The Role of the EU in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict A Qualitative Case Study on the Role of the EU in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict approached through realism, liberalism and constructivism

Master Thesis

Author: Elvira Sofic Supervisor: Anders Persson Examiner: Karl Loxbo Term: HT 19 Subject: Political Science Level: Masters Degree Course code: 5SK30E

Abstract For over four decades, the EU has been an active external actor in the Israeli-

Palestinian peace process. However, the role that the EU has in the conflict,

have many times been questioned. This thesis aims therefore to examine the

role of the EU in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by using three international

relations theories; realism, liberalism and constructivism. With the research

question of how the role of the EU can be understood and explained, a

qualitative case study is being done. The theories are being approached in a

theory consuming way focusing on following concepts; collective EU

interests, security and military resources, democracy promotion, international

law, and identity and norms. Following the results and analysis of the concepts,

the EU does have an important, yet laid back role in the conflict. The EU has

been an influential actor in many ways, however, the role has mostly been

diplomatic and economic rather that political. This indicates that, for the EU

to become a stronger political actor, the Union needs to take on more effective

measures when acting and also handle the occurring changes within the Union.

Key words European Union, Palestine, Israel, Interests, Security, Military, Interdependence, International Law, Identity, Norms

Table of contents 1 Introduction 1

1.1 Research Rationale 2 1.2 Purpose and Research Question 5 1.3 The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: what is it about and how has it evolved during previous decades along with the entrance of the EU in it? 6

2 Theory 9 2.1 Previous Research 9 2.2 Theoretical Approach 13

2.2.1 Realism 14 2.2.2 Liberalism 18 2.2.3 Constructivism 24

3 Method 29 3.1 Research Design 29 3.2 Case Study 30 3.3 Material 33 3.4 Operationalization 35 3.5 Demarcations 35 3.6 Theoretical framework 37

4 Results and Analysis 39 4.1 Common EU Interests 39 4.2 Security and Military Resources 44 4.3 Democracy Promotion 49 4.4 Interdependence 53 4.5 International Law 56 4.6 Identity and Norms 58

5 Discussion and Conclusion 62

6 References 66

1(74)

1   Introduction

”The Government of the State of Israel and the PLO team (in the Jordanian- Palestinian

delegation to the Middle East Peace Conference) (the "Palestinian Delegation"),

representing the Palestinian people, agree that it is time to put an end to decades of

confrontation and conflict, recognize their mutual legitimate and political rights, and strive

to live in peaceful coexistence and mutual dignity and security and achieve a just, lasting

and comprehensive peace settlement and historic reconciliation through the agreed political

process.”1

These sentences are the introduction to the Oslo Accords stated in 1993

between Israel and Palestine. With these accords a new era of hope and

peacebuilding began. As known to many, the conflict between Israel and

Palestine has been ongoing for several decades, during which many actors

have been involved. One of these is the European Union (EU) who during the

last 40 years have been searching for different approaches to advance and help

the development of the peace process between the parties. However, the role

of the EU has been questioned. In an evaluation of the conflict, Asseburg &

Goren (2019) are primarily questioning the EU due to its relationship with

Israel, other actors’ involvements in the conflict and its relationship with

Palestine. Based on the report, the EU has remained in the background in

situations where for example dynamics on the ground have been shaped,

instead they have had a key role in shaping the international language on the

conflict.2

1 Oslo Accords, 1993, Doctrine of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements (OSLO 1): p.4. 2 Asseburg & Goren, 2019, Divided and Divisive: Europeans, Israel and Israeli-Palestinian Peacemaking: p. 5.

2(74)

The work done by the EU is a part of the Middle East Peace Process (MEPP)

that besides Israel and Palestine also covers other states and conflicts in the

Middle East. Within this, the EU has developed several aspects underpinning

their work within the peace process, indicating that they, for example, are

willing to promote peace and work with various peace negotiations based on

different aspects, The EU can for example see themselves agree on pre-1967

borders only if both parties (Israel and Palestine) agree on that.3

Another aspect setting the grounds for EU’s work is a security agreement

aiming to respect the sovereignty of Palestinians, showing that the occupation

is over, as well as providing security for the Israelis. This security agreement

is also involving aspects regarding terrorism prevention and other security

threats. With this said, it is evident that the EU is trying to take on several

measures, of both diplomatic (political) and practical character.4 This study is

therefore focusing on the role of the EU in the conflict from 1993 until 2019.

The aim is to reach some kind of explanation and understanding of the role

that the EU has. This will be done by applying the classical international

relations theories realism, liberalism and constructivism on the case.

1.1   Research Rationale

Even though the EU together with other external actors have been active in the

conflict, the results of a stabile peace are minimal. According to Freedom

House and their freedom rating on both Israel and Palestine (the West Bank

and the Gaza strip) is Israel ranked as free while the Palestinian area is ranked

as not free.5 This could be seen as an indication that everything that has been

done so far, have not been enough. However, the aspirations and goals of the

3 European External Action Services (EEAS), 2019a, The Middle East Peace Process. 4 Ibid, 2019a 5 Freedom House, 2019a; 2019b.

3(74)

EU are clear, they are striving for an equal peace with a two-state solution and

an independent, democratic, contiguous, and viable Palestine that lives and

works side-by-side with Israel and other states in the region.6

Following this, it is clear that the EU has established a role and a voice in the

conflict that makes the actor relevant to discuss and analyze in order to see

how its work can be explained and understood. Many studies have been done

about Israel and Palestine, and the role of the EU in the conflict. But no study

has specifically been done on how the role can be explained and understood

based on these international relations theories; realism, liberalism and

constructivism. It is also interesting how the involvement of many big actors

have not resulted in a definite and stabile peace between the parties. It is

therefore interesting to look at the role of the EU in the conflict and to make

an attempt to understand it.

The relevance of the study can also be discussed based scientific and non-

scientific relevance. Non-scientific relevance is defined by the studies

relevance in the society. In other words, its political, economic and social

perspectives. It can also be measured by its impact and relevance on humans

within the society, for example, how large groups of people it affects.7 Looking

at the relevance of this study through that perspective it is evident that it has a

big non-scientific relevance. The EU is a big and influential union with many

member states. The actions taken by the EU affect both the institutions within

the union and the institutions within the member states. On the other hand, the

conflict is also affecting the people living in Israel and Palestine as well as the

people in the region. The every day life of the people in Israel and Palestine

6 EEAS, 2019a 7 Teorell & Svensson, 2007, 18; See also: George & Bennett, 2005; Esaiasson, 2012.

4(74)

have in many ways been shaped by the conflict whereas many people have

lived their whole lives under oppression, violence and instability.8

On the other hand, the scientific relevance stands for the relevance of the study

in relation to other research being done on the same case or within the same

field. Scientific relevance is also measured based on the contribution of the

research to the specific field of study. New research is most often building

upon older research, giving a more up to date perspective. This can be done by

supplementing previous research, or by reference to previous research.

Previous research can also be questioned by using other theoretical

frameworks, research questions or perspectives in the new study.9

However, the scientific relevance of this study is broad. The theoretical

framework differs from many previous studies; it contributes with a new

perspective on how the role of the EU can be approached. Indeed, older

research is going to be used and build upon by new, more up to date

perspectives and a theoretical framework that mixes indicators based on

various concepts from three distinct theories. The aim is to reach a

comprehensive and broad analysis that will bring a new and innovative

explanation of EU’s role in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

8 Freedom House, 2019a; 2019b; 2019c. 9 Teorell & Svensson, 2007, 18-19; see also, Esaiasson, 2013, George & Bennett, 2005

5(74)

1.2   Purpose and Research Question This study aims to examine the role of the EU in the Israeli-Palestinian

conflict. The main goal is to explain and reach an understanding of the work

that the EU has been doing by applying concepts from three international

relations theories on the case: realism, liberalism, and constructivism. Through

these theories, the role of the EU will be examined focusing on the timeframe

between 1993 to 2019. The focus will solely be on the work that the EU has

been doing. I will however also take different political changes, both within

the EU and on the international arena, into consideration, e.g. the entry of

right-wing populist parties on the EU-arena. By including all of these aspects,

the ambition is to reach an up to date and comprehensive study that will answer

the research question in the best way.

Research Question:

- How can the role of the EU in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict be explained

and understood though Realism, Liberalism, and Constructivism?

6(74)

1.3   The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: what is it about and how has it evolved during previous decades along with the entrance of the EU in it?

The Israeli- Palestinian conflict became an international issue after the World

War 1 (WW1). Due to different happenings, the League of Nations10 placed

Palestine under the control and administration of Great Britain, who was

supposed to mandate Palestine until the status of a fully independent nation

was reached. When giving the mandate to Great Britain, the League of Nations

made sure that the wishes of the communities in Israel and Palestine were

taken into consideration- this did not happen, much because of the

commitments that Britain made to the Zionist community11 where they

promised an establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine. Zionist

leaders claimed that the Jewish people had historical connection to the area

since their ancestors lived in Palestine before the occurrence of ‘Diaspora’12.

Moreover, during this period the Zionist organization worked towards

establishing a Jewish national home, while the indigenous people of Palestine

felt that their natural rights were violated. They also saw this as an intrusion

on their independence and sovereignty. This eventually led to resistance from

the Palestinian Arabs.13

This situation and other occurrences made Great Britain to submit “the

Palestine problem” to the UN with the motivation that the situation, facing

10 League of Nations was an organization for international cooperation established in January 1920. It was an initiative by the allied powers after WW1. One of its goals was to guarantee collective security (Britannica, 2019; Henig & Sharp, 2010). 11 Zionism is the Jewish nationalist movement aiming to create and support a Jewish state in Palestine (Britannica, 2019; SAOL, 2019) 12 Diaspora is a commonly used concept without any precise definition. It is sometimes a synonym for `ethnic group´ and is also often related to `globalization ‘and `transnationalism´. The concept can cover almost any ethnic/ religious minority that for some reason has been dispersed from its original homeland. In this case Jews from Palestine (Gitleman, 2016, 1). 13 E.g. Pardo & Peters, 2012.

7(74)

conflicting obligations, has become incompatible. At this point, with the UN

being a young organization along violent developments in Palestine, the UN

proposed a portioning of Palestine creating two independent states- one

Palestinian Arab state and one Jewish state, with Jerusalem being

internationalized. 14

However, as known to many, the partition plan did not result in peace for

Palestine. These happenings escalated into a Middle Eastern conflict. The

Jewish part of Palestine proclaimed its independence as Israel and after several

wars, where they succeeded, the territory of Israel expanded and occupied

shortly after all of Palestine. The Palestinian Arab state never managed to enter

the world’s map, and since then the Arab people of Palestine have fought for

their lost state. The proclamation of Israel occurred in 1948 and have since

then, resulted in many wars and destruction. Due to this, many Palestinians

have been forced into exile and many actors have engaged in the conflict

searching for a solution, since this conflict, in many ways, poses threat to

world peace.15

EU’s involvement in the conflict is on its fifth decade. In 1971, the European

Commission (EC) presented its first statement regarding the, so called,

“problem of the Middle East”. The problem that the EC referred to was the

Israeli- Palestinian conflict, meaning that it was important for Europe to

promote and establish peace in the Middle East.16 Following this, the

involvement of the EU in the conflict is still of importance. There are several

reasons for this, one of these is the strategic significance of the Middle East

for the security of Europe, because the happenings in the Middle East pose

14 United Nations (UN), 2019, The Question of Palestine, Key issues at stake. 15 UN, 2019; Möckli & Mauer, 2010, European-American relations and the Middle East. 16 Persson, 2013, Defining, Securing and Building a Just Peace: The EU and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, p.17

8(74)

global security threats and challenges including terrorism and

fundamentalism, nuclear proliferation, armed conflicts, regional instability

etc.17. These aspects have become more and more important over the past years

and cannot be compared with the importance of other regions.

17 Möckli & Mauer, 2010: p.1-2.

9(74)

2   Theory

In the following chapter, previous research and the theoretical approach will

be presented. I will primarily present previous research that has been done on

the area, focusing on the EU and their work in the conflict. Afterwards, I will

explain the theoretical framework that will be the starting point of this thesis

in order to understand EU’s work through different perspectives.

2.1   Previous Research A conflict as big and complex as this one have been studied in many ways and

through many perspectives. Different scholars have contributed with various

studies on this area from the beginning of the conflict. There are therefore

many good and extensive studies about the EU and its role in the conflict. But

somehow there is still many parts that have not been covered by previous

research, for example the role of the EU through different IR- theories, which

this thesis aims to cover in order to reach a new understanding and explanation

of the role that the EU has.

When looking at previous research there are several areas occurring within it.

