Thank you very much also to Commissioner Šuica, and we can open the floor to your questions now. Marc, please. Marc Peeperkorn Volkskrant

is a question for Commissioner Šefčovič.

The total export of Israel to the EU last year was about €16 billion. The effect of now, let's say.

The new tariff agreement or the stopping of the preferential tariffs has in effect

we are told of about EUR 227 million a year, so it is relatively modest.

So my question is, why do you think this modest proposal would change the behavior of Israel in Gaza. Your numbers, numbers are correct.

But I think that here we are.

Talking Not only about the trade and not only about the numbers, I would say the whole context of the decision was very political,

so I think the HRVP would be a better position to comment on this,

but you also heard the President of the European Commission being very clear.

On this particular element when she was addressing the peoples of Europe.

European Parliament members in the State of the Union.

And of course based on that announcement and political

commitment we've been acting very quickly to present the proposal.

I think there was some expectations that the European

Union have to use the tools at its disposal.

To address the humanitarian crisis in Gaza to make sure that not only we provide the humanitarian aid, but the humanitarian aid actually will be delivered

to Gaza to the people who would need it,

but I believe that two of my colleagues are in better positions to further elaborate on this question.

So would you like to come in? Welcome to Simon. No, we move on. Yes, please.

Hi, it's Nicholson from the Spanish newspaper El Confidential.

I would like to know, especially from the High Representative, why now exactly?

Why not, a year ago or, a couple of months ago,

a year ago, there were already 40,000 deaths in, in Gaza. So why specifically in this moment?

The situation is such that these measures are needed and not why a year ago. Thank you.

We all heard the speech of the President of the Commission where she proposed these points,

and I think this shows how the situation has really changed.

We see the E1 settlements we see also the action now in Gaza City,

all these things that bring more suffering to the people.

So this is why today is that because a week ago we had

the State of the Union speech where President von der Leyen proposed these things. Thank you. Yes.

Yes, hi, Matteo Baniolia National Italian News Agency.

Now, naturally, the question is, will the Member States approve the question that you put forward, the issue that you put forward, the proposal that you put forward,

and there are two tracks here because the sanctions against the ministers

and settlers and all of that requires unanimity and those on trade QMV.

Now, you, as the Chair of the FAC,

can you tell us a bit what the atmosphere in the room?

Do you have confidence that at some point These proposals will be adopted either in QMB or in unanimity,

and if not,

what does that tell us a bit about the state of affairs of the EU? Thank you.

So yes, you are correct that the sanctions require anonymity and the trade proposal,

the QMB.

You know very well how is the situation in the Council, although we see that.

The public opinion in member states is really shifting because the suffering in Gaza

and people really want to see the stopping of this suffering on a political level.

I think we will have the discussions after these proposals are made,

but I think the political lines are very much in the place where they have been so far. Yes.

The Austrian broadcaster OAF, if I may, a question on measures against Israel on a different level, but High Representative, as you mentioned, like the public opinion, right now we see how political, entertainment and culture are becoming when it comes to Israel,

in particular when we talk about the Eurovision Song Contest taking Place next year in Vienna and seeing Member States like the Netherlands,

Spain or Ireland threatening to not participate in case Israel participate.

So as the EU's most senior diplomat, I would be interested in what are your thoughts on this.

What I want to stress and we stress all the time, is that we are proposing these measures not to punish Israel or Israeli people,

but to really try to pressure the Israeli government to change course and to end the human suffering.

In Gaza, so that's why the proposals that we have made are not really touching or somehow

affecting the people so much as to put the pressure on the Israeli government to change course.

So all these steps that go to the direction of punishing Israeli people,

I think are wrong, and we are not proposing them.

Philippe. Philippe Jacquet, I have another question which is not related to the EU-Israel agreement association agreement.

It's a ban of the products from the settlements,

and I'm still wondering why the EU is not moving on this particular subject.

If it comes to the, to the, if it comes to the products from Israeli settlements, I think that this is the question which I'm sure that you,

you know very well they've been in any way under the association agreement trade parts which we are,

we are suspending right now because we never, we never recognized.

That especially the settlements would constitute the part of the state of Israel and that they should be they should be covered by, they should be covered by also the measures which we are now taking under the association agreement,

so if it comes to banning Of any imports of the goods again,

it can be done through the sanction proposal,

and that's something to be discussed in the future.

I think that today we've been focusing on the trade parts of the association agreement

and I think that's quite important step also from the political perspective we are adopting today.

I will take the 2 final questions.

I have 1 question online from Gabriele Rosana. Thank you. Can you hear me? Thanks for taking my question.

Gabriele Rosana Message to Italy, it's, a question on something that if I'm not wrong, is not in the package because several former ambassadors to

the EU have recently called for additional trade-related measures including export control

measures and the suspension of all arms and dual use exports to Israel.

So what is the reasoning, if I may ask, Commissioner, behind,

Commissioner Šefčovič behind the exclusion of such measures from today's package? Thank you.

