Hugh Lovatt is a senior policy fellow with the Middle East and North Africa Programme at the European Council on Foreign Relations. Lovatt has focussed extensively on regional geopolitics and advised European policymakers on the conflicts in Israel-Palestine and Western Sahara. He is also Chairman of the Brussels-based European Middle East Project (EuMEP). Follow him on Twitter/X @h_lovatt and on Blusky at @hlovatt.bsky.social.
Game changers are few and far between in the long-running Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Yet what has played out in European capitals over the past few weeks may mark the beginning of one of those rare moments. Of course, nothing is certain in politics—especially European politics. But the tide is turning against Israel, as the reality of its ethnic cleansing of Gaza, prevention of humanitarian aid entering the Strip and growing public anger finally catch up with Europe's leaders.
This month started with a call by the Dutch foreign minister to review the European Union's Association Agreement with Israel—the linchpin of the country's economic relations with the bloc—in light of its violations of international law in the occupied West Bank and Gaza. This followed French President Emmanuel Macron's broadside against the Israeli government, blasting its actions during a prime-time interview as shameful while calling for increased pressure on the country.
Events culminated this week with an unprecedented condemnation from France, the UK and Canada, threatening "concrete actions" in response to Israel's expanded military operations in Gaza and aid blockade. Then came the meeting of EU foreign ministers on May 20, where a majority of member states greenlit a review into Israel's compliance with Article 2 of the Association Agreement, which requires it to respect human rights and democratic principles. The same day, the United Kingdom announced a halt to free trade negotiations "with a Netanyahu government that is pursuing egregious policies in the West Bank and Gaza," though it has kept in place preferential tariffs under its existing trade arrangements with Israel.
Still, a full suspension is unlikely due to the lack of unanimity among the EU's 27 member states, given strong opposition from Hungary and the Czech Republic. However, a qualified majority could suspend parts of the agreement, blocking Israel's access to preferential trade tariffs and important EU funding under cooperation projects like Horizon Europe.
This moment has been a long time coming. European governments strongly backed Israel after Hamas's Oct. 7 attacks. But many capitals grew increasingly alarmed by its mass violence against Gaza's civilians. Deepening frustration with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's obstruction of international diplomacy and his rejection of any political pathway towards a two-state solution compounded this frustration.
Despite growing tensions, European states hesitated to move from words to deeds—eliciting strong criticism from Arab states over their perceived double standards after their significant response to Russia's aggression against Ukraine, resulting in 17 rounds of sanctions. While Ireland, Norway, Slovenia and Spain took the important decision to recognize the State of Palestine along the 1967 borders last year, broader change in Europe towards Israel has been slow and halting. The Commission and other states ignored Ireland and Spain's initial February 2024 request to review the Association Agreement.
The EU's former High Representative for Foreign Affairs, Josep Borrell, made a similar call in November to "end business as usual," proposing suspending political dialogue. While a largely symbolic measure, EU members rebuffed him, even after the EU's Special Representative for Human Rights shared a confidential 35-page report extensively documenting Israel's violations of International Human Rights Law and International Humanitarian Law.
But change is slow until it is not. After Israel killed 50,000 Palestinians over 19 months, its decision to renege on the January ceasefire with Hamas marked a turning point. That deal would have released the remaining Israeli hostages, creating a realistic political pathway for removing the Islamist group from power in favor of the Palestinian Authority. Israel's subsequent decision to cut aid to Gaza and expand its war, with the declared intention of expelling over 2 million Palestinians from the enclave, combined with rising European public anger, forced Europe's hand.
This moment has been a long time coming. European governments strongly backed Israel after the Oct. 7 attacks. But many capitals grew increasingly alarmed by its mass violence against Gaza's civilians.
- Hugh Lovatt
What comes next is unclear, although the EU took similar action 26 times in the past in response to human rights breaches by other partner countries. Legally, the European Commission—referred to as the "guardian" of EU treaties—could have acted on its own volition long ago. However, the Commission's president, Ursula Von Der Leyen, a former German defense minister, has positioned herself as a strong supporter of Israel. She has consistently deflected action against Israel and its settlement project. Though member states have forced Von der Leyen's hand, she will likely influence the review's pace and scope.
In the face of growing Israeli extremism in Gaza and the West Bank, where Israeli soldiers recently opened fire towards a delegation of European diplomats, rearguard action by the Commission and Israel's allies is nevertheless likely to only momentarily slow the rupture in relations that Israel is causing.
European measures could cost Israel hundreds of millions of Euros in tariff savings, making Israeli exports like fruit and vegetables less competitive against similar products from Europe's other partners. Israeli research institutions benefitting from €831 million in EU grants would also lose out, severely affecting a key Israeli sector. Future actions could focus on Israeli settlements, expanding sanctions against settler organizations or extremist government ministers or banning the import of settlement products and financial investments, as called for in the International Court of Justice's July 2024 Advisory Opinion.
Of course, none of this suggests an immediate or total end to European complicity, especially when it comes to military support to Israel—policies the UK and Germany continue to defend. Nor can Europe compel Israel to change course alone, even with all its economic power. However, even limited steps can positively impact Israeli decision-making. Israel's foreign minister, Gideon Sa'ar, admitted as much, citing European pressure and the threat of sanctions as one reason for their recent decision to allow limited aid into Gaza.
Next month's UN conference, co-hosted by France and Saudi Arabia, on the two-state solution offers an opportunity for practical steps in support of Palestinian self-determination. While speculation is intensifying over a major French move, potentially in conjunction with the United Kingdom, to join the more than 140 countries that have already recognized Palestine, opening a credible political pathway to peace will require countries to rally against Israel's violation of key legal norms. Of particular importance will be action by Arab members of the Abraham Accords—which have not only fully maintained their economic relations with Israel since October 2023, but continue to allow Israeli settlements to benefit from normalization agreements.
A broader and more robust response would force Israelis to confront a dilemma they have long escaped. That is a stark choice between two alternative futures: international integration and economic prosperity or increasing isolation as a pariah state. Yair Golan, a left-wing opposition leader, echoed this dynamic, warning Israel risks becoming a "pariah state" due to its conduct. By clearly and intentionally framing this decision, Europe and its partners can amplify Israel's anti-Netanyahu faction while reinforcing the Israeli voices insisting that a ceasefire and diplomacy offer the only path to securing Israel's long-term future.
While Europe aspires to be a geopolitical power, viewing its interests more directly tied to Ukraine's fate, it is in Gaza where these aspirations are being most tested. Ultimately, the aim of European policy should not be restricted to removing Netanyahu from power to achieve a Gaza ceasefire, but to eventually shift the Israeli public's calculations away from its current support for perpetual domination over Palestinians. Inching towards acceptance of de-occupation is the only viable means of securing a sustainable future based on mutual equality and security. To do this, Europe must actionably demonstrate to Israelis that ethnic cleansing and annexation of Palestinian territory comes with real, expensive costs.