Several big studies have been done before the peace process even started, for

example Allen & Pijpers study “European Foreign Policy-Making and the

Arab-Israeli Conflict” from 1984 where the authors present different

European countries attitudes and positions towards the conflict.18 Moreover,

Greilsammer and Weiler study in their book “Europe and Israel: Troubled

Neighbours” the institutionalized Europe, the EEC operating through the

Common Commercial Policy and Political Cooperation. The authors indicate

that the EC often tried to present itself as an actor that is different from its

18 Allen & Pijpers, 1984, European Foreign Policy-Making and the Arab-Israeli Conflict.

10(74)

member states. However, they are looking into the EC’s attempt to reach a

common European policy towards the Middle East and, as in this case, Israel.19

In broad, these two studies can be seen as some kind of groundwork for the

studies done afterwards. Gianniou’s (2016) study “Promoting Cohesion and

Consistency in EU Foreign Policy: The European Parliament and the Israeli-

Palestinian Conflict” where Gianniou digs deeper into the decision making of

the EU and how the member states need some kind of cohesiveness in order

for the EU to be a respected and effective international actor, can be related to

parts of the study done by Greilsammer and Weiler (1987).20

Looking at more modern studies, there are several fruitful ones being done

during the 2000s. For example, “The Israeli-Palestinian Road Block: Can

Europeans Make a Difference” where Hollis (2004) discusses different ways

in which the Europeans can contribute in the conflict. Hollis indicates directly

that Europeans can help by for example enter a proactive stance where the

estrangement between the parties gets acknowledged and reconfigured.21

Another example is the study “A State Beoynd the Pale: Europes Problem

with Israel” done by Shepherd (2009). Shepherd indicates that the state of

Israel is treated as an outcast by many states, including EU member states and

by the Union itself. The study therefore focuses on the relationship between

the EU and Israel and why it is as troubled as it is.22

Pardo and Peters (2010) have also done a study on the relationship between

the EU and Israel, “Uneasy Neighbors: Israel and the European Union”,

where they determine that the EU-Israel relations have been a source of

development for Israel. The authors divide the development of the relationship

19 Greilsammer & Weiler, 1987, Europe and Israel: Troubled Neighbours, p. 2-3. 20 Giannou, 2016, Promoting Cohesion and Consistency in EU Foreign Policy. 21 Hollis, 2004, The Israeli-Palestinian Road Block, p.195-199. 22 Shepherd, 2009, A State Beoynd the Pale: Europes Problem with Israel.

11(74)

into three intertwined scenarios: EU-Israel bilateral co-operation, EU-Middle

East multilateral frameworks, and EU’s approach to the Israeli-Arab conflict.

The authors confirm that the relationship have been including various

conflicts, which have resulted in a slightly problematic relationship where the

EU is engaged but at the same time bitter and angry with Israel.23 The same

authors are doing a similar study in 2012 as well, “Israel and the European

Union- A Documentary History”, where the relationship and historical

development between the two parties is being examined from 1957 until

2011.24 These studies are for an example strictly focusing on the EU-Israel

relationship, which is different from this study, since the focus here will be

equally divided between Israel and Palestine and the development of the

conflict as a whole.

Tocci (2009) is, in the article “Firm in rhetoric, compromising in reality:

the EU in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict”, analyzing EU’s actions in the

conflict and concludes that there is a gap between the goals set by the EU and

its practical conduct. EU declarations are supporting a norm-based solution to

the conflict, which is founded on the rights of self-determination of both Israeli

and Palestinian people.25 Persson (2013) on the other hand, have in his work

“Defining, Securing and Building a Just Peace: The EU and the Israeli-

Palestinian Conflict” studied the role of the EU in the conflict and have looked

specifically at their use of the term “just peace”. Persson (2013). addresses the

term with the goal to explain what it is, how it can be studied and achieved.

The term just peace is therefore looked into in a conceptual way in order to see

how it can be understood in the context of peacebuilding.26 However, much

has changed since these studies have been done and the area constantly needs

23 Pardo & Peters, 2010, Uneasy Neighbors: Israel and the European Union, p. 113. 24 Pardo & Peters, 2012, Israel and the European Union- A Documentary History. 25 Tocci, 2009, Firm in rhetoric, compromising in reality: the EU in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. 26 Persson, 2013, Defining, Securing and Building a Just Peace.

12(74)

new studies and new perspectives examining the development of the conflict

and the role of the EU. Studies have been done afterwards as well, but they

have also had a different approach than this thesis.

A study published in 2019 by Asseburg and Goren, “Divided and Divisive”

analyses the dynamics between the EU and Israel. The study focuses on

changes within the Union and how these have affected and are affecting the

goals set by the EU regarding the conflict. Happenings such as Brexit,

European Parliament Election 2019 and the institutional structure of the EU

are listed as factors that can affect the role of the EU in the conflict.27

The studies presented so far have mainly focused on describing the role of the

EU and its relationship with Israel and the Middle East region including

Palestine. These are broad, informative and useful, they can and will be used

in this thesis as groundwork that this study will build upon. One noticeable

difference between previous studies and this one is that there is no theoretical

approach that is alike the one in this study. Here, the theories are the core of

the study. This can be seen as the main aspect that this study is contributing

with to previous research. Realism, liberalism and constructivism will be used

in order to create a new and unique theoretical analysis model which will result

in a new theoretical framework that have not been used before.

This study will also be more up to date and broad in that sense that it will not

focus much on possible solutions or on some specific happenings that the EU

has done. It will instead contribute with a general description of the EU in the

conflict based on various concepts and indicators. As mentioned in the

purpose, I will include several political changes that have occurred both within

the EU and on the international arena as a whole, for example the changed

27 Asseburg & Goren, 2019: p. 9,15, 18.

13(74)

political climate within the EU where right-wing populist parties have entered

the union and are now affecting EU’s foreign policy.28 This study will

therefore take all these aspects into account and create an overall perspective

of the role of the EU, this is also the main aspects making this study different,

innovative and a good contribution to previous research.

2.2   Theoretical Approach In the following chapter I will present my theoretical approach; realism,

liberalism and constructivism. The theories will be presented separately in

order to gain understanding of their meaning. After that they will be

operationalized into an analysis model. In order to answer the research

question in the best possible way, different and relevant concepts from each

theoretical approach will be chosen. They will later on be put into the analysis

model that will follow through the whole thesis. Before I present my

theoretical approaches, I will shortly explain why these theories have been

chosen for this thesis.

In the attempt to understand and explain the role of the EU, concepts from the

theories are being selected. The concepts are chosen based on their

contribution to the analysis and the purpose of this study. The concepts will be

put in one common analysis model through which each concept will be

narrowed down into relevant indicators aiming to underpin the empirical

analysis. However, the theories will be used in different ways, whereas realism

and liberalism are having an explaining role. The concepts from these theories

will be used to explain how the EU manages in this conflict and how they are

perceiving security, national interests, democracy promotion etc.

28 See: Drago, 2018, Towards a New EU.

14(74)

On the other hand, the constructivist approach will be used to achieve an

understanding of why the EU is perceiving the concepts in a certain way and

how its role can be understood based on EU’s identity and norms. This because

constructivism is an international relations theory with a different foundation

and approach, it has a more understanding character offering alternative

understandings of many central themes within IR- e.g. power, identity and

interests.29 Hence, these three theories will complete each other reaching a

comprehensive explanation and understanding of EU’s role in the Israeli-

Palestinian conflict.

2.2.1   Realism Within Realism there are several thinkers that have contributed to the

development of the realist approach. Some of them are Niccolo Machiavelli,

Thomas Hobbes, Hans J. Morgenthau and John Mearcheimer. These thinkers

have, during different time periods, influenced the theory by adding new

perspectives on how and why states act in certain ways. Realism as an IR

theory is therefore very broad and consists of many different aspects and sub-

theories. But there are three core concepts that can be distinguished as they are

summing up the theory in a good way; Groupism, Egoism and Power-

centrism.30

Groupism includes the assumption that humans need to belong to different

groups in order to survive above subsistence, in other words, humans need

solidarity. Nowadays, the most important groups are defined as states. Egoism

stands for the assumption humans are egoists by nature always putting self-

interests against the collective good. This kind of behavior can easily lead to

altruism. This leads on to power -centrism meaning that power is the core

concept within politics. This is also linked with resources and the power one

29 Flockhart, 2017, Constructivism and Foreign Policy: p. 81-82. 30 Wohlforth, 2017, Realism and Foreign Policy: p. 36.

15(74)

can gain by having resources. Following this, the relationship between social

and material power becomes one of politics most central aspects.31 However,

more precisely I will focus on following concepts: common EU interests

(national interests), security and military resources. Through these three

concepts, the role of the EU will be analyzed in order to get a closer look at

how the EU operates within these fields.

Common EU Interests (National Interests)

When aiming to define national interests in regards to the EU, one needs to re-

conceptualize it from being national interests, to common EU interests. This

because the EU is constructed by member states and hence many different

national interests are represented within the EU. Following this, when

operating as one actor the EU works based on the EU interests presented in its

policies etc. Therefore, the concept will be referred to as common EU interests

since the focus will be on EU’s actions as a Union.

However, the theoretical definition of interests is broad. I will start by looking

at Niccolo Machiavelli’s thoughts. Machiavelli indicated that interests stem

from the leader whose interests should be based on its precursors and should

solely focusing on power and war. The leader should have much knowledge

in order to act accordingly in present conflicts and to avoid pitfalls.32 The

leader should therefore keep the power, take care of the people within the state

and strive for popularity among the people, and at the same time be strict and

bound to his principles.33

31 Wohlforth, 2017: 36; Hall, 2012 Realism: p. 36-39. 32 Machiavelli, 1515/2012, Fursten: p. 110-111, 27-28. 33 Ibid, 1515/2012: p.96-97, 87.

16(74)

Hans J. Morgenthau, on the other hand, talks about interests in the sense of

power meaning that power is the core concept of interests, especially within

international politics. Interests are therefore the leading concept of different

actor’s foreign policy being primarily based on rational assumptions and

decisions. States that act rationally minimize the risks of war and are instead

maximizing positive outcomes as well as gaining political prosperity. The core

of this view is therefore power, because all actions should lead to more

power.34 According to this definition, interests are led by the leader who acts

rationally with the strive for power put in the center. But due to the anarchic

international arena, the interests are also based on the survival of each actor.

According to Hobbes, actors can very easily fall into a global war, however,

the only protection from this is everyone’s fear of death. Actors interests are

therefore also based on creating alliances with likeminded actors. This results,

according to Hobbes, in both power, interest fulfillment and security.35

Based on the description of interests, the concept can be interpreted as central

within realism, meaning that all actions taken by different actors are

underpinned by interests. When applying this on the EU, the analysis will be

based on EU’ strategies, policies and reports. The indicators that will be used

in order to explain and understand the common interests of the EU are the EU

as a global actor, EU-interests in the MEPP and the EU-interests in the Middle

East.

Security and Military Resources

Following the discussion regarding interests we are automatically led into the

second and third concept, security and military resources. The security term is

also central within Realism. Moreover, the discussion of military resources is

34 Morgenthau,1948/1993, Politics Among Nations: p. 5-10, 10-12. 35 Hobbes, 1651/2004, Leviathan: p. 510.

17(74)

relevant due to its connection to security and that these two concepts often go

hand in hand.

According to realist thinkers one can say that the core of security is that each

actor is left alone, meaning that actors have to defend themselves in order to

guarantee their own security.36 Following the Hobbesian thoughts on this, it is

relevant to talk about the so called State of Nature in which the human is not

social nor political, but is an egoistic survivor. In this state are all actors are

aiming for maximum amount of power. Hence, this situation is characterized

by violence and an aggressive atmosphere where war easily can break out. The

state of nature on the international arena is creating international issues.37

Moreover, Hobbes indicates that natural freedom should be restricted in order

to reach peace. This can be achieved by a strong and authoritarian leader.

Humans should also go into alliances in order to reach security and peace.38

Morality and caution is not a priority within realism, this is stated by

Machiavelli who indicated that morality can be disturbing for successful

leaders. Military actions are therefore central within his thoughts, making them

relevant for actors that are striving to fulfill their security goals, to gain power

and to promote their interests.39

Following this, Realism as an IR theory is fundamental to the understanding

and explanation of the EU as a security actor in the conflict. The EU is

promoting security in different ways which will be examined through different

indicators: EU as a security actor, the Common Security and Defense Policy,

EU crisis management. When it comes to military resource the indicators

36 Machiavelli, 1515/2012; Morgenthau, 1948/1993; Hobbes, 1651/2004. 37 Hobbes, 1651/2004: p.128; Hall, 2012: p.37; Dahl, 2004: p. 24-25. 38 Ibid, 222; Dahl, 1970, Modern Political Analysis: p.28-29. 39 Machiavelli, 1515/2012: p.16-17; 22; 62-62; 88-90; 113.

18(74)

being looked at are: EU military resources, EU political resources, and EU’s

military cooperation with other actors.

2.2.2   Liberalism John Locke, Immanuel Kant, John Stuart Mill, Joseph Nye etc. are liberal

scholars who in different ways have developed the liberal IR theory. These

scholars are promoting freedom and liberty through democracy and economic

reforms. Another common aspect that all liberalist scholars want to handle is

the issue of organizing the state in a way that enables justice and order in the

society. But the way towards this differs between scholars, even though the

common thought is that liberal and democratic societies are the key concept of

a peaceful global order. The free market for an example benefits the most from

an open and globalized world economy.40

Moreover, liberals perceive the world as a result of the conflict tempering roles

of different concepts such as interdependence, international institutions,

democracy and so on. Much of the Liberal theory focuses on the role of

globalization and emphasizes the importance of international organization for

a functioning international arena and international relations.41The concepts

that I will be focusing on in this thesis are: democracy promotion,

interdependence, and international law.

Democracy Promotion

Immanuel Kant argued for a system where all humans in the society are free,

living under the same rules. He emphasized the distribution of power and

meant that there should be someone responsible for the freedom of the citizens

and their impact on the state. With this, Kant also promoted federations

40 Burchill, 2005, Liberalism; Doyle, 2017, Liberalism and Foreign Policy. 41 Ibid, 2005.

19(74)

between sovereign states that would protect the states from conflicts.42

Following this, it is evident that democracy plays a central role within

Liberalism. Humans are perceived as free, rational and egoistic creatures.

