JUDAICA - Wisdom In Torah

european community, the
minister of finance, while M. Jean Rey, member of the Commission,
headed the delegation of the EEC.
Israeli representatives explained the repercussions of the
Common Agricultural Policy on third-party countries and
put forward some original proposals like the idea of “trafic
de perfectionnement passif ” according to which European
raw material included in an Israeli industrial product and reexported
to the EEC should not be subject to the payment of
custom duties.
The negotiations were held in three subsequent meetings
in Brussels, on November 1962, June 1963, and March–April
1964; they reached a first non-preferential commercial agreement.
The Israeli government had to decide whether to accept
this first agreement, limited as it was in its scope, or reject it
in order to obtain a larger agreement more suitable to the solution
of Israeli foreign trade problems. It was decided to sign
the first agreement while at the same time endeavoring to enlarge
it. Ambassador Amiel Najar said during the last phase
of the negotiations:
Even if all the considerations which I have expressed bring us
necessarily and logically to the need for a global agreement between
the European Community and Israel, my Government
responding to the friendly advice and suggestions made to it in
various capitals, has accepted the request of the EEC to follow
what is called a pragmatic way.
Thus the commercial agreement was signed in Brussels by
Golda Meir, minister of foreign affairs, on June 4, 1964; it allowed
a temporary and partial suspension of the Common
External Tariff (CET) on about 20 products of interest to Israel
and the removal of quantitative restrictions. Since it was not a
preferential agreement, the reduction had to be “erga omnes,”
i.e., for all members of GATT (the General Agreement on Tariffs
and Trade); since Israel was not a major supplier to the
EEC for any item, it was very difficult to find products which
could benefit Israel without causing an excessive loss to the
EEC. Generally it was granted a 20% reduction, reaching 40%
for grapefruits, 35% for avocados, and 10% only for grapefruit
juice; moreover an acceleration of national tariffs to the CET
was decided for some other products, providing a concession
of temporary and decreasing value since CET had to be progressively
implemented anyway.
The economic value of this commercial agreement was
very limited, yet it was the first institutional link with the
EEC, establishing a joint committee, and had attached to it
an important protocol according to which if the EEC were to
give any new concession on oranges to any third country in
the future, a review of the commercial agreement with Israel
would become possible.
This was a very important principle since it was understood
that even without naming the North African countries,
they were the first ones to be considered. The North African
countries enjoyed a privileged status in the Rome Treaty as
previous French colonies, and it was of great importance to
avoid the discrimination of Israel vis-à-vis these countries,
especially Morocco, in the trade of oranges, a major Israeli
export at that time to Europe.
The European Parliament was of great help in that period
because even if it had no competence, it gave moral support
to the Israeli demands; before the Parliament M. Rey
said on January 24, 1964 that the commercial agreement
would permit the various problems not yet settled in its framework
to be reexamined periodically with the Israeli friends;
“we will strive thus progressively to strengthen it and enlarge
it.”
A report was submitted by M. Blaisse in the name of the
Commission for the external trade of the EP in 1964, in favor
of “a first agreement giving satisfaction to both parties.” An
official delegation of the European Parliament came to Israel
in November 1964 headed by President Duvieusart. The following
year, 1965, Mr. G.L. Moro presented a provisional report
proposing a resolution, later approved by the EP, in which
Article 1 read:
Reaffirms that only the association of Israel to the European
Community, according to Article 238 of the Treaty establishing
the EEC, will allow the complete satisfactions of the reciprocal
interest.
Thus the principle of an association was reaffirmed by the
EP, while Israeli representatives stressed in the meetings of
the Mixed Commission in April 1965 and in June 1966 that
a global agreement remained the aim of the Israeli government.
This goal was stressed in a formal diplomatic note and
a memorandum on October 4, 1966, to the Commission and
the Governments of the Six in which a demand was put forward
to substitute the commercial agreement expiring on
July 1, 1967, by an association agreement. In this memorandum
it was said inter alia:
Be it in the domain of commercial exchanges and industrial
organization, in that of international cooperation or in that of
science and technology, if Europe of the Six would conclude
a large association agreement with Israel, it would find in it a
loyal and efficient partner.
The Council of Ministers invited the Commission in December
1966 to start exploratory talks with Israel on the problems
raised in this note; thus for the first time the Council
was authorizing the Commission to discuss a new agreement
with Israel.
In June 1967 the Six-Day War started and on June 7, while
the Israeli people were engaged in a struggle for their security,
the Commission decided to recommend to the Council
of Ministers the conclusion of an Association Agreement with
Israel, taking into account the special links existing between
Europe and Israel. Undoubtedly this was a decision of great
political importance even if it could not be implemented without
the consent of the Six at the Council.
A special Committee of the Permanent Representatives
of the Six in Brussels envisaged in January 1968 either a pref-
562 ENCYCLOPAEDIA JUDAICA, Second Edition, Volume 6