EU proposes curbs on Israel research funding over Gaza crisis
Multiple EU countries said last week that Israel was not living up to its commitments under an agreement with the European Union on increasing aid supplies to Gaza and asked the European Commission to put concrete options on the table.
The proposal to partially suspend Israel's participation in the Horizon Europe programme needs approval from a qualified majority of EU countries to take effect - at least 15 of the EU's 27 members, representing at least 65% of its population.
The European Commission said in a statement that the proposal comes as a reaction to a review of Israel's compliance with the human rights clause of an agreement governing its relations with the EU.
The bloc's diplomatic service said in June that there were indications that Israel had breached its obligations under the terms of the pact.
"While Israel has announced a daily humanitarian pause in Gaza fighting and has met some of its commitments under the common understanding on humanitarian aid and access, the situation remains severe," the Commission said on Monday.
The U.N.'s World Food Programme has said that almost 470,000 people in Gaza are enduring famine-like conditions, with 90,000 women and children in need of specialist nutrition treatments.
The Israeli government has rejected international criticism of its policies in the enclave.
Israel's foreign ministry said in a post on social media platform X on Monday that the Commission's move was "mistaken, regrettable, and unjustified" and that it hoped EU member countries would not adopt the proposal.
Israel has been participating in the EU's research programs since 1996, taking part in thousands of joint projects over the past decades.
The Commission said the proposal would impact the participation of Israeli entities in the bloc's European Innovation Council Accelerator "which targets start-ups and small businesses with disruptive innovations and emerging technologies that have potential dual-use applications, such as in cybersecurity, drones, and artificial intelligence".
It did not say how much funding would be affected by the proposed freeze.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
14 minutes ago
- The Independent
Ministers ‘believe' Palestine recognition is compliant with international law
The Government 'believe' the plan to recognise a Palestinian state is compliant with international law, a minister has said. Business minister Gareth Thomas described the decision as a 'political judgment' after a group of peers warned it could be in contravention of international law. Some 38 members of the House of Lords, including some of the UK's most eminent lawyers, have written to Attorney General Lord Hermer about the Prime Minister's announcement. As first reported by the Times newspaper, the peers warned Sir Keir Starmer's pledge to recognise Palestine may breach international law as the territory may not meet the criteria for statehood under the Montevideo Convention, a treaty signed in 1933. Asked whether recognising Palestine is compliant with international law, Mr Thomas told Times Radio: 'Yes, we believe it is. 'In the end, recognition of another state is a political judgment and over 140 countries have already recognised Palestine, and we're determined to do so in September if Israel does not end the violence in Gaza, agree to a ceasefire and agree to a lasting route towards a two-state solution, and to no annexation in the West Bank.' In their letter to Lord Hermer, the peers said Palestine 'does not meet the international law criteria for recognition of a state, namely, defined territory, a permanent population, an effective government and the capacity to enter into relations with other states'. There is no certainty over the borders of Palestine, they said, and no single government as Hamas and Fatah are enemies. Mr Thomas told Times Radio there is a 'clear population' in Palestine and 'we have made clear that we think you would recognise the state of Palestine, and that state of Palestine would be based on the 1967 borders'. In their letter, seen by the PA news agency, the peers added: 'You have said that a selective, 'pick and mix' approach to international law will lead to its disintegration, and that the criteria set out in international law should not be manipulated for reasons of political expedience. 'Accordingly, we expect you to demonstrate this commitment by explaining to the public and to the Government that recognition of Palestine would be contrary to the principles governing recognition of states in international law.' Lord Hermer has previously insisted a commitment to international law 'goes absolutely to the heart' of the Government's approach to foreign policy. Among the respected lawyers to have signed the letter are Lord Pannick – who represented the previous government at the Supreme Court over its Rwanda scheme – as well as KCs Lord Verdirame and Lord Faulks. Sir Keir announced earlier this week that the UK could take the step of recognising Palestine in September ahead of a gathering at the UN. The UK will only refrain from doing so if Israel allows more aid into Gaza, stops annexing land in the West Bank, agrees to a ceasefire, and signs up to a long-term peace process over the next two month, the PM said.
The Independent
14 minutes ago
- The Independent
What does recognising Palestine as a state actually mean?