According to for example John Locke, are humans striving for their own needs

and interests, and in order to fulfill these are humans most often using their

common sense. However, Locke also meant that this could be dangerous since

free human beings that are working for their own good could easily get into

conflicts. By making this assumption, Locke gave each individual a key role

in the creation of politics.43

John Stuart Mill on the other hand argued for each human being’s will,

happiness and interests. He meant that all individuals have the right to live

how they want. This could be reached through self development and freedom.

The state, in this case, should only intervene when freedom is in danger.

However, Mill also stated that the state has the right to limit ones’ freedom in

order to provide protection.44

Furthermore, a liberal and free society consists of human beings that are born

free, equal and independent. No human should undermine itself to any political

power without consent. With this, all humans should have the right to organize

themselves based on their interests, values etc. even if these are not following

the interests and values of the majority- all groups and organizations of people

should be respected. This can be seen as a fundamental liberal and democratic

value. Following this, democracy promotion can be interpreted as a tool for

development, influence and peacemaking.45

42 Kant, 1795/2010, To Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch. 43 Marsh & Stoker, 2010, Theory and methods in political science: p. 160. 44 Mill, 1984; Marsh & Stoker, 2010: p.162. 45 Locke, 2004: p.141-142.

20(74)

Moreover, the concept of democracy can be connected to the concept of peace

and the assumption that democracy leads to peace. The connection between

these two concepts is widespread within liberalism, emphasizing the

importance of democratic states. One that uplifts this is Immanuel Kant who

introduced the democratic peace theory meaning that democracy leads to

peace. Kant argued that a state with individual rights, social order, and good

political governance and climate was an ideal liberal state.46 However, the

fundamental assumption in this theory is that democratic states are less likely

to go into war than non-democratic states.47 One reason why democratic peace

is possible is the fact that elected representatives are required to listen to

different opinions expressed by the people. By this, they become popular and

their chances to get re-elected will increase; power is after all a central and

important aspect.48

Hence, the democratic peace has an important role within international

relations since most democracies do not go into war with each other. Hence,

based on the assumptions of the theory, war could be extinct by

democratization of all states.49 Following this, one can also state that peace has

become more important nowadays, it has become much more important for

states and international organizations to get what they want through peaceful

actions, these actions are including democracy promotion, peace keeping

forces, international law etc.50 Following this, the democratic promotion

handled by the EU becomes an important concept to look into in this thesis.

EU is a democratic union promoting democracy in several regions, for

example in Western Balkans, Tunisia and Jordan.51 Also, the EU indicates that

46 Kant, 1795/2010. 47 Doyle, 2016, 225-226; 213-215; Russett, et.al., 1996, The Liberal Peace, p.14. 48 Doyle, 2005, Three Pillars of the Liberal Peace: p. 464. 49 Nau, 2007, Perspectives on International Relations: p. 394; Owen, 1998, How Liberalism Produces Democratic Peace: p. 138. 50 Pinker, 2018, Enlightenment Now: p. 164-166. 51 Grimm, 2018, Democratization via aid?: p. 164-164; EDP, 2019.

21(74)

worldwide democracy promotion is a priority for the EU, stating that

democracy is the only system of governance enabling people to realize their

human rights, which is the only determining factor for development and

stability.52

It is further on, relevant to look into the democracy promotion of the EU in

this particular conflict, to be able to do that I will focus on three indicators for

democracy promotion that will guide the empirical and analytical framework

regarding this concept: EU- Institution building, EU’s NGO funding’s and

democracy as a tool for peace.

Interdependence

One of the most central concepts within liberalism is interdependence meaning

that actors on the international arena are dependent of each other and in need

of cooperation in order to maximize their interests and the outcomes of their

actions. Keohane and Nye (1977) talk about interdependence which basically

means mutual dependence between actors that can be both economical and

political.53 Interdependence can be divided into three characteristics with the

first one being that there are several ways in which states can cooperate or

create relations through. It does not necessarily have to be between political

leaders. The second one is that states do not use military resources if

interdependence is existing between them. The third and last one is that there

is a hierarchy between various political questions and issues within a state. The

existence of hierarchy or plan within a state prevents the intervention of

foreign actors. Hence, the relations that foreign actors have are important,

making military interventions less attractive.54

52 Europarl, 2019. 53 Keohane & Nye, 1977, Power and Interdependence: p.8-9. 54 Keohane & Nye, 1977: p. 25, 32, 225.

22(74)

Nye (2013) focuses on economic development and the global economy

whereas he indicates that in conflicts, tools such as economic sanctions can be

used to control other actors through interdependence.55 The international arena

is in this case also perceived anarchic which makes interdependence extra

important making actors connected and dependent of each other. They

therefore need to cooperate, compromise and negotiate. Furthermore, when it

comes to international organizations they are perceived as equally important

as states that are contributing to peace and justice through cooperation with

states and civilians. Likewise, liberalism emphasizes the importance of

political rights, norms, interdependence, competition and foreign policy as

central concepts within the theory.56

Interdependence will therefore be used to understand EU’s relations to other

actors and how these are affecting the role of the EU in the conflict. I will for

example look into the interdependence between EU and Israel, and EU and

Palestine as well as the interdependence between EU and other actors involved

in the conflict.

International Law

The international system nowadays has been build up after the second world

war. This means that the international institutions, organizations and norms

are founded on national (domestic) liberal institutions and norms. The

international order, or so to day the liberal world order has been studied in the

work of Deudney and Ikenberry (1999) who introduced three different factors

within the international order. The first one is international law meaning that

55 Nye & Welch, 2013, Understanding Global Conflict and Cooperation; Burchill, 2005; Doyle, 2016. 56 Burchill, 2005.

23(74)

international law and other agreements on the international arena are most

often accompanied by international organizations. This creates an

international system that exists above the domestic state. The UN is a good

example of an international organization that is accompanied by international

law working to resource common goals, diplomacy between states and to

secure each states role on the international arena. The second one is free trade

and capitalism that is achieved through powerful liberal states and

international organizations. And the third one is international norms that favor

international cooperation, democracy, human rights etc. However, the focus in

this thesis will be on international law within the international order.

One that has uplifted the law on the international arena is John Rawls

(1971/1999) who talks about the Law of Peoples. Rawls makes an attempt to

present principles that are regulating the relations and interactions between

actors, these are territorially defined political and corporate agents who

legitimately can use force and govern individuals.57 The ideal type of

international justice according to him is a world consisting of well-ordered

actors whose relations and actions are controlled by moral principles. Also,

when the international system is not ideal, the moral principles should be used

in order to cover and support these situations. It can be societies suffering from

poverty, failing institutions, war, etc. Rawls meant that people should be taken

as they are and laws as they might be. Within this he meant that international

systems that are consisted of well functioning actors with representative

governments are peaceful.58

International law is also being defined by the EU, which is relevant to

emphasize since it is the EU that will be analyzed. The EU indicates that the

concept international law can be referred to as two legal disciplines, public

57 Rawls, 1971/1999, The Law of Peoples: p.6. 58 Rawls, 1971/1999: p. 11-12, 44-45, 36, 108-110.

24(74)

international law and private international law. The first one governs the

relationship between states and international organizations, dealing with areas

such as human rights, international criminal law and international

humanitarian law. The second one consists of a set of procedural law

determining the governing legal system and the law of jurisdiction that needs

to be applied to a given legal dispute.59 This definition of ‘international law’

is going to be used in this thesis with the aim to explain how the EU as an

international actor promotes this and how its actions can be related to

international law, since the EU also has EU-law regulating its actions.

The indicators that I will be focusing on regarding international law is EU’s

relations to the UN-system regarding international law, for example the

regulations on human rights, humanitarian law etc. Focus will also be put on

EU-law and how the law is affecting EU’s actions and the impact of

international law on EU-law.

2.2.3   Constructivism Constructivism can be seen as the youngest and most different approach within

IR. The state within constructivism is perceived as a construction meaning that

different happenings, for example conflicts, are situations created and caused

by humans. This because all humans, states and other actors have their own

interests; which also are constructed. This indicates that interests do not have

to exist, they only need to be perceived as existing in order to become an issue

for the actors.60

Alexander Wendt is the most prominent constructivist, he posed that

constructivism is a structural theory on the international arena, meaning that

states play the main role within foreign policy analysis. Hence, the key

59 E-justice/ EU, 2019. 60 Milner, 2009, 9.

25(74)

structure of states is intersubjective rather then material. This means that states

identities, interests, norms etc. are constructed by social structures.61 Another

thinker within constructivism in Anthony Giddens who also argued that the

society is a social structure, he indicated that this structure also sets the ground

for how humans behave and interact with each other. The result of this is,

according to Giddens, that humans most often, and unconsciously, act in

similar ways.62

The concept of power is also important within constructivism and is also seen

as a constructed value. Power is given to actors based on how the actor is

perceived by other actors. For example, strong states are powerful because

other states perceive them as powerful.63 Power is therefore given based on

how popular the actor is on the international arena. Moreover, actors are

following social norms which also play an important role in the construction

of human behavior and the social structure.64 States that for an example have

many resources will only be seen as rich and powerful if the resources are

demanded by other actors. Demand in this sense is also a constructed value

that changes over time.65 National interests are also created this way, meaning

that humans within a state perceive themselves as one, common unit with same

norms and values. This eventually leads to cooperation and a common

identity.66 The focus within constructivism will therefore be on the concept of

identity and norms.

61 Wendt, 1994, Collective Identity Formation and the International State: p.385. 62 See: Giddens, 1984, The Constitution of Society. 63 Ibid, 1984. 64 Brown, 2001,Understanding International Relations: p.48. 65 Wendt, 1994, 387. 66 Brown, 2001, 49.

26(74)

Identity and Norms

Identity within constructivism plays a central role. The concept of identity is

described as the actors understanding of the self, its role in the social world

and its relationship with other actors. However, the creation of an identity and

an understanding of it is always dependent on others, indicating that it

constantly is in a condition of reconstruction. Constructivists put much

importance on identity because to have a specific identity, the actor has to

follow rules, norms and values that are associated with the identity. When

understanding this, the actions of different actors can be understood. This

means that identities work as frameworks for how different states and

institutions act in different situations. Some actions are perceived more

appropriate and in line with one’s identity.67

According to Alexander Wendt, humans organize themselves and are

controlled by common thoughts and ideas. These are the foundational concepts

of a common identity. Wendt also presents an idealistic view on social life

meaning that social interaction is more important than technological,

biological or environmental aspects. He also presents a holistic point of view,

indicating that individual actors can not be held responsible for different

happenings. This means that the focus of this approach lies within the

collective, the common identity.68 The international arena according to Wendt

is described as difficult and complicated because all states own interests,

combined with other aspects such as international law, are setting the rules.69

Wendt’s conceptualization of identity is in many ways rejecting the realist

assumptions that states interests and identities are given, that actors know what

they want and who they are before they interact with other actors. But for

67 Flockhart, 2017: p. 87. 68 Wendt, 1999, Social Theory of International Politics: p. 1. 69 Ibid, 1999: p. 5.

27(74)

Wendt, the perception of this is opposite. Wendt assumed that the interaction

itself creates and instantiates the structure of identities and interests.70

What Wendt indicates is that states or unions are unitary actors with an

identity, and in order for states to become actors on the international arena they

have to be unitary. Hence, a common identity is needed. It is therefore relevant

to talk about identity in relation to the role of the EU. This in order to

understand why the EU acts the way it does and how the common EU identity

is incorporated in the actions taken by the EU. All member states are in many

ways represented by this common EU-identity and all decisions are influenced

by it.

However, identity is very much connected to social norms that also are a

central concept to constructivism. In broad, norms are defined as a standard of

appropriate behavior that is in line with one’s identity.71 Norms can also be

seen as rules which constructivist believe are important and necessary for all

kinds of situations. They mean that rules often are followed quite blindly, even

in situations where some might think that no rules are existing. But rules

provide order, predictability and guidance for how to behave. In other words,

rules are seen as general imperative principles that always require or authorize

a specific behavior.72

Moreover, the so called ́ logic of appropriateness´ is connected to social norms

meaning that some kinds of behavior are more appropriate or acceptable based

on the actor’s identity.73 Peter Katzenstein discussed norms where he made a

distinction between thin ordinary, liberal norms and thick constitutive norms

70 Wendt, 1994: p. 394. 71 Katzenstein, 1996, The Culture of National Security: p. 5. 72 Flockhart, 2017: p.86; Bell, 1977/1995: p.53. 73 March & Olsen, 1998: p. 951-952.

28(74)

that stand behind the definition of actors and their interests.74 This means that

norms are central to a states behavior since it is a big part of its identity and

the creation of an identity. Therefore, are norms very important, especially

when it comes to constituting a social relationship. This because, if an actor

wants to become a part of a social group, e.g. the EU, the actor has to follow

the norms of the group in order to become a member. With this, constructivists

also mean that structural change can be achieved if the norms are changed.75

Hence, it is evident that the EU has a set of strong norms putting pressure on

member states and its foreign policy making, this strengthens the EU-identity

and affects the way EU creates its foreign policy. It is therefore necessary to

identify the common EU norms and to make an attempt to understand its role

in the conflict. Within the concepts of identity and norms it is necessary to

include indicators that in various ways could have affected the EU-identity.

The focus, when analyzing identity and norms, will therefore be on recent

changes within the structure of the EU. For example, the are right-wing

populist parties on the EU-arena and Brexit.76 This will be related to the

identity of the EU and how these changes are affecting and may affect the role

of the EU.

