In every conflict in the Middle East, we are outraged by the presence of European weapons. Since the 1970s, European countries have been developing their arms exports to this region, which has led to transfers of equipment and know-how. According to SIPRI data, EU arms exports account for 24% of global arms sales. The EU is behind the United States (40%) but ahead of Russia over the 2018-2022 period (16%). Countries of the Middle East are the main destination for European arms sales and therefore possess huge stocks of weapons necessary to launch a conflict, but also to be able to create their own arms industry. A vicious circle that has largely fostered conflicts in Libya, Iraq, Yemen and more recently in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The trade has also played a major role in deepening repression in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Algeria. The numerous civilian casualties have sparked anger and then the mobilization of civil society, which regularly calls on governments to stop these exports and to control them by national parliaments. Until then, our organisations have focused mainly on the Member States, which are primarily responsible for the production and sale of armaments under Article 346 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union1. As security remained a national prerogative, the European level was neglected in view of the inadequacy of European governance in the field of defence. However, the Member States have been actively using it for several years to push their own agenda: Code of Conduct, then Common Position 2008/944/CFSP on arms exports2, a Directive on intra-Community transfers,3 the European Defence Fund,4 etc. These mechanisms are on top of other international instruments and in fact support the ever-increasing exchanges between the arms manufacturers of the various Member States. They take the form of financial support for arms companies amounting to eight billion euros over the 2021-2027 period. Indeed, the manufacture of armaments, which is highly complex, is based more than ever on the interdependence between manufacturers. The European Commission has been capitalising on this interdependence since Brexit to increase cooperation between arms manufacturers. The states agree to cooperate, but only up to a point: European projects must not encroach too much on their sovereignty and national interests, commercial and economic interests in the first place. The fact remains that the idea of peace and the defence of human rights, which are the foundation of the European Union, is in full retreat. Thirty years earlier, at the end of the first Gulf War, the European Union had drawn up a code of conduct on arms exports...Has this greater integration within the EU of issues related to arms transfers led to positive changes in terms of respect for international law and a reduction in the level of violence? What is the current trend in European arms production and exports to the Middle East? What are the consequences of this for the people of the Middle East and more particularly what is the impact of these transfers on the human rights situation? The European Commission must carry out an ethical review of projects at mid-term. It is scheduled to take place in 2024. On the other hand, the European elections are looming in June 2024. It is therefore important to ask the European Union to take stock of its action and to ask the different candidates to take a position on the subject. To enlighten them, we are preparing this report addressed to the European executive and the European Members of Parliament, and which evaluates the European arms production and export policy and its consistency with the law that the States themselves have established: the Common Position on Arms Exports.