��������

As British Prime Minister Keir Starmer prepares to make a big decision next month on whether the UK will officially recognize the state of Palestine, the reality is that Europe’s voice in the Arab-Israeli conflict has rarely been weaker.

Starmer is working with allies, in Europe and beyond, on a long-term strategy to establish peace “as part of a two-state solution.” However, as much as that might be still the right vision to pursue, it has declining traction outside Europe and the prime minister has admitted that “without both sides engaging in good faith in negotiations, that prospect is vanishing before our eyes.”

The diminished clout of Europe in the Middle East, not only in the Arab-Israeli conflict but beyond it, too, is a significant change from only a generation ago. The Venice Declaration of 1980, for instance, provided momentum toward international recognition of the Palestinian right to statehood. The region was also a significant player in the 1990s Oslo accords.

One of the reasons for Europe’s declining influence in the Middle East has been internal divisions. A small number of regional leaders hold pro-Israel views, such as Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, a staunch ally of his Israeli counterpart, Benjamin Netanyahu. Others nations, such as Spain and Ireland, have adopted much more pro-Palestinian stances.

These splits have resurfaced regularly since the Hamas-led terrorist attacks against Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, and Israel’s subsequent military offensives in Gaza.

Another key reason for Europe’s declining influence in the Middle East is the deepening of disagreements with the US. The transatlantic discord on the subject, and on a range of wider issues including the rise of China on the global stage, highlight the ways in which Europe is diverging politically from Washington. While these Western fissures did not begin with President Donald Trump’s presidential terms, they have been exacerbated by them.

The starkness of the present transatlantic divide on some issues related to the Middle East was evident this week when the US ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, blamed Europe for stalled Gaza peace talks. He said the “noise that has been made by European leaders recently … is having the counterproductive effect that they probably think that they want. If they believe that unilaterally calling for a two-state, a Palestinian state recognition, immediately brings them closer, the sad truth is it’s taking them further away.”

What Huckabee highlights here is Europe’s growing concern with the actions of Israel, including its recently announced proposed takeover of Gaza City. The results of this concern include the recent decision by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz not to authorize any further exports of military equipment that could be used in Gaza “until further notice.”

The diminished clout of Europe in the Middle East is a significant change from only a generation ago.

Andrew Hammond

This represents a break from the so-called Staatsrason, meaning “reason of state,” a traditional cornerstone of postwar German international policy that views Tel Aviv’s security as being tightly linked to Berlin.

Other regional politicians, including Antonio Costa, the president of the European Council, have similarly reacted strongly to Netanyahu’s latest plan for Gaza. Costa slammed the takeover plan, arguing that it, alongside “the illegal expansion of settlements in the West Bank, the massive destruction in Gaza, the blockade of humanitarian aid, and the spread of famine,” runs contrary to the requirements of international law and violates the agreement reached with the EU last month to improve the humanitarian situation in Gaza.

This is the context in which Starmer will make his big decision next month. He has already condemned the recent announcement by the Israeli security Cabinet in strong terms, stating: “Israel’s decision to further escalate its offensive in Gaza is wrong and we urge it to reconsider immediately. What we need is a ceasefire, a surge in humanitarian aid, the release of all hostages by Hamas and a negotiated solution.”

One of the ironies for Europe in its declining influence in the Middle East is that the fortunes of both regions have never been more interlinked. Economically, the troubling recent tensions in the Middle East have created significant tailwinds for the European and wider global economies, including in energy markets.

While neither Israel nor the Palestinian territories are major oil producers, the wider Middle East accounts for a third of global output. Some with long memories even warn of the possibility of an oil shock similar to that of 1973-74, during which the price of a barrel of oil nearly quadrupled in less than a year.

Another factor influencing economic tailwinds in the past few years has been the significant number of Houthi attacks on international vessels in the Red Sea. As a result of this, much commercial shipping has been diverted to avoid the area, via South Africa and the Cape of Good Hope.

Another key reason why Europe has a particularly keen interest in the Arab-Israeli conflict at the present time is the fact that it is widely considered to be complicating its support for Ukraine. For instance, some countries in the Global South believe some Western counterparts have been hypocritical in their condemnation of Russia while offering support for Israel.

Europe therefore faces an uphill task in its efforts to restore lost influence in the Middle East. This project might require a long-term, concerted strategy, including efforts to reduce intra-European divisions on key regional issues.

• Andrew Hammond is an associate at LSE IDEAS at the London School of Economics.