The European Union has taken a politically significant step in re-evaluating its relationship with Israel, voting to review the long-standing EU-Israel Association Agreement. The decision, though without immediate legal consequences, marks a shift in the EU’s stance amid the ongoing Gaza conflict, with Nordic countries like Sweden and Denmark among the most active supporters of stronger action.
This move builds upon earlier developments reported by NordiskPost, where Sweden and Denmark, together with the Netherlands and other countries, pushed for targeted sanctions against Israeli ministers over illegal settlement policies and the obstruction of a two-state solution.
A political shift led by Sweden and other northern European countries
The decision to review the agreement came during a meeting of EU foreign and defence ministers in Brussels on May 21. A total of 17 out of 27 member states supported the initiative, including Sweden, Denmark, Ireland, France, and Spain. The review was formally proposed by the Netherlands, but strongly backed by Swedish Foreign Minister Maria Malmer Stenergard, who also reiterated her country’s support for individual sanctions against extremist ministers in the Israeli cabinet.
However, the sanctions proposal was blocked by Hungary, reaffirming the deep divisions within the EU on how to handle relations with Israel.
“We must ensure that the EU does not turn a blind eye to violations of human rights and humanitarian law,” Stenergard stated during the session, underscoring Sweden’s stance.
EU to verify Israel’s compliance with Article 2 of the agreement
The EU-Israel Association Agreement, signed in 1995 and in force since 2000, governs both trade and political cooperation. Article 2 of the treaty obliges both parties to respect human rights and democratic principles. The European Commission, led by Ursula von der Leyen, is now mandated to verify whether Israel remains compliant.
If a violation is determined, the Commission may propose measures in response. While political measures require unanimity among member states, economic measures such as trade restrictions can be approved with a qualified majority.
Humanitarian conditions in Gaza a key factor
The turning point appears to have been the resumption of Israeli military operations on March 18, which violated a prior ceasefire and worsened the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Aid access has remained severely restricted for over two months, drawing criticism across the continent.
At the heart of the debate is the disproportionate number of civilian casualties, with over 52,000 deaths reported according to humanitarian observers, many of them women and children.
Nordic countries have consistently emphasized the need for unimpeded humanitarian access and accountability in line with international law. Denmark’s Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen had previously underlined this in statements covered by NordiskPost, noting that immediate pressure must be applied to open aid routes.
Italy and Hungary vote against, revealing EU rift
The measure was opposed by Germany, Italy, Hungary, and Croatia, demonstrating the enduring fault lines within the bloc. Italy’s vote against the review was especially notable, given its traditional alignment with core EU consensus.
Still, the overall support for the review reflects a shift in the EU’s collective posture, with previously hesitant countries such as Austria joining the majority in favor of reconsidering ties with Israel.
United Kingdom also distances itself
Parallel to the EU decision, the United Kingdom announced the suspension of negotiations for a new trade agreement with Israel. Signed in 2023, the UK-Israel cooperation plan was supposed to extend through 2030. British officials now say the relationship will be “broadly reassessed” in light of the situation in Gaza.
Possible measures and Nordic leadership
As the European Commission begins its formal review, Nordic countries are expected to play a continued leadership role in shaping the EU’s response. Although immediate sanctions remain blocked, the political momentum for stronger action is growing.
Whether the EU ultimately suspends the agreement or imposes economic penalties will depend on the Commission’s findings—and on whether pro-Israel member states maintain their current positions.
What is clear is that Sweden, Denmark, and their northern partners have been instrumental in moving the EU from rhetorical concern to concrete institutional action.
