🔗 Share this article

The initial phase of Donald Trump's Middle East plan has provoked a collective feeling of reassurance among EU officials. Following 24 months of bloodshed, the truce, captive releases, partial IDF pullback, and aid delivery offer hope – and unfortunately, create an excuse for European nations to continue inaction.

Europe's Troubling Position on the Gaza War

When it comes to the war in Gaza, unlike the Russian aggression in Ukraine, EU member states have displayed their poorest performance. Deep divisions exist, causing policy paralysis. But worse than inaction is the accusation of collusion in Israel's war crimes. EU bodies have refused to exert pressure on those responsible while maintaining commercial, diplomatic, and defense cooperation.

Israel's violations have sparked widespread anger among the European public, yet EU governments have lost touch with their constituents, especially youth. In 2020, the EU spearheaded the climate agenda, responding to young people's concerns. These very youth are now appalled by their leaders' inaction over Gaza.

Belated Recognition and Weak Measures

Only after 24 months of a war that many consider a genocide for multiple EU countries including Germany, France, Italy, Belgium, Luxembourg and Malta to recognise the Palestinian state, after Spain, Ireland, Norway and Slovenia's example from the previous year.

Only recently did the European Commission propose the initial cautious punitive measures toward Israel, including sanctioning extremist ministers and aggressive colonists, plus halting EU trade preferences. Nevertheless, both measures have been enacted. The initial requires complete consensus among 27 EU governments – unlikely given strong opposition from countries like Hungary and the Czech Republic. The second could pass with a qualified majority, but Germany and Italy's opposition have rendered it ineffective.

Divergent Approaches and Lost Trust

This summer, the EU found that Israel had breached its human rights obligations under the bilateral trade deal. However, recently, the EU's top diplomat halted efforts to revoke the agreement's trade privileges. The difference with the EU's multiple rounds of sanctions on Russia could not be more pronounced. On Ukraine, Europe has taken a principled stand for freedom and international law; on Gaza, it has damaged its reputation in the eyes of the world.

Trump's Plan as an Escape Route

Now, Trump's plan has offered Europe with an escape route. It has allowed EU nations to embrace Washington's demands, similar to their approach on the Ukrainian conflict, defense, and trade. It has permitted them to promote a fresh beginning of stability in the region, shifting attention from punitive measures toward European support for the US plan.

Europe has withdrawn into its comfort zone of taking a secondary role to the US. While Middle Eastern nations are anticipated to shoulder the burden for an international stabilisation force in Gaza, European governments are lining up to participate with humanitarian assistance, rebuilding, governance support, and frontier supervision. Discussion of pressure on Israel has virtually disappeared.

Practical Obstacles and Political Realities

This situation is comprehensible. The US initiative is the sole existing proposal and certainly the only plan with some possibility, however small, of achievement. This is not due to the intrinsic value of the plan, which is flawed at best. It is instead because the United States is the only player with necessary leverage over Israel to alter behavior. Supporting US diplomacy is therefore both practical for European leaders, it is logical too.

Nevertheless, implementing the initiative beyond initial steps is more challenging than anticipated. Numerous hurdles and paradoxical situations exist. Israel is improbable to completely withdraw from Gaza unless Hamas lays down weapons. But Hamas will not disarm completely unless Israel withdraws.

What Lies Ahead and Required Action

This initiative aims to move toward Palestinian self-government, initially featuring Palestinian technocrats and then a "reformed" governing body. But administrative reform means radically different things to the US, Europe, Arab countries, and the Palestinians themselves. Israel rejects the authority altogether and, with it, the idea of a independent Palestine.

Israel's leadership has been brutally clear in repeating its unchanged aim – the elimination of Hamas – and has studiously avoided addressing an end to the war. It has not fully respected the truce: since it began, numerous of Palestinian civilians have been fatally wounded by Israeli forces, while others have been shot by militant groups.

Without the global community, and especially the Americans and Europeans, exert greater pressure on Israel, the odds are that mass violence will restart, and Gaza – as well as the Palestinian territories – will continue being occupied. In summary, the outstanding elements of the plan will not be implemented.

Conclusion

This is why European leaders are mistaken to consider support for Trump's plan and leveraging Israel as separate or opposing. It is expedient but factually wrong to see the former as part of the paradigm of peace and the second to one of ongoing conflict. This is not the time for the EU and its member states to avoid responsibility, or to abandon the initial cautious steps toward sanctions and conditionality.

Leverage exerted on Israel is the sole method to surmount political hurdles, and if successful, Europe can finally make a modest – but constructive, at least – contribution to stability in the region.