🔗 Share this article

The first stage of Donald Trump's Middle East plan has elicited a widespread sense of relief among EU officials. Following 24 months of bloodshed, the ceasefire, captive releases, limited IDF pullback, and humanitarian access offer hope – yet regrettably, create an excuse for European nations to persist with passivity.

The EU's Troubling Stance on the Gaza War

Regarding the war in Gaza, unlike Russia's invasion in Ukraine, EU member states have displayed their poorest performance. They are divided, leading to policy paralysis. More alarming than inaction is the charge of collusion in violations of international law. EU bodies have been unwilling to apply leverage on those responsible while maintaining commercial, diplomatic, and military partnership.

The breaches of international law have sparked widespread anger among the European public, yet EU governments have lost touch with their own people, particularly youth. In 2020, the EU spearheaded the environmental movement, responding to youth demands. Those same youth are now appalled by their leaders' inaction over Gaza.

Delayed Recognition and Ineffective Actions

Only after 24 months of a conflict that numerous observers call a genocide for several European nations including France, Britain, Portugal, Belgium, Luxembourg and Malta to acknowledge the State of Palestine, after Spain, Ireland, Norway and Slovenia's lead from last year.

Only recently did the European Commission propose the initial cautious sanctions toward Israel, including sanctioning extremist ministers and violent settlers, plus halting EU trade preferences. However, neither step have been enacted. The first requires complete consensus among all member states – improbable given strong opposition from nations including Poland and Austria. The second could pass with a supermajority, but Germany and Italy's opposition have made it meaningless.

Divergent Approaches and Damaged Trust

This summer, the EU determined that Israel had violated its human rights commitments under the EU-Israel association agreement. However, recently, the EU's foreign policy chief paused efforts to suspend the preferential trade terms. The contrast with the EU's 19 packages of Russian sanctions could not be more stark. On Ukraine, Europe has taken a principled stand for freedom and global norms; on Gaza, it has shattered its reputation in the international community.

Trump's Plan as an Escape Route

Currently, the American proposal has provided Europe with an escape route. It has enabled European governments to embrace US requirements, similar to their stance on the Ukrainian conflict, security, and trade. It has enabled them to promote a new dawn of peace in the region, shifting attention from sanctions toward European support for the American initiative.

The EU has retreated into its comfort zone of taking a secondary role to the United States. While Middle Eastern nations are anticipated to shoulder the burden for an international stabilisation force in Gaza, EU members are preparing to contribute with humanitarian assistance, reconstruction, governance support, and border monitoring. Talk of leveraging Israel has virtually disappeared.

Implementation Challenges and Political Realities

All this is comprehensible. Trump's plan is the only available proposal and undoubtedly the single approach with some possibility, however small, of success. This is not due to the inherent merit of the plan, which is problematic at best. It is instead because the US is the sole actor with necessary leverage over Israel to alter behavior. Backing American efforts is therefore both practical for European leaders, it is logical too.

Nevertheless, executing the plan beyond initial steps is more challenging than anticipated. Numerous hurdles and paradoxical situations exist. Israel is unlikely to fully pull out from Gaza unless Hamas disarms. But Hamas will not surrender entirely unless Israel withdraws.

What Lies Ahead and Necessary Steps

This initiative aims to move toward local administration, first involving local experts and then a "reformed" governing body. But administrative reform means vastly distinct things to the Americans, Europe, Arab nations, and the local population. Israel rejects the authority altogether and, with it, the concept of a Palestinian state.

The Israeli government has been brutally clear in restating its consistent objective – the elimination of Hamas – and has studiously avoided discussing an conflict resolution. It has not fully respected the truce: since it came into effect, dozens of non-combatants have been killed by Israeli forces, while additional individuals have been shot by Hamas.

Without the international community, and especially the Americans and Europeans, apply more leverage on Israel, the odds are that widespread conflict will restart, and Gaza – as well as the West Bank – will remain under occupation. In short, the remaining points of the plan will not be implemented.

Final Analysis

This is why European leaders are wrong to consider support for Trump's plan and pressure on Israel as distinct or contradictory. It is expedient but factually wrong to view the first as part of the peace process and the latter to one of ongoing conflict. This is not the time for the EU and its member states to feel let off the hook, or to abandon the initial cautious steps toward sanctions and requirements.

Pressure applied to Israel is the sole method to overcome political hurdles, and if this is achieved, Europe can ultimately make a small – but constructive, at least – contribution to stability in the region.