History has a way of repeating its moral reckonings. Just as Apartheid South Africa became the global symbol of institutionalised oppression in the 20th century, Israel now occupies that same untenable position in our time – not through the slow erosion of credibility, but through the total collapse of its foundational narrative.
What began as a nation built on the promise of “never again” has become the architect of a humanitarian catastrophe so vast and outrageous that even its staunchest Western allies struggle to defend it.
The transformation has been spectacular. Where once Israel could claim the mantle of a besieged democracy, it now stands exposed as a practitioner of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and collective punishment on an industrial scale.
Its military campaign in Gaza has shredded the pretence of surgical self-defence, revealing instead the contours of a calculated project of displacement and domination. The world has watched as entire neighbourhoods are methodically erased, as food becomes a weapon of war, and as the language of annihilation enters mainstream Israeli political discourse.
This moral unravelling has produced a diplomatic isolation unlike anything in Israel’s history.
Europe has emerged at the forefront of mounting criticism against Israel, with the rhetoric intensifying to unprecedented levels since the war’s inception. Terms like genocide, using starvation as a weapon of war, and collective punishment now dominate political and media discourse with striking frequency.
On Tuesday, more than 800 eminent British legal figures, including retired Supreme Court justices, Court of Appeal judges, and leading King’s Counsels, implored UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer to impose immediate sanctions on Israel, warning that the UK’s inaction risks undermining the foundations of international law.
In a sharply worded letter, the signatories argued that Israel’s conduct in Gaza constitutes war crimes, crimes against humanity, and plausible genocide, citing inflammatory statements by Israeli officials such as Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich’s vow to “wipe out” Palestinians. They assert that the UK, as a signatory to international conventions, has a binding duty to prevent such atrocities.
While welcoming Foreign Secretary David Lammy’s suspension of free-trade talks with Israel, they demanded swifter, stronger measures such as sanctions on Israeli ministers and military leaders complicit in violations, a review of existing trade agreements, and even the suspension of Israel from the United Nations for its systematic obstruction of UN agencies like the Palestinian refugee agency UNRWA.
In France, 300 writers issued an urgent appeal for linguistic and moral precision regarding Gaza. No longer, they argue, can we obscure reality behind euphemisms like “horror” or “atrocities.” What is unfolding daily before the world’s eyes must bear its proper name of genocide.
These literary voices framed their declaration as both a moral obligation and a professional duty. Silence, they contended, constitutes complicity. “To look away as a people are systematically destroyed is to become an accomplice to crime.”
Published in the French daily Libération, their letter carries particular weight coming from practitioners of language. “We recognise that to kill a writer is to commit an act of cultural annihilation. When a poet is killed, the archive, the testimony, and the memory are killed.”
They emphasised that “Gaza’s writers serve as vital witnesses, reminding the world that Palestinians are not abstract casualties, but living people with stories. Words themselves are now under assault and are erased as ruthlessly as lives.”
In recent days, the European Union has taken significant steps to pressure Israel over its military campaign in Gaza. Most notably, the EU announced it would review its Association Agreement with Israel, a foundational trade and cooperation pact, citing potential violations of human rights clauses.
Several member states, including Spain and Ireland, have pushed for stronger measures, including suspension of the agreement if Israel fails to comply with international humanitarian law. Additionally, EU foreign ministers have discussed imposing targeted sanctions on extremist Israeli settlers involved in violence against Palestinians in the West Bank, though broader sanctions remain under debate.
The EU has also threatened to reassess its broader relationship with Israel, including potential restrictions on arms exports and cooperation programmes, though the bloc remains divided on immediate punitive measures.
Nevertheless, as Israel’s military campaign in Gaza escalates, expanding its devastation while systematically strangling humanitarian relief, the EU response crawls forward at a glacial pace. Such paralytic diplomacy has not gone unnoticed: over 2,000 EU staff members have now broken ranks, their collective rebuke laying bare the bloc’s feeble leadership in the face of an unfolding catastrophe.
Under the banner of EU Staff for Peace, the European staff in a joint letter criticised European leaders for their “little or no meaningful action” in addressing the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
In the letter, sent to the Presidents of the European Commission, Council, and Parliament, the group accused the EU of failing to leverage its political, diplomatic, and economic influence to alleviate the suffering in Gaza. They argued that this inaction has contributed to a climate of impunity, enabling Israel’s military offensive.
