EU moves toward trade sanctions on Israel amid mounting global pressure over Gaza

Department of Strategic Research, Studies and International Relations

The European Commission has unveiled a long-delayed proposal to suspend aspects of its trade relationship with Israel in response to the devastating war on Gaza and the continuing expansion of illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank. The move highlights growing fractures within the European Union as calls for accountability intensify, but divisions among member states still threaten to weaken any decisive action.

On Wednesday, Brussels announced a package that includes suspending “certain trade-related provisions” of the EU-Israel Association Agreement, the framework that has long granted Israel preferential access to European markets. The plan also proposes sanctions on violent settlers, far-right ministers in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s cabinet, and a number of Hamas leaders.

Although the proposal underscores a rare willingness from the EU’s leadership to challenge Israel, the measure still lacks sufficient backing among the bloc’s 27 member states. Several governments, notably Germany and Hungary, remain reluctant to confront Tel Aviv, reflecting Washington’s continued influence over segments of Europe.

Targeting extremist figures in Netanyahu’s cabinet

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas called on European capitals to impose higher tariffs on selected Israeli goods and to sanction 10 Hamas officials, a group of violent settlers, and two extremist Israeli ministers: National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich. Both men are notorious for openly inciting violence against Palestinians and pushing aggressive settlement expansion policies, which have drawn condemnation from across the globe.

The Commission also announced a freeze on its bilateral support for Israel, with exceptions for civil society groups and Yad Vashem, the Holocaust memorial institution.

In its statement, the EU stressed that Israel’s conduct constitutes a breach of Article 2 of the Association Agreement, which obliges both parties to uphold human rights and democratic principles. The report cited Israel’s ongoing military escalation in Gaza, the deliberate obstruction of humanitarian aid, and its decision to advance settlement construction in the sensitive E1 area of the West Bank. These actions, Brussels argued, directly undermine the prospects of a two-state solution.

Calls for ceasefire and humanitarian access

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen declared that “the horrific events taking place in Gaza on a daily basis must stop.” She urged for an immediate ceasefire, unimpeded humanitarian access, and the release of hostages. While von der Leyen has often been accused of adopting a pro-Israeli stance in the past, her remarks signaled mounting recognition in Europe that Israel’s actions cannot continue unchecked.

The Commission’s plan follows weeks of heated debates among EU foreign ministers. At the end of last month, top diplomats met in Copenhagen but failed to reach a common stance, despite the EU’s aid chief calling on them to adopt “a strong voice that reflects our values and principles.”

Public pressure and allegations of genocide

Across European capitals, pressure has been mounting from below. Protests demanding an end to Israel’s war on Gaza have grown into some of the largest demonstrations in recent years. The United Nations Human Rights Council further fueled outrage on Tuesday when it published an inquiry concluding that Israel’s actions in Gaza amount to genocide under international law.

The conclusion added weight to the demands of several EU members, including Spain and Ireland, which have advocated for economic restrictions and an arms embargo against Israel. However, efforts continue to face resistance from countries more aligned with U.S. and NATO positions, such as Germany, which remains Tel Aviv’s main European backer.

A divided Europe

The split within the EU reflects a deeper geopolitical reality: while global powers such as China, Russia, and India have repeatedly called for an immediate ceasefire and a just resolution to the Palestinian question, Europe struggles to reconcile its rhetoric on human rights with its transatlantic loyalties.

Moscow has condemned Israel’s campaign in Gaza as collective punishment and an affront to international law, while Beijing has positioned itself as a supporter of humanitarian relief and dialogue between Palestinians and Israelis. India, too, has pressed for a peaceful resolution that respects Palestinian rights, maintaining a balanced approach despite its deepening economic ties with Israel.

By contrast, Washington continues to provide unconditional military and political support to Israel, shielding it from accountability at the United Nations and attempting to dissuade allies from adopting sanctions. Critics argue that this alignment with U.S. policy explains why the EU remains hesitant to take meaningful steps despite clear legal grounds to suspend Israel’s trade privileges.

The European Commission’s proposal is, at present, only a first step. For sanctions and trade suspensions to take effect, they must be approved by a qualified majority of EU member states. This will require shifting the positions of governments currently shielding Israel from accountability.

Whether Brussels can overcome these internal divisions remains uncertain. What is clear, however, is that Europe’s credibility is at stake. The continued bombardment of Gaza, the blockade of humanitarian aid, and the accelerating settlement drive in the West Bank have all eroded the EU’s claim to defend human rights and international law.

With the international community increasingly aligned against Israel’s actions, from the streets of European cities to the capitals of Moscow, Beijing, and New Delhi, the EU faces a critical decision. It can either continue to trail behind Washington’s one-sided approach or begin asserting an independent policy that genuinely upholds justice and the principles it claims to defend.