9 European Neighbourhood Policy: EU-Egypt
Action Plan
| (27599)
10560/06
COM(06) 282
| Draft Council Decision on the position to be adopted by the European Community and its Member States within the EU-Egypt Association Council with regard to the EU-Egypt Action Plan
|
| Legal base | Article 15 EU; unanimity
|
| Department | Foreign and Commonwealth Office
|
| Basis of consideration | Minister's letter of 16 July 2007
|
| Previous Committee Report | HC 41-xvii (2006-07), para 11 (18 April 2007) and HC 34-xxxiv (2005-06), para 10 (5 July 2006); also see (26434) 7313/05 HC 38-xv (2004-05), para 14 (6 April 2005); (26155-60 and 26174) 16164/04, 16166/04, 16162/04, 16167/04, 16218/04, 15991/04 and 16178/04: HC 38-ii (2004-05), para 9 (8 December 2004); and HC 38-vii (2004-05), para 8 (2 February 2005); (25708) 9921/04: HC 42-xxii (2003-04), para 22 (9 June 2004); and (25744-50) —: HC 42-xxiv (2003-04), para 6 (23 June 2004)
|
| To be discussed in Council | To be determined
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared (decision reported 5 July 2006). Further information now requested.
|
Background
9.1 The European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) proposes a new framework
for relations with the eastern European neighbours of the enlarged
EU (Ukraine, Belarus and Moldova), its southern Mediterranean
neighbours (Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt, Israel, Palestinian
Authority, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon) and three countries of the
southern Caucasus (Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan). A closer
relationship with the EU is offered in return for progress on
internal reform, with the objective of promoting regional and
sub-regional cooperation, political stability and economic development.
The ENP does not prejudge future applications for EU membership
by eligible countries.
9.2 Our predecessors cleared the European Neighbourhood
Strategy, along with the Country Reports on seven "First
Wave" partners — Ukraine, Moldova, Morocco, Tunisia,
Israel, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority — in June 2004,[24]
and then the seven "First Wave" partners' Action Plans,
which were subsequently approved by the 13 December 2004 General
Affairs and External Relations Council.[25]
Each of the Action Plans, the then Minister said, combined "opportunities
for closer co-operation in areas of common interest, with a stronger
desire from the EU to establish a set of shared common values
including on issues such as human rights, democratisation, counter-proliferation
and counter-terrorism".
9.3 Finally, the previous Committee cleared the Commission
Communication that presented the key elements of Country Reports
for Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Egypt and Lebanon and made recommendations
on Action Plans for these countries. Each Country Report assessed
bilateral relations between the EU and the partner country, reflecting
progress under their respective Partnership and Co-operation or
Association Agreements, and described the political, economic
and social situation in each country.
The Council Decision
9.4 The Council Decision is the device whereby the
Council approves the proposed Action Plan for Egypt, which is
then approved by/implemented via the ongoing EU-Egypt Association
Council/Agreement. The Action Plan forms part of it. It builds
on and reflects the existing state of relations and includes commitments
on human rights, the fight against terrorism and the proliferation
of weapons of mass destruction. Egypt is offered new partnership,
economic integration and cooperation perspectives — particularly
an upgrade in the scope and intensity of political cooperation,
a significant degree of economic integration, support for institution-building
and for cross-border and trans-national cooperation and the possibility
to participate progressively in EU cultural, educational, environmental,
technological and scientific programmes.
9.5 In his 29 June 2006 Explanatory Memorandum accompanying
the draft Action Plan, the then Minister for Europe (Mr Geoffrey
Hoon) said that key among a comprehensive set of priorities were:
— Pursuing
legislative reform and application of international human rights
provisions;
— Taking forward political dialogue, re-enforced
cooperation in the fight against terrorism and respect for human
rights;
— Development of a favourable environment
for growth and foreign investment;
— Cooperation in matters of employment
and social sector; and
— Facilitating trade and negotiating an
agreement for liberalisation of trade in services.
9.6 We noted that with its ENP, the EU is seeking
to work with countries, many of whose societies and traditions
are very different from those of Europe, without what has hitherto
been seen as the major stimulus for progress. We had no wish to
hold up the Action Plan, whose aspirations we endorsed, and cleared
the draft Council Decision. But we asked for a fuller exposition;
in particular:
— we
asked the Minister first how he assessed the genuine readiness
and capacity of the Egyptian government and civil society to work
together towards achieving the very detailed and challenging agenda
set out in the Action Plan, especially in those areas that he
had highlighted;
— secondly, we asked for his views on why,
at the outset, the Commission had felt the need "to send
a message to the Egyptians that there will be no further negotiations"
— what were the areas of difficulty?
— thirdly, we asked him to explain what
he meant by saying he believed it is essential that EU Member
States remained actively involved in shaping this policy, "to
ensure it supports our objectives to the region and to Egypt".
