The Schuman Plan 60 Years Later: A Model for the Middle East?

Abstract

Europe has a special responsibility towards Israel and the Palestinian Authority, not only because the EU is the largest aid donor in the region, but also because of Europe's historical legacy. Europe can provide a roadmap on how a region is able to pull itself from centuries of violent conflict to peace and stability through economic cooperation. Granted, European integration cannot be transplanted to the Middle East; however, the plan set in motion by Robert Schuman 60 years ago can provide a starting point for regional cooperation in the Middle East.

‘Peace through trade.’ This fundamental tenet of liberal economics goes back to the philosopher from Königsberg, Immanuel Kant. It may very well have been on the minds of Jean Monnet and Robert Schuman 60 years ago, when, on 9 May 1950, the founders of the European project showed Europe the way forward with the Schuman Declaration.

The proposal was put forward by the French Foreign Minister in a speech before the international press in the Clock Room of Quai d'Orsay. It was based on the revolutionary idea of Jean Monnet to create a common market for the coal and steel industries of former arch-enemies Germany and France, within the framework of a European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC). His goal was to make another war between Germany and France impossible and thereby banish the spectre of war from Europe. By bringing together strategically important sectors under the direction of one common authority and in the form of an organisation that other European countries would be able to join, a common market would be created with strong economic links binding the parties together.

In 1951, the founding treaty was finally signed in Paris by France and Germany as well as by Italy, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. The work of European unification had begun. The story of European integration is impressive; it is still an unparalleled example of what can come out of reconciliation. We Europeans can take a great deal of pride in this on the anniversary of the Schuman Declaration. That today we live in a democratic Europe in freedom and peace, in societies in which human dignity is the highest good, is not to be taken for granted, as a glance at the situation in our neighbourhood should make clear.

The dramatic conflict between Israelis and Palestinians has continued for almost as long as the European unification process has been underway, since the founding of the State of Israel in 1948. This conflict has overshadowed the fate of many in an entire region of the world. In the past few years especially, the war in Gaza and the blockade of the Gaza Strip has made the situation worse. In East Jerusalem and the West Bank, Israel continues to build settlements.

The citizens of the European Union are closely connected to those who live in this conflict-ridden region, and not only through geographical proximity. The community also has a moral responsibility to do everything possible to bring an end to this long-standing and dramatic conflict. Germany has a special obligation towards the people of Israel. We will always stand together with Israel if the existence of the state is threatened from outside. In the same way we also support the right of Palestinians to live in a state of their own, in freedom and with secure borders.

It is not enough that the support of the European Union be restricted to the financial assistance which the community provides today as the largest donor in the region. On top of this, the EU must speak with a strong voice politically, so that—together with the other members of the so-called Quartet (the UN, the US and Russia) which is supposed to promote peace in the Middle East—it can mediate between the two parties in the conflict.

Perhaps the most important contribution that the EU can make to this end is to share its own historical experience: that it was possible, after centuries of conflict and wars among European countries, to reach out to each other and allow a gradual process of political integration to result in the European Union. Especially on the sixtieth anniversary of the Schuman Declaration of 9 May 1950, we Europeans should turn our attention to the Middle East and ask ourselves how a miraculous reconciliation such as that between France and Germany can be achieved between Israelis and Palestinians also. Could an initiative similar to the European Community for Coal and Steel have similar results in the Middle East and allow peace to flourish?

Political will is needed to promote just economic cooperation

European integration has shown that reconciliation and understanding can develop as a result of economic cooperation. In the case of the European Coal and Steel Community, it was of central importance that the common oversight of the strategic coal and steel sectors, which were indispensable for waging war, would make another war between the former arch-enemies Germany and France practically impossible.

Through the economic integration of Germany and France, political peace could grow to become a European Union, which today unites the countries of Europe in a community of values.