I think that if it comes to the The military to military cooperation and military exports that's more in the domain of HRVP,

but I understand that this comes into the exclusive domain of the prerogative of the member states,

and it's covered by the regimes.

Therefore, we've been acting in the area where we have in this case.

Exclusive authority, trade parts of the association agreement where we can make the proposals, where you need the QMV from the council to endorse it and approve it and where you need

to duly inform the European Parliament about the proceedings, but of course the military and dual use,

there's a different category, so I don't know if HRVP would like to address this question.

No, I mean,

of course you can always ask why don't we propose other things.

These are the things we are proposing right now and and that is the discussion.

Yes, in June I presented an options paper where all the options are listed,

what are the tools in our hands, but these are the choices that the Commission made right now. We take a final question here.

it is Rosie Birchard here for DW.

So first of all, Commissioner Šefčovič, could you give us a few words on how you think this will impact European businesses and consumers?

You have talked a lot in the past about how tariffs are taxed on consumers. For commissioner Šuica

I think the measure that that's within your portfolio is the only

one that might not be caught up in institutional deadlock among Member States.

I think, correct me if I'm wrong, but it can be done just by the Commission.

So, in the past we've heard the Israeli Government leveling

criticism that any such punitive measures are essentially empowering Hamas.

Can you respond to that, criticism or a claim from the Israeli Government?

And then for the High Representative, Presumably in the past, part of the calculation for not putting

such measures on the table is the risk that they get caught up in the Member States.

That risk remains, you've addressed it a bit already, but have you basically just changed your calculation in seeing that it's better to

look like you have something on the table in the works,

than the risk of looking like you have a total inaction until now?

We know that we might be here in several months' time and that none of these measures have moved forward.

Thank you very much, so I can start with the the numbers,

so preliminary estimates based on current trading volumes indicate that suspending

preferential access would expose EU exports up to €574 million in duties.

On the other hand, the EU imports from Israel would be exposed to the tariff. Duties up to €227 million.

Around 63% of the EU imports from Israel take place on most favored nation terms,

and 58% of trade with Israel benefits from zero MFN tariffs and hence cannot benefit from any.

Preferential regime, so less than 37% of EU imports from Israel

are imported under this preferential regime which is affected by this decision.

If you ask me which sectors would be the most exposed, so from the EU side,

this would include machinery, aircraft related goods,

medical devices, and, and pharmaceutical, pharmaceutical products.

As you know very well from all our discussions,

we are not friends of tariffs.

I much more prefer to come in front of

you to tell you that We created new market access.

We have a new free trade agreement.

We are opening new trade chapters with our, with our partners, so therefore, today, measures of different kinds and was necessitated by a clear commitment

our president presented in the State of the Union address last week

as a reaction to the dramatic urgent humanitarian disaster taking place in Gaza. Yes, Commissioner Suica.

Thank you very much for asking this question.

So, as I already said, we are putting today bilateral support to the Israeli Government on hold,

and this is something which we can what we can do independently,

and it is exclusive right of the Commission. I want to reiterate something.

This is very targeted, and we want to be crystal clear, and we want to make a distinction between the Israeli government and the Israeli people,

Israeli citizens, and this is what we have been doing.

Any money, any funding which is related to anti-Semitism,

any money which is related to civil society organizations. Is not put on hold.

This is very important to understand and to differentiate this.

So we are trying to put pressure, as you see,

because we stand with or by Jewish citizens also here in Europe who also suffer a lot.

So this is exactly why I'm mentioning anti-Semitism.

I want to reiterate that we all of us agree on several issues.

The two-state solution is the only alternative for us.

There is no other alternative, so there is consensus on this, also on humanitarian aid, also on ceasefire as soon as possible,

also on the right of Israel to defend and to exist, also on the release of all hostages.

This is something where we have consensus here in Europe.

So I hope that we will find a solution in the near future,

but this is the situation at the moment as we speak is very dire in the Gaza City, as you know. Yes, thank you.

First, I object to the statement that was in your question that we have been inactive. That's not true.

We have been the most active actors on the international sphere on this file, trying to improve the humanitarian situation on the ground,

really day in and day out working with what more can we do.

So yes, the proposal is now on the table to put more pressure on the Israeli government derived from the State of the Union speech, and yes, it's true that the College has not proposed,

but now it's up to the member states to discuss in the council,

which is problematic as we know of the lines,

but what it shows really, it shows.

That the public opinion in all the Member States has really shifted, and when we have the discussions,

all the Member States or representatives, foreign ministers agree that the situation is untenable.

So if we all agree on this, then the question is what do we do about this?

What are the tools in our hands,

and that's why we have proposed from the

Commission to we want to go with these proposals.

If these do not fly, then we can find other things if we all agree

that we need to take additional steps in order to have change on the ground.

Thank you very much to the 3 Members of the College present with us here today.

Thank you for your participation and questions and to the interpreters.

We wish you a good afternoon.