74 Ibid, 1998: p.27. 75 Flockhart, 2017: p. 86. 76 See, Drago, 2018.

29(74)

3   Method In the following chapter I will discuss the methodological approach of this

thesis. The starting point will be the research design and a reflection regarding

the material that is being used in the study. I will also make a demarcation in

order to clarify the purpose of the thesis and the theoretical framework.

3.1   Research Design Research designs are different ways in which a study can be conducted. In this

case, I will be using a descriptive qualitative case study, which is beneficial

when analyzing different texts and aspects.77 By using a qualitative research

design, the researcher can focus on details by using various reflections,

political institutions, and other actors or aspects when analyzing the collected

empirical material. Qualitative approach is also most suitable when wanting to

reach a deeper understanding of the case that is being studied, it helps the

researcher to get a broad view and makes it possible to deal with broad research

questions. With this, the researcher is also enabled to include different

variables and theoretical approaches into the study.78 Following this, it is

evident that a qualitative approach is most suitable for this study. Considering

the purpose of the study and the research question, this study needs to be

approached with a design that enables a detailed, broad and deep analysis.

Another aspect, making a qualitative approach best fitted for this study is the

concept of conceptual validity. This means that different concepts such as

peace, democracy, interests etc. can be interpreted differently based on

different contexts. So, this type of qualitative case study enables contextual

comparisons where the meaning of used concepts can be discussed and

77 Esaiasson, et.al., 2013, 237; George & Bennett, 2005; Denscombe, Forskningshandboken, 2009. 78 Esaiasson, et.al., 2013, 237.

30(74)

interpreted in relevance to the study. This increases the validity of the study.79

In this case, all theoretical concepts based on the theoretical approaches, are

being interpreted in relevance to this study. By making an analytical

framework, each interpretation is presented.

However, one could discuss whether an analysis of idea and ideological

content is a suitable approach for this study. With this approach, the researcher

can create various dimensions or so called ideal types when doing the analysis.

With this, broad concepts such as democracy can be broken down into key

indicators.80 But if that was to be done on this study, the timeframe for it would

need to be much longer. It would also be necessary to only chose one theory

and instead look into the role of the EU as a realistic, liberal, or constructivist

actor. This would delimit the study too much, and a comprehensive and broad

explanation would not be possible.

If another design was to be chosen, the theoretical concepts would not be as

beneficial as they are intended to be. Furthermore, theories that are being used

are going to be approached in a theory consuming way meaning that the chosen

indicators from each theoretical approach are being examined through the

theory. When using a theory consuming approach, the researcher applies

already existing theories on the case that is being studied.81 In this thesis, the

role of the EU is being examined by applying concepts from three different,

already existing, theories. Hence, a theory consuming approach is most

suitable when trying to explain and understand the role of the EU.

3.2   Case Study Case studies within social sciences are most often used to explain various

79 Bennett & George, 2005, 19-20. 80 Borgström & Borèus, 2012, Textens mening och makt: p.167. 81 Esaiasson, et.al., 2013, 40-41; See: Jensen & Sandström, 2016.

31(74)

processes and relations within societies, the main focus of case studies is to

understand and explain the connections between different processes and

relationships.82 The purpose with this thesis is to explain and understand the

role of the EU in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and with that also deal with

the relationship between the EU and Israel and Palestine. The Israeli-

Palestinian conflict has been ongoing for many years and is rather complex,

many actors are involved in it, the US, EU, Middle Eastern states etc.83

Because of this the conflict has a special character and have had an interesting

development, and the peace process has not been as successful as many have

hoped.84 This makes the case very interesting to study. Therefore, it is also

interesting to make an attempt to explain and understand the role of the EU in

the conflict. What makes the EU extra special is that it consists of many

different states which makes the action done by EU a mix of different states

opinions and strategies combined into one EU strategy.

So, the purpose with this case study is to dig deep into the role of the EU in

the conflict and try to understand it. The theoretical framework is playing a

central role here, primarily as a guiding line for the analysis but also as

different perspectives through which the EU’s work can be explained and

understood. No such study has been done before, which makes this study

relevant, up to date and different. But, making a case study can be difficult,

namely pure case studies are often rare. The reason behind this is that it is hard

to reach comprehensive conclusions by only studying one case. With this, one

can discuss whether comparative case studies are needed if the goal with the

study is to reach comprehensive and good conclusions. Because, by comparing

and observing different e.g. time periods or units the study will automatically

82 K. Yin, 2006, Fallstudier: p.28. 83 See: United Nations (UN), 2019. 84 See: Persson, 2013.

32(74)

include two or more units of analysis.85 In this case, the EU is being examined

based on different theoretical approaches, this does not indicate that several

units are being used, hence it is not a comparative study. But by including

different theoretical approaches, the single case study gains a broad and

comprehensive study. Moreover, the time period (1993-2019) that the case is

being studied between covers a period of 26 years, this also enables the broad

perspective.

Furthermore, case studies are structured, easy and detailed which makes it easy

for the researcher to focus on general questions and to objectively approach

the research problem. Within case studies, each research question is given

equal attention which makes systematic conclusions and comparisons

possible.86 This is very important in this study since all the concepts need to

be discussed separately before being put into one common discussion. And for

that to be possible, each concepts needs to be approached in a structured and

systematic way following the analysis model.

Moreover, it is also important to define each concept, because everything can

be interpreted in various ways.87 Following that, each concept have been

described in my theoretical chapter and put in an analysis model where the

interpretation of each concept is being presented. I have also described how

each concept is going to be related to the role of the EU in order to make the

interpretation and relevance of the concepts clearer. With this, the research

question is also being broken down into smaller more direct questions. Hence,

the analysis units and the research question is being operationalized.

85 Esaiasson, et.al., 2013, 108-109. 86 Bennett & George, 2005, 67. 87 Ibid, 2005, 19-20.

33(74)

3.3   Material The material that is relevant for the analysis of EU’s role in the conflict is

handling the actions taken by the Union from 1993 until 2019. The sources are

primary sources meaning that they are original documents made by different

political actors, organizations etc. Most of the material is being collected from

EU and are primarily documents and reports. I am also using other studied

done on the area because aspiring to achieve a fruitful and interesting

discussion using both EU reports, academic articles and literature commenting

the work that the EU has done. With this, different perspectives will be

included that will contribute to a more objective and broad analysis. Other

studies that are being used are secondary resources, meaning that I have to be

careful when using them. To make sure that they are relevant and valid, I will

control that each study is peer reviewed. Also, when choosing the material, the

source criticism criteria is being applied: authenticity, independence,

contemporaneity, and tendency.88

With this said, it is relevant to talk about validity. It is the researchers task to

make sure that high validity is being accomplished. Validity is the concept that

is measuring the relevance of the material in relation to the subject. Validity

can be controlled in three various ways, first one is to be consistent in the

research, meaning that the researcher is consistent with the theoretical

approach and its operational indicators. The second one is that systematic

errors are absent and the third is that the study measures what it aims to

measure.89 Validity can be distinguished into internal and external validity.

Internal validity stands for conclusions that are descriptive and explanatory

and based on the analytical units used in the study. External validity on the

other hand stands for the possibilities of generalization of the descriptive and

88 Esaiasson, et.al., 2013: p. 27. 89 Esaiasson, et.al., 2013, 63.

34(74)

explanatory conclusions.90 Furthermore, reliability is also important. The

concept of reliability stands for obtaining the results in different tests. High

reliability can mean that no random or systematic errors exist within the

research.91

By using a qualitative method, the conclusion and result of the study can vary

and result in different outcomes. Therefore, the researcher needs to focus on

achieving high validity, this is being done through the three steps explained

above. These will be taken into consideration in this study. I will do this by

collecting relevant material, using reliable sources, and prove that I am

measuring what the study aims to measure. Also, by only focusing on one case

(the EU’s role), the validity is increasing because the marginal for errors is

lower than in comparative case studies. However, it can also be negative to

only look into one case when it comes to the generalization of the results

(external validity).92

Following this, the aim with the study is not to make a generalization of, for

example, different international actor’s roles in the conflict, the focus lies

solely on the EU and how its role can be described through the theoretical

concepts. One could therefore discuss the reliability of this study and its

capability of obtaining the results in various tests.93 By looking at the

analytical framework, it could be applicable on other cases/conflicts aiming to

study the role of the EU. For example, one could use the same theoretical

concepts and examine the role of the EU in the peace process in Western

Balkans, for example in Bosnia or Kosovo.

90 Ibid, 2013, 64. 91 Esaiasson, et.al,. 2013, 70. 92 Ibid, 2013: p.58. 93 Ibid, 2013: p.70.

35(74)

3.4   Operationalization In order to answer the research question of this thesis “How can the role of the

EU in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict be explained and understood through

Realism, Liberalism, and Constructivism?” the theoretical concepts chosen

have been operationalized into an analysis model. An operationalization is

needed in order to create a connecting line between theory and practice, this

means that the theory is used and applied on the research problem. For this to

be possible, the research problem and the theory need to be broken down into

indicators.94 In this case, each concept from the theory has been broken down

into indicators that will be guiding the upcoming empirical and analytical

chapter.

The theoretical analysis framework is being divided into four sections,

whereas the first two indicates the theoretical approach and concept, the third

one contains a brief summary of the theoretical definition of the concepts

summed up and adapted to this specific case. The fourth section contain the

indicators being observed. These are different strategies, policies, structures

etc. of the EU. Each indicator has been based on its relevance to the theoretical

description of each concept and its relevance to the case. By doing this, a

bridge between the theory and analysis is being made where the analysis and

results of this study will be constructed based on the operationalized analytical

framework (see chapter 3.6).

3.5  Demarcations Following the discussion regarding material it is relevant to make a

demarcation on the scope of the study. Due to factors such as time frame, the

scope of the thesis and the availability of material I have narrowed down the

94 See: Lynham, 2002; Bryman & Bell. 2013.

36(74)

focus of the study to the work done by the EU and the chosen theoretical

concepts. The material that is being collected will be from year 1993 to 2019

to make sure that the results and analysis measure what this study intends to

measure. However, some older literature may be necessary to include just to

make a comprehensive description and understanding of EU’s role. But to

make sure that the study follows the theoretical framework, which has a

guiding role in the analysis, the analysis model will be applied.

The choice to focus on the time period from 1993 to 2019 is based on the fact

that the context of the conflict changed during the 1990s which led to the Oslo

Accords stated in 1993. The context of the conflict changed from being

perceived as a conflict between Israel and its neighboring Arabic states, to

being seen as a conflict between Israel, Palestine and neighboring Arabic

states. Following these developments, representatives from PLO and Israel

met in Madrid in 1991 where they discussed peace negotiations. Besides this,

were several meetings held in Oslo which eventually led to the Oslo accord

stated in 1993. The Oslo accords brought new hope to the parties involved due

to their agreement on a just, comprehensive and lasting peace.95 Delimitations

have also been made through the operationalization of the theoretical aspects.

The theories being used are very broad, to use them as a whole would not be

possible considering the scope of the paper and the timeframe of it. Therefore,

I have chosen two to three aspects from each theory in order to make the study

more direct, limited and do able.

95 E.g. Fraser, T.G., 2008; Oslo Accords, 1993.

37(74)

3.6 Theoretical framework

Theoretical approach Concepts Theoretical definitions Indicators

Realism

Common EU

Interests

The common interests of the European Union. Interests are related to power. One of the core concepts within the creation of foreign policy.

-EU as a global actor -EU-interests: Middle Eastern Peace process. -EU- interests in the Middle East.

Realism Security

Security should be guaranteed. Actors should defend themselves. Survival is the central theme within each state.

-Common Security and Defense Policy -EU foreign policy on crisis management. -EU funding’s and projects regarding security.

Realism Military resources

Military resources should be used if needed. Ones’ interests, morality and security goals are crucial to whether one is using military resources or not.

-EU military resources. -EU Political resources. -EU’s military cooperation with other actors.

Liberalism Democracy

Promotion

Humans are free, rational and egoistic. They have their own interests. The Human is always the most important one, Democracy results in peaceful states and international arena.

-EU’s institution building -NGO-funding and promotion. -Democracy à Peace

Liberalism Interdependence

Actors on the international arena are dependent of each other. Cooperation, negotiation and compromise is needed. International organizations are important, they bring peace and justice.

-Interdependence EU-Israel. -Interdependence EU-Palestine. (Political relations, economic and trade relations) -EU cooperation with other actors (UN, US etc.).

38(74)

Liberalism International Law

Plays a part in the international order. It is most often accompanied by international organizations (UN, EU etc.). Governs the relationship between states and international organizations.

-EU relations to the UN-system. - EU-Law in relation to international law. -EU promotion of international law in the conflict (NGO, projects, aid etc.). -EU non-intervention promotion.

Constructivism Identity

Can come in different types. Based on norms and identifies the actor on the international arena. The central concept on how the actor will create its Foreign Policy.

-Changes on EU’s structure (populist parties, Brexit). -EU’s identity in the Middle East. -EU as a normative power (actor). -EU’s identity on the international arena.

Constructivism Norms

Different ideas, values and rules that actors act upon. Accepted by the actor and are guiding the way in which the actors behave.

-EU’s goals as a Union. -The normative structure of the EU.

39(74)

4   Results and Analysis In the following chapter, the empirical results for each concept will be

presented. Also, the concepts will be analyzed in relation to the empirical

findings and the theoretical definitions. Each concept is based on the indicators

presented in the analysis model.

