Injured children arrive at Nasser Hospital. in Gaza. Photo: Loay Ayyoub/Getty Images
Nearly 19 months into Israel’s war on Gaza, the edifice of European moral clarity is beginning to show hairline cracks. What was once whispered in think-tank corridors is now being aired —- cautiously — in parliamentary chambers and diplomatic communiqués. The recent pronouncements by the European Union, United Kingdom, France and Canada mark an inflection point: not quite a reckoning, but certainly an uncomfortable pause.
The European Union, Israel’s largest trading partner, made waves last week by signalling its intent to review the EU-Israel Association Agreement. Specifically, Article 2 — that lofty clause which predicates the agreement on “respect for human rights and democratic principles” — has been pulled out of the drawer and dusted off.
The sudden interest in legal texts long filed under “irrelevant” is telling. Europe’s political class may not have grown a spine, but it is beginning to sense that complicity comes with a cost.
In synchrony, a trilateral statement from the UK, France and Canada condemned the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza as “intolerable”, warning that Israel risked breaching international humanitarian law. The language — typically calibrated to offend no one — was startlingly unambiguous: “We will not stand by while the Netanyahu government pursues these egregious actions.” The promised “concrete actions” remain undefined, but the threat was unmistakable.
Benjamin Netanyahu responded with familiar belligerence. To question Israeli conduct, he thundered, was to side with “rapists, baby killers and kidnappers”. To ask for restraint was, in his view, to advocate for Hamas. The rhetorical fusillade was designed to silence dissent — and perhaps to distract from an inconvenient arithmetic: since October 2023, Israeli assaults have killed more than 54,000 Palestinians in Gaza, most of them women and children.
The vast majority of hostages taken during Hamas’s 7 October — itself a horrific breach of international norms — have either been released or have died.
Europe’s dalliance with moral high ground found an unusual champion this week in Madrid. At a summit attended by European and Arab states, Spanish Foreign Minister José Manuel Albares called for an arms embargo against Israel and sanctions on those intent on “ruining the two-state solution forever”.
Gaza, he declared, had become humanity’s “open wound”, and silence amounted to complicity.
That silence is now being broken not only by politicians but also by civil society. In Britain, more than 800 lawyers, judges, and legal scholars issued a letter condemning what they described as the “worsening catastrophe” in the occupied territories. They urged their government to fulfill its legal obligation to “prevent and punish genocide” and ensure adherence to humanitarian law.
Among the signatories was Professor Guy Goodwin-Gill of Oxford, who minced no words. Israel’s actions, he said, were “blatantly in disregard of international law” and could no longer be brushed aside. His suggestion — to impose visa restrictions on all Israeli citizens, given the country’s system of universal conscription — will doubtless be dismissed in polite circles as too radical. Yet it reflects a growing discomfort with business-as-usual diplomacy.
The Israeli government’s standard defence — conflating any criticism of its actions with antisemitism — is beginning to wear thin. Even Jewish voices of conscience are now accusing their state of genocidal intent. On Wednesday, a group of 380 artists, musicians and intellectuals issued a searing indictment: “We refuse to be a public of bystander-approvers,” they wrote, calling for an immediate ceasefire.
The weight of their words was echoed by more than 30 United Nations special rapporteurs and human rights experts, who described Israel’s actions as “merciless manifestations of the desecration of human life”.
While diplomats in New York quibble over the definition of genocide, Israeli bombs continue to fall. On 18 March alone, 600 Palestinians were reportedly killed — 400 of them children. Euphemisms are no longer an option.
What of the British response? Thus far, it has been cautiously symbolic. Sanctions have been imposed on a handful of West Bank settler leaders and a few fringe organisations. Asset freezes and travel bans make for strong headlines but accomplish little when those targeted have no discernible presence in the UK.
Michael O’Kane, a sanctions expert, was blunt: “It is very unlikely that any of those sanctioned actually have assets in the UK.” Still, he insists, these actions serve as a signal — a diplomatic red card, even if not backed by enforcement.
More consequential measures may yet follow. There is growing pressure for targeted sanctions on key members of Netanyahu’s cabinet — notably National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, both of whom have made incendiary, openly genocidal statements.
The UK has also suspended several arms export licenses, though hundreds remain in place. A court case brought by the Palestinian group Al-Haq could force a more thorough review, especially concerning components for F-35 fighter jets used in Gaza.
In court, the government’s legal defence rests on the argument that “no evidence has been seen that Israel is deliberately targeting civilian women or children”. Yet, as Al-Haq’s counsel Raza Husain KC pointed out, the scale and tone of Israel’s onslaught — reinforced by dehumanising rhetoric from senior Israeli officials — tells another story. “Acts of annihilation”, he argued, have been accompanied by “celebratory statements” at the highest levels of government.
Whether any of this leads to a concrete shift in European policy is unknown. But there is momentum behind the push for an international conference, co-sponsored by France and Saudi Arabia, to be held at the UN in June. Its stated goal: to revive the prospect of a Palestinian state and implement “irreversible steps” toward that end.
For decades, Europe has played the part of the conflicted observer — offering rhetorical support for Palestinian rights while arming and trading with the very government that negates them. Now, with Gaza in ruins and Israel increasingly isolated on the world stage, that charade may finally be coming undone.
The road ahead is treacherous, and cynicism remains warranted. But for the first time in a long time, the possibility of a principled European response to Israeli impunity — however belated, however incomplete — is on the table. The question is not whether Europe will act. It is whether it can afford not to.
Dr Imran Khalid is a freelance columnist on international affairs based in Karachi, Pakistan.