that the Prime Minister [of the Palestinian Authority, Mohammad Mustafa] came and explained their reforms plans. 

Sometimes, we talk about Hamas as if Hamas was the representative of the Palestinian people. It is not. It is the Palestinian Authority who, with all the inconvenience and all the limitations, problems and difficulties, is someone that we recognise that they go to the United Nations to talk to the General Assembly, that come here being invited by us, and [of which] we are the strongest supporter financially. It is the Palestinian Authority.  

So, we cannot afford the financial asphyxia of the Palestinian Authority through indiscriminate actions by the Netanyahu government. For now, I will never say again “Israel”, I will say “the Netanyahu government”, because it is this government which is taking these decisions. 

And these are decisions that could kill the Palestinian Authority, by economic and financial asphyxia. 

The Ministers discussed what else we can do, apart from demanding Israel to do these three things, at least. 

Finally, the Ministers agreed on something that they rejected at the last Foreign Affairs Council: it is calling for an Association Council with Israel. Something that was not accepted and not agreed in previous discussions, and today it has been agreed because other Member States have been asking for that. We got the necessary unanimity to call for an Association Council with Israel to discuss the situation in Gaza – Israel being represented by the Netanyahu government, obviously – and to discuss the respect of human rights under the obligations that Israel has assumed under the Association Agreement, and how they plan to implement the ruling of the Court. 

But what we have seen since the Court has issued its ruling: not a stop of the military activities, but on the contrary, an increase in the military activities, an increase in the bombing and an increase in the casualties of the civilian people, as we have seen last night. 

Ministers asked me also to propose further concrete measures to be discussed by the Council to address the situation, because the discussion with the Arab colleagues was very long, very intense. It was a real political discussion, one of the most intense political discussions I have seen in the last four years.  

And we were short on time, because I had to go to chair the Syria Conference [Brussels Conference on ‘Supporting the future of Syria and the region’] and we have not had enough time to further [exchange] on the analysis of the decisions that we could take in order to address the situation.  

For the time being, we have limited ourselves to demand Israel to do these three things, and obviously, to condemn the attacks by Hamas with rockets against Israeli territory.  

But I want to stress the importance of the ruling of the International Court of Justice. 

The International Court of Justice – I want to repeat it – is at the core of the multilateral system, at the core of the United Nations’ system. One cannot defend multilateralism, rule of law at the international level, without being ready to support the implementation of the [International] Court of Justice rulings, which are compulsory for all members of the United Nations. 

I am not talking of the [International] Criminal Court (ICC). Yes, you can discuss about it and say “Well, Israel is not a member, it is not part of the ICC.” It is part of the ICJ. All members of the United Nations have the obligation to fulfil that. And certainly, the [UN] Security Council will have to discuss about what measures can be taken by the United Nations in order to make this court decision be implemented. 

Then, we went to Georgia. We had an exchange on developments around the law on transparency of foreign influence in Georgia. 

Some Member States considered that they were not so grave, not so important. Others considered – rightly so – that this law is against EU laws and values. 

The Venice Commission report was mentioned. In accordance with this Venice Commission, we urge the authorities to withdraw this law. 

We have started to consider the most appropriate EU response in case the law is enacted, and take decisions at the next Foreign Affairs Council in June. 

But I would like Member [States] to be ready to take decisions every time there is something which does not fulfil our values, which does not [go with] international norms, which does not fulfil the European path – not only in Georgia, but everywhere in the world. 

We discussed about the upcoming elections. The Georgian people will have to vote on the trajectory of their country, and government actions may eventually have an impact on the benefits they enjoy as a result of the EU integration. But no decision has been taken. 

I debriefed Ministers on Venezuela, and our engagement with Venezuelan authorities regarding a potential deployment of an EU Election Observation Mission. I will communicate about it in due time.  

Finally, I was chairing the 8^th Brussels Conference on ‘Supporting the Future of Syria [and the Region’]. I just opened it, and I will go to this Conference again after this press conference ends. 

I want to reiterate that the European Union and its Member States have been the strongest supporters of the United Nations Special Envoy [for Syria, Geir Pedersen] and providing a lot of funding to the Syrian refugees and to the neighbouring countries which are hosting them.  

The situation is very bad – much worse than last year. When you see the figures of the numbers of the Syrian people who are depending on humanitarian assistance and how many children are among them, and you see the amount of effort that the neighbouring countries have to do in order to take care of these millions of refugees.  

We see that there is no improvement in the situation. No, this year is still worse than last year. 

So, the international community has to continue providing efforts to support these people in the neighbouring countries, inside Syria and all refugees. 

We make a warning about the so-called “voluntary” returns of Syrian refugees to Syria. “Voluntary returns” means voluntary. The refugees should not be pushed back to Syria, and we should not look to the other side when this happens. And we should not incentivise this by any means. 

We consider that there are not [the conditions for] the safe, voluntary, informed, and dignified returns of refugees to Syria for the time being. 

This is – I think – everything we have been talking [about] today at the Foreign Affairs Council and at the Syria Conference. 