4.1   Common EU Interests The resolution of the Israeli- Palestinian conflict has been a central issue for

European leaders even before the involvement of the EC (later EU). The

conflict has a salient role on the Foreign policy agenda of the EU. Since the

involvement of the EU in the conflict, from early 1970s, European leaders

have perceived the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as mellow for EU policy

coordination. With this, strong consensus over the need for European states,

both collectively and individually, to play a defined and outstanding role in the

Israeli- Palestinian peace process existed within the EU. With this, the

common positioning of the member states of the EU have increased where the

interests of the Union are permeated by support for Israel’s right to security,

along with support for the right of the Palestinians right to national self-

determination.96

Some factors shaping the strong interests of the EU in the Middle East are for

example the proximity of Mediterranean Middle East to southern European

states, for example Spain, Greece and Italy. This because, national security

and stability of the EU and its member states is the Union’s most prominent

issue. With this, the happenings in the Middle East are affecting the security

and stability of the Union. Another issue is the economic aspect referring to

96 Peters, 2010, Europe and the Israeli- Palestinian peace process: the urgency of now: p.511-512.

40(74)

the economic interdependence of Europe and Middle East whereas EU states

are dependent of for example Middle Eastern oil and agricultural products. It

therefore lies within their interests to contribute to peace, stability and other

factors that may affect these interests.97

During the 1990s, more precisely 1993, the Oslo Accords, the Declaration of

Principles on Interim Self- Government Arrangements (DOP), was put

forward and signed by both Israel and Palestine. The Oslo agreement enabled

the Palestinians to, for the first time, maintain self-determination over some

civil matters. With this, the EU’s involvement in the conflict increased.98

However, the process of establishing the DOP was led by the US who at this

time excluded the EU from the political process, even though many of EU’s

interests and ideas were accepted on the international arena and the EU was

expected to act as a large economical actor contributing to necessary funds.

This exclusion resulted in frustration within the Union which led the EU to

take serious action on the positions and committees that they had access to.

Hence, they used their economic tools to their benefit on both sides of the

conflict, this resulted in the Barcelona Process in 1995. This process is still

active in 2019 and ties the EU to the whole Middle Eastern region making it

possible to negotiate and cooperate on many fields, even outside the MEPP.99

Another important establishment fostering the interests and the role of the EU

in the region is the Quartet- a diplomatic body put forward in 2002 including

the EU, the US, the UN and Russia. The Quartet established a ‘Road Map’

which have gained much recognition over the years from many actors

including both Israel and Palestine. The overall collaboration within the

Quartet did result in great success for EU policymaking, even though the Road

97 Laipson, 1990, Europe’s role in the Middle East: p.8-9; EUGS, 2016, 34-35. 98 Schultz, 2012, Statsbyggnad och demokrati i Palestina: p.306. 99 Dror, 2012, 4-5; Barcelona Process, 1995.

41(74)

Map in most often perceived as the last action taken by the Quartet as a good

collaborative body.100

Later in 2004, the European Neighborhood Policy (ENP) was established,

which is a bilateral initiative aiming to foster EU’s relations with individual

neighboring states.101 The ENP includes 16 neighboring countries outside the

EU including Israel and Palestine. The ENP has since its establishment been

reviewed (both in 2011 and 2015), this primarily due to a number of changes

and challenges in neighboring countries in terms of stability, prosperity and

security. The ENP has also been updated to be more in line with the work

conducted on the EU´s Global Strategy. The Policy is nowadays including four

main domains regulating EU’s work: 1) Good Governance, Democracy, Rule

of Law, and Human rights, 2) Economic Development for Stabilization, 3)

Security, 4) Migration and Mobility.102

The EU diplomacy towards the conflict has evolved since the very early days

of the European Political Cooperation (EPC). The Union have both supported

Israelis, aiming to support their rights, and the Palestinians security and self-

determination. To achieve its goals, the EU has developed several instruments,

all from diplomatic resources to aid, trade and cooperation strategies. These

instruments are most often put forward through the Union’s agreements with

other parties involved, which I have exemplified above.103 However, even

though the goals of the EU seem clear, the relationship between EU and Israel

and Palestine emphasizes a rising conflict between rhetorical goals and actual

performance.

100 Mueller, 2013, Europe’s Foreign Policy and the Middle East Peace Process. 101 Persson, 2013, 107. 102 EEAS, 2019. 103 Tocci, 2005, 1.

42(74)

The rhetoric’s put forward by the EU include several goals, defining the

interests of the Union. The first one is the two-state solution including the

Unions statement that the collective rights of Israelis and Palestinians need to

be respected. This has evolved historically with the EC/EU’s recognition of

Israelis right to statehood, their right to live in peace along with their

neighbors, entailing secure and internationally recognized borders. Moreover,

EU’s position towards Palestine has evolved and changed over time, for

example, after the Venice Declaration104 the EU positions became clearer.

Hence, the support for Palestinian’s self-determination became a clear goal.105

Other important aspects within EU’s goals are human rights, democracy and

international law (also being discussed in chapters below). These aspects

emphasize the importance of respecting human rights and international

humanitarian law. Most of the European declarations on the conflict have

condemned Palestinian violence and terrorism, as well as the Israeli

acquisition of territory by force where Israel has been called on to end the

occupation of Palestinian territories.106

The Common European Union Global Strategy (EUGS)

In order to understand the interests of the Union more clearly, it is also

necessary to look into the Common European Union Global Strategy (EUGS),

adopted in 2016 and put forward as an updated doctrine to the European

Security Strategy (ESS), the goal with the EUGS was to improve the

effectiveness regarding security and defense of the EU. The ESS on the other

hand was implemented in 2003, this brought a new depth and breadth of the

European projects which eventually resulted in a new perspective of European

104 E.g. Venice Declaration, 1980. 105 Tocci, 2005: p. 2. 106 Ibid, 2005: p.2; EEAS, 2019, Venice Declaration, 1980.

43(74)

peace and security, as well as in aspiration to rebuild a European and

transatlantic consensus with the goal to reach effective multilateralism.107

Following the EUGS, there are four leading principles underpinning the

strategy: engagement, responsibility, unity, and partnership- standing for the

over all philosophy of the EUGS.108 There are five main priorities of the

EUGS; the security of our Union, the resilience of the states and societies in

surrounding regions, an integrated approach to conflicts and crises,

cooperative regional orders and global governance fit for the 21st century.109

Following this, the conflicts in Middle East play a big part in upcoming

challenges for the EU where the main interests of the EU is to contribute to a

peaceful and prosperous union.110 One can argue that the interests of the EU

are based on the characteristics of the EU being a peace project that indeed has

stabilized Western Europe after the second World War, as well as Central and

Eastern Europe after the end of the Cold War.111 Following this it is stated in

several treaties, such as the Treaty of Lisbon for example, that it lies within

the interests of the union to contribute to peace, security, protection of human

rights, development of international law etc.112 Hence, the Middle Eastern

Peace Process (being a part of the EUGS) is founded on these aspects.113

The theoretical definition on the other hand, indicated that interests shape the

foreign policy of the actor, which is evident in this case. Moreover, interests

are most often centered around power and so are EU’s interests as well. The

EU is having clear interests in the Middle East and in the conflict, by having

107 Tocci, 2017: p.8-9; European Security Strategy (ESS), 2003. 108 Tocci, 2017: p.59-60; 62-64. 109 Ibid, 2017: p. 65; EUGS, 2016. 110 EUGS, 2016: p. 34. 111 Persson, 2013: p.93; Tocci, 2009: p.1. 112 Treaty of Lisbon, 2007. 113 EEAS, 2019.

44(74)

impact in the region and by cooperating through for example the Quartet, the

Union gains more power and, one could say, a more stabile role in the peace

process.

4.2   Security and Military Resources

The security aspect plays a central and big part of the Middle Eastern Peace

process as well as the EUGS.114 The EU is condemning all forms of violence

that do not go hand in hand with the peace process. Following this, the EU

recognizes Israel’s right to protect its citizens from violent attacks, the Union

also emphasizes the importance that the Israeli government acts according to

international law when protecting its citizens. The EU is also supporting the

reform and development of the Palestinian police and judicial institutions.

Furthermore, in more broad perspectives, the security arrangements should

respect Palestinians sovereignty and prove that the occupation is over. For

Israelis, the security aspect should be protecting, meaning that their security

should be protected, resurgence of terrorism should be prevented and emerging

threats should be dealt with effectively.115

As discussed in previous chapter, providing, promoting and guaranteeing

security lies within the foundation of the EU.116 The concept of security is

being defined as something each actor has to guarantee for themselves. This

can be done by having a strong leader, or strong cooperation with allied

actors.117 However, the EU and its Member states have during recent years

become involved in crisis mediation and management in the conflict.

Following this, the Union have deployed two CSDP (The Common Security

and Defense Policy) missions to Palestinian territories and participated in UN

114 Ibid, 2019; EUGS, 2016. 115 Ibid, 2019. 116 EUGS, 2016. 117 Hobbes, 1651/2004: p. 222; Dahl, 1970: p. 28-19.

45(74)

Interim Force. The EU have as well engaged in the conflict resolution,

primarily as a part of the Middle East Quartet. With the measures taken during

times, EU mediation activities in the conflict have helped to avert violent

escalation, yet they have not managed to prevent the repeated outbreak of

violence and war. With this said, the security actions have in many ways

served to freeze rather than settle the development of the conflict.118 Hence,

the EU actively works to make their existing security strategies more effective.

For example, the EU has provided two security and civilian missions to the

Palestinian area; EUPOL COPPS and EUBAM Rafah.

The EUPOL COPPS is a police and Rule of Law mission launched in 2006.

The point with the mission was to contribute to the establishment of a

sustainable and effective police and wider criminal justice arrangements under

Palestinian ownership, the goal was to establish these in accordance to

international standards. The mission was also in cooperation with EU

institution building programs and other efforts in wider context of the security

sector.119 The EUBAM Rafah on the other hand is a border assistance mission

for the Rafah Crossing Point (the border between the Gaza Strip and Egypt).

The aim with this mission is to contribute with a ‘third part’ to the crossing

point, to evaluate the PA border police and to build confidence between Israel

and PA .120

Regarding the Israeli parts, the EU have stated several measures in their action

plan that need to be taken care of. While maintaining the political dialogue,

the EU emphasizes the importance of including security matters in their work,

for example enhance the strategic issues and regional security, the fight against

terrorism, foster dialogue between cultures and religions, work with conflict

118 Asseburg & Goren, 2019: p. 75. 119 CSDP Missions & Operations, 2019: p.7. 120 Ibid, 2019: p. 6.

46(74)

prevention and crisis management including cooperation on research and

policy planning, and work with civil protection and peace-keeping.121

However, these security matters are mostly diplomatic rather than practical.

With this, the role of the Union can be discussed as passive and laid back.

The Common Security and Defense Policy (CSDP), the Human Security

Doctrine

The Common Security and Defense Policy (CSDP) of the EU presents the core

values, aspects and instruments of European security strategies.122 The

capabilities of the CSDP are being divided into civilian and military

capabilities indicating the focus of the policy. The civilian capabilities are

stated to be the core of every EU mission. Since 2003, the process of

generating the needed capabilities for civilian CSDP missions is a priority for

the EU. With this the Union have developed a Civilian Capability

Development Plan (CCDP) with the aim to help member states to address the

existing civilian capability shortfalls through direct and concrete actions. This,

of course, have to be in line with the EU-interests, ambitions, national

strategies etc.123

The military capabilities on the other hand are mostly regulated through

different agencies and committees, for example the European Defence Agency

(EDA). EDA supports the development of defense capabilities and military

cooperation among EU member states. Another instrument is the European

Union Military Committee (EUMC), it is the highest military body within the

121 Israel Action Plan, 2019. 122 EEAS, 2019b. 123 Ibid, 2019b.

47(74)

council and provides the Union with advices and recommendations on all

military matters.124

However, the meaning of security and how it is interpreted can be discussed.

The EU approach towards providing security is very much influenced by

human security where the EU developed a Human Security Doctrine during

the 1990s and along the Barcelona and Madrid reports. The Human Security

Doctrine is also one reason why the CSDP includes both civilian and military

capabilities. Moreover, the concept of Human Security is in many ways

guiding the defense and foreign policy. It gives the EU a specific approach that

is different from traditional security policies, this is needed since the EU is not

a traditional nation-state on the international arena.

Human security, in the sense of EU, refers to:

- The security of individual and the community in which the individual lives,

as opposed to/ in addition to the security of the state.

- Freedom from fear and want. Protection from political and criminal violence.

