By Jorge Liboreiro

For almost two years, the European Union has been urging Israel to cease its aggressive offensive in the Gaza Strip and provide immediate relief to the Palestinian population. The calls, voiced through various means and forms, share one key characteristic: they have all failed. In fact, the opposite has happened: the war has entered a new expansionary phase, the death toll has risen, the human suffering has deepened and the two-state solution has never looked more impossible. Just this week, an independent committee of the United Nations concluded that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza.

“Explicit statements by Israeli civilian and military authorities and the pattern of conduct of the Israeli security forces indicate that the genocidal acts were committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, Palestinians in the Gaza Strip as a group,” the committee said.

In Brussels, the shocking images of starving Palestinians being shot to death by Israeli soldiers while waiting for humanitarian assistance forced a reckoning on the bloc’s persistent – and for critics, embarrassing – inability to take decisive action. The blame has often been put on Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, who is still haunted by the bad publicity generated by her trip to Israel in the early days of the war. 

Von der Leyen, whose stance towards the government of Benjamin Netanyahu has increasingly hardened, seems to be tired of being the scapegoat. Last week, she used her State of the EU speech to announce a partial suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement, an immediate freeze of bilateral aid and sanctions on extremist ministers of the Israeli government.

“I am aware it will be difficult to find majorities,” von der Leyne said. “And I know that any action will be too much for some. Too little for others.”

The proposals, formally unveiled on Wednesday, effectively shift the responsibility away from Brussels and towards member states, which, after endless debates and deliberations, continue to be sharply divided on their joint response to Israel.

By putting the Association Agreement front and centre of the table, von der Leyen aims to expose this internal split and compel the 27 countries to take a stand. 

Mathematics is at play: the partial suspension, which covers trade-related matters, requires a qualified majority to be approved. In other words, 15 out of 27 countries representing at least 65% of the bloc’s total population. It doesn’t take a calculator to figure out that one big-sized country, which happens to be von der Leyen’s home country, holds the key in the equation: Germany.

Diplomats in Brussels have concluded that any step towards Israel can’t and won’t take place without Germany’s backing. Because of its past, the country has a unique relationship with the Jewish state and is reluctant to take action that risks triggering a domestic backlash. Chancellor Friedrich Merz earned plaudits abroad when he halted military exports to Israel, but was faced with a barrage of criticism from his own political family, the CDU/CSU.

“We regard this as highly problematic,” said Alexander Hoffmann, a CSU lawmaker.

Merz is still reeling from the fallout of his decision, and his government hasn’t yet taken a stance on the new batch of proposals. In fact, Germany hasn’t yet made up its mind on a previous proposal to suspend Israel’s participation in the Horizon programme, which is far more limited.

The silence in Berlin has played out in parallel to the silence in Rome. Both capitals appear to be on the same page: strong condemnation of Israel’s military offensive and caution against any restrictive measures. While Italy’s voice is less influential in foreign policy, the country’s demographic size makes it a major actor in any vote that requires a qualified majority.

Diplomats suspect that Italy is waiting for Berlin to make the first move and create the momentum. If Berlin votes in favour, Italy should follow suit, the thinking goes. 

The thinking, though, is just that: an untested theory. So far, the arithmetic in Brussels remains unmoved. The only thing changing is the level of frustration.

“My question to all counterparts, because it’s not only Germany, was that if you agree on the diagnosis that the situation is extremely grave, that the situation is disastrous and untenable, then the question is: what do we do about this?” High Representative Kaja Kallas told us in an interview.

“If you don’t support these measures, then what measures can you support? Bring alternatives.”