🔗 Share this article

The first phase of Donald Trump's Gaza proposal has elicited a collective sense of relief among European leaders. Following 24 months of bloodshed, the ceasefire, hostage releases, partial Israeli military withdrawal, and aid delivery provide optimism – and unfortunately, furnish a pretext for Europe to persist with passivity.

The EU's Troubling Position on the Gaza War

Regarding the war in Gaza, in contrast to the Russian aggression in Ukraine, European governments have displayed their worst colours. They are divided, causing political gridlock. But worse than passivity is the charge of complicity in Israel's war crimes. European institutions have refused to apply leverage on those responsible while maintaining commercial, political, and military partnership.

Israel's violations have sparked widespread anger among European citizens, yet EU governments have lost touch with their constituents, particularly younger generations. Just five years ago, the EU championed the environmental movement, responding to young people's concerns. Those same youth are now shocked by their leaders' inaction over Gaza.

Delayed Acknowledgement and Ineffective Actions

It took two years of a conflict that many consider a genocide for several European nations including France, Britain, Portugal, Spain, Netherlands, Sweden to acknowledge the State of Palestine, following other European nations' example from the previous year.

Only recently did the European Commission propose the initial cautious sanctions toward Israel, including penalizing extremist ministers and aggressive colonists, plus halting EU trade preferences. Nevertheless, both measures have been enacted. The first requires complete consensus among all member states – 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.

Contrasting Responses and Lost Trust

In June, the EU found that Israel had breached its human rights commitments under the bilateral trade deal. But recently, the EU's foreign policy chief paused efforts to revoke the agreement's trade privileges. The contrast with the EU's 19 packages of Russian sanctions could not be more stark. On Ukraine, Europe has stood tall for democracy and global norms; on Gaza, it has damaged its reputation in the eyes of the world.

Trump's Plan as an Escape Route

Currently, Trump's plan has offered Europe with an escape route. It has enabled European governments to support Washington's demands, like their approach on the Ukrainian conflict, defense, and trade. It has enabled them to promote a new dawn of stability in the Middle East, redirecting focus from punitive measures toward backing for the US plan.

The EU has withdrawn into its comfort zone of taking a secondary role to the US. While Middle Eastern nations are expected to bear responsibility for an international stabilisation force in Gaza, EU members are preparing to participate with aid, rebuilding, governance support, and border monitoring. Discussion of pressure on Israel has largely vanished.

Practical Obstacles and Geopolitical Constraints

All this is comprehensible. Trump's plan is the only available proposal and undoubtedly the only plan with any chance, even if limited, of success. This is not because to the intrinsic value of the plan, which is problematic at best. It is rather because the US is the only player with necessary leverage over Israel to effect change. Supporting US diplomacy is therefore not just convenient for European leaders, it is logical too.

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

What Lies Ahead and Required Action

This initiative aims to transition toward Palestinian self-government, initially featuring Palestinian technocrats and then a "restructured" Palestinian Authority. But reformed authority means vastly distinct things to the US, Europeans, Arab countries, and the local population. Israel opposes this entity altogether and, with it, the concept of a Palestinian state.

The Israeli government has been explicitly clear in repeating its unchanged aim – the destruction of Hamas – and has studiously avoided discussing an end to the war. It has not completely adhered to the ceasefire: since it came into effect, numerous of Palestinian civilians have been killed by IDF operations, while others have been injured by militant groups.

Unless the global community, and particularly the Americans and Europeans, apply more leverage on Israel, the likelihood exists that widespread conflict will restart, and Gaza – as well as the West Bank – will continue being occupied. In short, the outstanding elements of the initiative will not be implemented.

Final Analysis

This is why European leaders are wrong to view support for Trump's plan and pressure on Israel as separate or contradictory. It is politically convenient but practically incorrect to see the former as belonging to the paradigm of peace and the latter to one of ongoing conflict. This is not the time for the EU and its constituent countries to feel let off the hook, or to abandon the first timid moves toward sanctions and conditionality.

Pressure applied to Israel is the only way to surmount diplomatic obstacles, and if this is achieved, Europe can finally make a modest – but constructive, at least – contribution to stability in the region.