{
"authors": [],
"type": "pressRelease",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [
"Middle East"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Middle East",
"Israel",
"Lebanon",
"Palestine",
"Syria",
"Western Europe"
],
"topics": []
}
REQUIRED IMAGE
Although Europe actively tries to manage Middle East crises, it undermines its economic, political, and security interests by assuming a secondary role to the United States and following its policy line.
BEIRUT, Mar 5—Although Europe actively tries to manage Middle East crises, it undermines its economic, political, and security interests by assuming a secondary role to the United States and following its policy line. For the EU to be an effective player in the Middle East peace process, it must pursue greater political engagement on three tracks: the Palestinian territories, Syria, and Lebanon, concludes a new paper by the Carnegie Middle East Center.
Drawing on interviews with EU delegations and European embassies as well as a wealth of local actors in Lebanon, Syria, and the Palestinian territories, Muriel Asseburg assesses Europe’s on-the-ground efforts in conflict management and recommends a more effective European approach to the Arab–Israeli conflict.
Key Conclusions:
Asseburg concludes:
“It is time for Europeans to rethink their policy approaches, refocus their activities, and seek a more effective coordination and division of labor with the new U.S. administration. Not only are intensified efforts needed to reinvigorate the Israeli–Palestinian negotiations, Europeans should also stand ready to help advance the other tracks of the peace process. In the end, for Europeans, it is not about claiming a role as a ‘player,’ but about assuming that role and engaging in politics.”
###
NOTES
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
The debate on the future of European deterrence has intensified, as NATO allies seek to balance three key aims. Going forward, they will need to cooperate more deeply to craft a coherent strategy for confronting new threats.
Sophia Besch, Jamie Kwong
The EU’s engagement with the rest of the world has become increasingly uneven. To chase the ambition of a global Europe, the second von der Leyen commission must leverage funds and diplomatic tools to play a more cohesive role in shaping international affairs.
Francesco Siccardi
Hard-line approaches to asylum policy are increasingly common, with crackdowns proposed even by parties that traditionally hold liberal views on migration. Does this shift represent a break with Europe’s fundamental values?
Thomas de Waal
Despite holding significant leverage, the EU remains sidelined in ongoing diplomacy around the Gaza peace plan. How can the union overcome internal divisions to take a more active role?
Rym Momtaz
As polarization increases across Western societies, the gap between Baby Boomers and Millennials could become a fault line. Rebuilding intergenerational trust is essential to restoring shared values in liberal democracies.
Cyrine Drissi, Marc Pierini