Mr. Pierre Vimont:

I will try to answer all of the questions asked. As regards trade in some products from Israeli settlements in Palestinian territory, this is an issue with which we have been dealing for some time. It must be remembered that EEAS work can only go as far as member states allow. Also, this is a competence that belongs to our colleagues in the Commission, with whom we work closely. On an issue as political as this, we are of course very much involved. We have stated several times, including again recently, in conclusions from the Council that this issue is one of concern for the European Union. We have discussed this with member states several times. To be totally honest, we have not been able thus far to reach an agreement of the 27 members. What we are witnessing at the moment is member states individually trying to address the issue. Members may be aware that some UK companies have taken the decision to tag these products in terms of origin. The decisions which have been taken by individual member states or by enterprise or corporations in those member states are the only ones taken so far. We recently discussed this issue again with the High Representative who told us she wanted us to continue to put pressure on member states to see how far we can go. This is a matter of major concern for the Palestinian authorities with whom we are engaging.

On the general issue of the relationship between the EEAS and the Palestinian Authority, I remind members that the major donor in terms of financial assistance to the Palestinian Authority is the European Union. In spite of what is being said by many partners inside the region or from other entities around the international community, the European Union is providing most of the financial resources for the day-to-day work of the Palestinian Authority, in other words, the Palestinian administration. We are supporting the UN agency in charge of Palestinian refugees outside of the Palestinian territory, either in Syria, Lebanon or Jordan. I could go on. There is no doubt but that the European Union is the major partner for our Palestinian counterpart. We intend to continue that work. Where we can act we try, as we have done in the past, to do so through the provision of financial resources, statements and support for the Palestinian position. On some other issues which are rather controversial, including that of trade of products from the settlements, we have not been able to go as far as would wish to.

The issue of sanctions taken against Iran and against Israel on the issue of the use of nuclear energy for military purposes was mentioned. Members will be aware, in spite of what has been said time and again, that there is no clear evidence and so on in the Vienna agencies of nuclear weapons in Israel.

Iran, in contrast, has ratified the non-proliferation treaty and all the inspectors who have gone there are telling us that the Iranian authorities may be in violation of that treaty and of the commitments made by them with regard to it. From a legal point of view, it is coming not from the European Union alone, but from the international community, as there have been several resolutions from the Security Council on that issue. The Security Council has asked time and again for Iran to abide by the commitment it made to the NPT and this is why we are imposing sanctions. We have stated time and again that if Iran goes back inside the framework of the non-proliferation treaty and abides by the advice of the Vienna agency, then we will look again at those sanctions, and we are quite ready to do that. So far, they have not complied with this wish and this is why we are keeping on with this.

On the issue of human rights, we are trying to be as practical as possible. The example of Bahrain was cited. We are closely monitoring it. On several occasions we sent a mission from our staff there to have contacts with the Bahraini authorities. We have been in touch with the ambassador from Bahrain in Brussels and time and again have passed messages. The High Representative has been in touch with her counterpart in Bahrain and, to be honest with the committee, so far to no avail. We were hopeful at one point because, after incidents that took place during last year's repression, there had been a good report by an independent inquiry which came out with a strong recommendation on what should be done. We supported that report and asked the Bahraini authorities to implement those conclusions. We have not been very successful but we will continue to stick to our point.

On human rights in general, we have had adopted in the Council not only a clear statement of our commitment to human rights, but also the setting up of an action plan on what we want to do. We appointed a special representative, the former Greek foreign minister and former Member of the European Parliament, Mr. Stavros Lambrinidis, who is now in charge and with whom we are working closely. He is the one who will provide us with a clear indication of what we could do and what should be done everywhere we face difficult cases.

I totally agree on the matter of the contradiction which arises where sometimes there are countries on the board of the council of human rights in Geneva that should not be there. When a case like that happens, at the time of electing those countries, we try to use all our efforts and all our best endeavours to prevent that. On several occasions we have succeeded in convincing some of our partners to prevent that, but it is not always the case.

