Barsam Mohammadi – Regional Affairs Expert
What distinguishes this trend from previous protests is not only its scope and speed, but also its crossing beyond the boundary of purely popular anger and its entry into the realm of formal governmental actions. War crimes in Gaza, Lebanon, and more recently the brutal aggression against Iran and the commission of war crimes through attacks on residential areas, vital infrastructure, energy centers, and so forth, have created a red line in European public opinion that can no longer be managed with general slogans and cautious statements.
Spain, as the pioneer of this movement, has officially placed the cancellation of its military cooperation agreement with the Zionist regime on the agenda. This action by Spain, which for years had been a relative supporter of Palestinian rights, has now taken on a practical dimension and has moved beyond a symbolic posture. However, more surprising is the shift in the positions of France and Italy. Paris, which has always regarded itself as a strategic ally of the Zionist regime, following the regime’s attacks on Lebanon and the targeting of French peacekeepers in that country, has adopted positions that Zionist media describe as anti-Israeli. Even Italy’s right wing, led by Giorgia Meloni, contrary to all conventional expectations, has suspended its defense cooperation agreement with the Zionist regime. Although Germany and Italy have for the time being halted Spain’s proposal to cancel the European Union’s agreement with the Zionist regime, this issue will not affect the growing trend of anti-Israel sentiment in Europe. This reality indicates that European governments, some of which have a record of strict support for the Zionist regime, have ultimately realized that cooperation with this regime has become problematic for them.
At the supragovernmental level, the citizen initiative “Justice for Palestine” in European cities has, within only three months, collected more than one million signatures, which, beyond being a simple online petition, has become an indicator of a generational shift in Europeans’ attitudes toward the Palestinian issue. Simultaneously, more than 350 former European officials, ranging from diplomats to generals and ministers, have called for the suspension of the European Union’s partnership agreement with the Zionist regime. This volume of consensus among former European political and security elites is unprecedented and conveys a clear message to current governments: unconditional support for the Zionist regime is no longer regarded as a necessity or strategic realism, but rather as a costly action.
The causes of the transformation of this public anger into formal political action are rooted in two factors: first, the inability of the Zionist regime to present a convincing narrative of its military operations and war crimes that would justify civilian casualties and the destruction of vital infrastructure in Gaza, Lebanon, and even Iran. The images broadcast of the bombing of hospitals, schools, and refugee camps have placed even the staunchest Western supporters in a difficult position. Second, the significant growth of public awareness in Europe regarding double standards in the foreign policy of Western countries. European citizens clearly understand that the same human rights principles that are firmly defended in Ukraine are easily ignored in Gaza and Lebanon. This evident contradiction has undermined the legitimacy of Europe’s foreign policy in the eyes of public opinion.
An assessment of the consequences of this trend indicates that the international system is facing a historical turning point. Unlike previous periods of tension—such as the 2006 Lebanon war or the Gaza operations in 2008 and 2014—this time not only left-leaning or Scandinavian countries, but a coalition from left to right in Europe has united against the policies of the Zionist regime. Italy, Hungary, and Austria, which until recently were considered loyal allies of Tel Aviv in the Council of Europe, have now either remained silent or adopted critical positions. This new consensus has significantly reduced the maneuvering power of the Zionist regime’s lobbies in Brussels and European capitals.
The divergence between governmental reactions and public opinion is also an important point. In many European countries, governments have reacted with delay and under the influence of public pressure. France and Germany, which have a long record of suppressing pro-Palestinian protests, are now compelled to criticize the Zionist regime. This indicates that it is no longer possible to consider a diplomatic safe haven for the Zionist regime in Europe; a place where governments provide support behind closed doors while outwardly displaying neutrality before public opinion. The gap between political elites and citizens is closing, but this time in favor of popular demands.
However, the difficulties of the path ahead should not be overlooked. Germany still remains one of the most steadfast supporters of the Zionist regime, and the United States, by vetoing Security Council resolutions, prevents the complete collapse of diplomatic support for Tel Aviv. In addition, the cooperation agreements between the European Union and the Zionist regime include clauses that make unilateral cancellation costly and complex. Nevertheless, the current trend shows that even cautious European governments are compelled to gradually adapt to public demands. From the recognition of the State of Palestine by Spain, Ireland, and Norway, to the recall of ambassadors and the suspension of arms sales, Europe is moving from political statements to practical actions.
Overall, what is unfolding in Europe today makes a return to the previous situation impossible. Even if the war in Gaza and Lebanon subsides, the level of distrust and demands in Europe will not return to the pre-2023 level. The Zionist regime has permanently lost a significant portion of its symbolic and political capital in Europe. This is highly discouraging news for the position and future of this regime in the West, but from the perspective of international law and justice, it can be regarded as an end point to a historical exception that is no longer tolerable.
This text was translated using artificial intelligence and may contain errors. If you notice a clear error that makes the text incomprehensible, please inform the website editors.