Despite EU leaders condemning Israel’s offences in Gaza, European diplomats argue that concrete actions such as trade sanctions or arms embargoes remain absent.
The bloc accounts for approximately one-third of Israel’s total global trade, and calls to impose embargoes and sanctions are increasing. However, the EU-Israel Association Agreement can only be fully suspended with unanimous approval, but key provisions like trade benefits and research funding could be frozen by weighted majority vote.
The commission has previously denied accusations of inaction but has yet to outline a clear timeline for reviewing the trade deal. The officials’ letter underscores growing internal dissent over the EU’s hesitant and delayed response to the crisis.
Some European leaders seem to believe that issuing statements of condemnation, however carefully worded, will be enough to shield them from criticism. But history is rarely swayed by rhetoric alone.
The stakes transcend EU political calculations: this is not merely about the collapse of the two-state solution, the fragile pillars of European diplomacy, or solely about the erosion of international law, the tarnishing of Europe’s global standing, or the metastasising security threats emanating from the Middle East.
The graver peril lies closer to home in the unravelling of Europe’s own social cohesion, as the crisis becomes a fault line dividing communities and testing the limits of democratic values.
Beneath the rubble of Gaza, Europe finds itself caught in the grip of two converging threats: the rise of religious extremism cloaked in ideological fervour and the resurgence of far-right nationalism. Though ideologically opposed, these forces feed off one another in a dangerous symbiosis. The war in Gaza has become their battleground, not out of genuine concern for its victims, but as a means to stoke division, recruit followers, and expand their influence.
On the one side, far-right movements exploit the conflict to amplify anti-Muslim rhetoric, framing entire communities as the “internal enemy” and demanding crackdowns on pro-Palestinian activism. Cities like London, Paris, and Berlin have seen aggressive attempts to suppress solidarity protests under the guise of combating “Islamic extremism.” Britain now ranks far-right extremism among the nation’s most severe terrorist threats, with groups seizing on Gaza’s devastation to propagate narratives of racial superiority.
On the other side, religious extremists weaponise images of Gaza’s carnage to fuel anti-Western sentiment, portraying the conflict as proof of collective Western guilt. The European police organisation Europol’s 2024 terrorism report warns of a surge in extremist recruitment, with propaganda leveraging Gaza’s civilian toll to radicalise vulnerable audiences.
British counterterrorism officials have noted a 13 per cent spike in counterterrorism Prevent programme referrals following the war’s outbreak, particularly among youth, a demographic increasingly targeted through digital radicalisation.
Caught between two rising tides, one cloaked in religious extremism, the other in militant nationalism, European governments walk a perilous tightrope. Each side exploits the war to inflame hatred, recruit followers, and sow division. European governments have scrambled to respond. The bloc has bolstered intelligence-sharing and online counter-extremism measures in recent months.
The tragedy of Gaza has thus become a mirror exposing Europe’s own fractures. The deeper dilemma remains – as long as Gaza burns, extremists on both sides will continue to exploit its flames.
Despite the tepid and fragmented international response to Israel’s relentless brutality, its government continues to rebuke even its closest European allies whenever they dare to voice muted criticism of the atrocities in Gaza.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu lashed out at France, Britain, and Canada after their joint statement urging Israel to cease using starvation as a weapon of war, lift the blockade, and allow the passage of humanitarian aid that has languished and rotted at sealed crossings.
Dismissing their concerns, he accused the three nations of aligning with Hamas and adopting its narrative.
Yet, as Israel mounts a diplomatic offensive against Europe and Canada, the American stance remains strikingly feeble. Washington has directed its efforts almost exclusively towards securing the release of the Hamas-held hostages, with negligible attention paid to opening crossings, ending the blockade, or delivering life-saving aid to stave off famine, much less pursuing an end to the war itself.
Even shifts in American rhetoric amount to little more than performative adjustments, as the Trump administration, like its predecessor, continues to endorse the war’s ultimate objectives, albeit while avoiding overt complicity in genocide.
With no expectation of meaningful American support to rein in Israel, Europe finds itself at a crossroads: it must now muster the resolve to act independently, however daunting the task, and exert pressure on Israel alone.
The tragedy is that Israel’s leaders appear not to recognise, or perhaps not to care, that they are writing their country into history as a cautionary tale. Where South Africa eventually chose reconciliation over ruin, Israel is accelerating towards international pariah status, its destruction of Gaza ensuring that its isolation will long outlive this war.
* A version of this article appears in print in the 29 May, 2025 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly
Short link: