WRITTEN QUESTION E-0296/98 by Leonie van Bladel (UPE) to the Commission (17 February 1998)

Subject: Anti-Israeli declarations made by European firms

1. Is the Commission aware of the view expressed by the Dutch multinational, Philips NV, that, when it supplies goods to companies requesting a declaration that the goods to be supplied by Philips NV neither originate in Israel nor include any material originating in Israel, it is proper for such an undertaking to be given?

2. Does not the Commission feel that multinational undertakings operating within European Union Member States must be required to comply with the agreements with the Arab countries laid down in the Oslo Accords on the lifting of the boycott against Israel?

3. Does not the Commission feel that the delivery by the Dutch multinational, Philips NV, of what might be termed a 'negative goods declaration' constitutes, in fact, nothing more than collusion in a persistent boycott of Israel by Arab countries?

4. What measures can the Commission take in order to rule out in the future any form of collusion by European commerce in a boycott of Israel by Arab countries?

Answer given by Mr Marin on behalf of the Commission (25 March 1998)

Regardless of economic considerations, the Commission is of the view that the Arab boycott is contrary to the spirit of the Barcelona Declaration and thus incompatible with the new Euro-Mediterranean partnership. In this respect, the Community has repeatedly undertaken demarches with the Arab countries concerned with a view to lift the boycott as a contribution to the Middle East peace process. Extra-territorial application of such a boycott purporting to regulate activities of natural and legal persons under the jurisdiction of another state also violates international law.

The Commission is aware that the Israeli press has reported a case of a 'negative declaration of origin' issued by a European multinational to its trading partners. However the Commission is also aware that the same multinational has formally denied any linkage between this practice and the Arab boycott.

Although the Arab boycott remains fully in force formally in all its primary, secondary and tertiary elements, its implementation is not uniform among the countries members of the Arab League. Moreover, since the early stages of the peace process there has been among the Arab League countries a form of tacit convention to relax at least the secondary and tertiary aspects of the boycott. This practice is still applied in spite of the present stalemate of the peace process.

To the knowledge of the Commission, the economic impact of the secondary and tertiary elements of the boycott on the Israeli economy is negligible, as witnessed by the growing number of European multinationals operating both in Israel and in Arab countries. The continuous growth of European exports and investments in Israel is another indication of the largely political nature of the boycott.

It is however clear that a formal lifting of the boycott requires the unanimous consent of all the Arab League's members, and will probably depend on the peaceful settlement of the regional conflicts in the Middle East.