The conflict in the Middle East raises one of the greatest diplomatic evidence for Europe. ANDThe old continent boasts of being the paladin of international law and human rights. However, the situation in Gaza shows internal tensions and the difficulty of maintaining a unique voice in foreign policy. That, added to narrow commercial, military and technological links with Israel and the fear of tensioning, even more, the transatlantic relationship, is leaving it in a secondary role in front of the United States or regional powers.
From Brussels, the speech is clear: two states, high immediate fire, hostage release and humanitarian access without restrictions in Gaza. The president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, has come to propose sanctions aimed at Israeli ministers of hard line and violent settlers. It is also studied to suspend parts of the association agreement with Israel. But, as always happens, the great obstacle is that decisions must be made by qualified majority. And there, national interests weigh more than shared principles. The EU marks the road, but the steps depend on each European capital.
The French Emmanuel Macron has positioned himself as the European voice that claims a more active role in the Middle East. In July he already advanced that he will recognize the Palestinian State in the Imminent General Assembly of the UN on September 23, a decision that seeks to relaunch the solution of two states. The Elyseo knows that this step will irritate Tel Aviv and generate friction with Washington, but defends that without a firm gesture Europe will remain condemned to diplomatic irrelevance.
For its part, in the United Kingdom – which is the other European country with a seat in the UN Security Council – the Premier Keir Starmer has adopted a firmer tone towards Israel than its predecessors. On September 8, after meeting in London with the Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, he reaffirmed that the United Kingdom will recognize the Palestinian State in the next UN General Assembly, unless Israel of concrete steps such as accepting a high fire, opening Gaza to humanitarian aid and renouncing the annexation of the West Bank. Both Starmer and Abbas agreed that “Hamas should not have any role in the future Palestinian government.”
In addition, eThe British Premier has condemned Israel specific bombings against civil areas and against food distribution centers, And he came to “unacceptable” an attack in Doha aimed at Hamas leaders, considering it a violation of the sovereignty of Qatar. In short, British policy reflects more prudence than conviction, in a country where social division and public opinion pressure are felt in Westminster.
For Berlin, the dilemma is more complex. The memory of the holocaust conditions every word that is pronounced on Israel. Germany has been the most loyal partner of Tel Aviv in Europe for decades. But the war in Gaza has forced Chancellor Friedrich Merz to move card. At the moment, he has suspended authorizations of military exports that can be used in the strip and demands respect for international law. However, he is still resisting to recognize Palestine unilaterally. Germany defends that this step must be the result of a direct negotiation and not of a symbolic decision. The tension between the historical duty and the present reality explains its ambiguity.
As for Rome, Under the leadership of Giorgia Meloni, he maintains a prudent line, close to the German. Italy reaffirms its support for the solution of two states, but rejects a precipitous recognition of Palestine that can bury any possibility of future negotiation. The Italian government defends that any decision must be adopted in the UN multilateral framework and the EU, avoiding unilateral gestures. Italian foreign policy moves between humanitarian solidarity, the pressure of its public opinion and the need not to dynamite its strategic relationships in the Eastern Mediterranean.
In short, the mosaic is evident. Europe wants to be a weight actor in the Middle East, but stumbles into its contradictions. And in a scenario where humanitarian tragedy is multiplied day by day, the lukewarmness of the old continent is paid with loss of influence.