The UK will recognise a Palestinian state in September unless Israel agrees to a ceasefire and a two-state solution in Gaza, Sir Keir Starmer has vowed. The prime minister said Benjamin Netanyahu's government must end its starvation tactics and allow the supply of aid into the embattled enclave after a UN-backed food security body said the 'worst-case scenario of famine' was playing out in the territory. The announcement on Tuesday came after an emergency virtual cabinet meeting where Sir Keir laid out his plan for peace in the Middle East, agreed over the weekend with French president Emmanuel Macron and German chancellor Friedrich Merz. Sir Keir has come under mounting pressure from his own party to recognise a Palestinian state, which has only grown since Mr Macron announced France's intention to do so by September. In addition, Britain's foreign secretary David Lammy is attending a United Nations conference in New York on Tuesday to urge support for a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians. Here, The Independent asks experts about what the UK recognising Palestinian statehood would mean in practice. What would UK recognition of Palestine as a state mean? Dr Julie Norman, an associate professor at UCL specialising in Middle Eastern politics, said it looks likely that the UK will recognise Palestine as a state, which would mean voting for this at the United Nations – but it would be unlikely the UN would be able to recognise Palestinian statehood due to the probability of the United States blocking the move. However, she said countries such as the UK and France voting for recognition at the UN would be a 'significant' move. And she said the UK officially recognising Palestinian statehood would still be of 'value', even if the reality is that not much would change on the ground, with Israel still 'fully rejecting' the prospect of recognition. Speaking of British recognition, Dr Norman said: 'It would be a strong moral commitment and stance to Palestine at a moment when it's never been more fraught in Gaza and the West Bank. 'In the short term, it's a diplomatic stance, and it makes room for policy changes. 'And, if and when parties come back to discuss the long-term conflict, it would put Palestine in a better position. So it wouldn't change things immediately, but I would say it still has value.' She added that the move might initially see more change in London than in Ramallah, a city in the central West Bank, which serves as the administrative capital of Palestine – with, for example, the opening of an embassy in the UK capital. This would not mean recognition of Hamas. What is the two-state solution? The idea of dividing the Holy Land goes back decades. When the British mandate over Palestine ended, the UN partition plan in 1947 envisioned dividing the territory into Jewish and Arab states. Upon Israel's declaration of independence the following year, war erupted with its Arab neighbours and the plan was never implemented. Over half of the Palestinian population fled or were forced to flee. Under a 1949 armistice, Jordan held control over the West Bank and east Jerusalem and Egypt over Gaza. Israel captured the West Bank, east Jerusalem and Gaza in the 1967 six-day war. The Palestinians seek these lands for a future independent state, and the idea of a two-state solution based on Israel's pre-1967 boundaries has been the basis of peace talks dating back to the 1990s. The two-state solution has wide international support, but there is disagreement about how it would be implemented. Israel's creation and expansion of settlements in the Occupied West Bank, which are illegal under international law, are seen as a major obstacle to this. What would recognition of Palestine as a state mean for refugees? Sir Vincent Fean, a former British consul general to Jerusalem and now a trustee of the charity Britain Palestine Project, explained that recognition of Palestine as a state would mean that if Palestinian passports were issued, they would subsequently be recognised by the UK as passports of a state. However, Sir Vincent said Palestinian statehood would not affect the UK's refugee system. 'Does it impact the tally of refugees coming to the UK? No,' he said. This is because he expects the visa regime the UK currently has with Palestine – where travel is only allowed between the two after a successful visa application – would continue. He added that Palestinian statehood 'wouldn't particularly change the right of return for Palestinians to their homeland'. He said this was a 'long-standing right', although it would require negotiation with Israel. What does UK recognition of Palestinian statehood mean for how the two would communicate? Sir Vincent said this was a 'very important point' to clarify, as he highlighted the distinction between recognising the entity of Palestine and recognising factions of government. He said: 'It's important to say the British government doesn't recognise governments, it recognises states. 'So it isn't actually recognising President [Mahmoud] Abbas as head of the PLO [Palestine Liberation Organisation] and head of the Palestinian Authority. 