- The sort of security that individuals enjoy in legitimate, law-governed states,

where the individual is provided with internal (law enforcement) security and

external (military force) security.125

The Political and Military Resources of the EU

When it comes to political resources, one can argue that the Union does have

a strong diplomatic role including multilateral, bilateral and transatlantic

dimensions. Since the 1990s, the EU have implemented different strategies,

cooperation’s and involvements. For example, in 1995 the EU launched the

EMP, in 1996 the Union designated a Special Envoy to the Peace Process

aiming to establish contact with all parties involved and to promote

124 Ibid, 2019b. 125 Kaldor, 2013, The EU as New Form of Political Authority: p.79.

48(74)

democracy, human rights and rule of law. The transatlantic dimension of the

EU diplomacy is influenced by the mediation role of the US where the EU has

attempted to influence the peace process through its transatlantic relation with

the US. Hence, the organization of the Quartet.126

More directly, the political goals set for the Union in the Middle Eastern Peace

process are primarily influenced by the ENP, association agreements, and

action plans. With this the EU aims to maintain its strong political and

economic relations with its partners in the regions that, besides Israel and PA,

are including Lebanon, Egypt and Jordan. The EU also aims to maintain the

Euro-Mediterranean partnership that serves as a forum for regional dialogue

with a multilateral context operating without the UN.127

In regards to the military resources the Union does not have its own army, but

it can bring together the armed forces from the member states. However, there

are several requirements that need to be fulfilled for joint troops to be possible

and necessary. Primarily, all member states have to agree that a joint military

mission is needed. Secondly, the EU requires international legitimization (e.g.

operating under UN adopted mandate). Thirdly, the hosting country needs to

accept the EU-mission. For example, if the EU was to use military resources

in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, all member states would have to agree on

this, the UN would need to accept or invite the Union to the mission and Israel

and/or Palestine would have to accept EU’s involvement.128

With this, it is evident that military interventions are not a priority nor resource

that is being used by the EU. The member states have instead agreed to focus

on other aspects such as intelligence, computer networks, and operations the

126 Tocci, 2005: p.4. 127 EEAS, 2019b. 128 Boin et.al., 2013, The European Union as Crisis Manager: p.60.

49(74)

development of the military resources and strategies has therefore not been as

quick as it intended.129 Moreover, the EU has not shown much willingness to

engage in military missions, the missions have instead been more of civilian

crisis management (e.g. EUPOL COPPS, EUBAM Rafah).130

By looking at the theoretical definition of security, it is evident that the EU is

not a classical security and military actor, based on realism. The EU includes

morality, caution and consequence reasoning in their actions. Each action is

also underpinned by treaties, policies, reports and evaluations guaranteeing

that the Union acts in accordance to its values. The security if civilians are the

main focus for the Union, both within and outside the EU. Hence, one could

argue that the Union has a political rather than military role in the conflict.

4.3   Democracy Promotion The EU as an international, democratic actor can in many ways promote

democracy, meaning that democracy promotion can occur through political

dialogues, economic cooperation, and technical cooperation etc. They can also

assist the institution- building and help to develop the capacity of governments

from local to state level, improve electoral processes and economically foster

civil society programs etc.131 However, the external democracy promotion did

not become an explicit, formal and general goal of the EU until the 1990, e.g.

through the Maastricht Treaty.132

Nowadays, the EU democracy promotion goes primarily through the ENP,

whereas one of the main goals is to promote good governance, democracy,

129 Ibid, 2013: p. 62. 130 EU CSDP Missions & Operations, 2019. 131 Persson, 2013, 114; European Commison, 2019. 132 Lavenex & Schimmelfenning, 2011, Democracy Promotion in the EU’s Neighbourhood: p.885.

50(74)

rule of law and human rights.133 However, the external democracy promotion

of the Union has been discussed, primarily due to its structure and the

instruments being used. Over time, the Union has been using different models

when supporting democratic development in other countries. The first model

is based on ‘linkage’, a bottom-up support from democratization in third

countries, the second one is based on ‘leverage’, a top-down inducement

focusing on political elites and political conditionality. And the third model,

‘governance’, has primarily been introduced through the ENP and focuses on

the cooperation between administrations, i.e. institution building.134 The

‘Leverage’ model was the most dominant model during 1990 primarily

targeting third-country governments aiming to introduce democracy in state

institutions and behavior. This is a top-down strategy, and does generally very

little to foster the civil society culture (e.g. NGO’s).135

During the 2000s, in the context of ENP, the ‘Governance’ approach was

introduced. This approach focuses mostly on democratic governance in

sectorial cooperation between the EU and public administration in target

countries. The focus is therefore less on specific institutions, but rather on

principles underpinning democracy, e.g. transparency, accountability, and

participation.136

Moving further and looking at the EU funding of Non Governmental

Organizations (NGO), the EU is a large provider of NGO funding. Together

with its member states, the EU was providing more than half of the global aid

from 2014-2020 whereas a large amount went to NGO.137 NGO support during

peace building can be perceived as an influential factor in preparing the public

133 EEAS, 2019c. 134 Lavenex & Schimmelfenning, 2011. 135 Ibid, 2011: p. 893. 136 Ibid, 2011: p. 895-896. 137 NGO- Monitor, 2016.

51(74)

for peace. During the 1990s and early 2000s the belief in the importance of

NGOs in peace processes was widespread, and the donor community was keen

to support the civil societies in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

With this, the EU became closely involved in the conflict and is one of the

most important donors to the majority of Palestinian NGOs. However, since

the Oslo Accords were signed, the EU have had a rather passive role in regards

to Palestinian NGO sector, but has vocally promoted NGO’s that

systematically aimed for an Israeli-Palestinian dialogue fostering the peace

process. E.g. the EU have introduced the people-to-people programs with the

goal to strengthen the cooperation between Israel and Palestine through

international aid.138 However, these have not been perceived as effective and

the role of the EU regarding the civil society has remained questioned with the

EU being perceived a second range player in the PA institution building, the

Israeli-Palestinian dialogue and the overall contribution to the democratic

development.139

Democracy today

Looking at the democracy situation nowadays, based on the democracy index

by Freedom House (2019), the development is very clear. The Israeli parts are

being ranked as a free, multiparty democracy with strong institutions providing

political and civil rights for the majority of the population.140 The Palestinian

parts (Gaza Strip and the West Bank) are being ranked as not free where the

political and civil rights are constrained. The Israeli occupation of the West

Bank and blockade of the Gaza Strip is affecting this in many ways

138 Schultz, et.al., 2009: p. 83-85. 139 See: Hollis, 2004; Tocci, 2009; Schultz, et.al., 2012. 140 Freedom House, 2019b.

52(74)

constraining free movement, using violence, and destroying homes and

infrastructure.141

The EU country report shows the same results, where Israel is classified as a

democratic state and the Palestinian parts are being classified as non-

democratic and under occupation. The EU is therefore focusing on different

aspects. In regards to Israel, the Union aims to focus on Israel’s responsibilities

as an occupying power, children and armed conflicts, upholding democratic

values, the situation of the Arab minority, asylum seekers, migrants and

foreign workers. In regards to the Palestinian parts, the EU aims to focus on

making a distinction between responsibilities of the PA and those of Israel as

an occupying power. The EU also aims for continued capacity building of the

PA, for example in the sense of Governance reforms.142

The concept of democracy is clearly important within the EU. When defining

the interests of the Union (chapter 4.1) one can see that democracy is the core

concept of the Union. There is a strong consensus that democracy needs to be

promoted and fostered in other countries. All actions taken should also be

underpinned by democratic values.143 The EU has in many ways been effective

in their democracy promotion in the conflict. By looking at the NGO support,

the Union is playing one of the largest roles. However, considering the

characteristics of the conflict, one could indicate that being a large ‘economic

actor’ is not enough. With this, it is possible to state that despite being a strong

democratic actor, the EU plays a laid back role on this matter as well.

141 Freedom House, 2019c; Freedom House, 2019d. 142 EEAS, 2019. 143 EUGS, 2016.

53(74)

4.4   Interdependence Interdependence can be used in order to explain the relationship between

actors and their dependence of each other. Like mentioned in the theoretical

explanation of interdependence, the concept can be divided into three parts

explaining the characteristics of it; Ways in which states cooperate, peace

exists between interdependent actors, and hierarchy within the state/actor is

needed. Interdependence can therefore be both political and economical, hence

both aspects will be taken into consideration when explaining the relations

between EU and Israel, EU and Palestine, and the UN.144

However, the EU’s involvement with Israel and Palestine is broad and

multilayered. With Israel, the EU is maintaining advanced and well

constructed relations regarding economy, science and culture. On the other

hand, the Union is being the largest donor to Palestine and Palestinians,

supporting the Palestinian state-building. However, the EU has not managed

to transform its large financial involvement into a political role, meaning that

the policies towards Israel and Palestine are severely disconnected from each

other.145 It is therefore necessary to look at the relations separately.

EU- Israel

As, Tocci (2005) discusses the EU has a constructive engagement with third

countries, using positive conditionality, i.e. the so called “dangling carrot”,

meaning that the EU have, through its contractual relations offered benefits

that have been delivered with special conduct of the third country in question.

This approach has been applied on Israel. By using a quite firm rhetoric’s, the

EU has achieved several goals by playing a compromising and tolerant role.

144 Keohane & Nye, 1977: p.25,32, 225. 145 See: Del Sarto, 2015, Fragmented Borders, Interdependence and External Relations:The Israeli-Palestinian- European Union Triangle.

54(74)

By using positive conditionality, negotiation and its own norms, the EU has

e.g. turned the concept of a Palestinian state from heresy to an accepted

rhetorical goal.146 This is evident when looking at the trade and economic

relations. If the conditions set by the EU are broken, the agreements set

between the actors can not be fulfilled, hence the interdependence is affected.

Yet on the other hand the EU is being put in a paradox position when it comes

to Israel. By having a positive, yet negative attitude towards Israel has

damaged the credibility of the EU where Israel has accused the EU for being

anti-Israeli.147

Despite this, the relations between the EU and Israel are growing, with

increasing interdependence and cooperation. The interdependence between

EU and Israel is mostly shaped through trade and economy having a free trade

agreement as a part of the EU-Israel Association Agreement stated in 2000.

The EU is also Israel’s largest trade market and makes around one third of

Israel’s total trade. And Israel on the other hand, is EU’s most important

trading partner in the Middle Eastern region, being EU’s 24th trade partner

globally.148 When it comes to political relations, the EU is mostly focusing on

maintaining a regular political dialogue, freedom establishment and

liberalization of services, free movement etc. These goals are all related to

Human Rights and democratic principles of the Union.149

EU-Palestine

The relations with Palestine are different, the EU has a long- standing

commitment to the sight of an independent and sovereign state of Palestine

146 Tocci, 2005: p.16. 147 Ibid, 2005: p.19. 148 EEAS, 2019d. 149 Ibid, 2019; Action Plan Israel, 2005.

55(74)

living in peaceful relations with Israel. The relationship is also permeated by

principles of mutual accountability, transparency and deep democratic values

that are fundamental to a future constitution of a democratic Palestinian state.

The political relations are primarily based on EU support to the PA in order to

build up institutions. The EU mainly works through the Middle Eastern Peace

Process and the Quartet. Through this, several agreements and partnerships

have been established, these are guiding the relationship between the EU and

the PA.150 When it comes to the financial and trade relation, the EU believes

that grater trade between the actors can bring increased economic growth and

stability for Palestine. Regarding this, the EU cooperates with other actors in

the region in order to improve Palestinian access to international markets.151

However, the largest interdependence is occurring along the humanitarian aid

provided by the EU. The aid has been helping Palestinian people since the

2000 with basic needs and is contributing with 82 million EUR to UNRWA152

each year. On this matter, the EU works together with many other actors,

primarily the UN (e.g. OCHA & UNRWA), NGOs and states in the region.

Based on the concept of interdependence are economic aspects important,

where economic tools can be used in order to e.g. control other actors.153 With

this, it is evident that a peaceful solution of the conflict is not only important

for the Middle East, but also for the whole EU. One of the reasons is the

Union’s own security and economy where many European leaders believe that

the conflict threatens the economic interests in the Middle East. Besides this,

there is a fear that the conflict is alienating and radicalizing people. One can

also point out that, despite EU’s involvement in both Israel and Palestine,

150 See: ENI, The financial support for PA for the implementation of ENP initiatives. 151 EEAS, 2016. 152 UNWRA, 2019. 153 See: Nye & Welch, 2013.

56(74)

mostly regarding economic interdependence, the EU has proven unable to

contribute with any direct political power regarding the peace process. 154

4.5   International Law International law in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict can be explained as one

fateful but troubling paradox. This because, it has contributed tremendously to

the forward development of international rule-making, e.g. the core principles

of international law such as laws of war, international humanitarian law, the

centrality of self-determination, meaning of terrorism and so on.155 But at the

same time, the efficacy of the law has been affected since the most powerful

actors involved in the management of the conflict, have perpetually

marginalized international law as a political and diplomatic criterion when

founding the negotiation principles of the peace process between Israel and

Palestine.156

Since 1993, the large agreements and declarations of the conflict have been

quite silent regarding many fundamental legal obligations pertaining to the

Israeli-Palestinian conflict.157 Despite ongoing violations against human rights

and international humanitarian law, the EU did not do much. But, after 1999,

the Union intensified its work regarding international law, for example by

condemning most of the ongoing violations including everything from

Palestinian suicide bombings to Israeli forms of collective punishment.

Moreover, since 2002 the EU is speaking against the Israeli’s settlements,

which is illegal under international law.158

154 Miller, 2011; Tocci, 2005. 155 See: Akram, 2011, International Law and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict; Benivesti, 2004, The international Law of Occupation. 156 Lynk, 2018, The Challenge for Europe: Making International Law Work for Middle East Peace Process; p.7-8. 157 See: Peters & Newman, 2013a; 2013b. 158 Tocci, 2005: p.10.

