UNNUMBERED DOCUMENT
DISSOLUTION EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM ON THE EUROPEAN
UNION’S COMMON FOREIGN AND SECURITY POLICY
Council Decision appointing the European Union Special Representative for the
Middle East peace process
Submitted by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office on 7 April 2015.
SUBJECT MATTER
1.
On 27 January 2015, EU HR Mogherini wrote to EU member states proposing
to appoint a new EU Special Representative (EUSR) for the Middle East Peace
Process. A number of proposed candidates were put forward by EU Members
States. The UK did not have a preferred candidate. At the Foreign Affairs
Council meeting on 16 March 2015, Mogherini announced Fernando Gentillini
(Italian, Director for Western Europe, Western Balkans and Turkey, EEAS) as
the new EUSR MEPP. No EU Member State objected to his candidacy.
2.
Gentillini is a senior Italian diplomat. He is well connected in Brussels, has
strong negotiation skills and an excellent understanding of Common Security
and Foreign Policy issues and EU external relations. He has worked on conflict
issues including Afghanistan and most recently the Western Balkans and was
previously EUSR on Kosovo, where he was well regarded by the parties to the
dialogue. He has no background in Middle East issues but this may not
necessarily hamper his efforts as it will mean he has a clean slate with both
parties.
3.
The previous EUSR MEPP, Andreas Reinicke, stepped down from the role in
December 2013. The roles and responsibilities were then transferred to the
EEAS in the interim, with Helga Schmidt (EEAS Deputy Secretary General)
acting as envoy to the HR.
4.
The UK welcomed the decision to re-establish the position of EU Special
Representative for the Middle East Peace Process, as it was viewed as a visible
demonstration of EU and Member States’ commitment to making progress on
the peace process and enhancing the EU’s engagement.
5.
The draft sets out the High Representative’s proposals for the mandate. The
mandate will be based on the EU’s policy objectives regarding the Middle East
peace process, including pursuing a comprehensive peace and a two-State
solution. This will involve:

actively pursuing appropriate international initiatives to create a new dynamic
for negotiations;

providing an active and efficient Union contribution to actions and initiatives
aiming to achieve a final settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict based on
the two-state solution;
6.

facilitating and maintaining close contact with all the parties and other
relevant countries and international organisations, paying particular attention
to factors affecting the regional dimension of the peace process, to the
engagement with Arab partners and to the implementation of the Arab Peace
Initiative;

supporting peace negotiations and contributing to the implementation of
international agreements reached and;

contributing to efforts to bring about a fundamental change leading to a
sustainable solution for the Gaza Strip. The government supports this
approach.
Written procedure is expected to be launched during week commencing 14
April 2015. We have placed a scrutiny reserve on this draft. Sweden has also
put down a scrutiny reserve but we expect them to lift this on 1 April 2015.
SCRUTINY HISTORY
7.
An Explanatory Memorandum on the Council Decision repealing Decision
2013/350/CFSP amending and extending the mandate of the European Union
Special Representative for the Middle East peace process was last submitted for
Parliamentary Scrutiny on 6 January 2014. The House of Commons European
Scrutiny Committee cleared the document as “politically important” on 15
January 2014 (ESC 35701, 30th Report, Session 2013/14). The House of Lords
Select Committee on the European Union cleared the document on 14 January
2014 at the Chairman’s sift.
8.
An Explanatory Memorandum on the Council Decision extending the mandate
of the European Union Special Representative for the Middle East peace
process was submitted for Parliamentary Scrutiny on 19 June 2013. The House
of Commons European Scrutiny Committee cleared the document as “politically
important” on 26 June 2013 (ESC 35061, 7th Report, Session 2013/14). The
House of Lords Select Committee on the European Union cleared the document
on 27 June 2013 after referral to Sub-Committee C.
MINISTERIAL RESPONSIBILITY
9.
The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs is the Minister
with overall responsibility for UK policy on the EU’s Common Foreign and
Security Policy.
INTEREST OF THE DEVOLVED ADMINISTRATIONS
10.
The UK’s Foreign Affairs policy is a reserved matter under the UK’s devolution
settlements and no devolved administration interests arise. The devolved
administrations have therefore not been consulted in the preparation of this EM.
LEGAL AND PROCEDURAL ISSUES
11.
Legal Basis: Article 31 (2) and 33 of the Treaty on European Union.
12.
Voting Procedures: QMV.
13.
Impact on UK Law: None.
14.
Application to Gibraltar: Yes.
15.
Fundamental rights analysis: No fundamental rights issues apply.
APPLICATION TO THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA
16.
None.
SUBSIDIARITY
17.
As the EU Special Representative is appointed to represent the Council, it is
appropriate that this decision is taken at EU level.
REGULATORY IMPACT ASSESSMENT
18.
Not applicable.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
19.
EUSR’s are funded from the EU’s Common Foreign Policy and Security Policy
Budget, of which the UK currently contributes 17.5%.
20.
A political decision still needs to be taken on where the EUSR will be based.
The cost of the EUSR’s mandate for financial year 2015/16 is currently
calculated to be €1,980,000, based on costs associated with accommodation and
office in Jerusalem.
21.
The Service for Foreign Policy Instruments (FPI) have confirmed that there is
no capacity to host the EUSR office with the EUDEL office and that the budget
was based on the previous one for MEPP and is consistent with the guidelines
and other EUSR budgets. However, there is a large contingency within it to
allow for the confirmation of where the office will be finally located to provide
the flexibility within an agreed level.
22.
The number of total staff has remained the same although a greater number of
these staff will be based in Jerusalem rather than Brussels. This has therefore
increased the personnel costs. Establishing a new office also means an increase
in running costs. The UK has suggested that savings should be made wherever
possible (including mission costs on travel and running expenditure) in order to
reduce overall costs.
23.
Itemised Breakdown of costs:
Budget heading
1. Personnel costs
Proposed budget
551,269.29
2. Missions
262, 316
3. Running
expenditure
1,077,480
4. Capital expenditure
5. Representation
33,750
8,400
Sub-total (1-5)
1,933,215.29
Contingencies
46, 784.71
Total
1,980,000
TIMETABLE
24.
The draft was discussed in RELEX on 26 March 2015 and put under silence
procedure. Written procedure is expected to be launched on week commencing
14 April 2015. We have placed a scrutiny reserve on this draft. Sweden has also
put down a scrutiny reserve but we expect them to lift this on 1 April 2015.