Europe’s long-awaited shift on Israel signals a harder line

[MIDDLE EAST] For months, Europe watched Israel’s devastating military campaign in Gaza with little more than hand-wringing. Tens of thousands of civilian deaths, attacks on hospitals and schools, and the blocking of humanitarian aid were met largely with silence or tepid statements. But now, a cascade of unusually strong diplomatic actions suggests the EU is finally moving. The trigger? A Dutch-led push to review Israel’s compliance with the EU-Israel association agreement, a trade pact hinging on respect for human rights. Seventeen EU states have backed the review, signaling that the political center — long cautious and pro-dialogue — has shifted closer to the bloc’s critical flank.

1. The Power of Trade: Europe’s Leverage Over Israel

The EU-Israel association agreement is not just diplomatic fluff — it grants Israel preferential access to the world’s largest single market. Europe accounts for 32% of Israel’s trade, while Israel makes up less than 1% of EU trade. That asymmetry gives the EU real leverage. If the EU suspends Israel’s preferential trade status, tariffs would rise, market access would shrink, and Israeli industries, especially in tech and research, would feel the squeeze. For Israel, losing access to Horizon Europe, the EU’s prized research program, could also hurt its innovation ecosystem. Historically, the EU has suspended such agreements over human rights violations more than 20 times — but mostly in smaller, less geopolitically sensitive regions.

2. Political Roadblocks: Can Europe Get to a Qualified Majority?

Despite the momentum, achieving meaningful action won’t be easy. While a full suspension of the agreement requires unanimous consent — virtually impossible with Hungary and Italy in opposition — suspending the trade component only needs a qualified majority: 15 states representing at least 65% of the EU population. That threshold means a shift in position by heavyweights like Germany or Italy would be decisive. So far, both have resisted. But political winds can change. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s unusually sharp criticism of Israel hints at growing unease even among Israel’s staunchest allies. If Israel continues its hardline approach, internal EU pressure may grow to act decisively.

3. The Stakes: Europe’s Credibility and Global Influence

This isn’t just about Israel. For the EU, this moment tests the credibility of its entire human rights framework. Since the 1990s, Europe has prided itself on embedding human rights clauses in its international agreements — and on using them when needed. If the EU’s review confirms Israel’s breaches but no action follows, it would signal to the world that human rights standards are selectively applied, weakening the EU’s global standing. Conversely, meaningful action would show that even close partners are not above accountability. More than that, imposing tangible costs could give the EU new leverage to push Israel toward a path of peace, equality, and long-term security.

What We Think

Europe’s shift on Israel is late but potentially transformative. The Dutch-led review has cracked open space for a real reassessment of EU-Israel ties, but the follow-through is what matters. Without economic or political consequences, Israel has little incentive to alter course — something decades of dialogue have proven. The EU now faces a stark choice: uphold its human rights commitments or expose them as hollow. If Europe wants to reclaim global relevance and moral authority, it must be willing to use its considerable economic power, not just its words. That means preparing to suspend Israel’s trade privileges unless there is a genuine change in policy — because only pressure, not pleas, will shift the trajectory toward peace.