🔗 Share this article

The initial phase of Donald Trump's Middle East plan has provoked a widespread sense of relief among European leaders. Following 24 months of bloodshed, the ceasefire, captive releases, partial IDF pullback, and humanitarian access provide optimism – yet regrettably, furnish a pretext for European nations to continue inaction.

Europe's Troubling Position on the Gaza Conflict

When it comes to the Gaza conflict, unlike Russia's invasion in Ukraine, European governments have displayed their worst colours. Deep divisions exist, causing political gridlock. More alarming than inaction is the accusation of collusion in Israel's war crimes. European institutions have refused to apply leverage on the perpetrators while continuing commercial, political, and defense partnership.

Israel's violations have triggered mass outrage among European citizens, yet European leaders have become disconnected with their own people, especially younger generations. In 2020, the EU championed the climate agenda, responding to youth demands. These very youth are now shocked by their government's passivity over Gaza.

Delayed Acknowledgement and Weak Actions

It took two years of a conflict that many consider a genocide for several European nations including France, Britain, Portugal, Belgium, Luxembourg and Malta to recognise the State of Palestine, after Spain, Ireland, Norway and Slovenia's lead from the previous year.

Just last month did the EU executive propose the initial cautious sanctions toward Israel, including sanctioning radical officials and aggressive colonists, plus suspending EU trade preferences. Nevertheless, neither step have been implemented. The first requires complete consensus among 27 EU governments – improbable 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 Approaches and Damaged Trust

In June, the EU found that Israel had breached its human rights obligations under the EU-Israel association agreement. But recently, the EU's foreign policy chief halted efforts to revoke the preferential trade terms. The contrast with the EU's 19 packages of Russian sanctions could not be more pronounced. On Ukraine, Europe has taken a principled stand for freedom and international law; on Gaza, it has damaged its credibility in the international community.

Trump's Plan as an Escape Route

Now, the American proposal has provided Europe with an way out. It has allowed EU nations to support US requirements, like their approach on Ukraine, defense, and commerce. It has permitted them to promote a fresh beginning of peace in the Middle East, shifting attention from sanctions toward backing for the US plan.

The EU has withdrawn into its familiar position of playing second fiddle to the US. While Middle Eastern nations are anticipated to shoulder the burden for an peacekeeping mission in Gaza, EU members are lining up to participate with humanitarian assistance, reconstruction, administrative help, and frontier supervision. Talk of leveraging Israel has virtually disappeared.

Implementation Challenges and Geopolitical Constraints

All this is understandable. Trump's plan is the sole existing framework and undoubtedly the single approach with any chance, however small, of success. This is not because to the inherent merit of the proposal, which is problematic at best. It is instead because the US is the only player with sufficient influence 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 easier said than done. Numerous obstacles and paradoxical situations exist. Israel is unlikely to completely withdraw from Gaza unless Hamas lays down weapons. But Hamas will not surrender entirely unless Israel withdraws.

What Lies Ahead and Required Action

This initiative aims to transition toward Palestinian self-government, initially featuring local experts and then a "reformed" governing body. But reformed authority means vastly distinct things to the US, Europe, Arab countries, and the Palestinians themselves. Israel rejects the authority altogether and, with it, the concept of a independent Palestine.

The Israeli government has been explicitly clear in repeating its unchanged aim – the destruction of Hamas – and has carefully evaded discussing an conflict resolution. It has not fully respected the truce: since it came into effect, dozens of Palestinian civilians have been fatally wounded by IDF operations, while others have been shot by militant groups.

Without the international community, and particularly the Americans and Europeans, exert greater pressure on Israel, the odds are that widespread conflict will restart, and Gaza – as well as the West Bank – will continue being occupied. In summary, the remaining points of the initiative will not see the light of day.

Conclusion

Therefore European leaders are mistaken to view support for Trump's plan and leveraging Israel as distinct or opposing. It is politically convenient but practically incorrect to see the first as part of the peace process and the second to one of continuing war. This is not the time for the EU and its constituent countries to avoid responsibility, or to abandon the first timid moves toward sanctions and requirements.

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