Europe at a crossroads: Navigating the shift in EU-Israel relations amid the Gaza conflict

Ethical and political crossroads

In the aisles of European institutions, there seems to be a pervasive numbness as we witness images from Gaza of thousands of dead, children emaciated from hunger, entire neighbourhoods lost under the rubble, events that bring Europe face to face with its moral responsibilities. In the face of this destruction, a policy of ‘equal distance’ seems cynical, while European capitals are called upon not only to decide on their stance towards international law but also to define through their actions their identity as bearers of values such as democracy, solidarity and peace, concepts that the EU itself has elevated to core values for its identity (2). At the same time, Washington remains committed to an unconditional alliance with Israel. Europe has thus reached a turning point where it will either continue to participate as a spectator or claim its role as a moral actor on the international stage  (1) ,  (2) 

The reason for recognising this point is difficult to define, but Friedrich Merz’s (Chancellor of Germany) statement was of key importance in public discourse. Germany is a country that for decades considered Israel’s security to be raison d’état (meaning the foundation of national policy; in the German case, it refers to the ongoing historical support for Israel after the Holocaust)  nevertheless, Merz stated that ‘I can no longer understand Israel’s goals in Gaza.’ In any case, Europe seems to have regained its conscience and appears ready to question its relationship with Tel Aviv (3)

However, this effort does not seem to be coordinated, as Spain, Ireland and Norway officially recognise Palestine and support the decisions of the International Criminal Court, while other countries such as Greece, Hungary and the Czech Republic continue to support the Netanyahu government, even when an arrest warrant is pending against him, citing historical or geopolitical reasons. But perhaps we should talk about this ‘silent majority’ that is dissatisfied and sceptical, unwilling to make themselves complicit in a war that is becoming less and less convincing as being for ‘national security’ (2)

For six months, most European governments refused to call for a ceasefire, even when images from Gaza provoked international outrage. This stance changed in the spring of 2024, when even the pro-Israel Biden administration shifted its position in favour of a temporary ceasefire. The EU followed suit, without courage, without an organised plan, but rather in an act of political self-preservation (4) 

And yet, this shift, albeit a modest one, is historic, with Europe caught between political risk and lost credibility. If it chooses to continue to ‘negotiate’ with the Israeli government as it did in February, with Gideon Saar, Israel’s Foreign Minister, at the same table as High Representative Kaja Kallas, then it loses any moral advantage or argument regarding the values that govern it. But if it decides to suspend Israel’s trade privileges and align itself with international law, then perhaps it will find its voice again. A voice that for years seemed to have been silenced  (1) 

Divisions within the EU

The unity of the EU seems to crumble when the issue must be turned from a political one into a policy one. As it stands, condemning the escalation in Gaza and the fact that some Member States welcome the decisions of the International Criminal Court is not enough; they must proceed with sanctions, freeze arms programmes, and publicly acknowledge that war crimes are not tolerated, even when committed by allies.

In this dynamic, Paris, Madrid and Dublin are taking the lead, with France discussing the official recognition of a Palestinian state and Spain proposing the suspension of EU trade cooperation with Israel and the imposition of an arms embargo. Pedro Sánchez (Spanish Prime Minister since 2018, leader of the socialist party PSOE) speaks of ‘a war for war’s sake’. But the question remains: what’s the reason for this awakening? Is it political courage at a time when international law is under attack, or pressure from public opinion to save the honour of European values? At the same time, at the societal level, pressure is mounting, from the EU Staff for Peace group active within European institutions to demonstrations and mass appeals by citizens; tolerance is running out. The images from Gaza, combined with revelations of attempts at resettlement and mass population displacement, leave no room for silence. As Nathalie Tocci notes, Israel’s strategy is now so overt that ‘there is nothing behind which anyone can hide’ (2) ,  (3) ,  (4), (5).

In the same context, the review of the EU-Israel Association Agreement (note: the Association Agreement, in force since 2000, regulates trade and political dialogue between the EU and Israel, providing for respect for human rights as an essential condition), an initiative strongly supported by the Netherlands, is a confirmation of the turbulent relationship at this time. When even the President of the Commission, known for her staunch pro-Israel stance, describes the military operation as ‘abhorrent’, then the rift in relations has deepened  (3) 

Consequently, diplomatic relations with the US appear to be heading for a breakdown, with the Trump administration continuing to defend Israel fanatically, describing European reservations as ‘moralising’. London has suspended negotiations on a new trade agreement, while Canada and France are imposing sanctions on West Bank settlers. Berlin, on the other hand, mindful of its own historical guilt, is hesitant, but is now leaving open the possibility of cutting off military support for the first time since the war, signalling a change in European policy towards greater autonomy in the Middle East (3) ,  (2).