 Q&A 

Q. Tendría dos preguntas. La primera: cuándo cree que se puede reunir este Consejo de Asociación UE-Israel; si cree que Israel va a asistir – y más dada la escalada diplomática que está teniendo con algunos Estados miembro, sobre todo con Irlanda y con España. La segunda pregunta: ¿si Israel sigue incumpliendo la resolución de la Corte Internacional de Justicia, cree usted o ve ánimo en la sala para que haya sanciones y se puedan aplicar sanciones contra Israel – igual que se hizo con Rusia cuando empezó a incumplir esas resoluciones – o estamos lejos de este escenario?  

Gracias. Comprendo que hay una especial atención por parte de la prensa española sobre la reacción que ha tenido el gobierno de Netanyahu a la decisión de España, Irlanda, Eslovenia [y Noruega] de reconocer el Estado de Palestina. Yo no le llamaría diplomática a la escalada. Es todo menos diplomática. Algunas de las cosas que he visto son cualquier cosa menos diplomática. Al contrario, es una agresión verbal absolutamente injustificada y extrema que el gobierno español ya se ha encargado de rechazar.  

Con respecto a tu pregunta, para decirle la verdad, hoy no lo he visto. Pero, como les he dicho antes, hoy ha sido un día apresurado en el que hemos tenido que acortar la discusión porque empezaba la Conferencia de Siria. No puedo decirle cuál sería la reacción, en un momento posterior, si Israel – el gobierno de Netanyahu, perdón - continua como está haciendo las últimas horas, haciendo caso omiso de la Corte Internacional de Justicia.  

 Q. Two questions on Hungary, please. We are constantly hearing new reasons from the Hungarian government why they are still blocking the European Peace Facility (EPF). I am just wondering how you explain that. Is there another reason why they are doing it which they are not naming, and which one could it be? The second question: some Ministers today have raised the question whether it is even necessary for Hungary to agree to all these decisions on the Ukraine Assistance Fund, given that they have secured a drop out, an opt-out for themselves. So, they will not be financing any weapons to Ukraine. My question is: is there a legal pathway to take these decisions without Hungary? 

Well, I am not going to speculate about the arguments - the reasons - that one Member may have to support or to justify his disagreement with a legal text. I have seven legal texts pending approval. Seven legal texts pending approval to mobilise resources to support militarily Ukraine. Everybody is saying that we are not fulfilling our commitments, that we are not providing on time our commitments. I have seven legal acts pending approval in order to mobilise about €5 billion to support Ukraine militarily. This delay can be measured in terms of human lives. It is not a financial problem. This is a problem of human lives. And yes, maybe a Member State can have reasons and arguments to disagree on something and to look for other things which are unrelated. But [as] some Member States have said today, it has to be proportional. There has to be a certain degree of proportionality between your concerns – legitimate concerns – and the issues that you are not allowing the others to do.  

We have agreed that the Hungarian contribution to the European Peace Facility will not be used to supply military support to Ukraine. This has been already agreed. Their contribution will not be used – not only for non-lethal or lethal - for any kind of military support to Ukraine. But, according to our rules – as far as we interpret these rules, right now – we need unanimity in order to approve these seven pending legal acts. Now it will be the seven legal acts that I need in order to use the revenues from frozen assets and to convert in arms. I will need some more legal acts, and they will be presented to COREPER this week. I do not want to speculate about what is going to be the position of all Member States, but I have been asking them: “please do not block it.” Otherwise, when we will have the revenue of these assets, we will keep them carefully in our current account. 

Q. I would like to follow [up on] the Hungarian issues but from another angle. One general question: the governing parties, the government members and even the Prime Minister [Viktor Orban] himself, claim that the EU policies in Ukraine push the world to the brink of the World War III. I would like to ask your reaction to this. The short question: I am wondering whether the European Union is contemplating the introduction of compulsory military conscription as the [Hungarian] Foreign Minister [Péter] Szijjártó said today in his conference. I am wondering whether he raised this issue in the Council.  

La Unión Europea no tiene la capacidad de establecer el servicio militar obligatorio. Estamos muy lejos de tener estos poderes, ¿no?  

The European Union has not the capacity to call for a compulsory conscription. We are far away from having this kind of power. This is a national decision. I read in the newspapers that the United Kingdom is thinking about it, but the European Union cannot. I am not even thinking of that because it is far away from our capacities. 

About this issue of the policy of the European Union towards the war in Ukraine, this is an interesting [issue] to discuss at the level of [the] European Union´s leaders. This is something that has to be discussed where the leaders of the governments sit and discuss. At our level, [a] much lower, much more modest level, we do not have to discuss these kinds of things. We discuss practical issues. If the Member States decided to create a Fund to support Ukraine – and it was decided, by the way, by the European Council – my duty, and the duty of the Ministers, is to implement it and to overcome the difficulties in order to make this implementation possible.  

Philosophical discussions about the Third World War – for sure, important and interesting – were not on the agenda today. Not on my agenda, maybe it could be in another agenda of another institution. Today, [at the] Foreign Affairs Council, the purpose of the discussion was much more grounded [and] lower level: how do we manage to use the resources that the budget has allocated to us.  