This suggested at least the possibility of some sort of tension
between Member States and the Commission, and we asked what those
"objectives to the region and to Egypt" were, which
he implied might in some way be jeopardised, and to explain what
was meant by "active involvement" in this context.
The Minister's letter of 12 April 2007
9.7 The then Minister said his response had been
delayed because the Action Plan was not agreed until the March
2007 EU-Egypt Association Council meeting. Egypt had begun a gradual
process of reform, as was evident from their first ever multi-candidate
Presidential elections and the improvement in the parliamentary
elections in 2005. That was not to say that the elections were
"any sort of model: indeed, they had many flaws including
allegations of fraud and episodes of violence". But the Egyptians
had "shown that they are willing to start the ball rolling".
He also drew our attention to the "dramatic increase"
both in the number and range of newspapers and satellite channels
and their "increasingly critical reporting of current events
and the government". Economic reform had progressed particularly
since the appointment of Prime Minister Nazif in 2004, with significant
moves on tax and customs reform, privatisation and Qualified Industrial
Zones (which encourage partnerships with Israeli investors). The
EU was following the steps taken towards realising the pledges
of political reform made in 2005, particularly the amendments
to the constitution which were approved by referendum on 26 March
2007, and had concerns that the amendments were put to a referendum
just one week after they were approved by the People's Assembly;
but he and other Member States hoped that they would pave the
way for measures enhancing pluralism and transparency, and expected
the introduction of new anti-terrorism legislation to meet international
human rights standards.
9.8 Adoption and effective implementation of an Action
Plan could qualify Egypt for increased funding under the European
Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) and particularly
its new Governance Facility, which would reward those countries
that undertake the reform commitments in their ENP Action Plans.
The ENPI had approximately €11 billion in 2007-13 for the
EuroMed region, along with Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova and
the Southern Caucasus, and the Commission was proposing a Governance
Facility of €300 million.
9.9 As to our question about the difficulties the
Commission had had over negotiations of the EU-Egypt Action Plan,
details of the negotiations were confidential between the Egyptian
government and the Commission; he was delighted that the Action
Plan was ultimately adopted, and looked forward to strengthening
EU/Egypt relations.
9.10 We thanked the Minister for his further views,
which demonstrated that, despite the progress to which he referred,
there remained important areas where the commitment of the Egyptian
authorities to "shared values", especially in the areas
embraced by "good governance", remained to be seen.
9.11 Elsewhere in the same Report we looked at the
EU-Lebanon Action Plan,[26]
and in particular the machinery that had been established to allow
for more detailed discussions and closer scrutiny of progress
across a similar range of policy areas, to enable the EU to monitor
more closely progress made towards the objectives set out in the
Association Agreement, and for "the EU to calibrate its engagement".
We accordingly asked if similar machinery was to be set up within
the EU-Egypt Association Agreement, and how and when progress
would be assessed and published for scrutiny.[27]
The Minister's further letter
9.12 In his 16 July 2007 letter, the new Minister
for Europe at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Mr Jim Murphy)
confirms that, under the EU-Egypt Action Plan, ten sub-committees
will be established to monitor progress on the benchmarks in the
Action Plan, covering:
— migration,
social and consular affairs;
— internal market;
— industry, trade, services and investment;
— transport, environment and energy;
— information society and audiovisual,
research and innovation, education and culture;
— agriculture and fisheries;
— justice and security;
— customs cooperation;
— political matters, human rights, democracy,
international and regional issues; and
— economic dialogue.
9.13 The Minister explains that these sub-committees
will meet every 12 months and report back to the Commission, and
that progress on the Action Plan will be reported at the annual
EU/Egypt Association Council. He offers to forward future Association
Council statements to us for information, "if you would find
them useful", and provide further information, should we
require it.
Conclusion
9.14 We are grateful to the Minister for this
further information, and have no further questions or observations
at this stage. It is now time to see if the Action Plan lives
up to the previous Minister's hopes. Plainly, a great deal will
depend upon the response of the Egyptian authorities.
9.15 We are not sure what he means by "future
Association Council statements": what we are interested in
is progress against commitments. We assume that this will be the
nature of the reports to the Association Council to which he refers.
We should therefore be grateful to hear from the Minister in due
course about the first such report and his views thereon, with
particular reference to progress on the "governance"
issues with which we are particularly concerned.
24 (25708) 9921/04: see HC 42-xxii (2003-04), para
22 (9 June 2004). Back
25
(26155-60 and 26174) 16164/04, 16166/04, 16162/04, 16167/04, 16218/04,
15991/04 and 16178/04: see HC 38-ii (2004-05), para 9 (8 December
2004); HC 38-vii (2004-05), para 8 (2 February 2005). Back
26
See (28469) HC 41-xvii (2006-07), para 13 (18 April 2007). Back
27
HC 41-xvii (2006-07), para 11 (18 April 2007). Back
|
