🔗 Share this article

The initial stage of Donald Trump's Middle East plan has provoked a widespread sense of relief among EU officials. Following 24 months of violence, the truce, captive releases, partial Israeli military withdrawal, and aid delivery provide optimism – and unfortunately, create an excuse for European nations to continue inaction.

The EU's Problematic Stance on the Gaza War

Regarding the Gaza conflict, unlike the Russian aggression in Ukraine, European governments have revealed their worst colours. Deep divisions exist, causing political gridlock. More alarming than inaction is the charge of complicity in violations of international law. European institutions have been unwilling to apply leverage on those responsible while continuing economic, diplomatic, and military cooperation.

The breaches of international law have triggered mass outrage among European citizens, yet EU governments have become disconnected with their own people, especially youth. In 2020, the EU championed the climate agenda, responding to youth demands. Those same youth are now shocked by their leaders' inaction over Gaza.

Belated Acknowledgement and Weak Actions

It took two years of a war that many consider a genocide for several European nations including France, Britain, Portugal, Belgium, Luxembourg and Malta to recognise the Palestinian state, following Spain, Ireland, Norway and Slovenia's example from the previous year.

Just last month did the EU executive propose the first timid punitive measures toward Israel, including penalizing extremist ministers and aggressive colonists, plus halting EU trade preferences. However, neither step have been enacted. The initial requires complete consensus among 27 EU governments – unlikely given strong opposition from nations including Poland and Austria. The other could pass with a qualified majority, but key countries' objections have made it meaningless.

Contrasting Responses 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 foreign policy chief halted efforts to revoke the agreement's trade privileges. The contrast with the EU's multiple rounds of sanctions on Russia could not be more stark. On Ukraine, Europe has taken a principled stand for democracy and global norms; on Gaza, it has shattered its reputation in the eyes of the world.

Trump's Plan as an Escape Route

Currently, the American proposal has offered Europe with an way out. It has enabled EU nations to embrace US requirements, similar to their stance on the Ukrainian conflict, defense, and trade. It has permitted them to promote a fresh beginning of stability in the region, redirecting focus from punitive measures toward backing for the US plan.

The EU has retreated into its familiar position of playing second fiddle to the United States. While Arab and Muslim majority countries are expected to bear responsibility for an peacekeeping mission in Gaza, European governments are lining up to contribute with aid, reconstruction, administrative help, and frontier supervision. Talk of leveraging Israel has virtually disappeared.

Implementation Challenges and Political Realities

This situation is understandable. The US initiative is the sole existing proposal and certainly the only plan with any chance, however small, of achievement. This is not because to the intrinsic value of the plan, which is flawed at best. It is instead because the US is the sole actor with sufficient influence over Israel to effect change. Supporting US diplomacy is therefore both practical for Europeans, it is logical too.

However, executing the plan beyond initial steps is more challenging than anticipated. Multiple hurdles and catch-22s exist. Israel is improbable to fully pull out from Gaza unless Hamas disarms. But Hamas will not surrender entirely unless Israel withdraws.

Future Prospects and Required Action

The plan aims to transition toward local administration, initially featuring local experts and then a "reformed" governing body. But reformed authority means radically different things to the US, Europe, Arab countries, and the local population. Israel rejects the authority altogether and, with it, the concept of a Palestinian state.

The Israeli government has been explicitly clear in repeating its consistent objective – the elimination of Hamas – and has carefully evaded discussing an conflict resolution. It has not fully respected the ceasefire: since it began, dozens of non-combatants have been killed by IDF operations, while others have been injured by Hamas.

Without the international community, and especially the US and Europe, apply more leverage on Israel, the likelihood exists that widespread conflict will resume, and Gaza – as well as the West Bank – will continue being occupied. In short, the outstanding elements of the initiative will not see the light of day.

Conclusion

This is why Europeans are mistaken to view support for Trump's plan and pressure on Israel as separate or opposing. It is expedient but practically incorrect to see the first as belonging to the paradigm of peace and the second to one of continuing war. This is not the moment for the EU and its constituent countries to feel let off the hook, or to discard the initial cautious steps toward sanctions and conditionality.

Leverage exerted on Israel is the only way to surmount political hurdles, and if this is achieved, Europe can finally make a small – but constructive, at least – contribution to peace in the Middle East.