The Middle East and the Odd Couple’s mystery man

Foreign policy dominates EU news this week as the Middle East crisis escalates. Naturally most of the focus is on events in Israel and Lebanon, but there's also a European angle to the coverage: namely, what, if anything, can the EU do about the situation?

Danish paper Information says the crisis is putting Europe "to the test" even as the EU prepares to make inroads in the region by one day admitting Turkey. "It is deeply worrying that the EU cannot work out how to make a distinct impression in the region," the paper says. "Whether Europe will continue to gaze inward, cling to historical divisions and leave well enough alone or the Europeans will use their strength to make a serious contribution to peace in the Middle-East by letting the US act on its own is almost a philosophical question." Yes, and a deeply confusing one, syntactically.

Sweden's Aftonbladet wants the EU to suspend its free-trade agreement with Israel for "as long as it does not respect human rights" - never mind the global can of worms that would open up if the same reasoning applied to all of the EU's trade agreements.

The paper takes issue with the notion that the US is the only country that can influence Israel and that the EU can't have much of an effect. "The US certainly has a special influence, but the EU is Israel's most important trading partner...if the EU wants to stop the assault the means are available."

Dutch paper De Volkskrant casts a disapproving eye at the statement EU foreign ministers issued on Monday from Brussels (they urged Israel "not to resort to disproportionate action") after what was reported to be a great deal of disagre-ement and haggling and compromise. "Is there any sense in Brussels issuing such a watered down statement?" it asks. "It is to be feared that every European appeal to the Middle EastÊ- mild or strongly worded - will fall on deaf ears."

Another Dutch newspaper, nrc.next, echoes another argument made by De Volkskrant, saying that the EU can't have much of an effect alone and should instead work through the UN Security Council. "The hostilities around Israel are in principle a matter for the United Nations Security Council," it writes, "and that is where they would have been handled, had there not been a G8 summit."

And what of that meeting of the world's richest nations (plus the EU on the side)? The UK's Guardian is unimpressed with the outcome and with the response to the situation in the Middle East. "In a sane world," it writes, "the summit would have allowed the heads of the most powerful countries to sit down and jointly persuade all sides into respecting a ceasefire and imposing a period of calm."

But, despite the Guardian's tireless efforts, this is the real world, so G8 leaders "merely called for 'utmost restraint' and an end to attacks".

Finally, Foreign Policy magazine reports on the overheard conversation between George W. Bush and Tony Blair at the G8 meeting. "Reading between the lines of Bush and Blair's unintentionally public conversation, you get the impression that they might have been 'strategerising' about how best to gang-up on their old adversary, Jacques Chirac."

• Craig Winneker is editor of TCSDaily.com.

Foreign policy dominates EU news this week as the Middle East crisis escalates. Naturally most of the focus is on events in Israel and Lebanon, but there's also a European angle to the coverage: namely, what, if anything, can the EU do about the situation?

• Primary Source