After a two-hour video conference on the escalating Middle East conflict, the verdict from the EU’s new foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas was sobering: the main outcome was coordination on evacuating EU citizens. When asked whether the EU had discussed anything that might influence Israel’s or Iran’s war plans, Kallas remained vague. She did point to a possible EU role in nuclear negotiations—but those talks are currently dormant, and even when they take place, the EU is not at the table. Once again, Europe finds itself sidelined, lacking more than a fragile common position.
Kallas had already issued a statement on behalf of the EU member states at the start of the conflict—remarkably swift by past standards in Middle East diplomacy. Yet beneath the surface of unity, discord was brewing. Germany failed in its push to include an explicit reference to Israel’s right to self-defense—a move that would have offered legal cover for Israel’s strike on Iranian nuclear sites. Instead, the declaration merely affirmed the EU’s “strong commitment to regional security, including the security of the State of Israel.” Critics, led by Spain, warned of “double standards”: if Israel’s preemptive strike was tolerated despite the questionable immediacy of the threat, how could the EU credibly condemn Russia’s war on Ukraine?
The EU’s longstanding internal divide over Israel had resurfaced. That a critical stance toward Israel is gaining ground became clear in the language of the statement: all parties were urged to respect international law and refrain from actions that could lead to “serious consequences such as the potential release of radioactive material.” Israel’s actions were implicitly admonished, with the message that lasting security can only be achieved through diplomacy—not military force. Kallas echoed this again on Tuesday: “Iran must not get a nuclear bomb, and diplomacy is the way to prevent that.”
The split was also visible in statements ahead of the G7 summit in Canada. Commission President Ursula von der Leyen voiced firm support for Israel, declaring its “right to self-defense” and calling Iran “the main source of instability in the region.” Her line made it into the final G7 communiqué—reportedly a condition for U.S. approval. European Council President António Costa, by contrast, made no such remarks during his joint appearance with von der Leyen, emphasizing instead: “Now is the time for diplomacy.” Costa, seen as more critical of Israel, highlighted the growing divide within the EU. Von der Leyen, meanwhile, described diplomacy only as a “long-term” solution to concerns about Iran’s nuclear program—leaving room for continued military action in the short term.
The next flashpoint is already on the agenda: EU foreign ministers are set to debate whether Israel is in breach of its commitments under the EU-Israel Association Agreement. Kallas launched a review in May, following pressure from 19 member states—despite opposition from countries including Germany, Italy, and Hungary. The question: Is Israel violating international law in its war on Gaza?
The allegations are serious: blocking humanitarian aid, destroying civilian infrastructure, targeting UN agencies, starving the population, and contemplating the mass displacement of Palestinians. Even von der Leyen sharpened her tone in late May, calling Israel’s conduct “abhorrent” and stating clearly that the “disproportionate use of force against civilians is unjustifiable under humanitarian and international law.”
What consequences might follow remains uncertain. The agreement allows for consultations and, in urgent cases, unilateral measures. In theory, that could mean suspending political dialogue or even the agreement itself—but such steps require unanimity, which is unlikely given the stance of pro-Israel governments. Specific areas of cooperation—like trade or research—could be suspended by qualified majority vote, but even that is controversial. Some diplomats have warned that a public clash over the issue could again fracture the EU. Still, Kallas made clear on Tuesday that she intends to keep it on the table.