The revision of the Association Agreement as a symbolic milestone

The EU’s decision to launch a formal review of the EU-Israel Association Agreement, following an initiative by the Netherlands and with the support of Spain, is seen by many not as a sign of a break, but as a long-overdue political move. For the first time, the Union is questioning whether its strategic partner is systematically violating its own institutional principles, namely international law, the protection of civilians, etc. Essentially, this is an existential question of the institution’s identity and credibility (4), (5)..

Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, who has historically been closely aligned with Israel and its policies, recently described the expansion of the Israeli military operation as ‘abhorrent.’ Similarly, High Representative for Foreign Affairs Kaja Kallas stated that ‘humanitarian aid cannot be instrumentalized,’ publicly expressing dissatisfaction with the new aid distribution system that bypasses the United Nations (3) . At the grassroots level, however, far from the institutions, the images from Gaza of queues for a bottle of water and people behind fences waiting for food, as political analyst Nathalie Tocci points out, ” have gone beyond the point where European leaders can pretend not to see” (2). The revision of the Agreement may not bring about an immediate suspension, as unanimity among the 27 Member States is required. But it already serves as a signal to Tel Aviv that Europe cannot remain complicit indefinitely and that a possible rupture is now on the cards (3) .

Strategic silence and double standards

European governments did not remain completely silent in the face of the Gaza massacre, but for a long time their stance was often characterised not by a lack of words, but by a choice of silence. This diplomatic restraint hides both the fear of internal division and the fear of losing geopolitical control. When the doctrine of ‘equal distance’ is applied to a deeply asymmetrical conflict, the result is not balance, but can lead to complicity.

Despite the horrific images from southern Gaza and Rafah, the EU avoided any commitment to sanctions against Israel for months while maintaining normal diplomatic flows, hosting Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar at an official meeting of the EU Association Council, in the presence of High Representative Kaja Kallas (note: the Association Council is the official framework for EU-Israel cooperation, based on the 2000 Agreement) (2) 

At the same time, while rhetoric on human rights abounds in official documents, the EU has been unable to mobilise its own tools. As Israel’s largest trading partner, the EU has clear leverage. Yet this remains at the level of rhetorical “concern”. The example of the Commission’s abstention from publicly condemning the bombing of the school in Unrua is indicative: instead of an active denunciation, it limited itself to expressing ‘regret’ and calling for restraint (3).

Ultimately, this stance ends up undermining not only Europe’s reputation as the guardian of international law, but also its own influence in the region. As the International Crisis Group report warns, the absence of a unified strategy and the inability to leverage political pressure undermine the EU’s credibility and strengthen the position of actors such as the US, Iran or Russia  (6) , a point that brings us to the emphasis of Simon Ilse, head of the Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung office in Ramallah, who states that Europe cannot remain bound by the American approach. Instead, it must chart an autonomous strategy based on international law, the recognition of Palestine and the strengthening of the UN’s role as a peacekeeping institution (1).

Europe at a crossroads in history

Historically, the EU was founded on a promise that it would never again tolerate crimes against humanity, with its institutions acting as a bulwark against such acts. Today, this value-based foundation is being tested in the offices of Brussels, because the genocide in Gaza, as characterised by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the International Court of Justice (ICJ)—is unfolding before the eyes of European diplomacy  (10) ,  (11) , (15) 

At the same time that more than 50,000 Palestinians are being killed and the cities of the Gaza Strip are being razed to the ground, Europe continues its trade relations and diplomatic tolerance with Israel. It is as if it does not hear the decisions of international institutions, as if it does not see the reports of organised deprivation of food, water and healthcare for the civilian population (11) ,   (10).

The UN Special Rapporteur on human rights in Occupied Palestine, Francesca Albanese, levelled a resounding indictment at Europe, stating that “the fact that almost unconditional commercial and political support for Israel while at the same time genocidal orders are being given, constitutes complicity‘ (9).

In this context of moral slippage, the silence or abstention of states such as Greece and Cyprus takes on particular significance. These are countries that for decades have invoked international law to defend their own national causes, from the Turkish invasion of Cyprus to the casus belli in the Aegean. And yet, at a time when 17 EU member states were calling for a review of the Association Agreement with Israel due to possible human rights violations, Greece and Cyprus chose to differentiate themselves, expressing their disagreement (14)  At the same time, Greece abstained from a crucial vote in the UN General Assembly on providing humanitarian aid to Gaza, provoking political and media reactions(12) . The Greek government seems to be choosing silence, even though public opinion in Greece is watching the developments with shock, with reports accusing it of ‘pretending not to see what is happening’ for the sake of a geopolitical relationship of interest (13).