Without the political will to find a peaceful resolution to the conflict, however, initiatives for economic cooperation alone cannot improve the prospects for peace. It is in this context that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's declaration of the intention to take steps towards an ‘economic peace’ does not appear very believable, and the political signals today point in the opposite direction. When it was announced in March 2010, during the visit of US Vice President Joe Biden, that 1,600 new homes would be built in East Jerusalem, Israel made it impossible for there to be direct negotiations with the President of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmud Abbas, in the immediate future. In reaction to this provocation, the Israeli leadership has received harsh criticism from its international partners. If it does not stop the construction of settlements, Israel will block any possibility of negotiations for a peaceful settlement. The lack of political will within the Netanyahu government for a peaceful agreement with its Palestinian neighbours is clear from its settlement policy. As Israel's most important partners, the EU and the US must use their influence on the Israeli government to encourage a commitment to a fair, peaceful resolution. In doing so, the EU should not allow itself to be overshadowed by the US. The EU is Israel's largest trading partner; it can and must push the Israeli leadership to work seriously for a peaceful political settlement.

Israel faces, on the Palestinian side, a leadership divided between the radical Hamas in the Gaza Strip and the moderate Fatah in the West Bank. It is questionable whether Hamas, which has been ruling the Gaza Strip since 2007 and which the EU considers a terrorist organisation, is seriously interested in a peaceful resolution to the conflict. For there to be a genuine opportunity for peace, it is necessary that the radical Hamas and the more moderate Fatah first come together to give Palestinians a political voice interested in peace.

In any case, an ‘economic peace’ with Israel can be regarded as ‘just’ on the Arab side only if it enables both parties to profit equally from economic cooperation. Until now this has not been the case. The economic disparity between the autonomous Palestinian territories and Israel is in fact the consequence of political factors. The decade-long occupation of the Palestinian territories by Israel, as well as the seizure of strategic land and water supplies, boycotts and an economic policy driven by Israeli self-interest, has left deep marks in the Palestinian territories. These developments have left the industries that have grown up in the autonomous Palestinian territories economically dependent on Israeli markets. It is imperative that such a one-sided dependency not be allowed to become even stronger. What is needed is cooperation on the ground, which can lead to a situation in which the two economies are mutually interlinked.

The benefits of regional economic cooperation

Besides the difficult task of finding a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the Middle East is confronted by other enormous challenges, which the countries of the region can best meet through cooperation. For years already the scarcity of resources such as water and energy has caused problems which will require intelligent, common management to solve successfully. As in the case of the Schuman Plan, it is possible to imagine the joint administration of these strategically important areas. Such cooperation could bring significant benefits to the Middle East, in light of the scarcity of resources which threatens the region. In this context, Israel would be well-advised to find ways to cooperate with the Palestinian Authority, before the Arab states unite without Israel and an equal partnership for Israel became possible only with considerable difficulty.

A concrete example of the benefits of regional cooperation in the management of resources can be found in the jointly agreed rules for dividing the scarce water resources of the Jordan River and its tributaries. At the same time the scarcity of water in the region requires that all countries make visible efforts to reduce their use of water.

A form of ‘trilateral economic cooperation’ is also conceivable. It could bring together energy in the form of oil from the Arabian Peninsula, the large labour pool from the countries which are the traditional source of migrant labour (such as Egypt and the Palestinian territories) and Israeli know-how.

Similarly, the construction of a railroad, which once existed, from Egypt along the Mediterranean coast of Israel as far as Lebanon and Syria could be undertaken with international participation. Similar projects such as the construction of harbours and a canal to the Dead Sea can also be imagined.

A peaceful solution to the Middle East conflict, in the framework of a regional approach, could lead to unimaginable gains in productivity in the form of a ‘peace dividend’. Reduced military spending could free up capital for productive investments. With the support of international aid for reconstruction, a Middle East ‘common market’ would allow all participants—as in the case of the European market—to take advantage of the reduced costs, leading to a growing standard of living in the Palestinian territories as well as in Israel.

The requirement for such a development remains the political will of those responsible on all sides. The example of European integration makes it clear how decisive the role of the founders was, who committed themselves to the realisation of their vision. The insight that the peaceful setting aside of conflict was the best solution for all sides must therefore form the foundation of a similar process of integration in the Middle East as well. When Robert Schuman put forward his plan on 9 May 1950, few had any hope that his vision would be implemented. The idea of a European Coal and Steel Community has led today to a highly integrated community of values, which has even overcome the division of Europe, and in which people live together in peace, freedom and democracy. The example of the European Union gives hope that this happy fate can also be shared by the people in the Middle East.