able to play a secondary role in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. As Miguel Angel
Moratinos, who was the EU’s Special Representative For the Middle East Peace Process
from 1996-2003, put it in talking about the EU role, “we know our limits” and the US is
still needed for “the hard parts.”
The limited political influence that economic
assistance creates, the reluctance of the Israelis to allow the European Union to play a
central role, the desire of the Arab states and the Palestinians to keep the United States at
the center of the peace process, and the possibility for internal divisions within Europe all
make a pure balancing option unattractive for the European Union and unlikely to work.
Would a pure bonding strategy work better?
IV. Potential For Bonding
The core of a bonding strategy is to try to develop a close relationship with a
greater power and to use that relationship “as a way to gain greater influence over how”
that state “uses its power, and thus gain greater leverage over key international
In this case, a bonding strategy would entail an EU effort to work closely
with the United States in the peace process, be willing to follow its lead and be publicly
supportive of US efforts, while also working behind the scenes to modify US positions
and influence the way the United States implements its agenda with regard to Israeli-
Palestinian issues. As Stephen Walt notes, there are three prerequisites for successfully
implementing a bonding strategy. First, the basic interests of the two actors must be
“closely compatible.” Second, there must be “an underlying foundation base of mutual
21
Quoted in Alpher, “The Political Role of the European Union in the Arab-Israel Peace
Process.” Moratinos has since been replaced by Marc Otte in the position of special
envoy.
22
Walt, Taming American Power, p. 191.
16
Convention