European consciences have started waking up to the Israeli government’s crimes in the occupied Palestinian territories – and it is about time. What has caused this long and slow awakening? Is it Israel’s killing of more than 54,000 Palestinians since Hamas’s horrific attack on 7 October 2023? Thousands of babiesat risk of dyingfrom starvation and malnutrition? Civiliansburning alive? Israeli ministers’ plans to reoccupy and recolonise the Gaza Strip,expelling Palestinians? Or perhaps it’s the Israeli armyfiring shots at diplomats, including Europeans, in the West Bank – or theracist chanting, during a state-funded march in Jerusalem, of “death to the Arabs” and “may their villages burn”?
It’s probably a combination of all the above, as well as the recognition that principled pressure on Israel will certainly not come from Washington. Whatever the triggers for it,Europemay be nearing an inflection point on the graph, turning the dark page of its complicity with Israel’s nearly 20-month war in Gaza.
A minority of European countries has made a principled stand over the war. EU members Spain, Ireland and Slovenia, as well as Norway outside the bloc, recognised Palestine as a sovereign state last year, fully supported the proceedings and decisions of the international court of justice and the international criminal court, continued funding Unrwa, the UN agency for Palestinian refugees, and voted in favour of all UN general assembly resolutions on Gaza.
However, there is also a minority of countries that has continued to offer unabashed support for the Netanyahu government. The most unrepentant are the Czech Republic and Hungary, with Germany and Italy next in line. Hungary’s prime minister, Viktor Orbán, went as far asinvitingNetanyahu, to Budapest, despite the international criminal court’s arrest warrant. Hungary thenleft the ICCaltogether.
Most other European countries have sat silently in the middle. For the first six months of the war, this meant refusing to call for a ceasefire. Only in the spring of 2024, when even Joe Biden’s rabidly pro-Israel administrationchanged tack, did the EU join the chorus in favour of a truce.
European governments and EU institutions have mildly pushed back against Donald Trump’s monstrousGaza “riviera” proposaland embraced theArab recovery and reconstruction plan. But they have continued to cooperate with Israel, going as far as holding an EU-Israel Association Council meeting in February that was chaired by the EU high representative, Kaja Kallas, and the Israeli foreign minister, Gideon Sa’ar. At most, they have lightly slapped Israel on the wrist for its disproportionate and indiscriminate violence in the strip.
Now, though, the silent majority is shifting. The UK hassuspended negotiationson a bilateral free trade agreement with Israel. Pausing that negotiation inflicts no cost on Israel, since no agreement yet exists. But it’s symbolically important.
France is louder and more active, not simply in its diplomatic pursuit of a two-state solution, but also in hinting at the possibility oftargeted sanctions on Israel. So far, these are baby steps, mostly abstract and/or tentative. But they indicate a change of pace and heart.
Potentially most meaningful is the move within the EU tosuspend its preferential trade arrangementswith Israel under the EU-Israel association agreement. To be clear, suspending preferential trade would not constitute a sanction. Sanctions, implying import bans or restrictions, require unanimous agreement in the EU, and it’s hard to imagine all 27 EU governments ever agreeing to that. Suspension of the entire EU-Israel association agreement is also hard to imagine, since this would also require unanimity.
But suspending preferential trade means withholding a benefit of theassociation agreement and this falls within the remit of EU trade policy, which only requires a qualified majority of EU states voting in favour.Trade between the EU and Israel would continue,just not on preferential terms as has been the case since the association agreement came into force in 2000.
While considered unthinkable in the past, there is now a real possibility that this process could move forward. For the time being, Kallas has mandated a review of Israel’s compliance with its obligations under the association agreement. Interestingly, the review was formally requested not by a pro-Palestinian member state such as Spain or Ireland, or even by France, butby a traditionally pro-Israel one, the Netherlands, led by a rightwing government.
Considering that human rights and respect for international law are legally “essential elements” of the EU-Israel agreement (article 2), it would be egregious if the review, which will report on Israel’s documented war crimes, were ignored and did not trigger a proposal by the European Commission for a suspension.
The qualified majority necessary to suspend the trade section of the agreement would require15 out of 27 statesto support the move. Seventeen countries backed the review. But a qualified majority also requires the agreement of member states representing 65% of the EU population. If Germany and Italy opposed the move, that population threshold is not met yet. Either one or the other wouldneed to budge.
At the moment, Italy’s far-right government, led by Giorgia Meloni, has given no indication of a change of policy. Criticism of Israel is growing, but not to the point of triggering a policy shift.
German governments have long regarded Israel’s security as aStaatsräsonfor Germany given its history. – This means it is near impossible to criticise Israel’s war in Gaza. But opinions about that may finally be shifting. The chancellor, Friedrich Merz, declared this week that Israel’s actions in Gaza couldno longer be justified– and that he could no longer understand Israel’s goals in the strip.
Actually, Israel’s goals have been made abundantly clear, by the words of the Israeli government and, even more so, by its deeds. This is a war that has much to do with reoccupation, recolonisation and mass expulsion, and very little to do with Israeli security and the release of hostages. Even the staunchest of Israel’s supporters, such as Merz, are becoming hard-pressed to deny this, and therefore less able to condone and support it.
The suspension of the EU-Israel association agreement’s preferential trade provisions may not stop the war in Gaza overnight. But it would be the first concrete step by the international community to exact a price on Israel for its crimes. Ultimately, imposing such costs is the only way to bring about change.
The EU is Israel’sbiggest trading partner, so the cost in question is not insignificant. Acting now will not bring back tens of thousands of lives in the Gaza Strip. These will remain for ever a stain on our collective conscience. But it would reduce the bleak prospect of a future with only more death and destruction in store.
Nathalie Tocci is a Guardian Europe columnist