Since the massive outbreak of violence between Israel and Hamas on October 7, 2023, the European Union has been struggling to find a common position on handling the Gaza conflict. While some member states grant Israel the unrestricted right to self-defense, others demand an end to military violence and greater respect for international humanitarian law. The conflict once again reveals the foreign policy limitations of the EU – and puts its claim to a values-based foreign policy to the test.
Discord in Brussels
Although the condemnation of the Hamas attack on October 7, which killed over 1,200 Israelis and resulted in numerous hostages being taken, was a rare moment of unity in the EU, opinions diverge widely regarding Israel’s military response in the Gaza Strip, which according to the Gaza Health Ministry has so far claimed tens of thousands of civilian casualties. Countries like Germany, Austria, and the Czech Republic emphasize Israel’s security interests. Others, including Spain, Ireland, and Belgium, criticize the military approach as disproportionate and demand an immediate ceasefire.
These tensions were also reflected in several EU summits, where member states sometimes had to settle on the lowest common denominator – such as the simultaneous demand for “humanitarian pauses” and recognition of Israel’s “right to self-defense.” EU foreign policy thus remains a mirror of national interests rather than a clearly defined European course.
Humanitarian Aid – but with Reservations
Despite political disagreement, the EU ranks among the largest humanitarian donors in the Gaza Strip. The European Commission announced humanitarian aid worth over 125 million euros in 2024 alone – for medical care, food, and emergency shelters. At the same time, Brussels temporarily suspended payments to the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA) after Israel accused the relief agency of having some employees involved in the Hamas attacks. Only after an internal investigation and international pressure did the EU resume part of the payments.
This episode illustrates the EU’s dilemma: on one hand, it wants to provide humanitarian aid, on the other hand, it faces domestic political pressure to avoid possible connections to Islamist organizations – not least in view of the growing influence of right-wing populist parties in Europe.
Mediating Role with Limited Influence
In the past, the EU played an important role in the Middle East peace process – for example, as part of the Middle East Quartet alongside the USA, Russia, and the United Nations. Today, it is increasingly being pushed to the sidelines. The crucial diplomatic threads run through Washington, Cairo, and Doha. Brussels is usually left only with the role of financier and admonisher.
Although EU High Representative Josep Borrell traveled to the region several times and called for, among other things, a two-state solution and compliance with international law, his statements – such as the warning of a “Gaza cemetery for international credibility” – met with opposition within the EU itself.
Between Aspiration and Reality
The Gaza war makes clear how much the European aspiration of “values-based foreign policy” can fail against geopolitical realities. As long as the EU does not speak with one voice on Middle East policy, it remains an actor of limited relevance for the conflict parties. The political disagreement within the Union – but also its dependence on Israeli cooperation, for example in aid deliveries – massively restricts its room for maneuver.
At the same time, pressure is growing to find a coherent position. Given growing protests in European cities, an escalating humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza, and the risk of regional escalation, the EU can hardly afford to permanently appear as a powerless spectator in one of its immediate neighborhoods.
