Europe Falls Hostage to Circumstances and Procedures

European Union countries have failed to formulate a unified position on the recent flare-up in the Middle East. This challenge could become a serious problem for the EU in the near future, impacting economic situations and political stability. To be blunt, this is the second attempt to shake the Euro-Atlantic integrity, the first being Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

During the EU leaders' meeting in Brussels, a call was made for a summit that should propose a peace mechanism in the Middle East. However, key questions about where the summit will take place, who will participate, and its goals remain unanswered. And two weeks have passed since that loud statement.

Recall that on October 27, the leaders of 27 EU nations called for an "international peace conference" to address the longstanding Israeli-Palestinian conflict following the recent escalation around the Gaza Strip on October 7. These efforts were announced in addition to diplomatic initiatives and security initiatives. It was the latest attempt by the bloc to influence events in the Middle East after a series of open disagreements among top EU officials on how to deal with the crisis in the region.

The EU should redouble its security efforts regarding the Middle East as rocket escalation has begun there. Last week, the Israeli armed forces destroyed two medium-range rockets launched from Southern Yemen—one ballistic and one cruise. According to the published data, these are decent replicas of outdated but still lethal Soviet missiles.

Thus, Hamas receives a second wind, and an unexpected and outspoken attack against Israel occurred on October 7.

This attack not only caused significant casualties and widespread shock but also transformed the Middle East conflict into the most media-highlighted hotspot in the world. The Russian-Ukrainian war, which people have become accustomed to over 20 months of bloody battles, temporarily took a back seat. Ultimately, there is nothing surprising in this, as the conflict between Palestinians and Israelis, with active involvement from external forces, has been ongoing for over 75 years. The positions of leading global players regarding it are generally understood, and each new outbreak of violence merely forces the already established reaction algorithms into the spotlight.

However, it would be a profound mistake to consider these two wars as independent and separate from each other. While Russia directly and unequivocally invaded Ukraine, the ears of the Russian bear protrude from Iranian and other local proxies in the Middle East.

No Need to Hide from the Ongoing Problem

Among all external stakeholders, the European Union has the least structured approach to the historical Middle East conflict. After World War II, with the support of the USSR and the United States, Israel emerged in the Middle East. Both Washington and Moscow acted based on their motives, significantly weakening the influence of Great Britain and France in the region. The proclamation of the Jewish state in May 1948 on the former British mandate territory triggered the first Arab-Israeli war, with the democratic Palestinian state being the primary victim. After the Suez Crisis in 1956, the positions of Great Britain and France in the Middle East significantly weakened, while those of the USSR and the USA strengthened.

During the Cold War and after its conclusion, European countries did not unconditionally support Israel's policy in the Middle East, unlike Washington, and actively supported Palestinian refugees. Depending on the ideological orientation of governments, they called for the realization of Palestinian self-determination rights and protested against the construction of new Israeli settlements.

The reasons are clear and evident – a significantly higher component of human rights and freedoms in European politics compared to American policies, powerful Arab diasporas in many European countries, and an interest in stable energy prices influenced by sponsors of Arab radicalism in the Persian Gulf region.

Therefore, the October attack by Hamas on Israel did not elicit a unanimous response from the EU, similar to the one demonstrated by the United States towards its Middle Eastern strategic partner. Both EU officials and individual European top politicians made conflicting statements.

In particular, the EU Commissioner for Neighborhood and Enlargement, Oliver Varhelyi, initially intended to cancel EU financial aid to the Gaza Strip, but instead, it was tripled to 75 million euros.

President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen was accused of a pro-Israel position due to her support for Israel's right to self-defense. The EU's chief diplomat, Josep Borrell, condemned the violence on both sides of the conflict and proposed convening a peace conference in Spain as soon as possible.

As mentioned, the European Council at its meeting at the end of October also failed to reach a common opinion on responding to violence in the Middle East. Incidentally, this uncertainty plays into Russia's hands, whose representative at the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, denied Israel's right to self-defense against terrorist attacks.

Statements by leaders of leading European countries were also interesting. British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak (Britain is no longer an EU member but is still a political center in Europe) firmly supported Israel, aligning with American policy in the Middle East. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz not only had to experience an air raid siren during his visit to Israel but also had to recount the tragic fate of German citizen Shani Louk, brutally killed by Hamas terrorists. French President Emmanuel Macron proposed creating an international coalition to fight terrorists, without specifying its composition or functioning format.

Photo: Israeli Defense Forces destroyed two medium-range rockets launched from Southern Yemen—one ballistic and one cruise. Launch of an interceptor missile in southern Israel. Source: Israeli Air Force

When to Gather Strength?

It's worth noting that over the past three weeks, demonstrations in support of Palestinians have taken place in most European capitals. Kyiv, by the way, stood out as a pleasant exception. However, instead of demonstrating the strength of Arab solidarity, these events showcased an intolerance for differing viewpoints and sparked a heated debate about whether to tolerate intolerance towards European values. Interestingly, this publication with the headline "Germany, we have a problem!" in Germany's most influential newspaper could be a significant milestone in shaping a pan-European policy. The echoes of this BILD Manifesto might be heard in various, and not always expected, ways.

Yet, it's not only mass protests that define the cautious stance of European leaders. In the run-up to the European Parliament elections (scheduled for early June 2024), they are not interested in the escalation of violence in the Old World, well-acquainted with manifestations of Arab terrorism, nor in the rise of oil prices, which Gulf countries could secure.

Thus, the outbreak of violence in the Middle East poses another challenge for the European Union, more potent than the migration crisis of 2015-16 and less straightforward in its decisions compared to the Russian-Ukrainian war. The European establishment is currently attempting to balance between two fires, urging a shift to plant-based food for those already smelling the scent of fresh blood. If Brussels fails to develop an adequate strategy on this matter, it will face significant difficulties. All this against the backdrop of the ongoing direct threat to the European Union from Russia due to its invasion of Ukraine.