On the question of CSPD and the neutrality of Ireland, what can I say except that any kind of operation we launch in the field of security and defence can only be done with the approval of all member states by consensus. So far, and with the most recent operations we have launched on the ground, those are mostly of a civilian nature. It is about the training of military institutions so that we can support the rule of law in some third countries, such as in the Horn of Africa with Somalia, and it is about sending observers to Georgia. It will be, perhaps tomorrow if we go ahead in the Sahel, about training police or military officers to bring back stability in the north of Niger and perhaps tomorrow in Mali, if there is an agreement among member states. Once again, nothing in that field can be done without the support of all the member states and we intend to go on in that way because this is what the treaty requests.

On the relationship with regional organisations, such as the African Union or the Arab League, this is certainly one of the major priorities the High Representative, Baroness Ashton, has asked us to implement. We have had strong requests not only from the African Union or the Arab League, but also from ASEAN and others, to increase our partnership with them. This is a road for real improvement as we move along because we increasingly detect a common approach with many of these regional organisations and a sense of moving forward together. The African Union has asked us time and again to work with it. The Arab League has also done so. We will have a ministerial meeting with the Arab League at the beginning of November in Cairo and it is eager to set up many new processes in order to work closely together. This is an interesting road on which we could move as swiftly as possible in order to build a partnership with the different regional organisations, which, I hope, will help in stabilising to some extent the international community which is fraught with too many crises.

On Bosnia-Herzegovina, I have been told about the assessment made by Lord Paddy Ashdown on the disastrous situation as it exists at present in Bosnia, and he is certainly one of those who know best about that region. We are very much aware that the situation has been deteriorating recently and we are, through the action of our special representative, Mr. Peter Sørensen, in Sarajevo and through our capacity, putting pressure on the Bosnian authorities because they are very much looking for an improved relationship with the European Union and, tomorrow, the possibility of starting an accession process. We have told them time and again that we would not follow that road until there had been an improvement on their side and a fulfilment of the three or four clear goals we have set them in relation to the change of their constitution, the rule of law and justice in Bosnia-Herzegovina. We are adamant on that and we intend to stick to that line. In the near future, arising from the report the Commission will release in the next few days, one will see this position reaffirmed very strongly.

Briefly, we are trying to do as much as we can for Tunisia. We have more or less doubled our financial assistance to Tunisia in the past two years, 2011 and 2012, and we need to do much more. We have offered to start negotiation on what we call the deep and comprehensive trade agreement, in other words, to make Tunisia more or less part of the European Single Market. We have offered them also negotiation on mobility of their citizens with all the necessary safeguards that would be necessary. We very much hope they will proceed along those lines so that we can promote economic and social development with that country. We are having regular political meetings. Their Prime Minister was in Brussels yesterday. There were meetings with the Tunisian President one week ago in New York. This is certainly inside the events that are taking place in the Arab world. It is one of the countries that we have, in a sort of way, prioritised compared to others if only because the scale of the problems Tunisia faces are manageable to some extent for the European Union. This is where I hope we could have, if we work well, a good success story in the future and we are very much underlining the importance and the priority that Tunisia is for us.

We are looking at the issue of humanitarian aid. Humanitarian aid comes within the competence of Commissioner Georgieva but in the framework of the comprehensive approach that the EEAS is trying to promote in every national, regional or local crisis, at some point there will always be the humanitarian dimension. This happened in Libya one year ago, and today in northern Mali and Syria. We work closely with our colleagues from the Commission to ensure consistency, whether in political or diplomatic efforts, with what is being done in the humanitarian field.

In regard to national parliaments, what we are trying to do is more or less what I am doing today. Every time we visit a member state we have contacts with the national parliament if only to listen to any grievances against the EEAS but also to try to improve and take stock of some of the good ideas and to inform it about the ongoing process. As the Chairman said in his introductory remarks, the twice yearly meetings with national parliaments, at which the High Representative attends on a regular basis, are very important to us. When the parliamentary assembly of the WEU disappeared we all agreed that we had to find another way of working with national parliaments as it was important for us to get regular inputs from them. We are aware of that and ready to take stock of whatever observation or recommendation we can get from national parliaments.