Public demonstrators, attired in red, gathered at Parliament Square in London, expressing their disquiet over the conditions of those residing in Gaza. With a pronounced stance against the continuation of the war in Gaza, the UK elicited the possibility of escalating its actions against Israel. This move followed a condemnation of Israel’s limited aid deliveries and the consequential loss of Palestinian lives, made predominantly by European nations. While these stern measures are in play, many individuals remain doubtful that Israel will succumb to this enforcement without larger, more decisive reprimands, notably without the endorsement of prime Western allies such as Germany and the United States.
The increasing disapproval of Israel’s operations in Gaza is catalyzed further in European countries due to the rising visual narratives of Palestinians’ sufferings, driving large-scale protests in London, Berlin, Brussels, and other capitals. The unfortunate events of Palestinians losing their lives whilst in pursuit of aid have strained the European Union’s amicable relations with Israel to an unprecedented extent. Yet, the European perspective on Israel remains fragmented, and the currently implemented sanctions and criticisms have yielded minimal impact.
The European Union is presently reassessing its diplomatic and commercial ties with Israel, particularly regarding their actions in Gaza. A recent internal investigation discloses probable indications of Israel breaching its human rights responsibilities as part of the EU-Israel Association Agreement. This long-standing agreement extending over two and a half decades, lays out the political and economic collaboration guidelines between both parties. Despite these findings, the European Union has hesitated to discontinue such ties.
There have been instances where individual nations like the UK have enforced sanctions on Israeli settlers in reaction to their aggressive conduct towards Palestinians, which include asset freezes and travel prohibitions. However, these measures are yet to demonstrate significant results. Furthermore, sanctions have also been imposed on two high-ranking Israeli leaders associated with far-right politics for reportedly stirring up extremist violence against Palestinians residing in the West Bank.
Should Israel fail to adapt its practices, potential repercussions could encompass complete or partial suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement. Such a decision would call for the absolute consensus of all 27 EU members. Alternate consequences could include pausing the aviation agreement, barring imports from settlements, limiting scientific and technological cooperation, and modifying travel restrictions for Israelis within the visa-free zone known as Schengen. These possibilities found their way to the public domain through a document leak from the EU’s leading diplomat to its members, later confirmed by two EU diplomats.
Beside these collective actions, individual nations retain the autonomy to execute separate sanctions on specific Israeli businesses or individuals, extending into the occupied West Bank. However, the reality remains that the European Union is characterized by differing views, making it distinctly unlikely for all member countries to attain complete agreement on escalating pressure on Israel.
EU nations, including Ireland, the Netherlands, and Spain, have urged the coalition to reassess its relationship with Israel openly. Their contention rests on their perception that Israel has contravened the human rights conditions stipulated in Israel’s agreement with Brussels. Despite these outspoken viewpoints, certain nations continue to firmly endorse Israel, some of which have recently proceeded to purchase air-defense systems from them.
To discontinue EU ties with Israel would necessitate an unanimous decision across the member nations, a feat that is almost impossible to accomplish. There was sharp criticism for these states’ position by certain factions, who labeled it as ‘repugnant,’ arguing that pressure should instead be directed towards the ‘barbarities’ of Hamas.
In contrast, the Israeli government counterclaimed that the fault rested solely with Hamas for prolonging the armed conflict. According to Israel, Hamas instigated the ongoing war, which has now been ongoing for nearly two years, following their attack on southern Israel. They also asserted that Hamas is still committing hostage acts, holding around 50 Israelis captive.
Despite these ongoing tensions, some nations still seem to prefer exerting influence on Israel through direct, diplomatic dialogue, articulating their concerns openly. In an act of defiance, the parliamentary head of the junior coalition partner voiced opinions suggesting the nation should join the UK’s initiative, arguing that failing to do so would erode the nation’s international standing.
Criticism was also voiced towards the operational methods of the Israeli army, which was flagged as unacceptable. The statement suggested that Israel was undermining the international credibility of the countries by not joining the initiatives and applying double standards.
In the eyes of an Middle East diplomatic expert, any action from the European Union must transcend mere rhetoric. The expert pointed out that the existing Israeli government doesn’t seem to heed only verbal communication. He emphasized that unless a tangible, enforceable mechanism is swiftly agreed upon and implemented, any verbal undertakings would lack substance and significance.
GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings