EU foreign ministers will discuss proposals on Monday to partially or fully ban trade with Israeli settlements, but the path to implementing any restrictions is fraught with difficulty, with some capitals accusing the European Commission of employing “delay tactics”.
As first reported by Euronews, the Commission last week pitched a paper outlining three options to further restrict EU trade with the settlements, after a majority of EU capitals called for concrete measures in response to escalating violence against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank.
Israeli settlements are considered illegal under international law and by the EU. While the bloc does not currently ban imports of products made in settlements, such goods are subject to higher tariffs because they fall outside the scope of the EU’s 2000 trade deal with Israel, known as the Association Agreement.
But crucially, the Commission’s paper suggests any measures should be treated as a foreign policy tool and therefore require the unanimous blessing of all EU member states — an unlikely prospect given that several European governments are staunch allies of Israel.
Germany, a crucial country in the debate, is also understood to favour the unanimity option.
The Council’s own legal service, which advises member states, had previously told capitals in an oral opinion that the measures could be approved as a trade tool, requiring the backing of just 15 EU countries representing 65% of the EU population, under the voting system known as “qualified majority”.
As many as 20 member states had called for the Commission to flesh out the trade restrictions available, with France and Sweden driving the initiative.
A qualified majority threshold could be within reach should key swing member states such as Italy back the proposal.
On Monday, a group of foreign ministers is expected to vehemently oppose the Commission’s suggestion that the move be treated as a foreign policy tool, amid concerns that the executive led by Ursula von der Leyen is holding up the measures.
“Some might try to muddy the waters, but what we’re talking about here is protecting the integrity of EU policy,” a senior diplomat said, lamenting the Commission’s preference for unanimity.
“Even if it’s just two euros, it’s important that our trade policy is aligned with international law.”
Another diplomat said the Commission’s arguments were “not convincing”, given that last year the executive proposed partially suspending the EU-Israel Association Agreement, through qualified majority voting, which never materialised.
This same logic of using a qualified majority was applied when the bloc approved a far-reaching plan to phase out Russian fossil fuels through trade rather than foreign policy.
“In all other files, the Commission always tries to extend her competence and here suddenly it discovers unanimity?” the diplomat said. “One could laugh if it weren’t so serious.”
A third diplomat also described the Commission’s position as a “strategy” to delay any action.
The diplomat also suggested that the EU executive had delayed the presentation of the options paper until last week, meaning no decision could be taken until the next formal meeting of EU foreign ministers in October. There are concerns the Israeli elections, due in late October, could scupper any decision.
The paper proposes restricting trade by introducing more punitive tariffs and requiring settlement exporters to acquire special licenses, as well as introducing a full or partial ban on the import of goods manufactured in settlements.
Any option other than a full ban is considered vulnerable to circumvention. Recent investigations have found that settlement exporters continue selling their goods to European markets free of tariffs despite existing restrictions, using methods such as mislabelling and mixing of settlement goods with products made inside Israel.
The proposal is considered more likely to attract broader EU support than calls to suspend the EU-Israel Association Agreement, given that only trade stemming from settlements which the EU considers illegal would be affected.
Proponents of the trade ban cite the 2024 International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion on the illegality of the Israeli settlements, obliging states to abstain from economic dealings that could entrench the unlawful situation.
Speaking to Euronews in May, France’s foreign trade minister, Nicolas Forissier, described calls to clamp down on settlement trade as “normal, not aggressive”.
EU sanctions against extremist Israeli settlers responsible for violence against Palestinians were recently approved following Péter Magyar’s electoral win in Hungary, after months of deadlock due to the opposition of the former Prime Minister Viktor Orbán.