57(74)

Furthermore, legal principles regarding international law in the conflict are set

by the UN. These principles serve as pre-established legal rights that the

leading actors in the peace process are acting upon. The legal principles are

emphasizing important situations that need to be handled, for example the

unequal dynamics between the occupier and the occupies.159 Also, the EU and

the UN are in many ways natural partners when it comes to peacebuilding, the

shared values and interests of the actors is setting the ground for this.160 Within

this relationship, the EU on the international arena, is embedded in the UN-

system where international law has a guiding role regulating the behavior of

the Union.161 With this said, international law in general plays an important

role in the work done by the EU.162

Following this, one can use the Israeli settlements in order to exemplify the

work that the EU does regarding international law. The citizens in the West

Bank, area C and east Jerusalem are living under oppression whereas their

fundamental rights are being persecuted by the oppressors who are using

violence, cutting of water supply, delimitating movement, and destroying

homes. By the settlements, the citizens are also forced to move away which is

a violence against international law.163

Hence, according to international law, third parties (e.g. EU member states)

should not accept, help nor assist the settlements. They should work against

these, this is also stated in EU-law which is in many ways constructed based

on international law.164 The EU has stated that the settlements are illegal, but

has continued to be one of Israel’s most important trading partners.165 This is

159 Lynk, 2018: p. 8. 160 Gourlay, 2009: p.1; Persson, 2013: p. 97. 161 Ibid, 2013: p. 97. 162 E-justice/ EU, 2019. 163 European Parliament resolution, res: 0348/2017; Tocci, 2005. 164 Ibid, 2017; EU, 2019. 165 Ibid, 2017; Tocci, 2005.

58(74)

putting the Union in a paradox situation, where the union is promoting a two-

state solution with a sovereign Palestinian state while not doing much

regarding the Israeli settlements besides proclaiming them illegal and violent.

The work done regarding international law is also severely diplomatic, the EU

is following the international law regulations, mostly due to its relationship

with the UN, by condemning the violations in the conflict and by formulating

its policies etc. on international law.166 Following this, it is evident that the EU

is acting upon international law and the liberal definition of it. The relations

between EU and for example the UN is regulated by international law, as well

as EU’s relations with Israel and Palestine. One could also conclude that this

is the reason putting the EU in a paradox situation, also forming the role of the

EU which in many ways can be questioned based on this. However, the EU is

also in this case having a laid back role primarily following the UN-system.

4.6   Identity and Norms

As presented in the theory, identities are some kind of frameworks for how

states and institution act in various situations. With identities, some actions are

perceived more or less appropriate and in line with one’s identity.167 The

international arena is therefore influenced with the identities of international

actors whose own interests, combined with other aspects such as international

law, are setting the rules.168

European foreign- policy making can in many ways be discussed based on the

aspects of identity and norms. One could also say that the process of foreign-

policy making is strange, yet structured with a wide range of states involved

(the member states). What actually enables the EU to act as a Union in other

166 See: Persson, 2013; Gourlay, 2009; Lynk, 2018. 167 See: Flockhart, 2017. 168 Wendt, 1999: p. 5.

59(74)

states, is in fact the European identity. The treaties, and various EU institutions

bring all states together and allow for the possibility of a single set of EU

policies.169

Moreover, the debate about EU as an international actor is constantly active,

this because the Union is neither a traditional international organization nor

state. The collective identity of the Union is created by different national

starting points resulting in a collective identity founded on common norms and

values. Ian Manners (2002) developed the concept of normative power where

he identified the EU as neither a military nor economic power. Instead, he

argued that the EU works based on ideas, opinions and conscience.170 Hence,

the EU entails an ideational impact meaning that the Union has impact over

opinions.171 This is evident in the actions taken towards the Israeli-Palestinian

conflict whereas the EU have not been using military resources. Instead, the

Union has established a diplomatic role, supporting the core values of the

Union and promoting these in the conflict .172

Moreover, one of the core norms of the EU is ‘peace’ which is based upon the

Union’s own history whereas the Union was established to provide peace in

Europe after years of war. Some would argue that the Union is a successful

peace project including values such as human rights, democracy etc. However,

with peace being the core value of the Union, the decision to be an external

actor in the MEPP does not seem strange.173 Also, the values of the EU have

been specified and expanded through the treaties of the Union, e.g. The

Maastricht Treaty and Treaty of Amsterdam. In the latter one, it was stated

169 Hill & Wong, 2011: p. 210. 170 Diez & Manners, 2007, Reflecting on Normative Power Europe: p.175. 171 Carr, 1962, The Twenty Years’ Crisis 1919–1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations: p. 108. 172 E.g. CSDP, 2019. 173 Cavatorta & Tonra, 2007, Normative Foundations in EU Foreign, Security and Defense Policy: p. 351; e.g. Tocci, 2005.

60(74)

that the EU was founded on the principles of liberty, democracy, fundamental

freedoms etc. These values are common to the member states and are in that

way creating a framework of identity putting certain principles to the actions

being taken.174

However, as stated in the theoretical explanation of identity, each actor’s

identity can change. Due to various happening the EU identity has changed

and so have the attitudes towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. For example,

after the 9/11 attacks, European leaders began a process aiming to accelerate

change within the Union. Before this, the Union did not have any specific

security role that included counterterrorism, it was therefore time for a change.

Terrorism was then put as one of five main threats to Europe and entered the

ESS.175 The strategy also included regional conflicts, organized crime etc.176

With this, the identity of the Union changed on the international arena and in

regards to the conflict. Peace was no longer the only core value, now security

entered the framework of the Union.177

Besides peace and security, the Union also strives to promote and support with

economic instruments, being Palestine’s largest aid donor and one of Israel’s

most important trading partners.178 However, the Unions own interests are also

setting the grounds for its identity. The EU and the member states are for

example depended of Middle Eastern oil, hence peace and stability in the

region are of great importance.179

174 Cavatorta & Tonra, 2007: p. 352. 175 ESS, 2003. 176 European Council, 2003. 177 E.g. MacKenzie, 2010, The European Union’s Increasing Role in Foreign Policy Counterterrorism. 178 EEAS, 2019d. 179 E.g. Laipson, 1990.

61(74)

However, recent changes within the Union have in many ways contributed to

a new identity taking shape right now and which in ways is affecting the role

of the EU in the conflict. For the last two decades, the support for populist

parties have increased all around Europe challenging the work of the Union.

This primarily because the populist parties are right-wing expressing

xenophobic values and norms while often being critical towards liberal

democracy. For example, the Fidesz party in Hungary. Another remarkable

result of the populist support is the 2016 Brexit reform.180

One could argue that this change within the Union is affecting its foreign

policy. The foreign policy is mostly based on the promotion of norms and

standards for democracy, and the fact that democracy is being questioned by

Hungary and Poland etc. is putting these norms and standards into question.

This in turn is weakening EU’s legitimacy when exporting its norms and

values, hence the EU identity could be questioned.181 Further on, one could

also discuss how this development within EU will affect future democracy

promotion, how the foundational values will change and whether peace in the

Middle East will continue to be of importance on the EU agenda.

What is important to emphasize is that the majority of EU parties are not

populist, the support for populist parties vary among the member states.182

This could be a reason to why the Union still puts effort in the MEPP. Also,

even if the identity of the Union changes, the economic interests in the Middle

East are remaining important. Moreover, the security of the Union is a priority,

meaning that neighboring regions need to be secure and in peace. Hence, one

could argue that the role of the EU based on identity will not change, however,

180 Drago, 2018: p. 2; Kreisi, 2016, The Politicization of European Integration. 181 Cadier, 2019, European Structural Power on the Wane? 182 E.g. McDonnell & Bobba, 2015, Italy: a strong and enduring market for populism.; Drago, 2018.

62(74)

the actions taken could in the future be taken based on other, more populist

and radical values.

5   Discussion and Conclusion The purpose with this thesis was to understand and explain the role of the EU

in the Israeli- Palestinian conflict based on various concepts from three

international relations theories; realism, liberalism and constructivism. Based

on the analysis above and the theoretical framework one could conclude that

the overall role of the EU is very much laid back. The EU is an important, yet

passive actor.

When looking at the first concept, the collective interests of the EU, the

interests regarding the conflict are clear. As stated in the analysis, the EU does

have important interests in the region (e.g. oil and agricultural resources)

making peace and security in the region a priority for the EU. However, the

interests are based on the characteristics of the Union being a peace project,

hence the role of the EU are shaped by the will to promote peace, democracy,

rule of law etc. In regards to the security and military aspects the Union is

following the realist approach when aiming to increase its power when

implementing its interests. But, they are not willing, or avoiding, to use

military resources. The role here is mainly diplomatic, with the EU not being

a military actor. However, the Union have contributed to several security

measures shown to be rather important for the Palestinian areas, e.g. EUROPL

COPPS and EUBAM Rafah. The EU also goes in line with the notion that all

actors have to provide their own security, since it lies within the interests and

priorities of the Union to guarantee its own security.

When looking at the analysis of democracy promotion, it is evident that

democracy is important for the EU, following the liberal definition of

63(74)

democracy. Based on the interests of the Union, democracy plays a central role

within all actions taken. Democracy remains a priority in that sense that it

needs to be promoted and fostered in external countries, e.g. Israel and

Palestine. However, EU’s role regarding democracy promotion is rather

strong. They are for example one of the larges democracy promoting actors in

the conflict, e.g. being the largest NGO supporter. With this, the economic

impact of the EU is large. But, on the other hand, by looking at the conflict

and its structure, one could indicate it is not enough to only be a strong actor

regarding economy. Following the analysis, the EU needs to be more effective

and direct in order to make the changes that they are striving for.

As shown in the analysis of interdependence, the economic aspect is also

relevant here, whereas the EU has strong economic relationships with both

parties. One could discuss if the EU actually has the strongest impact (role)

through its interdependence with Israel and Palestine. As stated in the theory,

economic tools can be used in order to e.g. control other actors. Hence, the

trade agreements with Israel and the large donations to Palestine puts EU in a

rather dominant position. By being Israel’s most important trading partner, the

EU can demand certain behavior from Israel. The same goes for Palestine in

regards to the aid donations. Also, a peaceful solution is important for EU’s

economic interests in the Middle East. It is therefore possible to conclude that

the EU can make large impact by using their economic power, however the

role of the EU remains strongly diplomatic.

The diplomacy continues further in the sense of international law. The EU is

following the liberal definition of international law presented in the theoretical

approach. By looking at the indicators the EU does have a stabile relationship

with the UN-system which is regulated by international law. Also, the relations

between the EU, Israel and Palestine are based on international law. However,

it is arguable that the EU has a paradox role regarding international law,

64(74)

risking to be questioned as a legitimate actor. This has much to do with the

interdependence between EU and Israel where the EU have condemned the

international law violations done by Israel, but yet they are stabile and strong

trading partners. Besides this, the EU role of the EU in this case is primarily

directed by the UN-system.

So, how can the role of the EU be understood? For this, the identity of the EU

has been approached. The overall conclusion regarding the norms and identity

of the EU, one could say that the EU is acting in accordance to its identity. The

core of the EU has been peace and democracy which the Union strives to

spread through its norms, being identified as a normative power. By being a

part of the MEPP the Union have in many ways exported norms. For example,

through interdependence, NGO’s, its cooperation with the UN and so on.

However, the structures of the EU have changed over the years. The Union

included security aspects in their work after the 9/11 attacks resulting in the

construction of ESS, this also impacted the external role of the Union. The

focus was now split between both peace and security promotion. The security

concept is still a priority within the Union. However, in recent years, changes

within the Union have occurred, e.g. increased impact of right-wing populist

parties. This has resulted in weakened representative democracy in some

member states which in many ways affects the EU, EU-decision making and

policy making. The analysis has shown, that this can further be discussed

whether it will affect the EU foreign policy and the role of the EU in the Israeli-

Palestinian conflict. Especially in regards to democracy promoting matters.

To conclude, the role of the EU can be explained in various ways based on the

theoretical concepts and indicators explained above. In general, with the

support from the analysis, I would say that the EU is a strong economic actor

with interests that can be related to realism and actions that mostly go in line

with liberalism. The EU does have a rather strong identity and norms that are

65(74)

guiding the role that the EU takes when acting as an external actor. With this,

it is also arguable if the Union is several steps behind regarding political

aspects. Following the analysis, they would need to make their policies and

political actions more effective in order to gain a more prominent and strong

role in the conflict. In that way, the results of the MEPP would maybe make

larger difference towards a peaceful resolution of the conflict.

Future Research

For future research, one could examine whether the EU’s work is limited by

other actors, for example the US or Russia. Also, it would be interesting to

examine how the changes of the EU’s identity are affecting democracy

promotion and how this is affecting the legitimacy of the EU. Also, another

relevant approach would be to compare EU’s peacebuilding in the Israeli-

Palestinian conflict with the peacebuilding done other regions or states- what

are the differences and how has the changed structure of the Union affected

this?

66(74)

6   References Allen, David & Pijpers, Alfred (eds) (1984). European Foreign Policy-Making and the Arab-Israeli Conflict. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. Akram, S. (2011). International Law and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: A rights-based approach to Middle East peace. London: Routledge. Asseburg, Muriel & Goren, Nimrod (eds) (2019). Divided and Divisive: Europeans, Israel and Israeli-Palestinian Peacemaking. Mitvim, SWP. Benvenesti, E. (2004). The international Law of occupation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Bergström, Göran & Boréus, Kristina (red.), Textens mening och makt: Metodbok i samhällsvetenskaplig text och diskursanalys, Studentlitteratur, Lund, 2012

Boin, R.A., Ekengren, M., and Rhinard M. (2013) The European Union as Crisis Manager: Problems and Prospects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Burchill, S., 2005. Theories of international relations. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Burchill, S., 2005. Liberalism. In: Burchill, S., 2005. Theories of international relations. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Brown, Chris (2001). Understanding International Relations. Palgarve Macmillan, New York. Cadier, David (2019). European Structural Power on the Wane? EU Foreign Policy between External and Internal Challenges. The EU Multifaceted Crisis. Mediterranean Yearbook 2019. Cavatorta, Francesco & Tonra, Ben (2008). Normative Foundations in EU Foreign, Security and Defense Policy: The case of the Middle East peace process- a view from the field. Contemporary Politics. Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 349-363.

