The EU has said “there are indications” thatIsraelis in breach of human rights obligations over its conduct in Gaza, but stopped short of calling for immediate sanctions.
“There are indications that Israel would be in breach of its human rights obligations under article 2 of the EU-Israel association agreement,” states a leaked document from the EU’s foreign policy service, seen by the Guardian.
Couched in the typically cautious language of Brussels, the document nevertheless represents a significant moment in Europe’s relations towards a longstanding ally.
The closely guarded paper, which will be presented by the EU foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, to European foreign ministers on Monday, cites assessments by the international court of justice, the office of the high commissioner for human rights, and numerous other UN bodies, while saying that it does not represent “a value judgment” by any EU official.
The finding has been seen as a foregone conclusion since a review of the EU-Israel agreement was put on the agenda last month by 17 EU member states, led by the Netherlands, a traditional ally of Israel.
EU officials were tasked to see whether Israel’s internal and international relations were based on “respect for human rights and democratic principles” against the backdrop of near-dailyfatal shootings of Palestinian civilians seeking food. The review was triggered by Israel’s blockade of the Gaza Strip, amid widespread horror over the ongoing bombardment that has laid waste to the territory and killed more than 55,600 people – mostly civilians – since 7 October 2023, according to the Gaza health ministry.
The EU discussion is complicated by Israel’s airstrikes on Iran, which may restrain some governments from putting pressure on Israel. Soon after Israel began waging war against Iran, the European Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, “reiterated Israel’s right to defend itself”. She has previouslyfaced criticism for not speaking upover the humanitarian consequences for Palestinians from Israel’s onslaught.
The EU-Israel association agreement, signed in 1995, underpins a trade relationship worth €68bn (£58bn) between 27 European countries and the Middle Eastern country. The EU is Israel’s largest market and accounts for about one-third of its trade. Israel is also a member of the EU’s Horizon research funding programme, and has secured grants worth €831m since the current programme began in 2021.
The document emerged after more than 100 campaign groups urged the commission this week to suspend the association agreement. “A weak or inconclusive review of Israel’s compliance with article 2, and/or failure by the commission and council to suspend at least part of the association agreement, would ultimately destroy what’s left of the EU’s credibility [and] further embolden Israel authorities to continue their atrocity crimes,” reads the statement, signed by 113 civil society groups including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch.
Eve Geddie, the head of Amnesty International’s EU office, said the decision to launch a review had come “tragically, devastatingly late” and that while it was important, as time passed Israeli forces had become “more and more emboldened”.
Separately, eight EU member states have written to Kallas urging her to look into discontinuing trade of goods and services from the occupied Palestinian territories. The letter, organised by Belgium, states the EU is obliged to respond to an opinion from the international court of justice last Julyordering Israel to end its occupationof Palestinian territories as soon as possible. In a landmark – albeit non-binding – ruling, the court said other states were under an obligation not to recognise the occupation as lawful.
“We have not seen a proposal on how to effectively discontinue trade of goods and services with the illegal settlements,” states the letter, calling for the EU to set out a timeline for reaching “full compliance” with the advisory opinion around its first anniversary.
EU policy on Israel has been hobbled by difficulties finding unanimity among 27 member states with starkly different views, from countries that have recognised Palestine,including Spain and Ireland, to staunch allies of the Israeli president, Benjamin Netanyahu, such as Hungary and the Czech Republic.
The tide turned last month when the Netherlands, a strong ally of Israel,launched a callto review the EU-Israel association agreement, afterthe largest protests on Dutch streetsover a foreign policy question in decades. The Dutch foreign minister, Casper Veldkamp, a former ambassador to Israel, argued that Israel’s blockade of the Gaza Strip was a breach of international law and therefore the association agreement. An unexpectedly large number of countries agreed, although the question was not put to a vote.
The EU is far from united over what to do next. A full suspension of the agreement, which requires unanimity, is seen as impossible, given the certainty of a veto from Hungary, the Czech Republic or Germany. The EU only needs a weighted majority to suspend favourable trade terms or Israel’s participation in Horizon, but even those outcomes are highly uncertain.
Hildegard Bentele, a German centre-right MEP who chairs the European parliament’s Israel delegation, criticised moves to question the agreement. “This will not have any influence on the Israeli government. I am very sure about it. This will put us in a less influential position,” she said in an interview earlier this month.
Kallas’s predecessor, Josep Borrell, however, has criticised Europe for shirking its moral responsibilities over Gaza. In a typically outspoken speech, he argued the EU should use the association agreementas a lever to demandthat humanitarian law is respected.
In a further illustration of the EU’s foreign policy knots, Hungary is blocking EU sanctions against violent Israeli settlers.
Kallas earlier this week voiced frustration at critics that have accused the EU of silence and inaction, citing the need to find consensus. “Sanctions need unanimity. And again I’m representing 27 [countries].” She argued that presenting sanctions that would inevitably fail was pointless: “I feel better myself that I’ve done something, but actually I know that this will not go through … and then it will just show that we don’t have a common position.”