'In practice, he would be the interlocutor in Ramallah, because there isn't an alternative.' He stressed, however, that Britain has already proscribed Hamas as a terrorist group and that this would not change. Dr Norman added that the Palestinian Authority is currently the main governing entity for Palestinians in the West Bank, which the UK has recognised and had lines of communication with for a long time. If Britain were to recognise Palestinian statehood, this would not change and would continue. Sir Vincent also said that the prospect of Hamas running Palestine next is 'practically zero' because the militants' chances of winning an election are 'remote'. He said the plan for the future governance of Gaza involving the Palestinian Authority will be a focus of the UN meeting being held this week. What countries have recognised Palestinian statehood? France has become the latest country to announce it will recognise Palestinian statehood, drawing angry rebukes from Israel and the United States and opening the door for other major nations to perhaps follow suit. Mr Macron last week published a letter sent to Mr Abbas confirming France's intention to press ahead with recognition and work to convince other partners to do the same. He said he would make a formal announcement at the United Nations General Assembly next month. France is now the first major Western power to shift its diplomatic stance on a Palestinian state, after Spain, Ireland, and Norway officially recognised it last year. The three countries made the declaration and agreed its borders would be demarcated as they were before the 1967 war, when Israel captured the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem. However, they also recognised that those borders may change if a final settlement is reached over the territory, and that their decisions did not diminish their belief in Israel's fundamental right to exist in peace and security. About 144 of the 193 UN member states recognise Palestine as a state, including most of the global South as well as Russia, China and India. But only a handful of the 27 European Union members do so, mostly former communist countries as well as Sweden and Cyprus. The UN General Assembly approved the de facto recognition of the sovereign state of Palestine in November 2012 by upgrading its observer status at the world body to 'non-member state' from 'entity'. What implications would UK recognition of Palestinian statehood have internationally? Dr Norman said: 'This is where it can be important'. Two major global powers, such as the UK and France, making the move would be 'significant' and would pave the way for conversations on the issue happening elsewhere, such as in Canada, she said. 'It starts isolating the US as the main major power backing Israel to the exclusion of Palestine,' she said. 'It makes them the exception and shows the rest of the world somewhat united in Palestinian self-determination, which has been the UK's policy for a while now. If we're serious about that, then we need to be serious about that. 'We don't have as much military weight as the US, but we do still have diplomatic weight, and we should use what we can. 'It would show Europe is committed to a two-state solution, and wouldn't let that disappear or sit in the back seat.'
Reuters
17 minutes ago
- Reuters
Pakistan says it wins US tariff deal; Trump cites oil reserves pact
WASHINGTON/ISLAMABAD, July 31 (Reuters) - The United States and Pakistan said they had clinched a deal that Islamabad described as leading to lower tariffs on its exports, while President Donald Trump trumpeted a pact to help develop the South Asian nation's oil reserves. Neither mentioned the tariff rate agreed. Pakistan, which Washington has designated a "major non-NATO ally" in its effort to counter rival China's influence in the region, faced a potential tariff of 29% declared in April that was later suspended for 90 days to allow trade talks. "We have just concluded a Deal with the Country of Pakistan, whereby Pakistan and the United States will work together on developing their massive Oil Reserves," Trump wrote on social media. "We are in the process of choosing the Oil Company that will lead this Partnership." He gave no further details. Pakistani Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar also confirmed the deal. "Deal concluded," he told Reuters, without elaborating. Although Trump did not mention a tariff deal, Pakistan's finance ministry said on Thursday it would lead to "reduction of reciprocal tariffs, especially on Pakistani exports to the United States", but stopped short of revealing the figure. "This deal marks the beginning of a new era of economic collaboration especially in energy, mines and minerals, IT, cryptocurrency and other sectors," it said. The deal was a win-win situation for both nations, Finance Minister Muhammad Aurangzeb, who led the final round of talks in Washington, said in video remarks. "From our perspective, it was always going beyond the immediate trade imperative, and its whole purpose was, and is, that trade and investment have to go hand in hand," he added in the statement from his office. Last week, Dar said both nations were "very close" to a trade deal that could come within days, after he met Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Friday. They discussed expanding trade and ties in critical minerals and mining, the two sides said afterwards. Other Pakistani officials have also visited for talks in recent weeks. Under Trump, Washington has sought to renegotiate trade deals with many countries which he threatened with tariffs for trade relations he calls unfair, a characterization many economists dispute. U.S. total goods trade with Pakistan was an estimated $7.3 billion in 2024, the office of the U.S. trade representative says on its website, up from about $6.9 billion in 2023. In 2024, its goods trade deficit with Pakistan was $3 billion, up 5.2% from 2023. Trump also said Washington was still negotiating with India on trade after he declared a tariff of 25% on goods imported from Pakistan's arch foe would start from Friday. Pakistan recently said it "appreciated the pivotal role" of Trump and Rubio "in de-escalating tensions between Pakistan and India by facilitating a ceasefire." Trump has repeatedly taken credit for the India-Pakistan ceasefire he announced on social media on May 10 after Washington's talks with both sides. India disputes Trump's claims that the ceasefire resulted from his intervention and trade threats. India's position is that New Delhi and Islamabad must resolve problems directly with no outside involvement. The latest escalation in the decades-old India-Pakistan rivalry was triggered by a deadly April 22 militant attack in India-administered Kashmir that India blamed on Pakistan. Islamabad denied responsibility. India struck Pakistan on May 7 and they exchanged deadly hostilities until the ceasefire.