Carr, E.H. (1962). The Twenty Years’ Crisis 1919–1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations. 2ed. London: Macmillan.

67(74)

Dahl, Robert A. (1970), Modern Political Analysis, 2Edition, New York, Prentice-Hall Dahl, Robert. (1989). Democracy and its critics. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press. Del Sarto, Raffaella (2015). Fragmented Borders, Interdependence, and External Relations: The Israeli-Palestine-European Union Triangle. London: Palgarve MacMillan

Denscombe, Martyn, Forskningshandboken – för småskaliga forskningsprojekt inom samhällsvetenskaperna, Studentlitteratur, Lund, 2009

Diez, Thomas & Ian Manners (2007). “Reflecting on Normative Power Europe”, in Berenskoetter, Felix & M.J. Williams (eds.), Power in World Politics. London: Routledge, pp. 173–188.

Doyle, W Michael (2016). Liberalism and Foreign Policy. In: Smith, Steve, Hadfield, Amelia & Dunne (2016). Foreign Policy – Theories, Actors, Cases. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Drago, A., 2018. Towards a New EU: Why Populism Can Save the European Union. Review of European and Russian Affairs, 12(1), pp.Review of European and Russian Affairs, 04/03/2018, Vol.12(1). Esaiasson, P., Gilljam, M., Oscarsson, H., Towns, A., & Wängnerud, L. 2013. Metodpraktikan: Konsten att studera samhälle, individ och marknad. Stockholm: Wolters Kluwer. Flockhart, Trine (2016). Constructivism and Foreign Policy in: Smith, Steve, Hadfield, Amelia & Dunne (2016). Foreign Policy – Theories, Actors, Cases. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fraser, T.G., 2008. The Arab-Israeli conflict 3. ed., Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. George, A., L. & Bennett, A .2005. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. Gianniou, M. (2016). Promoting Cohesion and Consistency in EU Foreign Policy: The European Parliament and the Israel-Palestine Conflict. Mediterranean Quarterly, 27(4), 61-80.

68(74)

Giddens, Anthony (1984). The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Polity Press. Gitelman, Z.Y., 2016. The new Jewish diaspora : Russian-speaking immigrants in the United States, Israel, and Germany, New Brunswick, New Jersey ; London, [England]: Rutgers University Press. Gourlay, Catriona (2009). EU-UN Cooperation in Peacebuilding: Partners in Practice? UNIDIR: United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research. Greilsammer, Ilan & Weiler, Joseph (eds) (1988). Europe and Israel: Troubled Neighbours. Berlin: Walter de Gruvter. Grimm, Sonja & Mathis, L. Okka (2018) Democratization via aid? The European Union’s democracy promotion in the Western Balkans 1994–2010. European Union Politics, Vol 19 (1) 163-164. Haas, E. (1958) The Uniting of Europe: Political, Economic and Social Forces, 1950-1957, Stanford University Press. Hall, M. (2012) Realism. In: J. Gustavsson & J. Tallberg (red.) Internationella Relationer. Lund: Studentlitteratur AB. Henig, R.B., 2010. The League of Nations, London: Haus Publishing. Hobbes, T. (1651/ 2004). Leviathan eller En kyrklig och civil stats innehåll, form och makt. Göteborg: Daidalos. Hollis, Rosemary (2004). “The Israeli-Palestinian road block: can Europeans make adifference”, International Affairs, Vol. 80, No. 2, pp: 191-201. Hollis, R. (2012). No friend of democratization: Europe’s role in the genesis of the ‘Arab Spring’. International Affairs, 88 , pp. 81-94. Irrera, D. (2010). EU and civil society: the case of NGOs in peace missions and humanitarian intervention. Romanian Journal of European Affairs, 10, pp. 32-51. Kaldor, Mary (2008). The EU as a New Form of Political Authority: The Example of the Common Security and Defense Policy. Global Policy. Vol 3 No. 1 pp. 79-86. Kant, I. (1795/ 2004). Om den eviga freden. Ny utg. Stockholm: ePan

69(74)

Kant, Immanuel, 2010 [1795]. “To Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch”, i Mingst, Karen A. (red.), Essential Readings of World Politics. 4 uppl. NY: W. W. Norton & Co., s. 12-15. Katzenstein, Peter (1996). The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identy in World Politics. Columbia, Columbia University Press. Keohane, Robert O. & Joseph S. Nye, Jr. (1977), Power and Interdependence, 2Edition, Harvard University, Harper Collins Publisher Kriesi, Hanspeter. 2016. “The Politicization of European Integration.” JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 54 (s1): 32-47. doi: 10.1111/jcms.12406

Laipson, Ellen (1990). Europe´s Role in the Middle East: Enduring Ties, Emerging Opportunities. Middle East Journal. Vol. 44, No. 1 pp. 7-17.

Lavenex, Sandra & Schimmelfenning, Frank (2011). Democracy Promotion in the EU’s Neighbourhood: From Leverage to Governance? Democratization, Vol. 18 No. 2 pp. 885-909.

Lynk, Michael (2018). The Challenge for Europe: Making International Law Work for Middle East Peace. Global Affairs. Vol 4:1, pp. 7-21.

Lynham, S. A. (2002). The general method of theory-building research in applied disciplines. Advances in developing human resources, 4(3): 221-241.

Machiavelli, N. (1515/ 2012). Fursten. Stockholm: Atlantis MacKenzie, Alexandra (2010). The European Union’s Increasing Role in Foreign Policy Counterterrorism. Journal of Contemporary European Research. Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 147-163. McDonnell, Duncan and Giuliano Bobba. 2015. “Italy: a strong and enduring market for populism.” In European Populism in the Shadow of the Great Recession, edited by Hanspeter Kriesi and Takis Spyros Pappas. Colchester, U.K: ECPR Press. Marsh, D. & Stoker, Gerry (red.) (2010). Theory and methods in political science. 3. ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Mearsheimer, John J. (2001). The tragedy of Great Power politics. New York: Norton

70(74)

Milner, Helen (2009). Power, Interdependence, and Nonstate Actors in World Politics. Princeton University Press. Morgenthau, Hans J. (1948/1993), Politics Among Nations,

Edition, New York, McGraw-Hill. Mueller, Patrick. (2013). “Europe’s Foreign Policy and the Middle East Peace Process: The Construction of EU Actorness in Conflict Resolution.” Perspectives on European Politics and Society 14.1 20-35. Möckli, D. & Mauer, V., 2010. European-American relations and the Middle East from Suez to Iraq, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, [England] ; New York: Routledge. Nau, Henry R., 2007. Perspectives on International Relations: power institutions and ideas. Washington D.C.: C Q Press. Nye, Joseph S. & Welch, David A. (2013). Understanding global conflict and cooperation: an introduction to theory and history. 9. [rev.] ed., international ed. Boston: Pearson Oslo Accords (1993), Doctrine of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements (OSLO 1). United Nations. Owen, John M. (1998) ”How Liberalism Produces Democratic Peace”, i Brown, Michael E. (red.) - Coté Jr., Owen R. (red.) - Lynn-Jones, Sean M. (red.) - Miller, Steven E. (red.) (1998) Theories of War and Peace. London: MIT Press. Pardo, Sharon & Peters, Joel (2010). Uneasy Neighbors: Israel and the EuropeanUnion. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Pardo, Sharon & Peters, Joel (2012). Israel and the European Union: A documentary history. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Persson, A. (2013). Defining, Securing and Building a Just Peace: The EU and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. Lund Political Studies, 2013. Peters, J. (2010). Europe and the Israel-Palestinian peace process: the urgency of now. European Security, 19, pp. 511-529. Peters, J., & Newman, D. (2013a). Declaration of principles on interim self-government arrangements. In J. Peters & D. Newman. The Routledge handbook on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (pp. 412–420). London: Routledge.

71(74)

Peters, J., & Newman, D. (2013b). Israeli-Palestinian interim agreement on the west bank and the Gaza strip. In J. Peters & D. Newman. The Routledge handbook on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (pp. 421–439). London: Routledge. Pinker, S., 2018. Enlightenment now : the case for reason, science, humanism, and progress, New York, New York: Viking, an imprint of Penguin Random House LLC.

Rawls, John (1971). A Theory of Justice, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Rawls, John (1999). The Law of Peoples, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Robert. K. Yin. 2006. Fallstudier: design och genomförande. Stockholm, Liber AB. Shepherd, Robin (2009). A state Beyond the Pale. Orion Publishing. Schulz, Michael, ”Statsbyggnad och demokrati i Palestina” i Aggestam, Karin – Höglund, Kristine, red., 2012. Om krig och fred. En introduktion till freds- och konfliktstudier. Lund: Studentlitteratur, s.306, 309-310. Smith, Steve, Hadfield, Amelia & Dunne (2016). Foreign Policy – Theories, Actors, Cases. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Teorell, Jan & Svensson, Torsten (2007). Att fråga och att svara: samhällsvetenskaplig metod. 1. uppl. Stockholm: Liber.

Tocci, Nathalie (2005). The Widening Gap between Rhetoric and Reality in EU Policy towards the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. Centre for European Policy Studies. Working Document No. 21/January 2005. Tocci, N. (2009). Firm in rhetoric, compromising in reality: the EU in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. Ethnopolitics, 8 , pp. 387-401. Waltz, Kenneth N. (1979). Theory of international politics. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc. Wendt, Alexander (1994), Collective Identity Formation and the International State. The American Political Science Review. Vol. 88, No. 2, pp. 384-396.

72(74)

Wendt, Alexander (1999), Social Theory of International Politics, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press Wohlforth, C William (2016). Realism and Foreign Policy. In: Smith, S., Hadfield, A. & Dunne (2016). Foreign Policy – Theories, Actors, Cases. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Østerud, Øyvind (2002). Statsvetenskap: introduktion i politisk analys. Stockholm: Natur och kultur . Web Sources: Britannica, (2019). League of Nations. Available at: https://www.britannica.com/topic/League-of-Nations (2019-12-01). Britannica, (2019). Zionism. Available at: https://www.britannica.com/topic/Zionism; (2019-12-01) Doyle, Michael, (2005). Three Pillars of the Liberal. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/30038953.pdf. ENP, Action Plan Israel (2005). Available at: https://library.euneighbours.eu/content/eu-israel-enp-action-plan (2019-12-14) European Comission (2019). International Cooperation and Development. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/sectors/human-rights-and-governance/democracy-and-human-rights/democracy_en (2019-11-30). European Union External Action (2019). Missions and Operations for Human Security. Available at: https://eeas.europa.eu/topics/eu-global-strategy/64992/eu-csdp-missions-and-operations-may-2019_en (2019-12-20). European External Action Services (2019). The Middle East Peace Process. Available at: https://eeas.europa.eu/diplomatic-network/middle-east-peace-process_en (2019-09-10) European Union External Action (2016). EU Global Strategy. Available at:: https://eeas.europa.eu/topics/eu-global-strategy_en

73(74)

EEAS (2019b), Common Security and Defense Policy. Available at: https://eeas.europa.eu/topics/common-security-and-defence-policy-csdp_en (2019-12-20). EEAS (2019c). European Neighborhood Policy. Available at: https://eeas.europa.eu/diplomatic-network/european-neighbourhood-policy-enp_en (2020-01-02). EEAS (2019d). Israel and the EU. Available at: https://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/israel/1337/israel-and-eu_en (2019-12-15). EEAS (2016). West Bank and Gaza Strip, UNRWA and the EU. Available at: https://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/palestine-occupied-palestinian-territory-west-bank-and-gaza-strip/1887/west-bank-and-gaza-strip-unrwa-and-eu_en (2019-12-15). E-justice/ EU (2019). International Law. Available at: https://e-justice.europa.eu/content_international_law-10-en.do (2019-11-25). European Security Strategy (2003). A Secure Europe in a Better World. Available at: URL=http://www.consilium.europa. eu/eeas/security-defence/european-security-strategy?lang=en (2019-11-12). Eur-lex/ EU (2007). Treaty of Lisbon. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2007:306:FULL:EN:PDF Europarl,(2019). Promoting Democracy and Observing Elections. Available at: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets/en/sheet/166/promoting-democracy-and-observing-elections) (2019-11-22). Fredom House (2019a). Freedom in the World- Israel. Available at: https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2019/Israel (2019-09-10). Freedom House (2019b). Freedom in the World, West Bank

74(74)

Available at: https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2019/west-bank (2019-09-11) Freedom House (2019c). Freedom in the World, Gaza Strip. Available at: https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2019/gaza-strip (2019-09-11) NGO-Monitor (2016). EU funding for NGO’s. Value for Money? Available at: http://www.ngo-monitor.org/nm/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Value-for-money-Part-I-Final-1.pdf (2019-12-01). SAOL, (2019). Sionism Available at: https://svenska.se/tre/?sok=sionism&pz=1) (2019-12-01). UNRWA (2019). United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East. Available at: https://www.unrwa.org (2019-11-27). United Nations (UN), (2019). The Question of Palestine, Key issues at stake. Available at: https://www.un.org/unispal/permanent-status-issues/ (2019-11-11). Venice Declaration (1980). Available at: https://content.ecf.org.il/files/M00062_VeniceDeclaration1980English.pdf (2019-12-12).