Does the EU have any ability to restrain Israel?

The war in Ukraine , for all its perils, has been a watershed moment for pan-European foreign policy. The EU, a supranational grouping of 27 countries, spanning Ireland in the West to Cyprus in the East, has rarely been so united, even though a couple of members remain sceptical of support for Ukraine. In its 32 years, the bloc has advanced its cause of “ever closer union” in governance, law, regulation and trade. Apart perhaps from the creation of a European defence force, a unified foreign policy is viewed by many eurocrats as the final frontier in manifesting a “geopolitical Europe” that could rival the likes of China or America on the world stage. Israel’s wars in the Middle East , which began after Hamas’s attack on October 7 last year, have tested the EU’s ability to get there. Josep Borrell, the bloc’s departing foreign affairs chief, appeared exasperated on Monday after most of its foreign ministers rejected his proposal to suspend political dialogue with Israel. Mr Borrell has called for such measures in response to numerous allegations of war crimes and human rights violations by Israel in Gaza and Lebanon . “I have no more words,” he said after the vote. EU member states are staunchly divided on the war. Some, like Germany and the Netherlands, have largely defended Israel’s actions. This is explained, in part, by historical factors: in Berlin, enduring guilt over the Holocaust has made criticism of Israel a red line in German politics. But the rise of right-wing politics and euroscepticism in some member states has played a role, too. Some European foreign ministers feel that EU institutions are overstepping by speaking on the continent’s behalf in a complex conflict outside the region. And some, such as Dutch Foreign Minister Caspar Veldkamp, argue it is more constructive to maintain dialogue with Israel. They are at odds with the EU itself, whose leadership has called repeatedly for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza. Other member states, like Spain and Ireland, have gone further by mooting unilateral arms embargos and trade boycotts. Some EU officials have quietly suggested Mr Borrell’s proposal was never expected to succeed but was rather intended to force European capitals to make their positions on Israel clearer. In France, for instance, President Emmanuel Macron’s government has been accused of oscillating between support for and criticism of Israel. While the EU is an international actor in its own right, its heavy reliance on unanimity means it can easily be hamstrung by a lack of clarity among its members. The stakes for Europe go beyond bloc unity. Israeli air strikes on northern Lebanese villages in the past fortnight occurred less than 200km from EU territory, and the displacement of more than a million people in Lebanon has raised fears in European frontier states of yet another refugee crisis. Europe’s reputation as a force for global diplomacy is on the line, too. Alongside the UN, the US and Russia, the EU is a member of the Quartet, a diplomatic group formed in Madrid in 2002 to mediate the Palestine-Israel peace process. The group’s last meeting was in 2021, after which its progress stalled. Since the war in Ukraine and October 7, its irrelevance has been cemented, although last month Russian President Vladimir Putin suggested it should be revived. Without a clear and coherent voice on Israel among European capitals, it is difficult to see how that could happen. In the meantime, Mr Borrell may be right: there is very little left to say.