Chiara Polverini | 5 June 2024

Summary

• Ireland, Norway, and Spain have recognised Palestine, spoken in defence of a two-state solution, and called other countries to do the same.

• Throughout the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the European Union used its potential to halt illegal settlements and human rights abuses.

• As Israel’s conduct is coming under increasing scrutiny, more European countries will dust off the two-state solution and assert the relevance of International Law.

Amid tension mounting for the invasion of Rafah and the International Criminal Court arrest warrant of Hamas and Israeli responsible, the Prime Ministers of Ireland, Norway and Spain announced their official recognition of a Palestinian state. The three leaders urged recognising an independent Arab state alongside an Israeli one and noted this two-state solution as the only viable way for lasting peace in the Middle East. Most European countries echoed the stance of the International Court of Justice for the immediate ceasefire, but have not taken any step further actions. Spanish Minister of Foreign Affairs José Manuel Albares asserted that “this time we have to raise our voice not only for an immediate ceasefire but also to back International Law and the United Nations Charter.” 

On the same day, Israeli Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir responded with a controversial video taken in the compound of Al-Aqsa Mosque in East Jerusalem. He praised the endurance of Israeli soldiers and insisted that while some countries reward terror, Jerusalem belongs only to Israel. Minister of Foreign Affairs Israel Katz also, in a sign of protest, recalled the Israeli envoys present in the three European countries.

In this persistent hostile climate, how compromised are bilateral relations between Israel and the Old World? Israel’s trade and especially imports heavily depend on the EU, their principal trading partner since the establishment of a free-trade zone in 1975. Over the years, tourism, educational exchange programs, and investments in research made trade more liberal, facilitating and fostering closer institutional partnerships. Nevertheless, the warm relations have invariably been hampered by the settlements in Palestinian territories. The EU has a long-standing acknowledgement of the settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem as unlawful under International Law and has supported a peace agreement of two states with pre-1967 borders. An agreement adopted by the European Commission in 1998 established that a free-trade agreement with Israel applied to its borders before the Six-Day War in 1967. Ever since the EU refused products coming from the settlements in the contested territory. This measure, however, has been ineffective, as it did not prevent Israel from expanding settlements in the Palestinian territories.

More European countries are increasingly dropping the narrative of Israel’s unconditional right of self-defence in support of the two-state solution for peace in the Middle East. This does not include a real plan for the reconstruction of Gaza, elections for the new Palestinian leadership, and a permanent solution for illegal settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Still, this slow but steady European shift represents an important step forward in multiple ways. First and foremost, it brings back the authority of International Law, revealing that Israel’s policy in Palestine has been left unchecked for the past decades. In this scenario, Netanyahu’s project of annexation will come to an end. Finally, it has the potential to wrest away the United States' dominance over peace and security in the region, as well as the dominant idea that Palestinian statehood must pass through peace negotiations with Israel first.

Forecast

• Short-term

  • It is unlikely that the EU will take a clear and cohesive position in the conflict. On one hand, it will continue to condemn Israel’s conduct and the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza. On the other hand, it is likely to refuse to impose sanctions and other measures to confront Israel.

• Medium-term

  • If Netanyahu’s coalition continues to ignore the calls for an immediate ceasefire from transnational judicial bodies, the majority of European countries are likely to take the side of the ICC and the ICJ. In this scenario, the EU would move the attention to the urge for the establishment of a more moderate government in Israel.

• Long-term

  • More European states, such as Belgium and Slovakia, will change their position and officially recognise the right of Palestinian self-determination. However, it is very unlikely that the international community will support an independent Palestinian state.