Op-eds
/ Israel and Europe
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, who last year wanted to suspend the Association Agreement, stated that the meeting did not take place under a “business as usual” atmosphere. And yet, nothing in EU – Israel relations seems to have changed since the previous meeting in October 2022 despite 7 October and the Israel – Hamas war. Back then, Israel was ruled by the “change government” of Prime Minister Yair Lapid.
In fact, under growing global friction, when fractures are clearly showing between the unpredictable and belligerent Trump administration and the rest of the West, the current far-right Israeli government finds itself in a more comfortable EU zone – that of interests and real-politic. The new Israeli foreign Minister, Gideon Saar, even said that some in Europe sees Israel as a potential bridge to the Trump administration.
Netanyahu was the first international leader to meet Trump at the White House and received more support than he could have expected. When EU’s new High Representative for foreign affairs and security policy, Kaja Kallas, visited Washington, secretary of state Marco Rubio canceled the meeting with her without explanation or apology. Later that day, at his first cabinet meeting, Trump stated that the EU was created “to screw the US” and that he intends to impose 25% trade tariffs on the bloc.
In the rapidly shifting transatlantic relationship—where a Trump administration appears to be disengaging from Ukraine and Europe — the EU must choose its battles. It is clear to everyone that Ukraine comes first and is linked to strengthening the defence of Europe. Gaza is not even third. Perhaps reacting to Trump’s tariffs on Europe are? The EU’s internal interest of repatriating rejected asylum seekers to the new Syria and elsewhere? Stopping Iran from turning nuclear? Much is on the list. Under the current ceasefire, Gaza and the Palestinian issue ranks low in priority.
Thus, while the EU formulates a normative language that largely reflects its liberal-democratic values, its bark has no bite. This is not new. We’re back to the EU simultaneously condemning Israel while also considering deeper cooperation with it in research and innovation, energy, cybersecurity, artificial intelligence and other fields.
Critical engagement
It’s important to remember that the convening of the Association Council is a commitment under the EU -Israel Association Agreement, setting a routine and institutionalized political dialogue once a year. Nowhere in the agreement does it say that meetings will only occur if relations are good or improving. The purpose of the Association Council is to facilitate dialogue — whether critical, friendly, or a mix of both.
Actually, it is precisely in times of crises that it is essential for the parties to engage in an open and candid dialogue – what EU calls critical engagement.
More than anything, the latest Association Council meeting reflected the shift from the previous Commission, where the former foreign policy chief Josep Borrell led a strongly critical tone – even confrontational – toward Israel, to the second von der Leyen Commission. President Ursula von der Leyen had always a friendlier stance toward Israel.
Borrell’s successor, Kaja Kallas, does not have a particularly defined position on Israel. She adheres to EU’s “agreed language” and promoted the meeting for the sake of engagement. She is now scheduled to visit Israel in late March. Borrell only visited Israel once in November 2023, six weeks after Hamas’s murderous terrorist attack on Israel, when he was still using acceptable language.
Soon afterwards he returned to harsh rhetoric against Israel. Later he amplified the positions of Spain and Ireland, who pushed to invoke Article 2 of the Association Agreement. The article stipulates that the agreement is based on shared democratic values and respect for human rights.
By now, the position of Spain and Ireland aimed at downgrading relations with Israel has been dropped. Article 2 was only generally mentioned in the EU position paper for the Association Council.
The new Commissioner for the Mediterranean, Dubravka Šuica, has been tasked to plan for the reconstruction of Gaza. Similarly to Kallas, she does not have a specific approach to Israel – neither as favorable as Várhelyi, the former Commissioner for Enlargement and Neighborhood Policy, nor as critical as Lenarčič, the former Commissioner for Humanitarian Aid. Together with von der Leyen, this trio of women is relatively neutral or even supportive of Israel.
Criticism, cooperation and challenges
Kallas must also represent the position of all 27 EU member states. As a result, the EU’s statement on the eve of the Association Council meeting was drafted as a 1+1 formula: both political and normative criticism, alongside an expressed willingness for deeper cooperation with Israel.
It is mainly diplomacy and security which stands in the center of this real-politic approach. In a world where global friction and internal Western fractures are intensifying – as highlighted by the Trump-Zelensky disastrous meeting in the Oval Office – Israel is both a burden and an asset to the EU.
It is a burden because when the EU engages with Israel in what appears to be business as usual, it faces allegations of double standards from the Global South, human rights organizations and part of the public in Europe. About 120 organizations have signed a protest letter calling for a review of the Association Agreement with Israel because of its alleged violations of international and humanitarian law. The protest would have probably been even stronger if they would have added settlers’ violence and de-facto annexation of parts of the occupied West Bank.
Israel is an asset because, like it or not, it got the upper hand in its multi-front war against Iran and its proxies in the region. As the EU has to rebuild and strengthen its defence capabilities and military know-how, Israel has valuable assets to offer.
The Israeli government is a liability because of its refusal to plan for a political exit strategy from Gaza which could lead to a political solution of the Israeli – Palestinian conflict. Israel can become an asset if it brings about a desired normalisation with Saudi Arabia, which will also advance peace with the Palestinians. Such a 1+1 approach is a direction that the EU would be willing to advance and take part in.
The article was publish on March 4th, 2025, in The Brussels Times.