Q. I would like to have your comment or reaction, if it is possible, if you are aware, about the killing of an Egyptian soldier by the Israeli forces this afternoon and the tensions on the border between the two countries. My question is about the meeting of today. What was the reaction of Member States, after they heard this extensive and comprehensive Arab vision, starting from the ceasefire and the Two-State solution? Can I ask you a clarification? You spoke about the [fact that the] Arab countries asked for a peace conference to look at how to implement the Two-State solution. Are you talking here about the preparatory peace conference or another one? 

Bueno, creo que ya se lo he dicho, ¿no? No sé de qué estaba hablando. Estaba hablando de eso, precisamente.  

Sobre el incidente al que usted se refiere, no voy a hacer ningún comentario. Si alguien lo tiene que hacer es el ministro egipcio. Sí, hemos sido informados de la tensa situación que hay en la frontera entre Gaza y Egipto. Por eso se nos pide que movilicemos nuestra misión de control de fronteras [EUBAM Rafah]. Se piensa que una misión de la Unión Europea podría actuar con el grado de neutralidad suficiente para hacer ser aceptada por todas las partes.   

En castellano se dice “tirar el guante sobre la mesa”, un desafío. Un desafío constructivo: esto es lo que hoy podría decir resumiendo lo que han hecho nuestros colegas árabes. Nos han tirado el guante sobre la mesa y nos dicen: “recójanlo ustedes”.  

“Están de verdad dispuestos to engage with us, when looking for a solution? To build the Two-State solution that theoretically you support? Are you ready to work with us on this endeavour? Okay, if you are ready, tell us how. How, and not only demanding and asking, but acting. What are you ready to do? Are you ready to engage with us? Here is our plan. What do you have to say about this plan, and [on what do] you agree and [on what do] you disagree?” 

This was the purpose of the meeting. The purpose of the meeting was to know which were the positions of the Arab countries. Not the League of Arab States, but the ones who came here.  Good, now we know. And now they ask us: “Do you want to engage? Then, how? A suggestion: why don’t we organise an International Conference on how to implement the Two-State solution? Would you be ready to participate in that and push for it?” 

“Oh, we have the idea of calling for another Conference. Okay, we can merge them. We can do that together.” 

These are the questions that today our Arab colleagues have presented to us. The glove is on the table. I hope that we will be able to take the glove, and to give a positive answer to this request. Certainly, there has been the consideration of a double standard, that, yes, we are expressing strong concern but apart from expressing concern there is no action.  Apart from the humanitarian side, in which we do a lot. We do a lot, and they thank [us and] they recognise [it]. They thank us: “yes, you do a lot.”  

But the question is not only to provide humanitarian support. It is, when we can, because humanitarian support has been [impeded] – everybody has to recognise it and the Arab states told us clearly: “Look, do you agree with us on the fact that humanitarian support has been impeded? In an unjustified manner? By whom?” Well, by the one who controls the border. 

People are blaming Egypt about the border in Rafah, but there are many other border points which are under Israeli control, and they are closed. That is a problem, and we have been told: “What can you do, to try to support more humanitarian support effectively entering and effectively being distributed?” 

When I see that today the Israeli parliament – the Knesset - has been starting to study a law to declare that UNRWA will be forbidden to act and work in the West Bank and Gaza, certainly, it is  not going to help. Certainly, it is not going to help.  

That is why we ask the three things. We demand three things: [first, the] implementation of the International Court of Justice’s ruling. There is a lot of things in this resolution, not only to stop military actions, also not to impede humanitarian access. You know what this court ruling says.

Second, to stop blocking the funding to the Palestinian Authority. On which grounds do you take the money of the Palestinian Authority? On which grounds are you going to create a meltdown of the banking system in West Bank? Do you want to bring [it] to the brink of collapse? We do not want [this]. “Okay, you do not want [this]. What are you going to do in order to prevent it from happening?” 

On the third one, it is the issue of UNRWA.  

By the way, all Member States have resumed their funding of UNRWA. This week the Commission will disburse the second tranche of support to UNRWA. We are going to pay the tranche due to the Palestinian Authority. But if the Netanyahu government prevents the revenue of taxes that belongs to the Palestinians [from] being received by the Palestinian Authority, who will take [it]? Who will prevent [this] and who will provide the money?  

Well, this is the problem [in] the West Bank. Not only in Gaza, [but] the problem in the West Bank. It is clear that there is violent actions by the settlers in order to attack the convoys of humanitarian support. These people are armed, heavily armed. The arms, as far as I know, they do not grow in the trees. Someone has provided them.  

Link to the video: https://audiovisual.ec.europa.eu/en/video/I-257524 

Contacts:

Peter STANO

Lead Spokesperson for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy

peter.stano@ec.europa.eu

+32 (0)460 75 45 53

Pedro FONSECA MONIZ

Press Officer for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy

pedro.fonseca-moniz@ec.europa.eu

+32 (0)2 291 38 76

+32 (0)460 76 14 96

Gioia FRANCHELLUCCI

Press Officer for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy

Gioia.FRANCHELLUCCI@ec.europa.eu

+32 229-68041