A country cannot demand respect for international law when it concerns its own affairs, while remaining inactive or neutral when the same law is brutally violated elsewhere. The UN Commission of Inquiry, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have already documented systematic violations that may constitute genocide in Gaza (9) ,  (10)  ,  (11) . In view of the above, Europe as a whole risks losing its soft power, i.e. its ability to influence through values, legitimacy and public morality. Instead of being a pillar of rights, it appears as a divided spectator, afraid to break with its tradition of alliance with Israel.

The real crisis is not only humanitarian, it is a crisis of credibility. As Human Rights Watch notes, Europe’s inaction ranks it not as a neutral observer but as a structural part of a system that perpetuates impunity (11). This crisis has consequences that go beyond the Middle East – they are reflected in the EU’s global image as a voice for justice. Already, according to Carnegie Europe, the EU’s failure in Gaza has eroded the confidence of much of the Global South in the sincerity of European soft power (17) .

Europe is, once again, faced with a choice. It can continue to protect interests and alliances, calling its silence “realism”. Or it can claim the role it claims to want to play as a guarantor of international law, defender of rights and agent of peace. The decision is not theoretical, on the contrary it is deeply political, existential and urgent.

Endnotes

1. Ilse, S. (2025, March 25). Europe must emancipate itself from the USA in the Middle East. Heinrich Böll Stiftung. https://www.boell.de/en/2025/03/25/europa-muss-sich-nahost-von-den-usa-emanzipieren
2. Tocci, N. (2025, May 30). The EU’s Israel policy is morally bankrupt. A rethink is long overdue. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/may/30/gaza-europe-israel-eu-trading-partner
3. Francis, E., & Ríos, C. (2025, May 30). EU’s ties with Israel fray amid Gaza war and public anger. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2025/05/30/eu-israel-gaza-war
4. The Guardian. (2025, May 26). EU officials accuse bloc of taking ‘little to no meaningful action’ on Gaza. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/may/26/eu-officials-accuse-bloc-of-taking-little-to-no-meaningful-action-on-gaza
5. Jacqué, P. (2025, May 29). Gaza war: EU seeks a common response after deciding to review its agreement with Israel. Le Monde.https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2025/05/29/gaza-war-eu-seeks-a-common-response-after-deciding-to-review-its-agreement-with-israel_6741811_4.html
6. International Crisis Group. (2024, December 21). The EU’s Gaza Dilemma. https://www.crisisgroup.org/middle-east-north-africa/east-mediterranean/israelpalestine/eus-gaza-dilemma
7. Euronews. (2025, May 20). EU urged to review Israel relations over Gaza war. https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2025/05/20/eu-urged-to-review-israel-relations-over-gaza-war
8. United Nations Human Rights Council. (2024, March 20). Report of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel. https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/co-israel/index
9. Albanese, F. (2024, March 1). UN special rapporteur says Israel’s assault on Gaza amounts to genocide. United Nations. https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/03/1147976
10. Amnesty International. (2024, December 5). Amnesty International investigation concludes Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/12/amnesty-international-concludes-israel-is-committing-genocide-against-palestinians-in-gaza
11. Human Rights Watch. (2024, December 19). Extermination and acts of genocide: Israel deliberately depriving Palestinians in Gaza of water. https://www.hrw.org/report/2024/12/19/extermination-and-acts-genocide/israel-deliberately-depriving-palestinians-gaza
12. The Press Project. (2025, May 11). Ντροπιαστική αποχή της Ελλάδας στην ψηφοφορία του ΟΗΕ για την ανθρωπιστική βοήθεια στην Γάζα. https://thepressproject.gr/ntropiastiki-apochi-tis-elladas-stin-psifoforia-tou-oie-gia-tin-anthropistiki-voitheia-stin-gaza/
13. Samara, V. (2025, May 21). Γιατί η κυβέρνηση κάνει ότι δεν βλέπει τι συμβαίνει στη Γάζα. News247. https://www.news247.gr/politiki/giati-i-kivernisi-kanei-oti-den-vlepei-ti-simvainei-sti-gaza
14. Lifo Newsroom. (2025, May 28). Γάζα: Η ΕΕ να επανεξετάσει συμφωνίες με το Ισραήλ, ζητούν 17 κράτη μέλη – Διαφωνούν Ελλάδα και Κύπρος. https://www.lifo.gr/now/world/gaza-i-ee-na-epanexetasei-symfonies-me-israil-zitoyn-17-krati-meli-diafonoyn-ellada-kai
15. International Court of Justice. (2025). Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Israel v. Palestine): Provisional measures order. https://www.icj-cij.org/case/192
16. Irish, J. (2024, May 28). Israel not facing effective pressure, Greece says. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israel-not-facing-effective-pressure-greece-says-2024-09-23
17. Young, M. (2025, May 21). The Europeans Wake Up: But growing hostility to Israeli actions is too late to save the West from the lasting damage of Gaza. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. https://carnegieendowment.org/middle-east/diwan/2025/05/the-europeans-suddenly-react?lang=en