Skip to main content

European Union member states’ responses to the political and humanitarian crisis in Gaza swing wildly – from recognition of Palestine as a sovereign state to doubling down on unwavering support for Israel, all while clinging to a ‘business as usual’ facade.

Even attempting to research the EU’s official stance on the Israeli government’s severe abuses against Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank is deeply frustrating – especially as both external and internal pressures mount, fostering an atmosphere of heightened risk for crimes linked to the political polarization that the conflict generates across Europe. 

Just a couple of weeks ago, Israeli football fans vandalized a taxi in Amsterdam, chanting in Hebrew: “Olé, olé, let the IDF [Israel Defense Forces] win, we will fuck the Arabs.” This was met with further clashes the next afternoon in the central Dam Square, resulting in five hospitalizations, 20 to 30 slight injuries, and 62 arrests. Benjamin Netanyahu was quick to respond, condemning this as “a planned antisemitic attack against Israeli citizens.”

Even the emails we receive from Sciences Po, while overwhelmingly belittling the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza and showing a clear bias against students protesting for Palestine, use ambiguous language and lack clarity about what the Administration intends to do. 

Email after email, the administration avoids making an unequivocal statement – Instead, it focuses “on the need for further consultation and reflection on the institution’s role,” leaving the community uncertain and reinforcing a narrative of indecision that weakens the urgency of addressing human rights.

Sciences Po’s rhetoric echoes von der Leyen’s European Commission almost to perfection. 

On October 7, von der Leyen’s statement condemned the terrorist attacks by Hamas while simultaneously calling for restraint and a diplomatic solution, all while avoiding a clear stance on the broader geopolitical conflict. 

She expresses concern for humanitarian suffering and stresses the importance of dialogue and de-escalation. However, despite her desire for a two-state solution, she refuses to provide specific or decisive actions regarding the parties involved or the EU’s broader political stance. 

Even though the pathway for a clear EU stance on condemning Israel has started to formulate, any concrete actions are yet to be taken. And I am not talking about public diplomatic statements and meetings producing yet more meaningless promises and words; I am talking about actual, concrete, transparent actions with proof. 

Despite all this ambiguity, there are specific unappealing facts that we do know. It is easy to claim a commitment to negotiation and peaceful solutions while doing little to genuinely advance the cause. 

The EU has not only failed to impose sanctions or break diplomatic ties with Israel but has actively funded and supported Israel’s military capabilities, contributing to the ongoing crisis in Gaza. 

Since the onset of the current situation in October 2023, EU nations have approved numerous research projects involving Israeli institutions, contributing millions of euros in funding. Some of these projects are directly related to military research, including collaborations with arms manufacturers and entities closely tied to the Israeli Defence Forces. 

And on top of that, the EU has facilitated the transit of US arms shipments to Israel, making it complicit in perpetuating the violence, and rendering its calls for peace or humanitarian pauses not only ineffective but disingenuous.

This support continues despite arrest warrants issued by the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court for Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.  

And, unfortunately, so many member states, led by Germany, continue to stand firmly by Israel’s side, seeing no moral wrongs in participating in the EU’s ‘business as usual’ strategy.  

But the EU, as an institution, should not horrifically sideline its devout commitments to international law and human rights — that it has, by the way, built itself upon — despite voices like Germany crying out due to its incapacity to condemn Israel. 

However, there are condemning voices amongst EU leaders. A recent blog post published by the former High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Joseph Borell, states, “We need to acknowledge that the approach we have used for over a year with the Israeli government has failed.” In this article, he states that he proposed an import ban on illegal settlement products and requested the EU special representative for human rights assess Israel’s compliance with its Association Agreement with the EU. 

During the 1980s, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and the Czech Republic recognized Palestinian statehood. Sweden followed suit in 2014, with Ireland, Spain, and non-EU member Norway doing so in 2024.

Borell recently proposed for the EU to suspend its political dialogue with Israel. However, Borell left his post at the end of November — And Germany, Austria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Denmark, the Netherlands, Italy, and Greece already opposed it. 

This shows, again, that condemning voices within the EU are not only small in numbers but lack the power of the EU’s paramount member states.

The EU is one of the only ones who can truly hurt Israel through sanctions – While Israel is only the twenty-fifth most important trading partner to the Union, the latter remains the largest for Israel itself. 

The EU’s hesitation and lack of concrete action betray the values of human rights and justice it claims to uphold. Words alone cannot rebuild the homes flattened in Gaza or resurrect the lives lost to this merciless cycle of violence. This is not just about policy or sanctions – it is about moral accountability and the kind of world Europe envisions for itself.

Suppose the EU wants to be taken seriously as a global force for peace and human rights. In that case, it must stop hiding behind vague statements and start taking decisive actions: imposing targeted sanctions, halting military funding, and holding Israel accountable for violations of international law. 

Anything less is complicity. 

The question is not whether the EU can afford to take a firm stance against Israel — it is whether it can afford not to.

Other posts that may interest you:


Discover more from The Sundial Press

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Helmiina Toivonen

Author Helmiina Toivonen

More posts by Helmiina Toivonen

Leave a Reply

Discover more from The Sundial Press

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading