The Israel-Palestine conflict, a decades-long struggle rooted in competing national aspirations, territorial disputes, and humanitarian crises, has once again taken center stage in global diplomacy. The European Union (EU), a significant player in international relations, has historically maintained a delicate balance in its approach to the conflict, advocating for a two-state solution while fostering economic and political ties with both Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA). However, recent developments, particularly the EU-Southern Neighbourhood ministerial meeting scheduled for July 14, 2025, in Brussels, signal a potential shift in Europe’s policy. This high-level meeting, attended by Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar and Palestinian Foreign Minister Dr. Varsen Aghabekian Shahin, marks a rare diplomatic moment where both parties will share a room amid tense EU-Israel relations.
A Historic Meeting Amid Strained Relations
The EU-Southern Neighbourhood ministerial meeting, part of the 1995 Barcelona Declaration’s framework to promote dialogue and cooperation in the Mediterranean, brings together representatives from 27 EU member states and 11 Arab countries, including Israel, Palestine, Syria, and Libya. The inclusion of both Israel and Palestine in this forum on July 14, 2025, is significant, as it is the first high-level Brussels meeting since the October 7, 2023, Hamas attacks and Israel’s subsequent military operations in Gaza. Unlike the more public and less intimate United Nations gatherings, this setting offers a unique opportunity for direct, high-level engagement, albeit under the shadow of strained EU-Israel relations.
The timing of the meeting is critical. It occurs just one day before the EU’s 27 foreign ministers are set to discuss ten potential measures in response to Israel’s breach of Article 2 of the EU-Israel Association Agreement, which mandates respect for human rights and democratic principles. These measures, prompted by a June 2025 report from the European External Action Service (EEAS), range from suspending the entire agreement to halting political dialogue or barring Israel from EU programs like Horizon Europe. The proposals reflect growing European frustration with Israel’s actions, particularly its blockade of humanitarian aid to Gaza and alleged violence by Israeli settlers in the West Bank. Yet, the meeting also follows a recent EU-Israel agreement to improve humanitarian aid access to Gaza, suggesting a complex interplay of confrontation and cooperation.
The EU’s Balancing Act
While the EU has long supported a two-state solution, its approach has often been criticized for lacking teeth. The Brussels meeting and the subsequent discussions on July 15, 2025, suggest a potential pivot toward a more assertive stance, driven by both moral imperatives and geopolitical realities. This shift can be analyzed through three lenses: humanitarian concerns, economic leverage, and diplomatic signaling.
Humanitarian Imperatives Driving Policy
The humanitarian crisis in Gaza has been a focal point of EU criticism. Reports of Israel blocking food and aid, coupled with allegations of shootings at civilians seeking humanitarian assistance, have intensified calls for accountability. The EU’s review of the EU-Israel Association Agreement, prompted by nine member states including Belgium and Ireland, underscores a growing consensus that Israel’s actions violate international humanitarian law. The Palestinian Authority, represented by Dr. Varsen Aghabekian Shahin, plans to use the Brussels meeting to highlight the dire situation, including the PA’s financial crisis exacerbated by Israel withholding €2.1 billion in tax revenues. This move aligns with the EU’s increasing emphasis on protecting Palestinian rights, as evidenced by its support for the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) and criticism of Israel’s attempts to dismantle it.
However, the EU’s response is not monolithic. While some member states push for punitive measures, others, such as Germany and Austria, are more cautious, reflecting the challenge of achieving unanimity on contentious issues. The recent EU-Israel agreement on aid access to Gaza, announced on July 10, 2025, suggests that the EU is also seeking pragmatic solutions to alleviate suffering without fully alienating Israel, its largest trading partner in the region, with annual trade valued at over €45 billion.
Economic Leverage as a Policy Tool
The EU’s economic relationship with Israel provides significant leverage, and the potential suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement signals a willingness to use it. The agreement, in force since 2000, governs trade, political dialogue, and Israel’s participation in EU programs like Erasmus+ and Horizon Europe. Suspending it would have far-reaching implications, potentially disrupting Israel’s access to European markets and academic collaborations. Posts on X reflect public sentiment on this issue, with some users highlighting the EU’s “duty” to address Israeli human rights violations through trade measures or sanctions, while others criticize the EU for not acting decisively enough.
For Palestine, the EU remains the largest provider of external assistance, with €5 million annually allocated to civil society organizations promoting peacebuilding and €12 million for projects in East Jerusalem. The EU-Palestine Action Plan, extended until 2025, focuses on job creation, water, and energy access, underscoring Europe’s commitment to Palestinian state-building. The PA’s call for elections and a political solution, as articulated by a Palestinian official at the Brussels meeting, aligns with the EU’s long-term goal of a viable Palestinian state. However, the EU’s ability to influence Israel’s policies through economic pressure remains constrained by the need for consensus among its 27 member states.
Diplomatic Signaling and Regional Dynamics
The Brussels meeting serves as a diplomatic platform to signal the EU’s evolving priorities in the Middle East. The inclusion of Syria’s new foreign minister, Asaad Hassan al-Shaibani, reflects the EU’s broader engagement with a changing regional landscape, particularly following the fall of the Assad regime in December 2024. The EU’s Southern Neighbourhood partnership, rooted in the Barcelona Declaration, aims to foster stability and prosperity across the Mediterranean, but the Israel-Palestine conflict remains a persistent challenge.
The presence of both Gideon Saar and Dr. Varsen Aghabekian Shahin in the same room, while not guaranteeing direct talks, is a symbolic step toward dialogue. The EU’s High Representative, Kaja Kallas, has emphasized the need for a two-state solution, a position reiterated at the Arab-EU summit in May 2025. However, Israel’s rejection of this framework, as seen in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s January 2025 statements, complicates the EU’s efforts. The EU’s simultaneous engagement with Israel and Palestine, coupled with its review of the Association Agreement, suggests a dual strategy: maintaining dialogue while signaling potential consequences for non-compliance with international law.
The EU as a Mediator in Crisis
Unlike previous analyses that frame the EU as a passive actor in the Israel-Palestine conflict, this article posits that the EU is positioning itself as a proactive mediator, leveraging its economic and diplomatic clout to address the crisis. The Brussels meeting is not merely a routine gathering but a calculated move to bring both parties to the table at a time when global attention is focused on Gaza. The EU’s willingness to consider punitive measures, as outlined in the ten options for July 15, 2025, reflects a departure from its traditionally cautious approach. However, the requirement for unanimity among member states limits the EU’s ability to act swiftly, highlighting the tension between its ambitions and internal divisions.
The Palestinian Authority’s emphasis on elections and financial stability at the meeting underscores a broader push for self-determination, supported by the EU’s funding and diplomatic backing. Meanwhile, Israel’s participation, despite its breach of the Association Agreement, suggests a pragmatic recognition of the EU’s importance as a trade partner and mediator. The recent aid agreement, brokered by Kallas, indicates that the EU is exploring carrots alongside sticks, aiming to balance accountability with engagement.
Challenges and Opportunities Ahead
The EU faces several challenges in translating its policy shift into tangible outcomes. Internal divisions among member states, with some favoring sanctions and others prioritizing dialogue, could dilute the impact of any measures. The requirement for unanimity on major decisions, such as suspending the EU-Israel Association Agreement, remains a significant hurdle. Additionally, the EU must navigate its role in a region increasingly influenced by other powers, such as the United States and China, while addressing criticisms of double standards in its human rights policies.
Yet, the Brussels meeting presents opportunities for the EU to assert its relevance in Middle East diplomacy. By facilitating dialogue between Israel and Palestine, even indirectly, the EU can lay the groundwork for future negotiations. The focus on humanitarian aid and Palestinian state-building aligns with the EU’s broader commitment to peace and stability in the Mediterranean, as outlined in the 1995 Barcelona Declaration. Moreover, the EU’s economic leverage provides a unique tool to influence Israel’s policies, provided it can overcome internal divisions.
The EU-Southern Neighbourhood ministerial meeting on July 14, 2025, and the subsequent discussions on Israel’s breach of the Association Agreement mark a critical juncture in Europe’s approach to the Israel-Palestine crisis. While the EU has not fully abandoned its balanced stance, the willingness to consider punitive measures and the emphasis on Palestinian rights suggest a subtle but significant policy shift. By leveraging its economic power, diplomatic platforms, and commitment to humanitarian principles, the EU is carving out a role as a mediator in a conflict that has long defied resolution. The Brussels meeting, though unlikely to yield immediate breakthroughs, underscores the EU’s determination to address the crisis head-on, balancing accountability with dialogue in pursuit of a lasting peace.
